2006 Winners and Losers – Predictions for 2007

Here you go, a partial compilation of winners, losers and even predictions,
because no list is complete without your input.

And the Biggest Losers for 2006 are…

The Republican Party, for getting whupped in the 2006 election cycle even after resurrecting their old southern strategy that failed to do it for \’em this time.

George W. Bush for getting whupped too, but still
not understanding what it means, while planning a way to increase his legacy
through a troop surge, even though the U.S. military heirarchy is against it.
And because as we greet the New Year we have now reached 3,000
casualties in Iraq.

Prime Minister
Olmert for the worst show
of force against Lebanon since, well,
a very long time.

Wingnuts
for striking Iran.

Deadey Dick,
who was made a fool because of a shooting incident that no experienced gun
owner would have let happen. But also because Senator Joseph Biden is sharpening
his shiv and preparing for investigations that will invite Mr. Cheney to come
forth and finally tell us the truth. Yeah, right.

Fox \”News\” network, because they bet on Bush and a bad war, not to
mention Bill O\’Reilly, and now find the bottom of their ratings falling out.

Joe Lieberman, who defied Democratic primary voters to run for the Senate,
proving that he believes he is more important than We the People.

Laura Schwartz\’s brand
of Democratic consultants.

Michelle Malkin
and Hot Air, who I caught lying about Hillary Clinton, as well as TRex\’s
recent slamming of her work, as Malkin continues to get things wrong time
and time and time again. (That Malkin is now a stand-in for Bill O\’Reilly says
it all.)

Oprah, because she actually believes sheet thread
count counts!

Michael Richards and his pal Mel Gibson.

Britney
Spears.

Beauty pageants.

And the Biggest Winners for 2006 are…

Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi,
the first female speaker of the House in U.S. history.

Keith Olbermann, who not only became the 21st century Edward R. Murrow, but
showed the cable hacks that political courage about speaking truth to power
is a big winner.

Stephen Colbert,
for bitch slapping
Bush around in the most profound performance of the year.

YouTube, because the company
was instrumental in getting rid of Macaca Allen.

My friend John
Amato of Crooks and Liars for being getting much deserved ink (h/t).

Howard Dean, because his 50 state strategy was vindicated; BlueAmerica,
because they simply rocked; bloggers like me and MANY others, because we saw
in candidates like James Webb, Tester, McCaskill and especially Joe Sestak,
what needed to happen in Congress and didn\’t stop pushing ever, even when, at
first, the odds were great against our victory.

UNIONS,
because of SEIU
and the new populist Democrats who are ready to fight for the middle class,
as well as the just announced candidacy of John Edwards who is the first of
the \’08ers to speak loud and proud about them.

Harold Ford Jr., because he proved that he has what it takes, while revealing
yet again that Republicans are racist. (Yeah, I know, he\’s not a progressive, but he\’s better than Frist.)

Iranian President Ahmadinejad, who has used the incompetency of Mr. Bush and
his Administration to expand his power throughout the Middle East, as well as
tip the balance of power in Iraq.

Taliban \”One,\” who are resurgent in Afghanistan, partly due to their
safe haven in Pakistan, while Taliban \”Two\” may become part of the
Karzai government. This interview
with Scott Kesterson explains the difference.

Rosie, for her comb-over
routine on \”The View\” and for actually getting that morning show
in the headlines!

And now, without further adieu, PREDICTIONS FOR 2007…

Regardless of what I\’m hoping, praying and working every day towards, we will
not have significatnly fewer troops in Iraq this time next year.

Condoleezza Rice will be sitting in front of Senator Joe Biden offering up
another gem like BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO ATTACK IN U.S., the Iraq version.

John
Edwards will continue to kick
ass and take names, regardless of the blathering on and on and on about
everyone else, by not just talking but insisting we take ACTION, including the
right to unionize. Just maybe… Especially if Edwards commandeers
the straight talk express by calling the new Bush Iraq policy \”The
McCain Doctrine.\”

Al Gore will win an Oscar(r) for \”An Inconvenient Truth,\” while continuing
to give Senator Hillary Clinton heartburn over the \”what if he runs\”
factor.

Finally, after years and years of effort, my radio show will manifest momentum
this year. (If believing is half of it…) Join me January 8th, as
we kick off the New Year, complete with a toll free number.

\”24\” fast forwards… Jack Bauer will escape from the Chinese and
live to kick their collective butts, while delighting us all while he\’s doing
it.

Rush Limbaugh will continue to be pompous, and Sean Hannity\’s hips will continue
to widen.

Now it\’s your turn. Winners? Losers? How \’bout your predictions for
the year.

Let \’er rip and let the countdown to a better year begin!

Share

3,000

God bless the fallen, their families and the buddies in the units still fighting on the front lines.

Share

A New Year Dawns

Red Rock. One of the most beautiful places I\’ve ever seen, though this picture doesn\’t do it justice. However, if you look closely you can see the red marbling of the mountain. Last week I had another encounter with a gorgeous hawk. These winged creatures have landed on our property too, even as close as our back window. When driving through Red Rock Canyon you also can\’t help but ponder the possibilities, especially this time of year.

On this New Years Eve, Richard
Clarke once again gives us something important and chilling to think about.

In every administration, there are usually only about a dozen barons who can really initiate and manage meaningful changes in national security policy. For most of 2006, some of these critical slots in the Bush administration have been vacant, such as the deputy secretary of state (empty since Robert B. Zoellick left for investment bank Goldman Sachs) and the deputy director of national intelligence (with Gen. Michael V. Hayden now CIA director). And with the nation involved in a messy war spiraling toward a bad conclusion, the key deputies and Cabinet members and advisers are all focusing on one issue, at the expense of all others: Iraq. (snip) In the end, there are only 12 seats at the conference table in the White House Situation Room, and the key players\’ schedules mean that they can seldom meet there together in person or on secure video conference for more than about 10 hours each week. When issues don\’t receive first-tier consideration, they can slip by for months. I learned this firsthand: In the early days of the Bush administration, I called for an urgent meeting to discuss the threat al-Qaeda posed to the United States. The Cabinet-level meeting eventually took place — but not until Sept. 4, 2001. Without the distraction of the Iraq war, the administration would have spent this past year — indeed, every year since Sept. 11, 2001 — focused on al-Qaeda. But beyond al-Qaeda and the broader struggle for peaceful coexistence with (and within) Islam, seven key \”fires in the in-box\” national security issues remain unattended, deteriorating and threatening, all while Washington\’s grown-up 7-year-olds play herd ball with Iraq. … While You Were at War . . .

Clarke\’s \”seven key \’fires in the in-box\’ national security issues\”
start with global
warming, then takes off to Russia, Latin America, Africa, arms control,
\”transnational crimes\” like the narco-state percolating in Afghanistan,
with Clarke\’s list ending on the one inferno that bothers me the most: the Pakistani-Afghan
border.

So much has been left undone and unattended because of Iraq. Because Mr. Bush
doesn\’t have the vision to see what\’s happening while he figures out his legacy.
If we turn inward, the list gets longer.

Enter the new Democratic Congress.

The excitement I feel for the new leaders in the Congress is growing. People
like James Webb, John Tester, as well as someone I\’ve had the pleasure to speak
with personally and look forward to meeting on my next trip to Washington, Joe
Sestak. He called me before Christmas and we had a long talk. These new, bright
Democrats, including some serious veterans with deep foreign policy experience,
coupled with the populists, offer great hope for 2007.

Only one thing can hold us back. Iraq.

We simply cannot let that happen. We will not. Our troops need to know that
a New Year is dawning and with it new leadership. Business as usual is over.
Get ready to rock \’n roll, baby.

Mr. Bush better hold on tight. The resistance is coming.

Share

2006: A Very Bad Year
cross-posted on Huffington Post\’s \”Fearless Voices\”

Oh, Pakistan.

\”There are three sides to every story: my side, your side, and the truth. And no one is lying. Memories shared serve each one differently.\” – Robert Evans

If I were to write my personal reflections on the year I have had this would
be a very different story. However, doing what I do, that is writing, talking
and analyzing politics, foreign policy and military issues, I can hardly write
about how much we as a people and country have accomplished. I can\’t think about
2006 without being bombarded by pictures of soldiers hung out to dry in Iraq.
The hanging of Saddam Hussein doesn\’t make the scenario play out any brighter
either, no matter that he was a murderous thug of a man. All I can come up with
is, Where is Osama bin Laden? Followed by something that haunts me,
Will we still be in Iraq this time next year? And I\’m not talking a
protection force, which will be needed for many years to come, but troops in
the tens of thousands. The only answer that follows is yes. It fills
me with dread that the Congress we just elected won\’t have the courage to do
what we must. Get out of Iraq. The obvious follows: Will We the People provide
the courage Congress lacks? Many thought the November elections did just
that, but Mr. Bush, still the commander in chief, has a mandate all of his own.

As Mr. Bush winds down his presidency, one thing is very clear. It\’s now about
his legacy, which means only one thing. Hanging on in Iraq long enough to pass
his Iraqi plan of preemption on to the next president so he can say the fight
is righteous and goes on. That\’s where Robert Evans\’ quote comes in. Mr. Bush
will have \”liberated the Iraqis,\” captured Saddam Hussein and allowed
\”justice to be done\” through the Iraqi\’s new judicial system, as well
as given rise to a new \”democracy\” in the Middle East.

Memories shared serve each of us differently.

Historians will eventually write their side of the Iraq story; no doubt, with
some capitulating to Mr. Bush\’s purpose.

It remains to be seen what our part in this tale will be, which will manifest
through the Congress we elected. Our tale is their tale. We are inextricably
linked. The only thing standing between our commander in chief and the desert
abyss is a wilful Congress that has the courage to do whatever it takes to end
the war in Iraq and our enabling of it. But again, it\’s We the People who stand
behind and make the will of Congress manifest.

There will be at least three sides to the Iraq war story. Mr. Bush\’s, the progressive
argument that won out in November 2006, and history\’s truth. It\’s not about
lying, that is, not until the investigations roll out and we find what a fraud
our mission was from the start. But that also depends on the will of Congress
to do their job. The chapter of this plot right now is about serving Mr. Bush\’s
legacy. Otherwise, why would we be waiting around for his foreign policy paralysis
to unfreeze and unfold out on to a new plan, which is sounding more and more
like \”stay the course,\” with escalation on the side, as our
military are once again drafted into more calamity at the U.S. commander in
chief\’s hand? Our part in this play is simple. It all revolves around our fearlessness
to buck the ghosts of Vietnam and refuse to believe that getting out of Iraq
shows weakness. It will take tremendous strength, purpose and courage to turn
the United States around. What we do starting in January 2007 will illustrate
if we are a nation of cowards or have the courage of our Founders. Historians
will write the rest.

In the end, our memories may serve us and salve our souls differently, as well
as protect the American fiction on preemption, but the truth of Iraq will be
there to haunt us forever.

Share

Missing the Edwards Message –updated below/with videos/YouTube–
cross-posted on Huffington Post

Taken Monday, Aug. 29, 2005. Meanwhile… KATRINA HITS LOUISIANA, THREATENS NEW ORLEANS AND BILOXI GET IT?

How cynical can we possibly get?

Or maybe it\’s just dense.

You don\’t have to be an Edwards fan or be convinced he\’s the one for \’08 to
get that the latest reviews on Edwards\’ presidential announcement are not only
way off base, but missing the point entirely. Or maybe it\’s just that the spending
gluttony of splashy campaign starts has jaded us all into believing that if
you don\’t flaunt it you don\’t got it, if you\’ll pardon the slang. If that\’s the case, then public funding
for campaigns, which will make presidential runs less glamorous as well as less expensive, are a non starter.

Between Harry Shearer\’s Edwards
Uses New Orleans as a Backdrop, and Michelle Pilecki\’s The
Media Disconnect of Edwards\’ New Orleans Photo Op, you\’ve got to wonder
if these two people understand what was going on yesterday. Sorry to pick on them, because they\’re not the only ones. Fox ran an old Bill O\’Reilly interview with Edwards featuring questions that would be insulting for the local dog catcher.

It\’s called an announcement for president not John Edwards solves the problems
of NOLA that George W. Bush and his Administration continue to ignore.

I know this may be tough, but try to follow along.

A Democratic candidate for president goes down to the Lower 9th Ward of NOLA
to announce his candidacy and people are complaining that he didn\’t clean up
the mess while he was down there.

People, come on, when was the last time we ever saw a candidate for president
announce his intentions so, er… modestly?

No podium. No pomp. No pandemonium. Just John Edwards in jeans and a shirt,
no tie or jacket, announcing from the devastation of NOLA that he gets it and
wants to represent people who\’ve been devastated by government incompetence.
He showed up in NOLA to prove his intentions are real. But that wasn\’t good
enough, as people piled on.

Where are the solutions?

Hey, don\’t forget about the levees!

Was it \”a moment\”?

That southern drawl!

Is the \”two America\” theme relevant or just some tired old sentiment
that\’s so yesterday\’s news?

Though I will say his web team wasn\’t exactly prepared for the day\’s events.

But take a look around at where Edwards was when he made his announcement. It\’s
hardly old news that there are two Americas, especially if you\’re one of the
people still trying to get back to square one after Katrina. To recount: there
is the George W. Bush – John McCain and Escalatin\’ Joe Lieberman America, and the America John Edwards took
the time to film during his presidential announcement.

I know we\’re all critics when politicians run for office, especially the presidency,
but this is getting ridiculous. I\’m becoming more convinced that the American
people are getting the president they deserve, because what people choose to
talk about has nothing to do with the message being sent. If we want things to change, at some point we will
have to give the brave souls who take on the run for the presidency a little slack, even if we eventually end up delighting that they
hung themselves with it in the end.

For the American people to get our government and the people who populate it to
change, we will have to give them an opening to prove that they can.

The only way Republicans can continue to win is if Americans continue to distrust government; the less faith voters have in government, the more they will support the type of cynical candidates who attack government and suggest tax cuts as the only prudent policy. Accordingly, if the Democrats can increase the number of Americans who believe in the government\’s capacity to do good above 50 percent, they will achieve as permanent a majority status as can exist in today\’s political environment and progressivism will once again become the dominant political philosophy it once was decades ago. Restoring Americans\’ Faith in Government

I sure as hell can\’t tell you if John Edwards is the man for the
Democratic Party in 2008, but I know one thing for sure. He\’s the first
candidate to show up like a real human being and dressed like your average American,
while standing amidst the tragedy of a city and region that is still not close
to being fixed, among people who have been completely forgotten by the current
president and many other Americans who just spent Christmas shopping, eating
and drinking in houses that are whole and lives that remain untouched by Katrina
or the Iraq war.

If we want better leaders then we should look to ourselves and our cynical
outlook on anyone daring to take the plunge.

John Edwards announced his presidential campaign launch from the devastation
of NOLA and all he got was a bunch of people bitching that he didn\’t create
a miracle while he was at it.

Cue the clucking.

Image alert!

UPDATE (11:05 a.m. – 12.30.06): Edwards \”Hardball\” appreance now up on YouTube, here and here.

UPDATE (4:16 p.m.): Edwards was on \”Hardball\” and here are the videos, Part I and Part II. Enjoy, give feedback, discuss.

UPDATE (11:15 a.m.): I had one of those awake in the middle of the nighters, where I didn\’t get back to sleep until around 7:00 a.m. this morning. So I\’m just catching up on what happened this morning. Please make sure you read Christy\’s posts on poverty, Part I and Part II. A critical issue that Edwards\’ candidacy will no doubt bring focus to going forward. By the way, John Edwards will be on \”Hardball\” later today.

Share

Saddam to Hang by Sunday? –updated–

UPDATE (5:15 p.m. – 12.29.06): AP reporting Saddam to hang tonight.

Sorry, couldn\’t resist the graphic.

On a very serious note, what will this mean for Iraq and for what the U.S. military will soon face?

Former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, sentenced to death for his role in 148 killings in 1982, will have his sentence carried out by Sunday, NBC News reported Thursday. According to a U.S. military officer who spoke on condition of anonymity, Saddam will be hanged before the start of the Eid religious holiday, which begins this Sunday. NBC: Saddam to be hanged by Sunday Ex-dictator’s execution expected to be carried out by start of Eid holiday

Steve Clemons
recently posed the questions: Snuffing out the Insurgency? or Igniting Full
Fledged Civil War?

Right now all we\’ve got are questions, including what Mr. Bush is going to do, though if he takes any longer he might as well just hold a contest for ideas. But if the NBC report is correct, we\’ll know a lot more soon enough.

No matter what, as the saying goes, buckle up. It\’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Share

IRAQ: Bush\’s \”Escalation,\” and Ford\’s Shiv

2006 Memories: Team Escalate in Conference

In Edwards\’ announcement today he evidently used the \”e\” word, according
to Ezra who was at the festivities. As regular readers are aware, I\’ve been
using the word \”escalation\” for weeks and weeks.

Edwards explicitly condemned the \”surge\” plan for Iraq. But he didn\’t call it the surge. \”It is a mistake,\” he said, \”for America to escalate the war in Iraq.\” That\’s the term the blogs have adopted as well, and its prominent placement, used before he mentioned the word \”surge,\” struck me as a possible dog whistle to the left.

Not only is John Edwards calling Bush\’s idea of a \”surge\” what
it is, but Barack Obama is too. Welcome, gentlemen, we\’re glad to have you on
board.

But Barack Obama
came out against the Iraq war when it was being debated in the Senate. Recently,
Senator Obama invoked the \”e\” word, too.

As I said more than a month ago, while some have proposed escalating this war by adding thousands of more troops, there is little reason to believe that this will achieve these results either. It\’s not clear that these troop levels are sustainable for a significant period of time, and according to our commanders on the ground, adding American forces will only relieve the Iraqis from doing more on their own. Moreover, without a coherent strategy or better cooperation from the Iraqis, we would only be putting more of our soldiers in the crossfire of a civil war. There is no military solution to this war. Our troops can help suppress the violence, but they cannot solve its root causes. And all the troops in the world won\’t be able to force Shia, Sunni, and Kurd to sit down at a table, resolve their differences, and forge a lasting peace. In fact, adding more troops will only push this political settlement further and further into the future, as it tells the Iraqis that no matter how much of a mess they make, the American military will always be there to clean it up. That is why I believe we must begin a phased redeployment of American troops to signal to the government and people of Iraq, and others who have a stake in stabilizing the country – that ours is not an open-ended commitment. They must step up. The status quo cannot hold. … Escalation Is Not The Answer

No kidding.

But the news today has been all about the
shiv the late Gerald R. Ford just slipped into Mr. Bush. It just adds injury
to the neocons, who are just now finding out that Ford thought them all quite
crazy. Which when juxtaposed alongside the insult he gave the rest of us when he pardoned Nixon it paints quite a presidential picture, now doesn\’t it? Then
there\’s Bob Woodward. Since becoming a ranking member of the corporate hack pack, Woodward has turned
into quite a toe sucker, hasn\’t he?

But when looking to \’08 we really need to find someone of true courage. Someone
who can speak clearly and lead with a strong progressive hand, without equivocating
or pandering. Well, at least speak clearly.

The rest of us will need to push back against the
idiots. No one else will do it.

Share

John Edwards Running

Thoughts?

Former North Carolina senator John Edwards this morning declared his candidacy for president in 2008, sounding a populist call for citizen action to reduce the U.S. troop presence in Iraq, combat poverty and global warming and help restore America\’s moral leadership in the world. Using a neighborhood devastated by Hurricane Katrina as his backdrop, Edwards said New Orleans symbolizes not only the theme of two Americas — haves and have-nots — that was the underpinning of his 2004 presidential campaign but also the power of ordinary citizens to take responsibility for their own futures. … Populist Edwards Announces Presidential Bid in New Orleans

Here are two other YouTubes on Edwards: first on
Iraq; then on unions,
in case you haven\’t seen them.

As far as what Edwards does to the field, my friend Bob Geiger has an interesting assessment.

Share

Poor George is \”Weary\”

Things that make you want to hurl.

Well, boo frickin\’ hoo.

Poor Mr. Bush, just so much on his mind and so many decisions to make, not
to mention those mean Democrats coming into power in just a few days. I mean
really, what\’s an incompetent, escalating warmonger to do?

Never fear, the corporate hack pack is always near.

The stress of the job — so well hidden for much of the past six years — has begun to show on Bush\’s face. He often looks burdened, distracted, haunted by a question that has no good answer. When a photographer captures him at ease, as in a sweet Texas-romance picture of Bush and his wife, Laura, that appeared in People magazine last week, it\’s as if he has escaped the Iraq sweatbox. I grew up in a Washington that was struggling with the nightmare of a failing war in Vietnam. The government officials of that time were people who behaved as if they\’d never known failure in their lives. They had the rosy confidence of the chosen — \”the best and the brightest,\” as David Halberstam put it. But then the war began to grind them down. I see that same meat grinder at work now. Bush and his officials are strong characters; they work hard not to let you see them sweat. But the anguish and exhaustion are there. Bush is not a man for introspection. That\’s part of his flinty personality — the tight, clipped answers and the forced jocularity of the nicknames he gives to reporters and White House aides. That\’s why this version of reality TV is so poignant: This very private man has begun to talk out loud about the emotional turmoil inside. He is letting it bleed. … Bush\’s New Look on Iraq: Weary By David Ignatius

Bush is \”letting it bleed\”?

Our president has never shed one drop of his blood for this country.
He and his chickenhawk crew did everything they could to keep from shedding
their blood. But given the power and the opportunity they were all
too willing to shed other\’s blood for their ongoing, never ending, ceaselessly
careless blunder in Iraq.

Mr. Bush deserves to look \”weary.\” I only wish he was also worried,
but not just about his legacy. Bush should be worried about what he is doing
to this country and what his arrogant push to preserve his presidency through
a plan for escalation in Iraq will do to our military, not to mention to the Middle East at
large and American influence in that region.

\”Weary\”?

I\’d like to see that one explained to our troops.

Share

Targeting Democrats with Stereotypes

Consultant Helps Democrats Embrace Faith, and Some in Party Are Not Pleased
is the headline.

Who, exactly, are "some"? Read it
for yourself. You can count the number on one hand.

But even if you don\’t like religion and faith mixed with your politics, it\’s
the Democratic stereotype that the Times works so hard to continue.
We had the myth that Democrats were weak on defense and national security, but
now religion is the target; making the point that we are just a bunch of godless
liberals. However, even as a person of faith I would argue that you don\’t need
religion to be moral or to prove that people of faith don\’t have a monopoly on good deeds. Just look at the world today and the fights raging between \”people of faith.\” Look at the war \”Christians\” like Mr. Bush and the Republicans have waged on the poor, as well as women. Not exactly \”Christian\” in nature, now is it?

The point is that Democrats have the biggest tent of all, welcoming secular
progressives who contribute a large and important voice to this country. However,
the Democratic Party is also filled with a huge number of people of faith, like
myself, who have encouraged the reach out to evangelicals, but also to Muslims,
Buddhists, you name it, including secularists.

Someone needs to tell the Times that most Democrats are practical in the end, realizing that reaching out to the faithful benefits us all. We just don\’t believe you need to sell out to do it. If it works, let the church bells ring.

Exit polls show that Ms. Vanderslice’s candidates did 10 percentage points or so better than Democrats nationally among those voters, who make up about a third of the electorate. As a group, Democrats did little better among those voters than Senator John Kerry’s campaign did in 2004. “Everybody is looking at the specific steps that had value in those states, and the compass points to her and the efforts she helped lead out there,” said Burns Strider, an evangelical Christian who directs religious outreach for House Democrats and was recently hired to play a similar role for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton if she runs for president. Mr. Strider said he was speaking only in the context of his current House role and declined to comment on the work with Mrs. Clinton. Ms. Vanderslice’s success in 2006 is a sharp rebound from her first campaign, in 2004. She was hired, at age 29, to direct religious outreach for Mr. Kerry in his presidential campaign and was then quickly shoved aside, a casualty of a losing battle to persuade him to speak more openly about his Catholic faith, even if it meant taking on the potentially awkward subject of his support for abortion rights. Consultant Helps Democrats Embrace Faith, and Some in Party Are Not Pleased

Hey, but maybe the Times is just courting their base. Because it\’s
an article Tim
Russert would love.

Share

O\’Reilly to Pimp for Renegade Judge

\”Tyranny of Tolerance\”? He\’s kidding, right?

Bill O\’Reilly and Missouri Circuit Judge Robert H. Dierker Jr. deserve each other. The
only wingnut missing in this mix is the original champion of \”feminazism\”
el Rushbo. It can only be a matter of time. That this controversy comes out
of the great state of Missouri is equally fitting. It also exposes the rancid
underbelly of a state long overdue for a wringing out from the inside out. Harry
Truman should be the inspiration, but with Senator Claire McCaskill about to
be sworn in there is no time like the present.

\”The Tyranny of Tolerance: A Sitting Judge Breaks the Code of Silence
to Expose the Liberal Judicial Assault\” is reportedly a right-wing screed
from a judge who actually is charged with being impartial, but who seems oblivious
to that role. However, it\’s good we finally know what he really thinks of female
lawyers, especially since there are more and more turning up in court every
day. …and let me add, not to mention all those sexual harassment lawsuits! Nuts to those cracy chicks, I guess.

O\’Reilly has a thing about judges. He loves to lambast supposed \”liberal\” judges, so the interview coming up next week is likely to be a love fest.

The conservatives
trumpet the book. Read the blather.

Can\’t wait for O\’Reilly\’s interview,
which is obviously meant to make the book a runaway bestseller. But the language
in the book should do that on its own. Rev. Falwell will likely invite the man
to Liberty University. Dierker is Ann Coulter\’s kind of judge.

Chapter 1 of Circuit Judge Robert H. Dierker Jr.\’s book, \”The Tyranny of Tolerance: A Sitting Judge Breaks the Code of Silence to Expose the Liberal Judicial Assault,\” has circulated via e-mail since last month and been widely read in legal circles, lawyers and judges say. The sentiments expressed in that chapter, which frequently uses the term \”femifascists\” and is titled \”The Cloud Cuckooland of Radical Feminism,\” have already prompted a complaint with the state body that can reprimand or remove judges. Other judges and lawyers have said that Dierker may have violated a state rule against a judge using his or her position for personal profit. One judge said it would be surprising if Dierker was not removed, calling the book \”professional suicide.\” … St. Louis judge\’s outspoken book causing controversy

There\’s a reason this guy has never been promoted.

One can only hope that the
latest scrutiny will make Missourians wise to the type of judges they have sitting
and holding court. With the Blunt family still firmly ensconced in Missouri\’s political firmament one can only hope.

But with a judge writing a book about the \”Tyranny of Tolerance,\” you\’ve got to wonder just who is running the asylum, that is, besides the Blunts.

When it comes to needing a political awakening, Harry Truman\’s
Missouri could use a good dose of Truman type political intelligence and courage. Maybe
McCaskill is the first sign of better things to come. The next step should be
to get rid of Judge Dierker. As a former Missourian, one can only hope.

Share

MERRY CHRISTMAS

\”White Christmas\” starts the season in our home. Watching it and trimming the tree has been a tradition for me since I was a kid, through my single life (which adds up to most of my life) and into my life today.

Blessings to you all. Prayers go out to all our troops in harm\’s way. May next year bring more peace to the earth than we have today. Imgagine and it can be so.

From my family to yours; whether you\’re celebrating with mom, dad, brother or sister, your partner, your extended network of friends that have become closer than kin, or perhaps it\’s just you and your pet (or pets, including of course all manner of birds and beyond).

Have a joyous day. Celebrate.

Merry Christmas.

Share

To the Soldiers on Christmas Eve

Semper Fi.

Hoo-rah.

…and a heartfelt salute from a civilian puke who never served. That would
be me.

There is nothing I can do to ease the burden of families torn apart by redeployments
that do not end, in a
war that Mr. Bush refuses to end. Nothing I can say that will bring your
loved one home. Nothing I can offer to the soldiers, men and women,
who serve and sacrifice every day.

So all I can do is honor you all, every single one of you on the front lines
and supporting the troops by keeping a fire burning at home. Monica Beltran
is one of you. She served proudly and came home to tell about it. She is one
of the many women now ready to give life and limb for her country on the battlefield.
It\’s still not easy for women, but because of Beltran and others who came before
her, some day a soldier will just be a soldier, regardless of gender. She makes
us all proud.

Beltran, at the time 19, was the youngest member of her 46-soldier platoon. One soldier told her that she — a female, a private first class — would not respond quickly enough to an ambush. Others did not trust her driving. On a few bad days, she wondered to herself: \”What am I doing here?\” Over the months, she developed as a gunner and driver, Sgt. 1st Class Michael Kohrt recalled. Then, on Oct. 26, 2005, she was riding in a Humvee turret near Ashraf, her hands on the .50-caliber machine gun, when she heard a boom. She saw a cloud of acrid, black smoke and heard another boom. It was a \”daisy chain\” of bombs, one setting off the next, and was followed by a hail of gunfire They were under attack. She remembers the next few minutes with unfading clarity. Saying she had positive identification of the enemy, Beltran yelled, \”I\’m shooting back!\” She saw a line of armed men behind a roadside berm about 25 yards away. The men had a machine gun. The men had cover. She kept firing. A rocket-propelled grenade hit her Humvee on the driver\’s side, shattering the window and sending shards of glass into her driver. Then another. Beltran kept firing. \”Just push forward,\” she urged the driver. \”Take us out of the kill zone.\” When she glanced at her hand, she noticed blood all over her left glove. She had been hit, too. She flashed on her family\’s faces. She kept firing. She knew that as the gunner, it was up to her to suppress fire. … … (snip) At a ceremony in Martinsville, Va., two months later, Beltran stood near her fellow soldiers wearing her combat uniform for the first time since Iraq. She was awarded the Bronze Star With Valor. She had already been given a Purple Heart. Her Bronze Star citation says that, in the face of a complex attack with \”a massive amount of small arms fire,\” Beltran returned \”maximum suppressive fire.\” Even after she was wounded, it said, she laid down \”enough suppressive fire to ensure that the rear element of the convoy could move through the kill zone safely. . . . Her personal courage was beyond reproach and contributed to saving the lives of 54 soldiers.\” Five other soldiers were awarded Bronze Stars that day. A Silver Star later went to the family of the fallen soldier — who was credited with taking the full blast of the grenade, thus saving the lives of the three other soldiers in his vehicle. Even now, the power of that day has not faded. (snip) She mentions her new pickup truck, with its Purple Heart license plates. She says she chose a tag number with meaning to her. It reads: OCT 26. From Parties to a Purple Heart

If we\’re going to fight preemptive wars of choice that drain us of our people and our treasure, is Rep. Charles Rangel
is right? Do we need to bring back the
draft? Steve Gilliard says no. But I don\’t believe it\’s as easy as a flat out no, regardless of the burden on minorities. I also realize that the rich always find a way out. But a draft would put the collective conscience of this country in the mighty wurlitzer. I see value in that dialogue. Wars must be the people\’s choice and the sacrifice and service of
soldiers must be born by everyone across this country, including those standing on the sidelines watching the draft take our youth. The draft will never be popular, because it also doesn\’t end up being democratic. What we must not do is lower standards to fill the ranks. It\’s a recipe for disaster. We do have to make people understand that any war that is unpopular will make fighting men and women believe less in the cause, with fewer people willing to sign up and die. Maybe the solution is to only fight wars that must be fought. Unfortunately, our politicians aren\’t that pure of purpose. Those against the draft worry about divisions in the country over it. What about the divisions in a war that the people no longer support, pushed by a president no one trusts anymore, in a nation that cannot get the Congress to stand up and do their job? Something has got to give.

Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.), incoming chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, has proposed reinstitution of the draft in part to address disparity concerns. And Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson, a Vietnam War veteran, said Thursday that he thought \”society would benefit\” from a draft. Nicholson later issued a statement to say that he did not support reinstitution of the draft. Charles Moskos, a military sociologist and professor emeritus at Northwestern University, said that without a draft, the burden of war falls disproportionately on the working class. He noted that of his 1956 Princeton University class of 750 men, 450 served. In the Princeton University class of 2006 there were 1,108 men and women, but only nine so far have joined the military. \”They call this an all-volunteer military,\” Moskos said. \”But in the United States we are paying people to die for us.\” Expanding the military, without a draft Proposals to sign up more troops are raising concern about lower recruiting standards.

To every soldier who is serving, whether in Iraq, Afghanistan or beyond, or
just getting ready to go, I say a prayer for you all and for your families.
God\’s speed. Safe return. You are all heroes.

Share

See a Film for New Orleans –updated below–

Have you seen \”Déjà Vu\” with Denzel Washington? We
finally did.

It\’s filmed in and dedicated to the people of New Orleans.

I don\’t know if you\’re as big a movie goer as we are, but if you get a chance
go see it, if only to honor the fact that it\’s dedicated to New Orleans. My
husband and I visited that great city right before Katrina hit. Some of the
devastation makes it into the film. It\’s a reminder of what we all still can
do for the Gulf Coast region.

As for the rating on this film, I\’ll let you be the critics on this one. I
enjoyed it immensely, but to say I\’m a huge Denzel Washington fan is an understatement,
so my critic\’s hat is off for now. I will, however, recommend that you suspend your disbelief
before entering the theater. I\’ll leave it at that, but feel free to pick up
on the theme in the comments.

More movies to come over the holidays. Can\’t wait.

UPDATE (7:20 p.m.): I keep getting asked if I\’ve seen \”Casino Royale,\” which I reviewed recently. Short version: GO SEE IT.

Share

The Kumbaya Congress?

Geiger\’s
got it.

Nausea alert: Do not read this on a full stomach if you\’re a Progressive, who has had it up to your eyeballs with some elected Democrats regularly accepting prison shower-room, Ned-Beatty-in-\’Deliverance\’ treatment from Republicans and then meekly saying "Thank you, sir, may I have some more?" Because what you\’re about to read is the Washington, D.C. version of just that. … On Snowe-Landrieu Bipartisan Initiative: Kiss My Democratic Ass

It\’s about this…
and this.

But the bottom line is that now that Democrats have the majority Republicans
want to hold hands and forge… What? Bi-partisan agreements that sell our progressive
soul down the political river. Mind you, Senator Landrieu was the one who got bitch slapped by Anderson Cooper because two seconds after Katrina hit she was genuflecting to Mr. Bush. When her constituents reacted by wanting to throw her in the Big Muddy she made her one and only stand up with spine speech on the Senate floor in order to save her own behind. As for the other \”Democrat\” in the mix, SoreLoserman, well, we\’ve already nailed his sorry butt to the board.

But seriously, remember Senator Roberts and what he didn\’t do with the Intel committee? It\’s call his job.

Remember Mr. Incompetent, Bill Frist, who basically threatened to take the
filibuster away?

The list goes on and on.

Here\’s the thing about winning. You own the joint. Got it? Now let\’s act like it.

Share

Murray Waas Under Attack

Going after a cancer survivor while ignoring the fact that he (or she) made it out alive? I
can\’t imagine it, but that\’s what\’s happening.

Waas has a piece up on Huffington
Post that explains the outrage.

Wonkette
has some background.

The attacks on Waas boggle the mind.

UPDATE (9:10 a.m.): More on the Waas story at The Left Coaster.

Share