FILMS AND TELEVISION REVIEWS BY TITLE: use Search box to bring up review for a movie

  • 12 Years a Slave ---
  • A Separation ---
  • Albert Nobbs ---
  • Anonymous ---
  • Argo ---
  • Blackfish ---
  • Carrie (1976) ---
  • Carrie (2013) ---
  • Chimpanzee ---
  • Closed Circuit ---
  • Creation ---
  • Django Unchained ---
  • Free Birds --
  • Fruitvale Station ---
  • Hope Springs ---
  • Lincoln ---
  • Miss Representation ---
  • Olympus Has Fallen ---
  • Project Nim ---
  • Rise of the Planet of the Apes ---
  • Star Trek Into Darkness ---
  • The Company You Keep --
  • The Dark Knight ---
  • The East --
  • The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo ---
  • The Help ---
  • The Iron Lady ---
  • The Island President ---
  • The Lorax ---
  • The Master ---
  • The Newsroom (4) ---
  • The Pirates! Band of Misfits ---
  • War Horse ---
  • Young Adult ---
  • Zero Dark Thirty (2)
Showing posts with label Iraq War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iraq War. Show all posts

Saturday, December 4, 2010

FEAR AND LOATHING IN O.C.: Bush Hawks His Wares in the Temple

This article was originally published on OpEdNews.com on Saturday, December 4, 2010:



Bush Jr. by unknown



Dr. Hunter S. Thompson by Magnet

For Hunter S. Thompson*, R.I.P. 

Much as I hate to stray from the standards of objective journalism, you may as well know from the outset that I am writing this thing under duress, having been dragged out from under my bed by several thugs sent over by pencil-pushers in the editorial department -- literal-minded bureaucratic types who do not appreciate my having spent three days straight in a coma, inhaling dust bunnies the size of small goats, instead of writing my article. This is a lamentable failure of imagination on the pencil pushers' part, considering how on Monday I had to endure almost an hour and a half in the same room as George W. Bush, having to listen to him deliver platitudes and "jokes" to 3,100 devotees at the Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, CA. It ought to be obvious that I have sustained lasting, severe damage from the experience, not least of all from the tension of sitting there, wanting to rush the stage, yet knowing that I'd be torn limb from limb by the Orange County multitude -- and that's just counting the old ladies. I was also afraid, as I sat there watching the whole Satanic ritual, that my eye sockets might get burned out of my skull. I have not yet precluded this possibility.

Ah, Jesus, I have to get a grip on myself. The apes sent by Editorial are watching me write this and they are not to be trifled with. More to the point, if I don't finish, I believe they may take my liquor as a perverse form of compensation, and I'm not expecting a delivery for another two hours -- so it will be very tough going if they do. The illicit substances I had in my pocket rolled out while I was under the bed and the dog may already have licked them up, so things are looking pretty dire. Come to think of it, where is that dog?

But I digress. The theme of the Bush appearance was "We are well and truly fucked," although technically, it was called a "Saddleback Civil Forum on Leadership and Service", and the devout crowd in attendance left with big smiles on their faces. Pastor Rick Warren, who is "America's most powerful religious leader" per a 2008 Time magazine cover, hosted the ex-Prez on a talk show-like stage set, and webcast the chit-chat live via his "Purpose-Driven" network to 164 countries (which is more countries than have signed the land mine ban treaty, but who's counting?). This is the same Rick Warren who Obama picked to give the invocation at his inauguration, pissing off the LGBT community early so he could get to work pissing off other progressives on his list once his presidency officially began.

I looked for the picketers from CODEPINK and the Orange County Peace Coalition at Bush's book promotion, but the 50 or so protesters were banished to the outer limits of the sprawling mega-church grounds. Tickets were free to go hear Bush sell his memoir, Decision Points , but they had been handed out over a week in advance, so I gazed uncertainly at the hordes pouring in. I considered just skipping the whole thing and going out on the town, but I wasn't sure if Lake Forest knew that Prohibition had been repealed. Five minutes before the doors were about to close, I asked the Will Call table if they had an extra ticket, and a woman smiled and handed me one with a flourish: "It's your lucky day." That was not exactly my sentiment, but I obviously had to attend now. I went into an adjacent restroom and hid the protest sign that had been in my satchel, and made it through the bag-check without incident.

After a woman sang an extreme vibralto version of the national anthem that would not have been out of place in a Bugs Bunny cartoon, Rick Warren's wife Kay expressed her gratitude that she was raised to love her country, and a video extolled Bush's righteousness. Then Pastor Warren and the ex-Prez came out together.

Bush lounged comfortably in a recliner while the pastor all but drooled, asking him questions for which the word "softball" is inadequate -- I'd call them "shuttlecock" questions but I think the LGBT community hates Pastor Warren enough as it is. The questions revolved around how to be a good leader, in ways that the audience could try at home or at the office, i.e.: "How do you deal with the egos of the people you are assembling?" (If there'd been more time, perhaps Warren would also have asked for tips on writing good memos and whether Casual Fridays are a good idea). I had gone in with a vague plan to guffaw loudly at every lame-brained thing the Crawford reptile said, but evidently the pastor was careful to only ask questions Bush was expecting, because the kind of stumblings and circuitous sentences we're used to from Bush were in short supply. I also ended up changing my plan because my vocal chords are not in peak condition these days -- for which I blame my attorney, who regularly insists that we go out after midnight to howl at the moon. I've noticed increasingly thick hair growing on his back, but I don't like to be impolite.

Dammit, there I am on another tangent. Writing about politics has clearly sapped me of my moral strength, but the goons Editorial sent over are scratching up my wood floor with their jackboots, so I really do have to bite down and push through.

Bush kept describing what it was like to lead "an organization" -- as if he'd been a high school principal, or the head of his neighborhood watch patrol. "There's nothing worse than trying to lead an organization and be full of self-pity", the Supreme Court's anointed one remarked thoughtfully. ""Why me?' It just doesn't work."

The pterodactyl from Texas bragged that he did not believe in "surrounding" himself with "sycophants", because there's a "tendency for people to say "oh boy, you're looking pretty' when you're not." The audience took him at his word that he wanted advisors who were "willing to share opinions in an open and honest way", conveniently forgetting about Colin Powell, Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neill, and others who apparently tried to share opinions. The CIA also comes to mind, people I don't normally feel a lot of sympathy for -- and people who may very well have tampered with my GPS recently, since it told me to turn right when I needed to turn left, and when turning right propelled me straight into oncoming traffic. But nonetheless, the CIA comes to mind, as an agency whose skepticism about Saddam's alleged WMDs and the wisdom of invading Iraq were not welcome in the Bush White House. Oh yes, and then there were the U.N. inspectors. And critics of the Administration's policies of surveillance, detention, and torture. Somehow, they all missed the Decider's open-mindedness.

W. did actually wrap up his declaration of tolerance with: "once you decide, they need to say "Yessir,' or they're out". One of the few scraps of honesty in the whole evening. But his audience got off on the display of power. As did the fundamentalist pastor, who was getting a little flushed sticking his tongue that far up Bush's fundament, and who interjected at one point: "it's a theocracy, and you're Theo."

The worshippers noticed no disconnect when Bush advised using "good judgment" to put "people around you who you can trust." In that crowd, I didn't think it was prudent to bring up Donald Rumsfeld, who sent the troops to war without enough body or Humvee armor, or Alberto Gonzalez, who "couldn't recall' details of the firing of federal attorneys, or Michael Brown, the former unsuccessful horse commissioner turned disastrous FEMA administrator, or Harriet Miers, who Bush trusted to be a Supreme Court justice until senators were appalled at her ignorance of the law. Besides, as I've said, my voice was a little too hoarse to carry in that enormous stadium. I may have to change my cigarette brand.

But let's not be uncharitable. Who would want to be a downer, when Bush was being so upbeat? The conversation did touch on the low points of his presidency -- Warren, channeling Barbara Walters for a moment, asked him very sympathetically: "You clearly weren't listening to the polls. What kept you going?", but Bush replied "Belief." #43 admitted that "it's hard to relive those days", but his faith kept him going -- allowed him to endure the hardships of"he didn't say, but I guess you'd call it "democracy'. He told the Saddleback Church: "you've got to tune those people out. They're acting out of spite and"emotions that are negative." With an approval rating below 30% by the end of his presidency, he must have had some industrial strength earplugs.

The most important thing about leadership, he told us, is to have "a set of principles you will not violate." One of his key principles was: "All life is precious". Warren smiled and nodded, discreetly refraining to mention the 1800+ lives lost in Katrina, the 3000 lost on 9/11, or the close to 5,000 troops lost in Iraq thanks to Bush. The ex-Prez shared another heartfelt principle, reposing leisurely: "to whom much is given, much is required". He did not, however, explain how this principle related to his lack of any response to direct verbal warnings that Hurricane Katrina would breach the New Orleans levees. In fact, when Warren even mentioned Katrina, Bush quickly changed the subject -- and Laura has probably since struck the pastor from their Christmas card list.

A slogan that came up often during the evening, causing a tremor just below my right eye, was "it's not all about you" -- a slogan, apparently, that Warren favors and which Bush feels is the secret of good leadership. King George made sure we knew that he did not view his job as "serving George Bush" but "serving the United States of America." This from the guy who oversaw eight years of troubled times, yet told his wife that "the worst moment" of his presidency was being called a racist by rapper Kayne West in a Katrina telethon. But the horrors of Katrina, 9/11, economic collapse, two occupations, deterioration between Israel and the Palestinians, and the vilification of America worldwide seem to have vanished from W.'s mind. He exclaimed to Pastor Warren with religious conviction that every day in the White House had been "joyous" for him.

It was at that point that DeDe Miller's brain exploded. Cindy Sheehan's sister, unable to take anymore, stood up and harangued Bush at length from the back of the hall. Without a mike her words didn't travel far, but it's safe to guess she was demanding how Bush could've been joyous during a bogus war that had taken the life of her nephew Casey and thousands of others. About 15 minutes later, a second woman, in a CODEPINK-style Statue of Liberty tiara, disrupted the event and held up a sign. And near the end of the event, a third woman also stood up near the front and yelled at Bush. Each was mostly ignored by those on stage and in the audience, although one guy seemed to think the third protester was a lamp at home -- he kept clapping abruptly in her face. Each woman was soon pulled out by dark-clad personnel and vanished behind a mysterious row of black curtains, never to be seen again.

W. did explain his reasons for the invasion of Iraq: to combat a dictator "enriched by oil", with "the capacity to build weapons", and worst of all, an "aggressive attitude toward the United States." Many in the audience nodded encouragingly. It was all the explanation they needed.

Bush Jr. also recalled his emotions on 9/11: "anger", "unspeakable sadness," and feeling "helpless", but then his "instincts kicked in" -- though not immediately, because "The leader of an organization cannot overreact"I made the decision just to wait." He made the decision to wait and then overreact, I guess (starting a new Cold War-like era of belligerence against the entire world, and so on). But at least, while he was in that classroom, he avoided upsetting the children. And when he made that first speech about 9/11, he "wanted to console and help people try to heal" -- it was only on the next day and subsequent seven years that he wanted to scare the bejesus out of everyone.

But this crowd had a special relationship with Bejesus: when Bush recalled using his 9/14/01 cathedral speech to "try to start the grieving process" and yet also to "let the enemy know we're going to come and get them," the congregation jumped to their feet in a thunderous ovation. It may have been their favorite part of the whole evening. Bush had actually been trying to say that he was worried in 2001 about expressing a war-like sentiment in a church, but he looked at the bloodthirsty throng of Orange County citizens in the Saddleback Church on Mon., and didn't even bother to finish his sentence.

After about an hour, my teeth had been ground down to nubs and I was beginning to suspect that the relentless glare of the lights on the audience was emitting brainwashing rays, but I was afraid my only chance to make it safely to the exits would be to blend in with the crowd, so I endured. Meanwhile, the congregation was applauding madly again -- Bush had mentioned his tax cuts. The pastor grinned: "we like those. We want them to continue." I wondered what tax cuts have to do with Christianity, until I remembered that the gigantic Saddleback Church, which is spread out over an estate of vast parking lots, eateries, and other buildings, serves one of the 100 most affluent cities with a pop. over 50,000 in the United States.

In a gee-shucks way that his audience lapped up, Bush also stressed that he didn't know much about economics, but when told of the fiscal crisis, "didn't want to gamble on whether or not we had a depression." And so, this former friend of Ken Lay, "decided to use your money to bail out Wall Street, and I was really unhappy about it, but nonetheless I do believe that decision saved the country from a depression."

The Clowner-in-Chief spent a fair amount of time talking about humor and how important it is to him, since it's a "sign of a relaxed personality" -- quite evidently a priority for him in times of national crisis. He joked frequently during the dialogue, impressing the audience with his modesty and folksiness while turning it around at the same time. For example, he quipped that people are surprised he can write a book, since they don't even think he can read one. Then he casually mentioned that the way he read 92 history books in one year was to read on the exercise machine and wherever he could. Warren did not ask if TinTin comics count as history books.

The evening was almost over when Bush proclaimed that "Everyone loves America." His audience seemed momentarily confused, since after all he'd spent his presidency telling us that we were surrounded by people who hate us for our freedom. Then, a Middle Eastern-looking man in a somber suit, sitting by himself, stood up from the very back of the auditorium and began purposefully walking forward. It was at this dramatic moment that I remembered there had been no metal detectors at the entrance; security seemed to remember it at just that moment too. But the gentleman turned to the nearest exit and went to find the restroom. Later it turned out he was Latino.

When it was all over, a complete stranger said to me, beaming: "It doesn't get any better than that." By that point I had lost all ability to form words, so I merely glowered back. Before crawling into my car with its "Jesus called: he wants his religion back" bumper sticker, I checked all my tires and lights for damage. Then I realized that they would have had no need to assault my car. Decision Points is currently at #1 on the L.A. Times hardcover non-fiction list.

Our efforts to move the book to the True Crime, Fantasy, and Psychotherapy sections of our local bookstores have clearly been inadequate. And when a man that the Mayor of London has warned might be arrested as a war criminal if he shows his face in the borough can get away with telling such whoppers -- and the public's response is to think it would make a good Christmas gift -- then it would indeed seem that we are well and truly fucked.

However, one small glimmer of hope struck me. Twice during the book talk, Bush referred to the time when "it looked like Iraq was lost." Bush said that. As in, Mr. Chauncey Gardiner, who kept perpetually saying that the U.S. was just about to claim victory in Iraq, any minute now. He didn't even believe it himself? It seems like a chink in the armor. Perhaps there are others. Of course he's trying to resurrect his image, but he clearly is aware of his unpopularity; when the Saddleback Church audience stood and cheered one of his remarks, he ad-libbed "Thanks. I forgot what it was like." That lifts the gloom a little, to hear that the delusional narcissist is aware he's not universally admired.

Hell, I might even be persuaded to place a bet on justice being done and the old man getting a fair trial some day. Sometimes you just have to place your bets on principle. In any case, I've been known to back a few losing causes in my day.

(* by Jennifer Epps, in tribute)

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Cheering Change, Booting Out Bush, and Beyond - a D.C. Diary

This article was originally published on SmirkingChimp.com on Tuesday, January 27, 2009:

I have never seen so many people so happy, so hopeful, so full of energy, and so united.
Being in D.C. for Inauguration Week was an experience like no other. I got to see Barack and Michelle Obama, and Joe and Jill Biden, close-up as they walked by my section of the parade route – incidentally, all of the above except Barack looked in my direction and I believe must have seen my “Arrest Bush & Cheney” sign. But the excitement was not about star-gazing. I live in L.A., I know how people are at premieres and such. That was not the vibe. In D.C., we were there to Witness, to use our senses (i.e. of the freezing cold) to make sure we weren’t dreaming when the loudspeakers joined those two words “President” and “Obama.” Above all, the excitement was the communal experience. We were thrilled to see how thrilled we all were, to meet people from all over the country, to be so crowded it took 40 minutes to exit a subway station. It was thrilling because it felt like democracy.

First of all, there was the considerable honor of being able to share this openly emotional moment with so many kazillions of proud and beaming African-Americans. To celebrate their victory in particular, and to realize how fully it signifies a universal victory, was profound. Moreover, there was the exuberance that we the people had pulled this off, in spite of many powerful forces and Fox News, fear-mongering, smear campaigns, voter suppression, electronic voting fraud, and history. There was also the enormous relief that after struggling for almost 8 years against a hostile, capricious, and monomaniacal government, finally someone was going to listen to different ideas, and actually make an attempt to pull us back from the precipice.

The joy was only heightened by the exhilarating feel of the defeat of madness, a.k.a. the Bush-Cheney regime. Not that I wasn’t worried that they were going to try to pull something. But that was part of our job, the 2-million-strong citizen brigade; to show them they were outnumbered and out-passioned. My taxi driver had deplored the expense of the Inauguration and asked why we couldn’t just watch it on TV. He overlooked the importance of an actual throng being on hand to ensure that much-ballyhooed “peaceful transfer of power.”

Inauguration pilgrims did not generally seem to agree with the party line that the outgoing president had suffered enough. Time columnist Nancy Gibbs described him as “unloved by more of his fellow citizens upon leaving office than any modern President including Nixon”, but it’s almost as if the reality of a 22% approval rating had not hit the media elite until they heard the crowd boo Bush from the Mall.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07ckQxmU9KM

Even the MSNBC commentators, who conservative ideologues are always trying to diss as too ideologically liberal, tried to scold the American Republic for caring more about the damage that has been done to their country than about Washington ceremonial etiquette. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4ByPZgU4_0

On Bush’s exit, MSNBC followed the usual corporate media line -- trying to ignore dissent and keeping up a superficial chatter -- while the crowds sang “Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye” to the departing helicopter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNdVj_jeWJI

Gibbs’ column claimed “Bush may not be popular, but there aren’t crowds calling for him to be hanged or accusing him of raiding Fort Knox”.
She needs to get out more.

A FEW EXAMPLES:
During Inauguration Week, activists from peace and social justice groups converged on D.C. to give Bush the boot and to express their hopes for real change under Obama. Those who are perpetually out of the loop tried to downplay them, or to pretend they would not be welcome amidst the festivities. This was not the case.

On Sat. Jan. 17th, a dozen members of the national groups World Cant Wait and also Veterans for Peace got the attention of visitors to the Newseum, the popular D.C. museum about the media: “When we got inside people did a huge banner drop from the 2nd floor that said prosecute war criminals Bush and Cheney,” a World Cant Wait write-up of the event later reported. “There were quite a bit of people inside and they were completely shocked. People outside and inside were very responsive for the demand to Obama to arrest Bush and Cheney. Then World Can't Wait hung out near 18th and Constitution with a banner that read, ‘From Gaza To Guantánamo: Stop The Endless Wars of Terror and Torture’. Tons of people were taking pictures with the banner. So many in fact that we had a hard time leaving because people kept wanting pictures.”

The activists also handed out 2,000 premiere editions of a new tabloid newspaper, War Crimes Times, to Newseum attendees. (This is a separate venture from the similarly-named free paper War Times/El Tiempo de Guerra, a tabloid which began in Feb. 2002, is bilingual, is financed by Center for Third World Organizing, and after close to 3 years became an online journal, still continuing at:http://www.war-times.orgWar Crimes Times is brand new, partly funded by Veterans for Peace, and specifically focuses on bringing U.S. war criminals to justice: http://warcrimestimes.blogspot.com/.)

The Inauguration edition of War Crimes Times featured articles and commentaries by Retired Col. Ann Wright (a longtime member of the military who resigned her post as a diplomat in protest over Bush’s war), Jesselyn Raddack (the Justice Department ethics lawyer when John Walker Lindh was interrogated), Center for Constitutional Rights head Michael Ratner, and various other legal experts laying out arguments for war crimes prosecutions of key members of the Bush Administration.

The next day, war crimes of the Bush Administration were also enumerated in a panel discussion in Georgetown with Ray McGovern (retired CIA officer who served under various presidents), David Swanson (founder of leading impeachment, now prosecution, advocacy site www.AfterDowningStreet.org), Col. Ann Wright, and Jesselyn Raddack. New strategies were developed and the struggle for accountability renewed.

SHOE-THROWING:
On Mon. Jan. 19th, Martin Luther King Day and the end of Bush’s term, a “Shoe Bush” protest began in Dupont Circle with some cathartic shoe-throwing at a giant inflated Bush doll with a Pinocchio nose.

The shoe-throwing was, of course, a condemnation of the former ‘commander-in-chief’ and also a tribute to Iraqi journalist Muntazer al-Zaidi, who threw a pair of shoes at Bush’s head on Dec. 14th at a press conference in Baghdad. Though not the first Western anti-Bush activists to utilize shoe symbolism since that incident, the Jan. 19th ‘Shoe Bush’ protesters in D.C. wanted to bid farewell to Bush by borrowing from Muslim culture, where to show anyone the bottom of your shoe is to express your utter contempt for them.

(Although Bush had brushed off al-Zaidi’s act as that of someone trying to get attention, the BBC and the British paper The Guardian reported in Dec. that al-Zaidi’s family claimed his arm and ribs had been broken and he had suffered internal bleeding while in custody. The judge who saw al-Zaidi in court then also told the Associated Press that the accused appeared to have been beaten. The Swiss newspaper Tribune de Geneve has recently reported that al-Zaidi is seeking asylum in Switzerland because he fears for his safety in his Baghdad prison. Yet Bush expected us to buy that al-Zaidi would risk such negative consequences, and worse, just for “attention”.)

The Shoe Bush rally featured speakers like Debra Sweet of World Cant Wait, CODEPINK co-founder Gael Murphy, Col. Ann Wright, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGVPtiyxtV4 ) and representatives of other peace and justice organizations such as Arrest Bush 2009, Veterans for Peace, Iraq Veterans Against the War, D.C. IndyMedia, and the International Socialist Organization.

World Cant Wait, which has trademarked orange as “the color of resistance” and who frequently appear in orange jumpsuits and black hoods to dramatically remind Americans of the torture done in their name, provided the 300 or so at the rally with a disturbing demonstration of waterboarding and a lesson about torture.

Some presenters mixed their serious political message with humor, including Hartbeat Ensemble, a theater group from Hartford, CT, which did a skit about Obama’s moral dilemma if people like Secretary of State Hillary Clinton try to dissuade him from ending the war in Iraq; Grandmothers for Peace, who sang a protest ballad demanding Bush’s prosecution http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbm787kBRmU; and a cadre of CODEPINK women in flounced skirts, who showed off the can-can routine they were dancing that weekend outside various inaugural balls: “Yes We Can-Can End the War.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftVU1121uO0

The highlight of the event, however, was when 200 or so of the activists then marched, loudly, to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., prosecution banners and peace flags aloft, and when they arrived, clustered as close as they could get with the Inauguration structures up, and hurled their footwear at the White House gates. There was much rejoicing. Bystanders snapped pictures delightedly, a few audibly commenting on “how clever” the symbolic protest was, and the whole time the activists remained outside the White House (CODEPINK sang repeatedly), tourists stayed and watched. Many of those watching clamored, giddily, to get pictures with a big-headed Bush in prison costume and chains.

Other events on the afternoon of Bush’s last day in office included a “die-in” by a coalition of activists lying on the ground as a visual reminder of those killed by Bush’s wars; an anti-war and anti-torture street theater “freeze” in busy Union Station; and an Inauguration Eve ceremony outside the White House by spiritual believers (and in some cases, just humorists) who came with sage to purge wicked spirits from the building.

BUSH SPOTS ‘ARREST BUSH’ SIGNS:
On Jan. 20th, Inauguration Day, some peace groups held vigils before the main event, while a coalition of activists with “Arrest Bush” signs joined the crowds waiting on the parade route on Pennsylvania Ave. One reveler asked to borrow my own homemade “Arrest Bush” sign to make a music video with some of the exuberant dancers on the street. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FVNJHTyE7w. I ended up leaving the sign with another parade spectator who wanted it.

Numerous other Inaugural celebrants asked to take a picture of me with my 2nd sign (which read “Arrest Bush & Cheney” on one side, and “No-One is Above the Law” on the other). The same phenomenon was reported by a group of “Arrest Bush” activists who’d been walking through D.C. on Jan. 18th, according to an email by David Swanson of AfterDowningStreet.org: the activists “were absolutely dumfounded by what they had just experienced. They'd spent the day at the train station in D.C. and on the streets of D.C. as excited Obama celebrators poured in by the tens of thousands, and they'd been unable to walk a dozen steps without people stopping them to have their photo taken with an "Arrest Bush" sign.”

And on that most unusual Inauguration Day, I swear to God, the ex-president who throughout his presidency, has been protected by ludicrously-named ‘free speech zones’ keeping protesters away from him at public appearances, finally saw a bunch of those “Arrest Bush” signs by the FBI Building.

After breakfast at the White House with the Obamas, Bush’s motorcade drove up Pennsylvania Ave. to the Capitol. His head turned toward and lingered on an unmissable sea of “Arrest Bush” placards.

NEXT...
Meanwhile, CODEPINK ladies in their favorite hue moved through the bustling crowds handing out pink ribbons – the kind you tie around your finger so you won’t forget something – to remind us to remind Obama to remember his promises.

Their flyer lists 7 Obama promises to keep track of: ending the war in Iraq, rejecting the Military Commissions Act, holding unconditional talks with Iran, abiding by Senate-approved international treaties, working to eliminate nuclear weapons, and of course stopping torture and shutting down Guantánamo. Obama did indeed show good faith on his first full day, Jan. 21st, by issuing executive orders to begin the closing of Guantánamo and the end of U.S. use of torture; his Admin. has declared they will use “direct diplomacy” with Iran; and yesterday Obama signalled a foreign policy shift when in his first formal interview he told Al-Arabiya Network that "My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy." Groups that pressured for these changes are of course urging us to write him our thank yous for these first steps and our encouragements to continue this vein.

Still, the unwillingness of CODEPINK and other progressives to just leave it all up to Obama shows that demands for Bush Admin. prosecutions are not personal or partisan. (CODEPINK, for one, is explicitly non-partisan in their registered status.) CODEPINK, Progressive Democrats of America (which used the pre-inaugural weekend for a panel-filled, national organizing conference), and their confrères just want us to stay awake, to make sure we achieve the change we seek. And consistent with that aim, they demand prosecutions to prevent the recent presidency’s crimes from happening again.

“This is not a fantasy, boys and girls,” David Swanson told AfterDowningStreet members. “The New York Times' Scott Shane and Attorney General Mukasey agree with me that prosecution is now going to be hard to avoid. When even Nancy Pelosi has figured out where we're going, you know the winds of change are blowing strong.”

AfterDowningStreet and its allies have a petition requesting Attorney General-Designate Eric Holder “appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate and prosecute any and all government officials who have participated in War Crimes”. They have 20,000 signatures so far and will deliver the petition after Holder’s confirmation process. Add your name here. You may also want to take steps to make sure Holder gets into the job first, by signing a People for the American Way petition against Republican attempts to block Holder’s confirmation.
A Jan. 26th PFAW alert featured a call by Barbra Steisand to defend Holder in the face of Republican attacks. She feels Republicans want to throw their weight around; she did not mention that they might be against him because he says he values the rule of law. In other words, they could see getting rid of him as self-protection.

David Swanson finds the roots of the movement to hold the Bushies accountable in Obama’s inspiring oratory. “That's the dangerous thing about telling people that anything is possible,” quips Swanson. “They'll end up insisting on what they really want. And they want lots of new laws, but they very dearly want us to start enforcing the old ones too.”



Tuesday, November 4, 2008

The Mess that Pelosi Left for Obama

This article was originally published on SmirkingChimp.com on Tuesday, November 4, 2008:

If we are so lucky as to have a fair election despite the voter suppression, hackable voting machines, and intimidation, Obama is going to inherit a hell of a mess. He might have to be almost as superhuman as many of his swooning fans think he is to straighten it out, and I blame Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that the task has remained so gigantic.

She was handed her mission in Nov. 2006 and chose not to accept it. Despite her frequent claim that legislative “priorities” left no time for impeachment, under her leadership Congress did not stop the war, repeal the Patriot Act, curb global warming, protect our privacy, ensure the integrity of elections or pass other important legislation. I believe that is precisely because she refused to impeach. Her weakness emboldened Republicans and certainly encouraged the White House to thumb its nose at the legislative branch.

Since she hasn’t been impeaching and she hasn’t been passing much-needed laws, what has she been up to? It seems she has been principally devoted to posturing with superficial outrage at the Republicans, while letting things get as bad as possible so a Democrat can win the White House.

But electing Obama isn’t enough. Trusting that he won’t be like Bush and send troops off to war on outrageous lies, or spy on his own people, or censor government science, or fire U.S. attorneys resistant to voter suppression, or rebuff pleas for federal resources during an epic natural disaster, or defy the Geneva Conventions, habeas corpus, the Bill of Rights, or hundreds of new laws with ‘signing statements’ – isn’t enough. These crimes that have happened to the American people have to be answered. We deserve it and democracy requires it. Otherwise it can happen again.

Though millions of people certainly want to shake off the shackles that the radical right-wing coup inflicted on the country in 2000, there are others who actually have no idea what’s been going on for eight years. Even Oliver Stone, emerging from some sort of coma, is under the impression that Bush is just an incompetent dum-dum. A portion of the populace actually still maintains that Bush was fantastic, because they still believe Iraq was in league with al-Qaeda and involved in 9/11; they heard Bush speak many times of a link, but missed it when he finally admitted there was none. There are people who have no idea that the whole propaganda operation on the American people to authorize the Iraq War was a deliberate deception; they haven’t read the books by former prosecutors Vincent Bugliosi and Elizabeth de la Vega, and they don’t know that the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded the intelligence had been manipulated to gain support for the war – that’s manipulated, not misunderstood. The culture has settled into a kind of mythology that the war was just a mistake. Again, even Oliver Stone and his W. screenwriter Stanley Weiser believe that Bush had good intentions. This is very dangerous to leave uncorrected.

A sizeable number of crazies, hyped into a slavering frenzy by the McCain/Palin campaign, are going to raise a ruckus -- possibly on Nov. 5th – but almost certainly as soon as Obama tries to bring the troops home, close Guantanamo, halt global warming, tax the rich, or various other big changes. If he decides on talks with Iran, for instance, imagine the fuss there’ll be.

Oh, how much easier it would be for Obama if Congress first cleared the way by setting the record straight on how different the world and America really are from what Bush and Cheney have made us believe. America frequently does undergo mass delusions -- it used to believe slavery was justified, for instance, and communist witch hunts – and when these delusions are not firmly corrected on a national level, they persist for generations and lead to other delusions.

If Congress doesn’t get it on the record that so many dozens of things the Administration did were completely illegal, then there’ll be more trouble the next election and on down the line, and there’ll also be a very bad precedent that will just encourage repeats. The fact that LBJ got booed out of office but not booted out of office for leading the nation into Vietnam on the false Gulf of Tonkin incident laid the way for Reagan’s phony MIGs crisis in Nicaragua, his fabrication of a weapons cache in Grenada, and Bush Sr.’s fake claims of satellite photos showing Iraqi troops along Saudi Arabia.

Obama is very unlikely to lead any charge against the Bush criminal gang, having run on a platform of co-operation. But Rep. Dennis Kucinich has recommended a truth and reconciliation commission, and there’s still a big movement that wants to see prosecutions. Bugliosi says any state prosecutor could prosecute Bush.

I just hope that enough people in California’s 8th district vote for Cindy Sheehan to let Pelosi know that they are pissed at her. Her last opponent, running for the Greens, got 8% of the vote. If Sheehan can get more than that so Pelosi doesn’t think it’s just par for the course, if it’s a noticeable number, maybe a crack will appear in that bubble she has encased herself in so determinedly. If Pelosi would just stop standing so firmly in the way of those in Congress who want to see justice done, maybe something could happen.

Thursday, September 4, 2008

THE IMPEACHMENT FILES: Isn't It Too Late?



Originally published on OpEdNews on September 4, 2008.

On July 28th, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was asked on ABC’s The View why she insists on “not impeaching” Bush and Cheney. She responded: “If somebody had a crime that the President had committed, that would be a different story.” She finished her rationalization by implying that no-one yet had “the goods”, as she put it, on the President. However, Pelosi has yet to address the substance of – and perhaps even to read, if her off-hand comment is to be believed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUlhmOQEI_M), the 35 Articles of Impeachment against Bush which Rep. Dennis Kucinich proposed to the House on June 9th. Yet Kucinich isn’t giving up. His speech at the DNC was so rousing, the amazed crowd cheered incessantly through most of it and continued for some time after:http://www.opednews.com/articles/Dennis-Kucinich-s-Rousing-by-Meryl-Ann-Butler-080826-755.html. And he wants 1 million signatures for impeachment by Sept. 10th. Sign his petition to Congress at: http://kucinich.us/
Since “the goods” on Bush are already there, in the documentation Kucinich gave Congress (as well as many other places), much more attention should be paid to these 35 Articles. 

"But isn’t it too late? The 110th Congress is almost over..."

Congress reconvenes Sept. 8 for a mere 3 weeks with a “target adjournment” date of Sept. 26. Then they will likely focus on campaigning; 1/3rd of the Senate and the entire House are up for re-election. However, even if they do adjourn on schedule, that break may not have to be the final story. Some members did return to Capitol Hill over the summer – Republicans with their sudden election-year concern for gas prices, and, more importantly, the House Judiciary Committee, which Chairman John Conyers, Jr. called back to investigate the allegations by reporter Ron Suskind that Cheney’s office, with the CIA, forged a pre-invasion letter implying a link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. I think this shows the Judiciary Committee could begin impeachment even if Congress is not in full session. And in that case Pelosi’s canard, that impeachment is too distracting from the work of law-making, would be completely inapplicable.
Moreover, the investigations have already happened. We’ve been at it for years. Bush’s crimes are public record. You don’t need FBI agents snooping around for months; you just need the word ‘impeachment’ and the website ‘Amazon’ and the whole case could be made. Impeachment movement leaders keep trying to tell people: it could take only a few days.

Recent House Judiciary Committee events have energized the impeachment movement: the testimony of Scott McClellan, the HJC vote to hold no-show Karl Rove in contempt of Congress, the July 25th hearing on the limits of executive power at which the word “impeachment” came up countless times, (watch over a dozen of the speakers at: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/35061  and also http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8chOuPZaIkQ   and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJW5WTs3yT4), the July 31st ruling by District Court Judge John Bates that the White House cannot ignore congressional subpoenas, and the subsequent Aug. 26th refusal of Bates to grant the White House a stay on that decision http://judiciary.house.gov/news/080826.html. Re-invigorated, Veterans for Peace, Democrats.com, and National Impeachment Network activists will lobby in D.C. for 2-3 weeks this month. Kucinich’s champion Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL, 19th) and other pro-impeachment HJC members, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA, 35th) and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN, 5th), have told activists not to quit. Also, at the July 25th proceeding, HJC member Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI, 2nd) gave a clarion call for impeachment hearings as the next step.

There is another point. As Jon Ponder remarks in The Pensito Review, Pelosi took impeachment “off the table” for the 110th Congress, not the 111th.


“But there isn’t enough time to impeach Bush before he leaves office…”

Tobi Dragert of the L.A. Area Impeachment Center told me that impeachment historian John Nichols (also Washington Correspondent for The Nation) informed the Progressive Democrats of America forum in Denver last week that post-term impeachment is possible, and that it would follow the same path as the regular kind: from the House Judiciary Committee to the Senate. This surprised me, so I did some research.

Ironically, it’s the Republicans who argued for post-term impeachment last. Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), who voted ‘not proven’ during Clinton’s impeachment trial, told FOX in early 2001 that Clinton could still be impeached even though he had left office--this time for allegedly taking bribes to grant pardons. "President Clinton avoided a conviction on impeachment the last time around because he had not lost the confidence of the American people, and we didn't want to shake up the government,” Specter said. He added, “but he's not in office anymore"; as if conviction is easier – and justified -- after a term is up. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=get_over_it Around the same time, Congressman Dan Burton (R-IN) also called for an investigation of Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich. And then-Senator Don Nickles wanted to see Clinton's pension and other benefits cut.

More significantly, Detroit College of Law professor Brian Kalt argues in a March 1st, 2001 column how a Clinton post-term impeachment could be justified by constitutional history  http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/pardonop3.htm. Kalt makes a fascinating point that English practice, which was the Founders’ starting point, included it. If they had intended to outlaw it, Kalt writes, they would have codified that, since they did explicitly correct several other facets of English impeachment practice for our constitution. Kalt also unearths debate from the Constitutional Convention over impeachment: did congress deserve to remove a president or veep even though terms of office would be limited? The Convention decided Yes--in other words, I think, they seem to have felt all civil officers need to be accountable even if their high crimes or misdemeanors end within 8 years. They placed the urgency of justice in the fore. And if they didn’t think justice should wait for 8 years, how could they possibly have wanted it to wait for a lifetime?

Those who assume, as I had, that only a sitting president can be impeached may recall that Article I, Sec. 3 of the Constitution states “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office.” But that phrase ends with a comma, not a period. The original quote is: “not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States”. (It also goes on to make clear that any civil officer who is impeached could still be “subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment” – criminal prosecution. Probably few people who’ve called for Bush’s impeachment would oppose that! But criminal prosecution will be a lot harder to instigate if Congress continues to pretend that everything Bush has done is legal. Prosecutors would be unlikely to feel they have as much power as Congress.)

Disqualifying Bush from post-term perks – like the honorific “President” in front of his name, maybe? – is not revenge, it’s justice. And it’s taking precautions against One Who Cannot Be Trusted. I personally don’t want Bush going abroad as any kind of ex-presidential ambassador; he wouldn’t have Jimmy Carter’s altruistic intentions. It would probably be too hard for Bush to give up scheming like he did with the Brits to lure Hussein into shooting at aircraft painted in fake UN colors.  http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/international/europe/27memo.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&oref=slogin And if he gives speeches in the U.S., I don’t want the Secret Service to enforce ‘free speech zones’ (i.e. perimeters of non-free speech) for him. Since he’s never had much of a work ethic, he’s probably not going to want another federal office like William Taft did—Taft was Chief Justice after the presidency—but we should never underestimate what lucrative or influential job title he and his buddies might finagle, nor overestimate how much work he would believe any post would entail. Besides, it would just be a tremendous boost for how America is perceived if we formally recognized that he is not fit to hold federal office. And after he’s swindled Americans out of trillions for the war and trashed the economy, does he deserve a pension?

Alan Hirsch, a constitutional scholar and J.D. from Yale Law School, per the website for his book A Citizen’s Guide to Impeachment, also believes that a president’s departure from office does not mean he can no longer be impeached. http://essential-book.org/books/impeach/#nine He and law professor Kalt both separately cite the precedent of the 1876 impeachment of General William Belknap, the only Cabinet member to be impeached by the House. (So far. Hear that, Rummy and Condi? So far.) Belknap was Secretary of War until he resigned a few hours before the House was to debate articles of impeachment. He was accused of accepting a bribe. (Ah, how innocent the crimes of yesteryear seem.) He was impeached by the House anyway. Unanimously. Note the absence of the partisanship those blocking Bush’s impeachment keep warning against -- it’s amazing what happens when you actually air the evidence. The impeachment (which equals an indictment) moved onto the Senate for trial. The majority of the Senate did not think the Secretary’s resignation got him off scot-free: they voted 37-29 to hear the case. Then came the trial. He was acquitted - by my math, to get the 2/3rds required to convict, they would have needed 44 votes. But to an entire House and 56% of the Senate, leaving office was not a get-out-of-jail-free card.




And why should it be? Kalt notes that scholars during the Nixon era believed he could have been tried even after he resigned. And Jon Ponder argues if he had been, that might have deterred Bush and Cheney. (After all, deterrence is one of the reasons we have a criminal justice system.) Imagine if the Enron principals had left to head up Halliburton, and that erased all responsibility for previous fraud. Or to use an analogy even Bill O’Reilly should like: imagine if a camp counselor molested a child but, because camp was only two weeks, the authorities just said in Sept., “well, what’s done is done.”

Now, there’s always the risk that Bush could be tried and then acquitted. Well, he’s a free man right now – and the country is not – so it wouldn’t be a step backward. It would at least revive a little public faith in Congress. And the Republicans, if they are to teach us anything, should teach us that the odds don’t need to stop anyone. They didn’t care about the odds or even the polls when they impeached Clinton. This time, the polls are on the other side: Bush is so unpopular he was even a liability at the RNC. Moreover, the case against Bush is completely different. The proof is overwhelming - if only the Democrats would stop fleeing it.

The trial itself would be a huge event. The media would carry the proceedings live. People who’ve been out of the loop (because they don’t follow alternative media) would hear the damning facts for the first time. As Joy Behar said to Pelosi on The View: impeachment would meanthat the world and America can really see the crimes that [Bush and Cheney] committed.” And that, regardless of prosecutorial outcome, would be a victory for Truth. After 8 years of being trampled, Truth deserves a hand up.

Saturday, June 21, 2008

HEALTH ADVISORY: Invasion of the Impeachophobes

This article was originally published on OpEdNews.com on Saturday, June 21, 2008:

IMPEACHOPHOBIA:
Malignant disease, fiercely contagious. Destroys congressional Democrats' natural defenses against tyranny. Begins as a weakening of the spine. Soon clear vision is lost, followed by coherent speech, rational thought, and, eventually, all ability to stand up. The virulent Pelosi Pathogen seems to be the root.WARNINGImpeachophobia can be extremely fatal for those impacted by the patient's decision-making. The patient's illness may lead to death of U.S. active-duty forces, Iraqis, Lebanese, Iranians, as well as New Orleanians, Midwesterners, Chinese, and polar bears. Traditional forms of treatment, which consist of appealing to the heart, have proven completely ineffective. Some experimental remedies involve administering shocks to the gluteus maximus, known in laymen's terms as "campaign pocketbooks", but this approach requires broad public awareness and support. Meanwhile, research into antidotes has uncovered a promising substance, sanfranciscomide cindysheehanide, which tests show, if injected directly into the 8th district of California, could eradicate the Pelosi Pathogen at its source. However, the vaccine will not be ready until November.

Epidemiology of the disease:
The first noticeable signs of the Pelosi Pathogen appeared in 2006, when the original sufferer was heard to murmur "Impeachment is off the table." Since this was akin to a police officer vowing "We do not arrest criminals", or a bank manager declaring "Come on in, the safe is open", a loss of oxygen supply to the brain may have been involved. After all, medical detectives attest, at that time it was well known that the White House had committed crimes against humanity, violations of the constitution, betrayals of oaths of office, and acts of tyranny. Some Republicans, such as Rep. Ron Paul and Sen. Chuck Hagel, even expected the Dems to put impeachment on the table.

And the Dems have been repeatedly handed Republican critiques of Bush/Cheney's conduct on a platter. Ronald Reagan's associate deputy attorney general, Bruce Fein, came out many months ago in favor of impeachment and even co-wrote a play on it, which ran in Nancy Pelosi's district. John Dean, former counsel to Nixon, wrote back in 2004 that Bush Admin. offences were Worse than Watergate. Paul O'Neill, Bush's former Treasury Secretary, opposed Bush's failure to halt al-Qaeda funders, objected to the White House's economic recklessness and its blackout on Treasury's findings, and also exposed, in his 2004 book, Bush's predetermination to attack Iraq despite its irrelevance to 9/11. Counter-terrorism expert Richard Clarke exposed the same predetermination in his own memoir that year.

In 2006, the Homeland Security Dept. cut anti-terrorism funding by 40 % for New York City because of a lack of  "national monuments or icons". Republican congressman John Sweeney charged that the Admin. had "declared war on New York", and GOP colleague Peter King called for Secretary Michael Chertoff's resignation. The same year, the all-GOP House Select Committee on Katrina (boycotted by Dems for fear of whitewashing) issued a report which called Katrina "a national failure, an abdication of the most solemn obligation to provide for the common welfare," and which member Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT) summarized as "very tough on the president, ... very tough on the Department...a blistering report." Though Dems won both houses in Nov., Chertoff retained his post, and Bush was never charged with any crime for his delays in releasing federal disaster resources, or for pretending not to have been warned about the levees.

This year, after the story broke of the CIA's destruction of interrogation tapes, former GOP governor Thomas Kean, Chair of the 9/11 Commission, co-wrote a Jan. New York Timesop-ed with his Democratic Vice-Chair Lee Hamilton complaining that "no one in the administration ever told the commission of the existence of videotapes of detainee interrogations". Kean and Hamilton baldly concluded: "We call that obstruction." In Nixon's era, obstruction of justice was considered impeachable. But the Pelosi Pathogen seems to destroy former standards, like justice. On June 20th, former Bush press secretary Scott McClellan testified to the House Judiciary Committee that Cheney, Karl Rove, and others are withholding information from the public on who leaked CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity. Another case of obstruction. McClellan also accused the White House of "packaging" intelligence and misleading the public on the war. Deception to lead the country to war would seem to be the very crux of what the Framers had in mind by "High Crimes"; but it doesn't seem that way to Impeachophobes.

Prognosis:
Once infected, patients become increasingly listless, unable to lift their arms to vote to stop funding a war ¾ of the U.S. opposes. Nor can they close Guantanamo. Nor can they say the four words: "No War on Iran". They even lose the self-preserving ability to ensure that voting machines be hacker-proof.           

The infected become cavalier about whistleblowers' sacrifices. For example, the decorated Major General Antonio Taguba, former Deputy Commanding General, submitted a damning report on Abu Ghraib abuses in May 2004, and was subsequently reassigned to the Pentagon, then later instructed to retire. Though this year it was established that Abu Ghraib-type methods were approved by Bush and Cheney, and though Taguba's preface to D.C.-based Physicians for Human Rights' new report affirms "there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes," yet the Impeachophobes leave Taguba hang out to dry, and refuse to allow Dennis Kucinich's articles of impeachment against either Bush or Cheney to be debated.           

Meanwhile whistleblower Babak Pasdar, a computer security expert who worked for a wireless giant, revealed this spring that the system he saw allowed a third party to access all phone calls, emails, textings, and website viewings of any client. Instead of following that up, the House just gave telecoms retroactive immunity from lawsuits. Thereby demonstrating a will to actively stand in the way of legal redress by citizens stepping up to do the work Congress has shunned (defending the 4th Amendment). In this trampling on citizen attempts to bring to light White House law-breaking, we see a marked progression from the disease's passive phase to an active, malicious stage.

The Center for Disease Control should screen Invasion of the Body-Snatchers (forget 2007's "Invasion") for clues to the spread of contagion. Before Pelosi became Speaker, experienced Rep. John Conyers, Jr. authored a resolution for an inquiry into grounds for Bush's impeachment. A few dozen congresspersons co-sponsored. Conyers also published "The Constitution in Crisis," a 302-page book of Admin. violations with an unwavering sub-title: "The High Crimes of the Bush Administration and a Blueprint for Impeachment". Yet when Conyers became Judiciary Committee chair, suddenly he started talking about "other priorities".

In Invasion of the Body-Snatchers (1978), a Chinese launderer desperately asks Donald Sutherland for help because his wife seems "wrong", "not right", "different". But a few scenes later, the man asserts creepily: "She much better now". When people start talking about "other priorities", or how Bush is just "an unpopular president who can't do much more damage"...this may be a sign they've already succumbed to the disease.

Watch out for the pod people.

Friday, April 18, 2008

The Gender Card

Originally published on OpEdNews on April 18, 2008.         

Earlier this year, Clinton supporters like Geraldine Ferraro, Gloria Steinem, Saturday Night Live alumnae, contributors to a Newsweek special issue, and some email petitions decried a sexist bias against Hillary in the media. Ferraro went on Fox several weeks after she supposedly left the campaign and used the occasion of Randi Rhodes’ comedy routine to again defend her own statement that had gotten her into hot water; she defended herself by accusing the Obama campaign of “playing the race card”. But in the process of lamenting the inequity between the way the two campaigns are received she herself was playing the gender card.

It’s true that after Hillary got teary in New Hampshire the ludicrous question of her emotionality saturated the media. But what that news cycle showed was that she is savvier about the media than some feminists fear. She did win that primary.

Clinton’s sniper fire gaffe is not something she can blame the media for; unless rising from its usual lethargy and actually researching something a politician said is an example of bias. But it does show that she thought it was sound media strategy to align herself with an image of war. It also underlines how the junior senator from New York wants liberals to see her as against the Iraq war while she tries to be militaristic for the right-wing.

As we all know, Clinton voted in 2002 for the war on Iraq while Obama went on public record opposing it. She has tried very hard to claim Obama’s stand against the war doesn’t count. It may have surprised her that the war became so unpopular that this difference between them actually seemed to mean something, especially to the young. She has repeatedly undermined Obama’s early anti-war position by unsmilingly joking that it’s her “lifetime of experience” and McCain’s “lifetime of experience” versus Obama’s “speech he made in 2002.”

In so doing, she undermines the stand any of us who opposed the war took in 2002 – or 2003, or since – whether it was a speech, a protest sign, a letter to Congress, or more. She has never explained why she couldn’t tell that the Bush Administration was lying even though millions of us worldwide could. She has not explained why she, supposedly so tough and so savvy in D.C. ways, saw nothing fishy in any of the administration’s 935 false statements about Iraq in the two years after 9/11. Perhaps we ordinary citizens, armed with internet access to public information, had greater resources than she did and knew things she couldn’t: that Bush made claims about an IAEA report on Iraq that were publicly contradicted by the IAEA the next day; that intelligence officials expressed disagreement on various of the Administration’s allegations before the war; that former UN inspector and ex-marine Scott Ritter was sure he and his team had thoroughly and permanently destroyed Hussein’s biological and chemical weapons after the Gulf War.

Even if we give her the benefit of the doubt and accept her argument that Bush tricked Congress into thinking they were just supporting a resolution to give him power to force U.N. inspections—and he did try that ruse—the truth is she also voted against the Oct. 2002 Levin Amendment, which contained a clause for “a new resolution of the United Nations Security Council” before a move to disarm Iraq. That would have kept Congress in charge of authorizing war. But it seems this ‘tested’, ‘ready’ candidate who says she’s the best to stand up to Republicans didn’t care to stand up during that test. (Her presidential campaign statement on this vote blames "the language of the Levin Amendment” as if it “would have made it the law of the land that the President could not act without Security Council approval.” Yet the amendment clearly stated the opposite by reiterating the U.S.’ right to self-defense. As does international law anyway.)

She has spent years trying to distance herself from her vote to authorize military force, but without going as far as Obama has in condemning the war. In Dec. 2006 she told ABC News “if we knew then what we know now there wouldn’t have been a vote”—implying that it was all a mistake, and perhaps that Bush would never have sought the authorization if he’d known there were no WMDs in Iraq.

Yet she made this excuse over a year and a half after “the Downing Street memos” were published in The Sunday Times (U.K.) on May 1, 2005. It’s very unlikely that Hillary was still unaware so long after their publication that memos of secret meetings between the Brits and the White House, several months before Congress’ vote on Iraq, revealed that “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy” to invade. She certainly should have understood the significance of the July 23, 2002 memo which briefed the Prime Minister on the U.S. plan: “Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD.” And she should have grasped that the lines in the memo which read “But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran” were clear evidence that Bush already ‘knew then what we know now’.

She tried to stress once again, in the April 16th debate in Philadelphia, that she thinks she can fight the Republicans better than Obama can. Oh, when will she start? The DNC’s own website catalogues numerous allegations of improper relations between McCain and a variety of lobbyists – potentially powerful financial and political scandals – but does Clinton care? She praised McCain again at the debate on ABC, calling him ‘formidable’; while critiquing Obama’s associations with Rev. Wright and William Ayers under the cover that this is what “the Republicans will be raising.” When will she raise Democratic objections against them instead of Republican objections against a Democrat?