Bill Maher: Neo-Cons Are Wrong

From Crooks And Liars:

Bill Maher Smacks Around Some NeoCons

This is Bill Maher at his best. He deftly boils down the Neo-Con lies, mistakes, and false predictions of the last several years into one witty and biting commentary. He says it all, eveything many have been saying all a long about how wrong the Neo-Cons are, but he says it more succintly. I highly recommend this for your education and/or entertainment.

The War of the Words

I realize that this website and its videos are supposed to be funny and sardonic, but frankly, by being reminded of all this stupidity from right-wing bloggers, pundits, and columnists, I find it all very immensely depressing and infuriating.

Having said that, I highly recommend that everyone visit The War of the Words because we all need to be reminded now and then of the kind of rhetoric and propaganda that led to one of the most horrible mistakes in U.S. history, the Iraq war, so that we do not allow our country to be misled into committing such evil again.

The Pro-Death Religious Right

On June 8th, 2006, the US Food and Drug Administration approved an HPV vaccine called Gardasil. This vaccine can be used to prevent sexually transmitted HPV which can cause cervical cancer, genital warts, and other health problems.

From Wikipedia.org:

Worldwide, cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women (after breast cancer) and is the third leading killer (behind breast and lung cancer). It affects about 16 per 100,000 women per year and causes death in about 9 per 100,000 per year.

Before the FDA approved the Gardasil (another HPV vaccine, Cervarix, is still going through the approval process), some crazy Religious Right conservatives expressed concerns about HPV vaccines. Now what kind of person would be against a vaccine that prevents cancer? A Pro-Death Religious Right conservative.

These Pro-Death Religious Right conservatives initially opposed FDA approval of Gardasil. They would have rather had women die from cervical cancer than be vaccinated against HPV. Why? Because they have this insane idea that if you vaccinate a girl against one of many STDs in the world, she will become sexually promiscuous. They do not seem to realize that there are still plenty of other STDs to worry about or that there are many other emotional and psychological reasons for why people choose not to be promiscuous.

Fortunately, the FDA ignored that crazy ideology and approved Gardasil. Despite this, these crazy Religious Right conservatives continue to fight having their own daughters vaccinated. That's right. They don't want the vaccine to be mandatory so that they can choose to keep their daughters vulnerable to HPV in case their daughters decide that abstinence is not for them. These people are disgusting. They would rather their daughters die from cervical cancer than be vaccinated for HPV.

Today, I heard about this:

AIDS vaccine heads to clinical trials

"We expect FDA approval within a year," he said, adding that Curocom is also committed to another $35 million for the final phase of three rounds of testing that will follow an initial series of toxicology tests on animals to show that the vaccine has no harmful effects.

"We expect that the initial tests will clear the way for this vaccine to be used therapeutically within three years to treat patients suffering from low-level HIV infection," Kang said.

It will not be a cure for those suffering from full-blown AIDS, he said.

Kang said he expected the full set of clinical trials, to be completed in six or seven years, will clear the vaccine for widespread use as a HIV/AIDS preventative.

"We hope it will give total immunity," he said from London.

There is a lot of research going into potential HIV vaccines, and we don't know whether this one or any other will be successful in ending HIV and AIDS. However, let me say this to any religious nutcase who might try to oppose a preventative or therapeutic HIV vaccine:

Don't. Don't try to stop medical advances. Don't try to stop vaccines. Don't try to stop stem-cell research. Leave the rest of us alone. If you want to refuse a vaccine or stem-cell treatment for yourself for whatever crazy reason you can think up, fine. However, if you choose to prevent any life-saving medical treatment for your children, then I consider that a form of child abuse or, at least, child negligence.

Don't force your religious beliefs onto me, my health, or the health of my friends and family.

Kenneth Lay Conviction Erased

Apparently, if you die before sentencing or appeal, your conviction never happened. Now, I don't consider myself a conspiracy theorist, but I find the timing of Ken Lay's death to be suspicious given this recent news.

ENRON: Judge erases jury's verdict against Lay

The ruling thwarts the government's bid to seek $43.5 million in ill-gotten gains prosecutors allege he pocketed by participating in Enron's fraud. The government could still pursue those gains in civil court, but they would have to compete with other litigants, if any, also pursuing Lay's estate.

JUDGE VOIDS CONVICTIONS AGAINST LAY

The Department of Justice had argued against vacating the conviction, saying it would unjustly enrich Lay's estate by preventing criminal forfeiture proceedings to recover restitution for victims of Enron's downfall.

The government even proposed a law that would prevent courts from vacating criminal convictions in such circumstances. That effort didn't succeed.

This Should Not Happen

If we had universal healthcare coverage in this country (like every other industrialized nation), perhaps we would not have problems like this:

Mother convicted of abuse in daughter's botched piercing

BOSTON --A mother whose teenage daughter nearly died from an infection caused by a bellybutton piercing was convicted Tuesday of endangering her daughter's life by failing to seek medical attention until she was gravely ill.

I am not, by any means, defending the mother in this story, and I am not saying that having a national healthcare system would have definitely prevented this. It seems this mother was incredibly irresponsible, and I do not know whether poverty and/or lack of health insurance was a factor in the monstrous negligence of her daughter. If it they were a factor, then this possibly could have been prevented by a national healthcare system.

Again, I am not sure why this mother did take her daughter do a hospital sooner, and I am sure that sane parents would have done so much sooner regardless of their financial status. However, I am sure there are many less serious situations where parents do have to worry about financial concerns when their child is sick.

No parent should have worry about money when their child's health is at stake. That is why we need to demand universal healthcare coverage for all Americans from our government. Now.

Culture Of Corruption

As if the Mark Foley scandal wasn't bad enough, there is more bad news for the corrupt Republicans in Congress. Apparently, Foley wasn't the only Republican member of Congress who raised "red flags" that were ignored by the majority party.

Bribery scandal's scope highlighted

The investigation found no evidence of criminal activity by other lawmakers or committee aides, according to the report. It describes a permissive environment in which staffers ignored or failed to act on "red flags" surrounding Cunningham's unusual funding requests.

According to the investigation, Cunningham repeatedly pressured aides to insert special funding provisions, known as "earmarks," designed to enrich business officials who were paying the lawmaker millions of dollars in bribes.

Over a five-year period, the report said, Cunningham inserted language into spending bills adopted by the intelligence panel that provided "approximately $70 [million]-$80 million in funding" for those companies. The committee oversees about $40 billion in spending on U.S. spy agencies. Most of the earmarks went to companies run by businessman Brent Wilkes of California and his former associate, Mitchell Wade, in Washington. Wilkes remains under investigation, and Wade pleaded guilty in February to charges.

The fact that Randy "Duke" Cunningham was corrupt is by no means new news. (He plead guilty to bribery charges last year.) This is merely more evidence of how Republican corruption is ignored or overlooked by the Republican leaders in Congress.

The Day The Constitution Died

Bye-bye, Miss American Constitution.

Yesterday, Bush signed the Military Comissions Act of 2006, a bill to make torture legal in our country, destroy the right to habeas corpus, and invalidate major portions of our Bill of Rights.

I find it depressingly ironic that Bush uses arguments like "they hate us for our freedom" to support his flawed and failed plans for fighting terrorism and then does everything in his power to give the terrorists what they want by working with the corrupt, "rubber stamp" Republicans in Congress to take away our freedom.

Not since the Reichstag fire led to the Enabling Act has there been such a regression in freedom and democracy.

We have seen this before in life (see previous paragraph) and art (see subsequent paragragph). Those who do not learn from the mistakes in history are doomed to repeat them.

In art we have seen this:

Padmé watches with increasing suspicion as Chancellor Palpatine becomes a dictator, using the Clone Wars to amass emergency powers and gain control over the Senate and judiciary. Padmé later witnesses Palpatine transform the Republic into the Galactic Empire and proclaiming himself Emperor. As the Senate cheers for Palpatine, she comments to Senetor Organa, "So this is how liberty dies: with thunderous applause."

Bush has been killing liberty in our country since 9/11, and because Bush shamelessly uses 9/11 as an excuse, there are people who are applauding him when they should be impeaching him.

The people who voted for this disgraceful president allowed this to happen. By voting for Bush and the Republicans, they enabled the destruction of some of the most important tenets of our democracy (such as prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment and the writ of habeas corpus).

I hope and pray that the Supreme Court, now our constitution's and our country's last chance to stop this horrific legislation, will do the right thing and declare this act unconstitutional.

I fear greatly for all of us if they do not.

New US terrorism law criticised as "stain" on history

President Bush has called it vital for his war on terrorism; however, one opposition Democrat Senator said his country would look back on the day as a "stain" on the nation's history...

E. Vincent Warren at the Centre for Constitutional Rights says his organisation will launch a legal challenge. "This bill puts in the president's power, solely, the ability to determine who is and who is not an enemy combatant, even US citizens," said Warren. "This bill also allows for non-citizens to be detained indefinitely, pulled up wherever they appear - whether they are on the battlefield or not."

Critics of the law also claim suspects will not be able to challenge their detention or treatment in court, and authorities will be able to try people based on secret evidence.

Battles brewing on torture, detainees

But as Bush and a group of key Republican senators hailed the compromise that led to the passage of the new rules last month, the American Civil Liberties Union called it ``one of the worst civil liberties measures ever enacted in American history." Groups of defense lawyers vowed to fight the new law in court, calling it ``blatantly unconstitutional" because it denies detainees the right to challenge their detention in court.

How Many More Have To Die?

I was born after the Vietnam War, but I imagine that, at the time, this sentiment was the same:

How many more have to die? How many more have to die before everyone realizes the war in Iraq was a mistake? How many more have to die before our president will admit he was wrong? How many more have to die before this war becomes such a disgrace to our honor that every politician will stand up and say "no more"?

I was against this war from the beginning. I did not fall for the lies of the Bush administration. I watched as, slowly, more and more people switched sides from being for the war to being against it, and now, those who are against the war are in a strong majority in this country.

Despite this, we do not have a majortiy of elected officials who are against the war and do not believe the lies of the Bush administration. This needs to change. This November is your chance. Do not let it pass you by.

10 American Soldiers Killed in Iraq

By JOHN O’NEIL. Ten American soldiers were killed on Tuesday, the military announced today, bringing October’s death toll for United States forces to 68.

Kidnapping of 13 Carloads of Shiites Fuels Iraq's Sectarian...

By Borzou Daragahi, Times Staff Writer. Gunmen wearing Iraqi police uniforms kidnapped 13 carloads of Shiite Muslims today from the...

Bombings and shootings kill at least 33 in Iraq

Gunmen in both police and civilian vehicles gunned down victims including four students outside the city’s university and a well-known doctor who was leaving her house, said a Basra police captain.

In Karmah, west of Baghdad, a roadside bomb killed five Iraqi soldiers, police Lt Ahmed Ali said. Gunmen stormed into the house of a Shiite family in Balad Ruz, 45 miles north-east of Baghdad, killing the mother and four adult sons and injuring the father, provincial police official Khalil Yacoub said.

US joins Iraqis in city where 91 died

BAGHDAD, Iraq — U.S. forces were back patrolling the streets of the predominantly Shiite city of Balad on Tuesday after five days of sectarian slaughter killed 95 people, violence that surged out of control despite the efforts of Iraq's best-trained soldiers.

Iraq's 4th Army took command of the region north of Baghdad a month ago, but had been unable to stem recent attacks in Balad, where the slayings of 17 Shiite Muslim workers on Friday set off revenge killings by Shiites.

It's Not Funny 'Cause It's True

Again and again, the decision to go war in Iraq proves to be a terrible mistake. From the resurgence of the Taliban to North Korea gaining nuclear weapons, Bush shows his incompetence. As if Iraq wasn't already a huge mess, Afghanistan is quickly becoming one as well.

Iraq war cost years of progress in Afghanistan

The invasion of Iraq prevented British forces from helping to secure Afghanistan much sooner and has left a dangerous vacuum in the country for four years, the commander who has led the attack against the Taliban made clear on Tuesday.

NATO general: Coalition erred in Afghanistan

WASHINGTON - The US-led coalition in Afghanistan failed to follow through as it should have after ousting the government in 2001, said the NATO commander in...

Iraq war 'stalled' Afghan mission

BRITAIN could have carried out its current stability mission in Afghanistan as long as four years ago if it had not been for the war in Iraq, a senior military commander said yesterday.

Brigadier Ed Butler, who recently handed over the command of British forces in Afghanistan, said that the concentration on Iraq had left Britain to "mark time" in Afghanistan since 2002.

Republican Party: Pro-Torture And Now Pro-Pedophile

The Republicans in Congress have been protecting a pedophile in their midst for almost a year.

GOP informed of Foley's e-mails
House speaker told months ago, says congressman; both parties want investigation

(10-01) 04:00 PDT Washington -- Top House Republicans knew for months about e-mail traffic between Rep. Mark Foley and a former teenage page, but kept the matter secret and allowed Foley, R-Fla., to remain head of a congressional caucus on children's issues, Republican lawmakers said Saturday.

GOP leaders knew of Foley e-mail in '05

WASHINGTON — GOP leaders admit their offices have known for months that a Florida Republican congressman was sending inappropriate e-mails to a boy who had worked as a page in the House of Representatives.

The office of House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who earlier said he'd learned about the e-mails only last week, acknowledged that aides referred the matter to the authorities last fall. They said they were only told the messages were "over-friendly."

Rep. Thomas Reynolds, who heads the House Republican election effort, said Saturday he told Hastert months ago about concerns that a fellow Republican lawmaker, Rep. Mark Foley, had sent inappropriate messages to a teenage boy.

Speaker was told about Foley e-mails, GOP member says

WASHINGTON -- House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, Republican of Illinois, was notified early this year of inappropriate e-mails from Representative Mark Foley, Republican of Florida, to a 16-year-old male page, a top GOP House member said yesterday.

The member, Representative Thomas Reynolds of New York, contradicted the speaker's assertions that he learned of concerns about Foley only last week.

Hastert did not dispute the statement by Reynolds, and the speaker's office said some of Hastert's top aides knew last year that Foley had been ordered to cease contact with the youth and to treat all pages respectfully.

Reynolds, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, became the second senior House Republican to say that Hastert has known of Foley's contacts for months, prompting Democratic attacks about the GOP leadership's inaction. Foley, 52, abruptly resigned his seat Friday after the e-mails became public.

House majority leader John Boehner, Republican of Ohio, said Friday that he learned in late spring of inappropriate e-mails that Foley sent to the Louisiana youth, and that he promptly told Hastert, who appeared to already know of the concerns. Hours later, Boehner said he could not be sure he had spoken with Hastert.

Abramoff tied to White House, Corruption Everywhere, American Public Doesn't Seem To Care

What does it take to get people to wake up to the fact that the White House and the Republican-controlled Congress are corrupt?

Democrats press White House on Abramoff contacts

"For months, White House officials have refused to be straight with the American people about Jack Abramoff," said House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California.

"Now we know the truth: a disgraced lobbyist traded perks and campaign contributions for special access to the Bush White House," she said.

A report by a House of Representatives panel found Abramoff and his lobbying team had about 485 contacts with the White House, including 10 with Karl Rove, who is Bush's top political adviser.

Abramoff, Associates Claimed 485 White House Lobbying Contacts

Sept. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Lobbyist Jack Abramoff claimed in billing records that he and his associates had at least 485 contacts with White House officials during the Bush administration's first term, according to a report by a U.S. House panel.

Abramoff, 47, claimed he personally had at least 66 contacts with White House officials, including at least 10 with White House chief political adviser Karl Rove, according to the yet-to- be-released report by the House Committee on Government Reform. Bloomberg News obtained a copy of the study, which was first reported last night by ABC News.

``Abramoff was selling information and entrée that shouldn't need to be bought while making his clients pay inflated fees for access and influence which shouldn't be for sale,'' wrote committee chairman Tom Davis, a Virginia Republican, and ranking Democrat Henry Waxman of California.

Republican Wants To Sterilize People

Republican Wants to Sterilize Parents with ‘Bad’ Children

“What we’ve got is a failure in society, whether it’s in Mount Pleasant with yuppie parents or whether it’s on the East Side with poor crackhead parents,” Shirley said Friday. “We pick up stray animals and spay them. These mothers need to be spayed if they can’t take care of theirs. … Once they have a child and it’s running the streets, to let them continue to have children is totally unacceptable.” Deadbeat dads might ought to be sterilized as well, he said.

Politician Says to 'Spay' Moms of Criminal Kids

A Charleston City Council member, reacting to a video store holdup believed to have been carried out by children, said parents who couldn't properly care for their kids should be sterilized.

"We pick up stray animals and spay them," Larry Shirley said in a story in the Post and Courier newspaper. "These mothers need to be spayed if they can't take care of theirs."

NY Post Jokes About Olbermann Death Threat

Crooks and Liars reports on a NY Post article that makes fun of an incident in which Keith Olbermann received a letter filled with powder. Obviously, the intent of the person who mailed the letter was to make the recipient believe the powder could be anthrax. It wasn't anthrax in this case, but it was still a federal crime and a death threat, which the shameless NY Post thinks is hilarious.

Here's an E-mail I sent to the NY Post and the author of the "article":

To Paula Froelich:

Is this what you consider to be journalism?:
Powder Puff Spooks Keith (Page Six)

Honestly, do you consider all federal crimes to be fodder for your disgusting and distasteful sense of humor, or just the ones that don't affect you, your loved ones, or those who agree with Murdoch's politics?

It's good to know how the NY Post treats serious matters regarding threats on someone's life. I wish I could say I was surprised that a "news" medium owned by Murdoch could spread such callous tripe, but I'm not.

-Bryan Arnold

You can write your own letter if you desire, but if you do, please be civil. They obviously need to be shown what civility looks like:
paula.froelich@nypost.com
letters@nypost.com

::Sigh:: More Bad News On The Climate

Earth at warmest point in 12,000 years, say scientists

The globe is at its warmest in the past 12,000 years, triggering environmental changes that could become "dangerous" if it continues, said the new study...

World 'warmest for 12,000 years'

Extraordinary Rise in Warming Is Seen

DEBUNK: Right-Wing Talking Points

I am getting sick and tired of being sick and tired of Right-Wing Talking Points, especially when they are so easily debunked. I mean, if a nobody like me can debunk them, shouldn't our elected Democrats be able to dismantle them like a nut and a screw?

And yet, I keep hearing the same RWTP repeated over and over and over again, but I don't hear enough dismantling. That may speak more to the state of the traditional media, but regardless, the answers seem so easy to me that I fail to see how the Right can keep getting away with saying these things.

Here are my thoughts on the RWTP and how easy it is to render them useless:

DEBUNK: "The detainees at Guantanamo are unlawful enemy combatants, not prisoners of war."

Oh, really. I thought there was a War On Terror. Wouldn't that make them prisoners of a war and, therefore, POWs?

DEBUNK: "But they are terrorists!"

Yes, and the Nazis were Nazis, the most evil enemy this nation has ever known and terrorists in their own way, and yet when it came to Nazi POWs held by the U.S., they were treated better and given more rights than those at Guantanamo.

DEBUNK: "But the terrorists don't belong to any nation. The don't follow the rules of war. They aren't protected by the Geneva Conventions."

Um, we signed the Geneva Conventions, so it is a part of our law. We should follow our laws and the Geneva Conventions regardless of who our enemy is.

DEBUNK: "But the terrorists don't follow the Geneva Conventions."

This is America. We are supposed to be better than our enemies. We are supposed to set a good example by following national and international laws and not taking away the rights of POWs and not torturing them.

DEBUNK: "We do not torture."

Then why is Bush trying to retroactively redefine the Geneva Conventions for the sake of "alternative" interrogation techniques? Why did Bush fight the McCain anti-torture amendment and then issue a signing statement that said he would follow the amendment according to his "interpretation"? Why did we send Maher Arar and who knows how many other people to foreign countries, who are known to use torture, to be tortured? Why is Bush afraid to say what these "alternative" techniques are? Why is he trying to take away the checks and balances of power from the legislative and judicial branches to hide what he is doing? Why doesn't he want the American public to know what he is doing? Is it because he knows we would consider the "alternative" techniques to be torture?

DEBUNK: "If we know, then the enemy would know. Then the enemy could adapt. Loose lips sink ships."

Yes, well tight lips sank the World Trade Center. The Bush administration is to blame for not preventing 9/11 because they failed to warn the American public. If Bush had released the August 6th PDB to the public instead of ignoring it, every man, woman, child, FBI agent, CIA agent, INS agent, police officer, and security guard in our country would have been on guard and on the look out for terrorists in time to stop them.

It is one thing to keep secrets to prevent the enemy from knowing your plans; it is another thing (an evil and irresponsible thing) to keep secrets to prevent your own people from knowing the enemies' plans.

As for our enemies adapting to Bush's "alternative" techniques, what does Bush expect them to do? "Grow gills," as Jon Stewart suggests? If Bush can't tell the American people what these techniques are because he knows they would not approve, then he should not be using those techniques.

DEBUNK: "Our enemies use torture all the time."

Well, most Americans believe in the Golden Rule, even if President Bush does not.

DEBUNK: "President Bush is doing what he has to do to keep us and our families safe."

At what price?! Our humanity? Our good name in the world? Our innocence?

The ends do not justify the means. Doing evil for the sake of good is still evil. Torture for the sake of security is still torture. I would rather die knowing we always tried to do the right thing than live in a country that is known for torture.

Our safety and security should come from intelligence and goodwill, not from torture and war.

DEBUNK: "What if there is an imminent threat?"

Torture causes people to say anything to end the torture. This means lies. This means false intelligence. The result is the same regardless of whether the threat is imminent or not.

False intelligence can be disastrous. It can be even more disastrous when the threat is considered "imminent." Take the war in Iraq, for instance. WMDs, nuclear weapons program, and the connection to al Qaida and 9/11 were all lies about Iraq based on false intelligence which led to the disastrous situation we have in Iraq today.

DEBUNK: "At least we are fighting the terrorists over there, so we don't have to fight them over here."

That is an absurd argument. If our troops weren't being killed in Iraq, then maybe this would be a good point. So far, about as many Americans have died in Iraq as on 9/11, and if you consider that that number of Americans have died in Iraq in 3 years, compared to the 8 years it took bin Laden to orchestrate 9/11, the terrorists are able to kill Americans more efficiently because we went into Iraq.

So, I fail to see how fighting them "over there" is beneficial to us when more Americans are dying because we are "over there."

DEBUNK: "America is safer because we went into Iraq."

Again, more Americans are dying because we are in Iraq, our country has lost respect amongst our allies because we are in Iraq, our enemies' hatred for us has grown because we are in Iraq, and the number of terrorists has grown all because we went into Iraq. More Americans dying, more hatred, more enemies, and less friends does not equal "safer."

DEBUNK: "But America hasn't been attacked since 9/11."

Again, our troops are attacked almost everyday in Iraq. Aren't our troops a part of America? When they are attacked, America is attacked.

It makes no difference to terrorists whether they attack Americans in Iraq or in America. Why should it make a difference to us?

DEBUNK: "Would you rather have Saddam Hussein back in power with his rape rooms and torture chambers?"

That argument lacks so much rationality that I can't believe it even exists.

No one disagrees with the claim that Saddam Hussein was evil and did evil things (except maybe Saddam). However, we didn't stop any of that evil by removing Hussein from power. Now, instead of Hussein's dictatorial evil, there is this chaotic evil. We didn't stop the torture or sexual abuse (see: Abu Ghraib. It continues today through sectarian strife and civil war.

So, while we may have removed Hussein from power, the evil has not been removed.

DEBUNK: "That's why we need to stay the course."

Staying the course is not working. Staying the course means more troops are killed or wounded. Staying the course means more sectarian strife and civil war. Staying the course means more terrorists. Staying the course means more terrorist attacks. Staying the course means more innocent Iraqi civilians are killed or wounded. Staying the course means more ripping off American tax payers and war-profiteering by American corporations like Halliburton. Staying the course means increasing our national debt. Staying the course means continuing to FAIL.

If we were all on a bus and that bus kept getting driven into a ditch despite all our warnings to the bus driver, shouldn't we fire the bus driver. Whatever we are doing, it is not working. We keep getting driven into a ditch. When that happens, we need to demand change from those in power. So far, our demands are going unanswered, and when our demands go unanswered, we need to fire those in power. That means voting against every politician who supports Bush this November.

I see no reason why around 40% still approves of Bush or why any Republican should survive a race against a Democrat this November except that these RWTP still have some sway over the American public. However, I see no reason why that should continue when these RWTP are so easily DEBUNKED.

All Democratic Campaigns Should Read This

Building a narrative by Kos should be mandatory reading for all Democratic campaigns.

Republicans are masters of building the "narrative". They don't throw these kinds of numbers at voters and expect to move them their direction. They build a narrative based on their (positive) values and their opponent's (negative) ones.

So in 2004, Bush's entire campaign was essentially 1) Bush will defend America, and 2) Kerry is a flip flopper. In 2000, it was 1) Bush is a compassionate bipartisan conservative, and 2) Gore exaggerates.

That's it. Everything else is slotted into that narrative.

At a recent event I ran into a gubernatorial candidate who asked me, exasperated, why his state's press wouldn't cover the GOP nominee's draconian position on abortion -- he opposed it even in cases where the mother's life was in danger. I said, "because it's an issue. And issues don't generally make good stories. Or, at best, they are a one-day story."

The key is to find that negative value, and base the entire campaign to define the opponent around it. Then, every single issue that arises can be neatly slotted into that value, reinforcing it in the media and the voters' minds.

This speaks to my own theory that Republicans are good at running campaigns but bad at running government. Democrats are the opposite, and unfortunately, if you are bad at running campaigns, then it won't matter how good you are at running government because you won't be running it.

I am pretty sure that the gubernatorial candidate Kos references is Ted Strickland who is the Democratic candidate for governor in Ohio. He is running agains the Republican candidate Ken Blackwell who opposes abortion even to save a woman's life.

This extremist position is dangerous for women everywhere, and no Ohioan should vote for Blackwell because of it. Personnally, I think that if Strickland ran against Blackwell on this issue alone, he would win the election easily.

However, this does little towards "building a narrative" as Kos suggests. The Strickland campaign needs to work on that. I would suggest that the narrative against Blackwell is that he is an extremist.

Ken Blackwell is an extremist. On abortion, he is an extremist. On taxes, he is an extremist. His dangerous extremist positions are dangerous for Ohio and Ohioans.

There is your narrative, Strickland.

Now, if we can just get all Democratic candidates to focus on this idea of building narratives, they would be unstoppable.

Gore Unveils Global-Warming Plan

From The Washington Post:

NEW YORK, Sept. 18 -- Former vice president Al Gore laid out his prescription for an ailing and overheated planet Monday, urging a series of steps from freezing carbon dioxide emissions to revamping the auto industry, factories and farms.

Gore proposed a Carbon Neutral Mortgage Association ("Connie Mae," to echo the familiar Fannie Mae) devoted to helping homeowners retrofit and build energy-efficient homes. He urged creation of an "electranet," which would let homeowners and business owners buy and sell surplus electricity.

"This is not a political issue. This is a moral issue -- it affects the survival of human civilization," Gore said in an hour-long speech at the New York University School of Law. "Put simply, it is wrong to destroy the habitability of our planet and ruin the prospects of every generation that follows ours."

The Result Of Pro-Torture Repulicans In Charge

This is what happens when we elect Pro-Torture Republicans:

Maher Arar (entry from Wikipedia)

Arar was imprisoned in Syria for 10 1/2 months, during which time he was tortured and forced to sign a false confession which purported that he had trained in Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. He says that he was kept in a small, dark, underground cell, beaten and threatened with electrocution. He was further traumatized by overhearing other prisoners being tortured. He had some visits from diplomatic officials, but he did not tell them that he was being tortured until their seventh visit, after which conditions improved for him. His explanation for waiting was that his jailers were in the room during the visits and that they had warned him beforehand not to discuss his treatment or he would be punished.

Canadian Falsely Accused Of Terrorism

(AP) A software engineer falsely accused of being a terrorist by Canadian police was shipped to Syria by the United States, where he was imprisoned and tortured ...

Canadian falsely tortured as extremist, inquiry finds
Canada al-Qaeda suspect cleared
Rendition Rendered
MR. PRESIDENT. YOU NEED CLARITY? HERE'S YOUR CLARITY

The Republican Party Is The Pro-Torture Party.

That sentence deserved its own post.

Bush fears war crimes prosecution, impeachment
Powell joins opponents of Bush tribunal plan
Recovering from 9/11: Return to the Rule of Law

Debate Over Torture? What Happended To Our Country?

Bush argues terrorism case after Republican revolt

Bush goes before reporters a day after a Senate Committee rejected the president's pleas that legislation on foreign terrorists allow CIA interrogators to use tough interrogation methods.


Instead, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted 15-9 to endorse an alternative bill by Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain that would protect the rights of foreign terrorism suspects.

McCain, Virginia Republican Sen. John Warner and South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham made up the core of the rebellion against Bush and engineered the vote despite a personal visit by the president on Thursday.

Let stop beating around the bush, and start talking about what is really going on here. This is about human rights versus torture.

Since when did the Republican Party become the Pro-Torture Party? Since when did America become the country where we are having debates over whether or not it is okay to violate human rights?

This is why I hate Bush, his administration, his party, and the people that voted for them. I hate them for what they have done to our country, our ideals.

Suddenly, we find our government fighting for the right to torture, violate human rights, and redefine the Geneva Conventions. It is like we are living in the Twilight Zone. How did we get to this point?

Where is the outratge?! How can 40% of the the United States (where we are supposed to be better than our enemies) still support a president who supports TORTURE? 40%! There should be a revolution in this country! There should be storms of massive protests demanding the resignation of any president who argues for the right to torture! But because of stupid, blind party loyalty, people believe this lying sack of crap when he says we don't torture while simultaneously demanding the right to torture.

If you are not planning to torture anyone, then you do not need to be able to legally torture. Bush wants to be able to legally torture because he is torturing people. Why else would he fight so hard for this?

The Bush administration complains that the Geneva Conventions are too vague on this issue. No one else seems to have had this problem with the Geneva Conventions since they were created (unless they wanted to torture people). Obviously, the Bush administration has a problem with the Geneva Conventions. They want to torture, and the Geneva Conventions say they can't. That is why they want to try to redefine or reinterpret them, so that their illegal activities and human rights violations can be legal under their new definitions.

Again, why there is not rioting in the streets over this is beyond me. This is supposed to be America. This is supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave, not the land of the torturers and home of the human rights violators.

If the Geneva Conventions is really too "vague" for the Bush team, how about a Golden Rule standard? Is that too vague? Do unto your enemies in your prisons, as you would have them do unto you in their prisons? That's what the Geneva Conventions are based on. Protecting your own.

It could be that I was just naive, and America was never as rosy as I believed it to be when I was a child, but I cannot help how I feel about this.

I want my country back.