TWIN PEAKS (the giant)

This Twin Peaks scene is what I imagine it would have been like to have been in a meeting with Dick Cheney...

Please forgive me, Mr. Lynch...

"Agent Cooper has been shot and is in the land of nowhere. A Giant appears....

My Muse Busts Chops (mine)

Sometimes it takes a headline to jolt the senses enough for my muse to rise up and begin to move me to write.

I had her look at the headlines below and she smirked, rolled her eyes and said, "You've got to be kidding me? Those headlines aren't inspiring, they're, unbeknownst to their authors, friggin’ rhetorical!" I responded incredulously. Really? You think so? I ducked and she began to furiously break each of them down for me. The headline comes first, followed by her detailed analysis.

Tucker Carlson and Dana Perino Join Fox News as Contributors

No shit! Couldn't have seen that one coming...

Republican Insiders: Cheney Is Hurting the Party

No shit! You reap what you sow, I suppose.

Bair: Some Bank CEO’s Will be Fired

No shit! (As well they should be!)

911 Mastermind Questioned About Iraq/Al Qaeda Link During Waterboardings

No shit!

Media Shocked, Shocked, Shocked (I tell ya!) That Pelosi Criticizes CIA

No shit! Liberal media bias my ass! The MSM are a bunch of egomaniacal corporate friggin’ lapdogs!

Miss California on Cable News: Fox & Friends Gives Carrie Prejean Her Chance

Oh my goodness! Who’d have ever imagined that one, Wally!

43 Children Stun-Gunned at Prisons ‘Take Your Kid to Work’ Day

No sh-
Wait... You snuck a headline in on me!

This one’s got legs. Not too shoddy.
That one, my dear, is a headline that,
Although shocking, no pun intended,
Hasn’t a rhetorical bone in its body.

Now, if you’ll not bother me again,
Until you stop being a nitwit,
I might, sometime in the future,
take you seriously... No shit.

© 2008 mrp/thepoetryman

The Dick and Liz STFU Sandwich on Wry...

(A Poetic Justice Photomontage)

Cheney To Travel Around Country In Sound Truck Promoting Torture

What? It must be his Straight-Jacket Express Tour! Only funnier...

Truth & No Consquences

The topic below was originally posted on my blog, the Intrepid Liberal Journal.

Unless hermetically sealed in a dungeon, I assume readers are aware of the “torture memos” authored by Bush administration lawyers in 2002-2003 and released to the public this past week by the Justice Department. Their release followed intense debate between Attorney General Eric Holder who advocated transparency and CIA Director Leon Pannetta who argued on behalf of secrecy.

Each time I started to read one I stopped out of disgust. I finally read them all yesterday after initially avoiding it. Ultimately, as citizens we all have a duty to familiarize ourselves with this dark chapter in our history yet it took me a couple days to overcome my reluctance and read these documents. Having done so I urge everyone to do the same and not simply rely upon the punditocracy and blogosphere for interpretation.

President Obama courageously and in my view rightly, authorized their release because we must not shield shameful truths under the false pre-text of national security. The criticism of former Bush officials notwithstanding, releasing these memos is an important step in the Obama administration’s efforts to rehabilitate America’s image.

The cost to our national security in releasing memos with respect to banned torture techniques is outweighed by the higher consideration of restoring America’s respectability with the civilized world. We can’t ignore our immoral transgressions because the world hasn’t and the national security argument is a false construct. Indeed, these now banned policies were ineffective at best and harmed our national security by further radicalizing the world against us.

Read More +/-

Many on the left are understandably outraged at the administration’s decision not to prosecute intelligence operatives who implemented these policies and have invoked the “Nuremberg defense” in venting their criticism. I sympathize with their argument even as I feel conflicted about it. Yes, I acknowledge feeling conflicted about what to do with CIA employees who were promised legal cover. Not all “truths” are absolute.

It doesn’t seem right to prosecute these people after the Justice Department promised they would not be prosecuted in the first place. To do sends a message that we expect these people to do our dirty work with the understanding they will be abandoned once the going gets tough.

I’d like to think I would have the moral courage to say no after receiving orders to engage in torture and resist the criminal rationalizations of White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and Justice Department lawyer John Yoo. It’s easy for any of us on the outside to say these people should be prosecuted. We might feel differently if we had to walk in their shoes.

It also doesn’t seem right to simply ignore what they did. The CIA required cover from the Justice Department because they knew the Bush administration torture guidelines were illegal as well as immoral. Suppose this administration or succeeding presidents order their operatives to conduct immoral and illegal activities with respect to future detainees?

Is it not better to establish a precedent that punishes “following orders” that are illegal and reward those who stand up for the rule of law? Even if these employees are not criminally prosecuted they should pay a professional price and be fired. The culture needs to be changed and won’t be without some kind of accountability.

Without hesitation I firmly believe those who helped design these policies such as White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and John Yoo merit prosecution to the fullest extent of the law. Prosecution should also include Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney and President George W. Bush and anyone else identified either through a truth and reconciliation commission or congressional investigation as designing and ordering criminal policies in our country’s name. It is to our everlasting shame that foreign courts are willing to prosecute Americans for war crimes, while we allow our own to go on as if nothing ever happened.

President Obama apparently believes absolving the prior administration for war crimes is analogous to President Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon: the only way to allow the country to move ahead. At least President Ford though “pardoned” Richard Nixon. The act of pardoning Nixon, although condemned at the time, at least acknowledged the man committed acts subject to prosecution. And Nixon had already paid a price.

There has been no reckoning for the figures that shamed our country or any sort of official acknowledgment that they engaged in criminal behavior. Congressional Democrats should have insisted upon accountability while the Bush administration was in power. It is to the everlasting shame of the Democratic Party that they did not impeach Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Gonzales after he later became Attorney General, when they had the chance.

I believe a mature democracy should be able to conduct the people's business and simultaneously pursue the truth no matter where or how high up it leads. If President Obama however truly believes prosecuting former members of the Bush administration, including Bush and Cheney to be a distraction the nation can’t afford, then he should pardon them. Let's assume for the sake of argument that President Obama is correct. That criminal prosecution of Bush, Cheney and their minions would paralyze the body politic at a time when action is needed on multiple fronts.

At least the act of pardoning sends a message that the United States of America acknowledges their wrongdoing for posterity. It would also forever mark those pardoned long after bloggers like me are dead. Pardoning them would further stain those who enabled their heinous policies. Those enablers not only include the Republican Party but Democratic leaders such as Nancy Pelosi and Jay Rockefeller of the Senate Intelligence Committee who were briefed on these policies. Even if the entire Bush cabal never serves a second in prison, pardoning them is far preferable than simply “not prosecuting” the most feculent administration in American history.

Otherwise, releasing these memos amounts to truth without any consequences. And that's not acceptable.

FUNDAMENTALS

The fundamentals of our economy may not be strong- 

The fundamentals of Wall Street may have lost their way- 

The fundamentals of our banking system may be corrupt and unethical- 

The fundamentals of our health care is in need of sweeping changes, 

But the fundamentals of the following exchange

between our president 

and 

Kroft of 60 Minutes is rock solid...

OBAMA: I fundamentally disagree with Dick Cheney. Not surprisingly. You know, I think that Vice President Cheney has been at the head of a movement whose notion is somehow that we can't reconcile our core values, our constitution, our belief that we don't torture, with our national security interests. I think he's drawing the wrong lesson from history. The facts don't bear him out. I think he is... that attitude, that philosophy has done incredible damage to our image and position in the world. I mean, the fact of the matter is, after all these years, how many convictions actually came out of Guantanamo? How many... how many terrorists have actually been brought to justice under the philosophy that is being promoted by Vice President Cheney? It hasn't made us safer. What it has been is a great advertisement for anti-American sentiment, which means that there is constant effective recruitment of Arab fighters and Muslim fighters against U.S. interests all around the world.

KROFT: Some of it being organized by a few people who were released from Guantanamo.

OBAMA: Well, there is no doubt that we have not done a particularly effective job in sorting rough who are truly dangerous individuals that we've got to make sure are not a threat to us, who are folks that we just swept up. The whole premise of Guantanamo promoted by Vice President Cheney was that, somehow, the American system of justice was not up to the task of dealing with these terrorists. I fundamentally disagree with that. Now, do these folks deserve miranda rights? Do they deserve to be treated like a shoplifter down the block? Of course not.

KROFT: What do you do with those people?

OBAMA: Well, I think we're going to have to figure out a mechanism to make sure that they are not released and do us harm, but do so in a way that is consistent with both our traditions, sense of due process, international law. But this... this is the legacy that's been left behind and, you know, i'm surprised that the vice president is eager to defend a legacy that was unsustainable. Let's assume that we didn't change these practices. How... how long are we going to go? Are we going to just keep on going until, you know, the entire Muslim world and Arab world despises us? Do we think that's really going to make us safer? I... I don't know a lot of thoughtful thinkers, liberal or conservative, who think that was the right approach.

Tomar medidas ahora!

UNO

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that in 2005, almost 95,000 Americans developed a MRSA (an antibiotic-resistant strain of "staph") infection, and 19,000 of them died from its symptoms, such as inflammation of the heart lining and pneumonia.

What's more shocking is that 85 percent of those infected with MRSA contracted it in health care facilities, largely due to inadequate sanitation procedures.

Congress must pass pending legislation that would lower the rate of MRSA and other deadly infections, including a bill that would require hospitals to publicly report infection rates. Tell your elected officials in Congress to vote to keep MRSA and other deadly superbugs out of our hospitals and communities.

DOS

The one click form here will send your personal message to all your government representatives selected below, with the subject "Investigate Cheney's Private Assassination Ring." At the same time you can send your personal comments only as a letter to the editor of your nearest local daily newspaper if you like.

RIP OFF

(Click to enlarge)

Bush/Cheney Action...

Demand that Bush/Cheney be held accountable

for possible constitutional abuses

"Quick, While No One Is Paying Attention!"

Following up on this earlier post of mine and just connecting some additional dots here ...

Expand the post +/-

First, this:

Bush leaves 'staggering' array of problems for successor

Most presidents-elect can look forward to a transition period after Election Day, during which they recover from the rigors of the campaign and assemble their cabinet and White House staff. However, with a looming recession and two wars under way and no fresh initiatives coming from the Bush administration to address them, whoever is victorious in tomorrow's voting won't enjoy that luxury.

"I guess you'd have to have your head examined if you wanted to be president of the United States right now," Professor James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University, told the Associated Press.

Thurber suggested that even though all presidents promise to hit the ground running, "This one will be jumping out of an airplane as soon as the election's over with."

According to a report released by AP on Monday, George W. Bush became president swearing "to confront problems, to not pass them on to future Congresses or future presidents."

However, noted AP's Mark Smith, "after two full terms in the White House, the array of things he leaves his successor to solve is staggering, from an economy rocked by the worst crisis since the Great Depression to a pair of wars, one of which US spy chiefs say is spiraling out of control."

"And then there are those minor crises," added Smith, listing energy costs, immigration, health care, social security, and climate change. "The fixes are all costly and America is flat broke."

Indeed, indeed. Now, this:

Ex-generals: Review Bush's detention authority

Former generals and U.S. Justice Department officials filed briefs Thursday urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Bush administration's authority to indefinitely detain the only suspected enemy combatant held on U.S. soil.

"This unprecedented expansion of executive authority within the borders of the United States is not only at odds with more than 200 years of history, but it is wholly unnecessary," argued former judges and officials, including former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno and former FBI Director William Sessions. "The federal government is eminently capable of both protecting our nation's security and safeguarding our proud tradition of civil liberties."

(...) The American Civil Liberties Union asked the high court last month to review a July decision in which the closely divided 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that the administration of President George W. Bush has the authority to detain anyone suspected of being an al-Qaida member.

But the court also ruled that suspects must be able to challenge their military detention. The Supreme Court has not yet said whether it will take the case.

A spokesman for the U.S. Department of Justice declined comment on the matter. After the appeals court issued its rulings, Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the decision "recognizes the president's authority to capture and detain al-Qaida agents who, like the 9-11 hijackers, come to this country to commit or facilitate warlike acts against American civilians."

(...) According to documents obtained last week through a Freedom of Information Act request, U.S. military officers at the Charleston prison were ordered to treat prisoners there the same way prisoners at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, were treated, including depriving them of natural light for months (...).

And then, there is also this:

Bush team rushes environment policy changes

As the U.S. presidential candidates sprint toward the finish line, the Bush administration is also sprinting to enact environmental policy changes before leaving power.

Whether it's getting wolves off the Endangered Species List, allowing power plants to operate near national parks, loosening regulations for factory farm waste or making it easier for mountaintop coal-mining operations, these proposed changes have found little favor with environmental groups.

The one change most environmentalists want, a mandatory program to cut climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions, is not among these so-called "midnight regulations."

Bureaucratic calendars make it virtually impossible that any U.S. across-the-board action will be taken to curb global warming in this administration, though both Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama have promised to address it if they win Tuesday's U.S. presidential election.

Even some free-market organizations have joined conservation groups to urge a moratorium on last-minute rules proposed by the Interior Department and the Environmental Protection Agency, among others.

"The Bush administration has had eight years in office and has issued more regulations than any administration in history," said Eli Lehrer of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. "At this point, in the current economic climate, it would be especially harmful to push through ill-considered regulations in the final days of the administration."

John Kostyack of the National Wildlife Federation, which joined Lehrer's group to call for a ban on these last-minute rules, said citizens are cut out of the process, allowing changes in U.S. law that the public opposes, such as rolling back protections under the Endangered Species Act.

(...) The Bush team has urged that these regulations be issued no later than Saturday, so they can be put in effect by the time President George W. Bush leaves office on January 20.

If they are in effect then, it will be hard for the next administration to undo them, and in any case, this may not be the top priority for a new president, said Matt Madia of OMB Watch, which monitors the White House Office of Management and Budget, through which these proposed regulations must pass.

"This is typical," Madia said of the administration's welter of eleventh-hour rules. "It's a natural reaction to knowing that you're almost out of power."

Industry is likely to benefit if Bush's rules on the environment become effective, Madia said.

"Whether it's the electricity industry or the mining industry or the agriculture industry, this is going to remove government restrictions on their activity and in turn they're going to be allowed to pollute more and that ends up harming the public," Madia said in a telephone interview.

What is unusual is the speedy trip some of these environmental measures are taking through the process.

For example, one Interior Department rule that would erode protections for endangered species in favor of mining interests drew more than 300,000 comments from the public, which officials said they planned to review in a week, a pace that Madia called "pretty ludicrous."

Why the rush? Because rules only go into effect 30 to 60 days after they are finalized, and if they are not in effect when the next president takes office, that chief executive can decline to put them into practice -- as Bush did with many rules finalized at the end of the Clinton administration.

Now, please read/re-read this previous post of yours truly from last month and then, of course, the real question becomes this: what else is Bush rushing to implement via decree?

Truly scary indeed ...

"FUBAR needing cleaning up in aisle 5 ..."


(Cross-posted from APOV)