"so you don't have to"

Read? Watch Fox? Jump to conclusions?
That's the ticket. I don't. Well maybe the last one,
but with reason. You should verify.
Military.com "Ruining America"
LA Times/Truthout "Not America's Man in Iraq."

Reality is a lot of flip-flop. Especially near elections, and it depends who and where you are speaking. But normally, a closer read will explain there is nuance.
There is a difference between timetables and benchmarks, even though they are both furniture that can be moved later.

And being someone's man, is not what freedom or progress is about.

It would seem that the leader in Iraq cannot be seen tied too close to the U.S. in Iraq for him to be successful, yet the whole divide represents the dillemma that there is flip flop for political consumption and we are dining on an international menu. This does not excuse flip flop, but putting the blame on nuance is why we got where we are.

Jumping to conclusions so I don't have to read,
you may just trust, or you can verify too.
[Note: links may or may not have been read by me or never even used before.]

SEVENTEEN SCARIEST WORDS

FOR REPUBLICANS:

"I'm from the Democratic Party and we're here to help the country and the common good"

Friday Night Quarterbacking/Random thoughts

Friday night as opposed to Monday morning?
Bush loves to campaign, but press conferences?
Benchmarks or timetables at this time?
Still seems like only rhetoric.
[Answering some questions, often going in length on some not asked.]
The election is the game; the war or the plan, the football.

[Random notes and/or(sometimes both) questions on Bush's words and/or thoughts?]

Most of the terrorist have been brought to justice?
More troops to Iraq? General Casey?
Must not believe in his own rhetoric.

Feelings? Bush felt. Timetable vs. flexibility
Time table means defeat. Having plan means defeat?
Decipher the Washington Post?
Violent methods to achieve political objectives?
Child Tax credit?
Benchmarks - buy in?
Expects people to be held to account?
Rests with him?

RIGHT ON!

[ORIGINAL GAME PLAN: THE NEW ADMINISTRATION?]
Accountable to the people? Past or future plans?

[These notes(unbold, un-bracketed, un-italicized)just jotted live during Bush press conference.]
[FINAL NOTE: Will these be addressed by the media or the Democrats?]

October Surprise? Changing "Staying the Course".

Is this the October Surprise? Bush has changed the words he will use to stay the course.

Let us hope that things don't get any worse or better, depending on whether you are planning the "October Suprise"

Hint: The suprise is buried in the planning, but they won't say it.

Beyond a Lost look back again.

Somewhere today I stumbled upon a link that was worth my reading. I believe it was in this blog, yet I cannot consider it a re-read. I did finally give it a full read as well as another result of re-search of other links.
Looking Beyond Conquest and beyond laissez faire or Wealth of nations

Krugman v. Pelosi

Not that they are opposed,
I just juxtaposition
the two perspectives.

Krugman: Don't Make Nice.

Pelosi: more than "lame duck is enough" (See "Two Heartbeats..." video)

Together: Not just don't make nice, but more than just a pledge of what is on the table or not.

Spinning Hot Air?

On Friday Bush made a pretty good arguement for following my blog. While I have yet to get a link to the quote, it had to do with seeing the future and the future was offensive. With all the recent talk about changing course (not Bush words) the one thing that would not change was the offensive nature of his approach.

Another think that I need to find is my earlier reference to troop withdrawal in this blog and that itself would likely change before the election. It would be helpful to find my post, but Sunday the New York Times questions the timing of the change in the discussion.

Fooling Time & Table Turning Nuance

The New York Times has two pieces that barely need to be read, but unlike memos which the Bush administration had trouble even reading at least they are taking us somewhere. They are worth a read but obviously It's Voter-Fooling Time in America and it is no October Surprise that Tables Turned for the GOP Over Iraq Issue.

Republicans have said the Democrats have no plan.
Democrats have at least four plans:
leave,
redeploy,
do a better job,
and/or increase the level of troops.

Bush has said he is "the decider" but he is waiting for a plan, so he must not even be a planner.
He certainly doesn’t want to want to choose between "stay the course" and "cut and run", but at least he is the chooser of when he will listen to those he chooses to find a plan.

Then I hear Shields and Brooks. I must disagree that whatever the plan, it would matter how and who actually uses it, that decides whether it should be done. Nothing would be off the table after an election if everything is not on the table before the election.

* Since few of these options are absolute, actual plans may be a combination that only increases the number available, but that only explains how "tough" it will be to get anywhere when Republicans are more about just winning.

Power Broker Mountain

What is it?
The current paradigm.
Not what it should be.

"Power Broker Mountain" Copyright 2006 Roger LeRoy Larson
[If this doesn't do the job, may it at least coin the term.
May the actual bucks stop here later.]

Voting Right/Equal Treatment

California Coalition for Immigration Reform sent "Spanish-language letter that was circulated to Latino voters in Orange County" to make sure they are voting right.

America's PAC encourages African American voters to Vote Our Values with the assistance of school voucher advocate J. Patrick Rooney with "Abortion ads".

My sarcasm must be noted in that these are just more of the "fear and smear" tactics which are common to the Republican camp to outright disenfranchise and lie.

For more on recent equal treatment of local Congressional and Senate races click back on the two here.

Lastly a concern about a report on voter fraud and the lack thereof which is itself being suppressed so as not to interfere with the fear that spurs the concern that feeds the suppression.

Act now to insist that the Elections Assistance Commission release the report now.

"whatsoever a man soweth"

New "Law"

Bush v. Olbermann

"The beginning of the end of America."

"Self-afflicted wound."

My take: Bush has just signed a law that Saddam could live with.

As summarized it is not the golden rule but the worst parental metaphore that he hopes will reign.

"Do unto others... as"

"Do as I say, not as I do"

Unfortunately we may not be able to change the cause and effect relations of physics simply by what we say, but by what we do, others will follow.

Echoes of Past Presidents and Wars.

As congress has made Bush the decider with the Military Commission Act, now he has a plan to get out of Iraq, so says a Senator, he just cannot tell anyone.

Any similarity to Vietnam is just a coincidence and in the wrong order. Coverup led to war, leads to new laws, leads to plan to get out, to win an election.

October surprise? Not this time.

But the sharpest tool in the shed?
Trying to compare it to the Korean War which defined the Cold War which we won.
Let's see the Korean war was a win because we won the Cold War but now North Korea has nuclear capabilities, and so does Pakistan and how many other's during the Cold War? Just what will be the questions when we win "in a new and 'different kind of war, an insurgent war' against Islamic fascists."?

The question now should be an echo of an earlier Bush on security and the economy.
"Are we better off now than we were 6 years ago"? OK, I tweaked it a bit.

Sharpening the questions?

Are Republicans "Running Scared"? as NBC Nightly News implies?
No.
They are running on "Fear and Smear".

Sound like Cut and Run?
No.
They claim they are sharpening the questions.
So that is what they are doing, instead of sharpening the answers.

October Surpise? "Power Broker Mountain"

It would be nice if the surprise were "no suprise".
It could be that it is National Character Counts Week,
but it is not the first.
Could it be that Humor Counts? Check first link.
Or could it be that there will be a National Straight Face Week.
See link again, imagining Bush reading it.
Maybe it should be National Tow The Line Week.

Just what is the connection?
When the Foley scandal first broke, I thought that
there may be one "heckuva" closet caucus.
Now it is more about what is being purged and why.

Here is the less than tenuous(That would be nine-you-us) connection to the nine little words that scared Reagan.
"I'm from the government, and I'm here to help". He also had 3 little words that he liked but was quoting Lenin:
"Trust but verify."
The new nine:
"Just trust me, but don't ask, and don't tell".

They may purge voter roles and the closet caucus but with one party control our government is in the closet.
Actually with 12 words, it is more than tenuous.
"Just trust me, but don't ask, and don't tell, that's my job."
The Unitary Executive is a theory that seems more than controversial, but which is put to rest in the Military Commisions Act.
The irony is that while Wikipedia has an article which has it's neutrality in dispute; with the Institute for Public Accuracy has two views presented; and Findlaw has quite an extensive article, if it was more than just a theory, why the new law?

And why the closet image? It is really about "Power Broker Mountain".
If this is too much to read,
(and I never saw the movie, not that there was anything wrong with that)
the shortest read is Article II, section 2, PARAGRAPH TWO
of the constitution and see how much congress is responsible for the law and presidential powers, which now must come out of the closet.
Sections 3 and 4 are even shorter and thanks to fear and smear even deeper in the closet.

Regime Change

even more "hard work",[mp3]

One of the problems involved in the discussion to Stop North Korea Now is that the administration tried to simultaneously deal with changing North Korea's behavior and regime change [see audio mp3]. It should be apparent that in dealing with North Korea these concerns work against each other, but when it comes to the behavior of our our leaders they are as close as can be. In the former case a threat of regime change leads to a reason to develop weapons for reasons given in the discussion: prestige, security and politics. For America the issues of prestige, security and even politics are what demand regime change here, but are only talk for those in power now.

Hence, another link I need to find is my earliest use of the term "fear and smear". Such tactics are the administration's only defense, and they are only offensive. The results are in, but they can only change their talk.

Democrats are the party of defense,
Republicans are the offensive party.

WARNING: Nuclear Diplomacy is "hard work".

McCain claimed that Clinton was too much carrot and no stick.
But Bush is all stick and no carrots.

In fact they are getting fat on both the sticks and the carrots. Feasting on the products of their failure to do the "hard work" to preempt wars and WMD proliferation.
[My above thoughts were from two days ago, but all links are thanks to the Center for American Progress and Eric Alterman's Think Again: Blaming Success, Upholding Failure]

The success and failure of the Clinton and Bush administrations are in that order.

As Bush has said "war is hard work", but as I have said, that is why they should have done the "hard work" needed before war was "a last resort".
Now there is even more "hard work",not just to change the course but fill the holes that have been dug.

[Finally, I am not sure where I expressed the concern quite some time ago, but the recent balking by China on "punitive" sanctions reflects the idea that some countries will not make even preemptive diplomatic "hard work" any easier. SEE above link even more "hard work" in the form of an MP3 discussion to Stop North Korea Now]

"Only talk" or "only politics"

"all options"

"only talk" in my previous post links to a Newsweek piece about just who shot progress in the foot. And Bush refers to Iraq today where stakes "couldn't be higher".

But are we better off with the "Excess of Evil".?

Hearing Jeffrey Feldman of frameshopisopen.com on Thom Hartmann helped me on the above tangent regarding the search for who is grilling the stakes? [my phrase]. And Thom reminds us that these links [my second two above] are in the International Edition.

Amidst the Pile and Piling On.

This is increasingly troubling. That John McCain is playing politics with history and world stability.

But what should give us courage are the likes of Ed Shultz who put me on the trail of hope and courage in House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi.

But even MORE BREAKING NEWS:
OCTOBER SUPRISE: Hopefully only politics.

Thanks to Thom Hartmann and a quick search [plausible " A and B "]
Hopefully only the talk.
But "coincidence" excuse sounds not only like "plausible deniability" but more like "plausible incompetence".

Meanwhile things are at such a pitch, I may run blog silent for periods, hopefully resulting in "plausible progress".

Could things get any worse?

October Surprise aside, when someone is digging a hole for themselves, you do not take away the shovel.

But as I said before the last election, do not bet that things cannot get worse.

For Republicans the hole they dig is only for them to shovel a pile on Democrats.

From the Foley scandal to the violence summit, to the North Korean nuclear test, are we better off than we were 6 years ago? OK, this one I borrowed with a twist from somewhere just today.

"You can't go home again" comes to mind as I review the last week or so of links which I have not revisited nor piled upon. But I will bring the latest from Keith Olbermann on the "The death of habeas corpus". But another piece that harkens back to how we got here, being the evolution of facts.
Keeping in mind that new facts will alter even current theories, but theories need unaltered facts.