Office of the Independent Blogger

CNN has dumped Reuters. Guess they’re going to ask Nancy Grace to cover the news and find it as well. Or maybe they’ll send James Carville out into the field and hire Newt Gingrich to rummage through dumpsters. Perhaps they’ll ask Matt Drudge to be their source. He does it for millions of Americans, after all. First Paula Zahn left, and now these guys are leaving one of the most credible news gathering services in the world for what?

There is no longer any reason to watch CNN.

Fidel Castro believes that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will run for President and Vice President, respectively, and he says they appear invincible. Contrary to popular belief, he doesn’t endorse them. In fact, he claims that they aren’t playing “politics” but are instead playing “cards.” Which makes one wonder what his definition of politics is. Card-playing can be political. Just like shooting someone, as his limited definition of political would agree with. I contend that everything is implicitly political and most things are explicitly political. He would accuse me of playing cards and attempt to have me shot. But wouldn’t it be something if this man whose idea of government has been antiquated and whose very life status is in question took me for a ride on the rickity boat he rides to hell every morning to explain to me what politics are? He clearly doesn’t understand them well.

Everybody knows that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama don’t like each other and wouldn’t be a good match, either, as that ticket would have far too many minorities on it for the nation to stomach.

Michael Vick pleaded guilty to all sorts of criminal charges on Friday. He apologized yesterday. I’ve been waiting for the right time to discuss his situation, and I will do it now. When the story broke, I wrote an entry entitled Dogging Byrd due to the anger it aroused in the senior Senator from New York but I decided against it as I wanted to wait to hear more information and I didn’t want to break any of Senator Byrd’s Rules. Or something.

I don’t buy his apology; if it’s sincere, I don’t accept it as he has a lot of work to do to make himself respectable (and no, writing a check isn’t enough); that said, I doubt he meant it, so it makes little difference to my opinion of the man. I will be disgusted if he only gets, say, a few months in prison or less than two years, even, but that’s not what I want to comment on as he hasn’t been sentenced yet. I want to comment on the idea that Michael Vick is a victim of racism or prejudice. He isn’t a victim of anything. He is a man with a lot of money with lousy morals who made terrible decisions and will now suffer the consequences, no matter how much he tried to cover it up. He’s a bad man, and he was never that great a Quarterback to begin with. He should be banned for life from the NFL, and if he ever goes back, especially if it’s before Rickey Williams is reinstated. Williams’ suspensions are particularly ridiculous because all he does is smoke marijuana while other guys, Shawn Merriman specifically, get busted taking steroids and get, what? A three game suspension? What a terrible justice system the NFL has, but it’s the same NFL that has turned its back on its old, ailing players, so there you go.

All I know is, Michael Vick is a moral midget, as is the organization he plays in. I sincerely hope he spends significant time in prison and never is even allowed the opportunity to return to the NFL as what he did takes a lifetime of good deeds to overcome, in my opinion. Much like murder. Atonement is all well and good, but I am not God, and so I do not know what’s genuine or not. All I know is what I see: evil actions that can’t be mended with a simple proclamation, that can’t be ignored because some would claim it’s racist to arrest him for his actions, that can’t be forgotten just because he’s got some cash. I do think that he’s a perfect fit for the moral-less NFL, but I’d like to see them move forward in the coming weeks, months and years without the Atlanta Quarterback who was a victim of nothing but his own lack of vision, faith and integrity. Anyone who tells you otherwise is on someone’s payroll.

Mitt Romney got a shout-out on the HBO series Big Love in their latest episode. There’s an old saying: “All publicity is good publicity,” but that’s not true. I count Big Love a favorite show I thoroughly enjoy watching it but unfortunately for Mitt Romney, it might be a kiss of death to be mentioned as it only brings more attention to his religion and he doesn’t want it as the American public doesn’t want it. Like I’ve long said, I don’t understand how he could be elected, even ignoring the pathetic Republican field this year, as he is a ghoul, as his Dog On The Car Roof story suggested weeks ago and as his “state fee” hikes as Governor suggest. If you’re going to hack away at a budget, don’t hack at those who can’t afford to be hacked at, whether they be school children or those with developmental disabilities. It’s crass, classless and unnecessary.

Breaking news! Senator Larry Craig of Idaho was busted in June for “a lewd incident” in a public restroom (more here). Moral of the story? Don’t come onto people you don’t know while they sit on the toilet. Ever. And you probably shouldn’t lecture the American public about morality when you’re risking sexual infection, lawful arrest and the humilitation of your entire family and political party by attempting to turn the Junior Senator loose in public and it’s even worse when you try to force the policemen to forget all about it by showing them your business card and saying, “What do you think of that?” Reminds me of an old The Critic parody where a woman has no voice but communicates using a slide whistle. Her husband says, “Let’s go make love” and the excitement is obvious from the note she plays. He then says, “What do you think of me naked?” and he receives a less than ringing endorsement.

My mother was watching Telemundo this afternoon as I arrived home from my first day of College and the four o clock news was on. First story? “Ice Cream Vendor Shot to Death in Joliet.” I couldn’t believe it. How could anyone kill a man while they do something so innocent to provide some bread for their family? And why? What would you get from the ice cream man? Were you that hungry for a Paleta? If you told him, “Give me one,” I’m sure he would’ve, no bullets needed, no death necessary. Were you that desperate to make big money? How much money did you think he would have? Why was shooting him necessary? He isn’t selling the popsicles at outrageous prices, just a dollar each, and it isn’t like he’s got hundreds sold per day.

I’m sorry, Dear Reader. I don’t often comment on crimes like these, because this is a political blog not a log of what disgusts me and doesn’t, but that was just too much for me to take without saying anything. I simply wish that I had a few extra dollars to give to this poor man’s family or the means with which to follow up on them and find out how they are. He’s left behind four children and a wife. Unfortunately, I can’t link you to a good writeup as the only one I can find is a translation by Google and the translation needs to be translated again as it went from Spanish to terrible English. Clearly, whoever programmed it failed High School Spanish.

Better news is out there, Dear Reader: George W. Bush has found a replacement for Alberto Gonzalez! Translation: Alberto has finally resigned, which means a replacement is going to be announced soon. Wonder who he’s hired, since nobody wanted it just a month ago which was why Alberto Gonzalez held on as long as he did. Whoever the replacement is has my pity, as it’ll be a thankless job. Know what I’m curious about? Did the replacement take the job because Rove resigned? Was that more a concern than working for George W. Bush? Working for Karl Rove? I’d think so, considering the negative reviews of him, but I don’t know for sure.

Lawrence Summers, the controversial former President of Harvard and ex-Secretary of the Treasury, says today that the chances of a recession are better than at any time in recent memory, and he’s right. The odds are great, though he isn’t predicting that it will recess. Just saying, It’s very possible.

I saw that, coming from him, and wondered how political it was. Is it supposed to subtly remind the public that the Clinton economy boomed? It would definitely be a boost to any Democratic campaign if the economy collapsed, but it would help Hillary Clinton the most. Not that I’d ever root for an economic collapse, large or small, as I believe the well-being of the American public is more important than political gain, but the economy is the greatest wild card in American politics, and I feel free to speculate.

A. James Carville’s War Room
B. Douglas Feith’s Fiddle
C. Douglas MacArthur’s replica uniform, worn by Gregory Peck in MacArthur because the MacArthur Foundation wouldn’t give the Pentagon the real suit as they’d once given them a pistol that was stolen
D. Paul Wolfowitz’ girlfriend
E. A copy of Wag the Dog

The correct answer is, A.

Some of you may say, “Feith’s Fiddle” doesn’t belong, but you need pleasant music to make awful war to. Some of you may say MacArthur’s fake uniform doesn’t belong, but it’s a great piece of memorabilia for one of America’s finest (and Peck was alright, too). Wolfowitz’ girlfriend is a hot little number, and what kind of warlord wages war without a little love at his side? “Well then, why is Wag the Dog on the list?” Easy. It’s a good movie. But Carville’s War Room has no room in the Pentagon, and the military is foolish for building one, as they currently are.

Listen: war rooms are for fighting wars, War Rooms are for campaigns. Before the Pentagon creates a propaganda center aimed at defending the Iraq War, they should create a war room aimed at winning the Iraq War.

Lance Armstrong is having a cancer forum this coming that that most of the Republicans are skipping but almost all the important Democrats are attending. What bothers me about it is that, without Armstrong’s attempts, there’d be little emphasis on fighting cancer from the candidates because there isn’t enough (read: any) money in it for the candidates so they don’t care, and that ultimately affects the goals of their public health administration. It’s a shame, because cancer and AIDS and other longstanding diseases need to be fought with funds from the federal government if we expect to overcome them.

This is the type of news that changes the course of a War and dictates how history will be written for future generations.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is expected to advise President Bush to reduce the U.S. force in Iraq next year by almost half, potentially creating a rift with top White House officials and other military commanders over the course of the war. Administration and military officials say Marine Gen. Peter Pace is likely to convey concerns by the Joint Chiefs that keeping well in excess of 100,000 troops in Iraq through 2008 will severely strain the military. This assessment could collide with one being prepared by the U.S. commander in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, calling for the U.S. to maintain higher troop levels for 2008 and beyond.

To be sure, the relationship between George W. Bush and his father, George W. Bush and the Pentagon, George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, Donald Rumsfeld and Doug Feith and Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney and everyone — these will all impact history, but from this point forward, whether George W. Bush listens to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or the Army General in Iraq will influence matters greatly. If he continues on the course we’ve set, Petraeus will be blamed in historical circles for advising the President to continue, and that is historically significant for reasons I don’t have to explain to someone as smart as you, Dear Reader.

Good article here about Hillary Clinton locking up the Democratic establishment as her own. Nothing surprising in there, for those who know their politics up and down and back and forth, but for those who don’t…you’re in for a treat! Or disappointment, if you prefer your candidates not to come from within, though you’d be fooling yourself because they all do, to some extent or other. That’s not all Hillary’s got going for her as proof that she’s the frontrunner: Barack Obama’s wife is getting antsy about the Senator and so she’s saying some nasty things about Mrs. Clinton. For instance: “If you can’t run your own house, you can’t run the White House.” She, and he, claim that it was taken out of context and she was just pointing out how motherly and moral she (Mrs. Obama) is (isn’t that, too, a crack?) but we all know what she was saying and what she meant. It’ll probably serve as a potent punch as the campaign goes on because some women will resent her, and peeling away the female vote will be key for any candidate. Obama, still, has no chance, but he’ll wield Bill as a weapon, as will the Republicans to a lesserbutgreater extent.

Let’s turn our focus to the Republican frontrunner, Rudy Giuliani, who I don’t take serious due to his social positions, lack of prestige and character and his lisp. He is, of course, the Terrorist Candidate: that is, the candidate who wants to strap a bomb to your chest in hopes that you’ll vote for him. Time has run an expose on his terrorist “abilities.” I don’t think he’s very good, and Time doesn’t think so either (neither do the experts, who consider himself an attention whore and a cheat — or maybe that’s just my opinion). I guess he’s pretty good at raising terror, though, as I feel fear in my spine when I think of this lisping, lying man as President. Don’t think that’s what he’s going for, though.

The Iraqi Prime Minister has me feeling flustered. All he does is attack the American government and he never cooperates with our goals or security forces. Always, “We don’t need you,” “We are better off alone!” and, most recent, “We can find friends elsewhere!” You’d think he’s back on the playground in grade school from his behavior, and upon further review, that parallel goes further than one might expect as he is speaking the truth — he can find other friends, and that is the only reason we don’t dump him off the slide and call it a morning: because he’ll wind up hanging in the sandbox with little Damascus and Tehran, brooding about Washington. That is the only reason we don’t cut our losses right now, the only reason, although I’m sure someone in the State Department has the genocide that would occur in mind.

On Iraq — Hillary Clinton praised Bush’s “troop surge” in Iraq and said it was working, which has got all the other Democrats in the race salivating the opportunity to trash her. I’m not sure what her position is on Iraq, but I don’t know anyone’s except Kucinich’s. I, for one, believe that the answer is to stick it out but decrease forces significantly. Like what we have in Korea.

Random thought: Candidates should be asked, at debates, what unpopular stances do you take and hold dear against all enemies? You see, a great measure of a great historical leader is the conviction they have in their beliefs, even if they are unpopular, and the lengths they’ll go to to uphold them. And if nothing else, it’ll tell us a little bit about each candidate’s character, whether they answer genuinely or say something like, “I support education” which doesn’t fit the parameters and is a total cop-out. End note.

In other news, a CIA report is said to say that George Tenet bears “ultimate responsibility” for not stopping the September eleventh attacks. I can live with that, but it should be noted that everybody in the American government failed and the final designation of Tenet as being most responsible for our inability to prevent the attacks does not mean that it’s his fault and if only — if only! — someone better were in the CIA, nothing would’ve happened. I contend that any man who held that post at that time would’ve been witness to history as Tenet was.

From that same story, though, I’ve derived a great complaint. Read that article and tell me what you think Richard Clark is saying. At the beginning, they make it seem as if he’s condemning Tenet for his failures and then they have him, rightly, pointing out that the issue isn’t that simple and there are many things to keep in mind. But who needs a well-written article? Nobody will read it, anyway.

The Bush Administration wants to move Guantanamo Bay to Kansas. Predictably, Kansans don’t want Gitmo there. That begs the question: who would want a prison for terrorists stationed in their backyard? No one, that’s who (would). Except for Alberto Gonzalez, though he should rethink that himself as he is a lawyer, so he should know that terrorists would gain many legal protections as captives in America as opposed to out of America.

We must make a decision — if the goal of Guantanamo is to have a prison with minimal legal protection for terrorists in an attempt to circumvent longstanding legal precedents, America isn’t the spot for that and the government would be better off holding them at Gitmo, outcry be damned, or moving them to some country that nobody has ever heard of. I just wonder if Sri Lanka needs a new bag of guns. Or an airport. I wonder what they need that we can give them as a nudge and a wink. What can we bribe them with? Perhaps that should be the State Department’s next assignment? “Figure out Sri Lanka!” That’s the problem with these strange, small countries, you know. Nobody even knows what a Sri Lankan looks like, so how do you bribe them? My only guess is that they’re lanky and as prone to accepting cash as anyone else, so let’s get to it, Mr. President!

This is a sad article to read. I, for one, have always believed in the beauty of the President’s end of tyranny in our world vision, and that’s about all he’s got. It’s a shame that nobody ever took it serious, innocent though it may be, because it’s a great goal to have, and perpetuated for generations it may eventually bear fruit. At the least, it’s a hope for peace on Earth, and the President deserves credit for ever proposing it or pushing it. Unfortunately, it goes to show that even amongst those who believe in seeking a “peace on Earth,” a “peace on Earth” has to come their way, and that way is a different way for all of us. Some believe that peace on Earth can only come through force. Others through God. Others through unilateral disarmament. So what people want isn’t truly “peace on Earth” — it’s “my peace, while I mentally masturbate to idealist visions and ignore any other peaceful proposals or ideas.” And that is why there will never be unconditional peace on Earth. Because you, taking offense, will write me a furious email stating your offense, and I will tell you that I don’t care, and you? You will not understand, throw a fit and that will be the end of it until we speak again in tenser tones.