News Roundup for 2/11/11

According to one neocon, completely incapable of democracy

-Headline of the Day-
"Former Bush-Cheney National Spokesman Thinks Muslims Are Incapable Of Democracy: 'This Is The Middle East'."

If you want an accurate and clear-eyed view of the middle east, you talk to a neocon -- because they've been so right on everything so far.

So it shouldn't surprise anyone that Fox News turned to Terry Holt, a former national spokesman for the 2004 Bush-Cheney presidential campaign, to talk about the prospects for democracy in the newly-Mubarak-free Egypt. Foxbot Martha MacCallum said that Egyptian people "want democracy, they’re tired of being repressed, they want something better."

Nononononono! said Holt. Democracy is beyond the monkey-people of Egypt, because they're all like Arab and stuff. See, the "traditions there do not support their embracing" democracy, because it's an alien concept. Never mind that they're talking about democracy all the damned time, Egyptians have never even heard of it.

Kind makes you wonder why the neocons wanted to dick around with democracy in Iraq, doesn't it? (ThinkProgress, with video)


-Cartoon time with Mark Fiore-
Hey kids, you know that Ariana Huggington lady? She just got richer! Yay!


Click for animation
Maybe the rest of us just got a little poorer, though... (MarkFiore.com)


-Bonus HotD-
"Republicans turn Congress into 'clogged toilet,' says Democratic lawmaker."

Cogent, concise, and accurate. (The Hill)

News Roundup for 2/3/11

Sen. John McCain

-Headline of the day-
"McCain Calls Middle East Pro-Democracy Movement A 'Virus'."

Remember how, when we invaded Iraq, democracy was supposed to bust out all over in the middle east -- and that was a good thing?

Well guess what: democracy is busting out all over in the middle east -- and that's a bad thing!

See, it works like this; these democracy movements have jack squat to do with Iraq, so that makes them automatically bad. Because they're gonna hate Israel. See, if democracy movements were born because of Iraq, then those movements would automatically love Israel.

Why? Just because, OK? When we bomb someone into democracy, that's like a vaccine. But when it breaks out all on its lonesome, then it's a virus.

Although, now that I think of it, I'm pretty sure that's how the British once felt about things -- say, two hundred and some years ago. (ThinkProgress, with video)


-Totally gratuitous graphic...-
...because I'm still wiped from dealing with ALL THAT SNOW!!



Totally worth it though, am I right? (Daily What)


-Bonus HotD-
"NATIONAL ENQUIRER SHOCKER: Enquirer Thinks Boehner Is 'Handsome'."

Also, that he's been banging a lobbyist and a "pretty congressional press secretary." (Wonkette)

Griper Blade: If There's Nothing to be Afraid of, Would Anyone Vote for McCain?

I may be in the minority on the left in believing that we're not going to attack Iran. Yes, we've been doing a lot of saber-rattling. Yes, our leadership is insane enough to do it. Yes, we're stepping up covert actions against Iran -- to the point of funding the al Qaeda- tied Iranian People's Resistance Movement, hypocritically making the Bush administration a state-sponsor of terrorism.

But how long have we been frightened with the scarecrow of war with Iran -- one year, two, three? We fire on Iranian boats, we move carrier groups into the Persian Gulf, we hear that Israel's going to get the ball rolling with an attack of their own. But nothing ever happens. I'm starting to think all this "war with Iran" stuff is a diplomatic game of good cop-bad cop. Unfortunately for the cops, it only makes them look indecisive; "We're cooking something up, just you wait. It's gonna be really bad..."

That it also freaks people in the US out is probably not coincidental. Bush has turned the Republican party into the party of fear. As long as you're so damned afraid you can't keep your pants dry, you'll agree to pretty much anything. And you'll look the other way when it comes to crimes like torture. The GOP has also been using the fear card to give them a leg up in elections. They're the tough guys. Never mind that these "tough guys" always seem to get their asses kicked. The "tough guys" didn't stop 9/11, Iraq continues to be uncontrollable, and Afghanistan is going south in a big hurry. They talk tough, so that must mean they are, recent history be damned.

But what will happen to them when Iraq isn't an issue and we have no reason to freak out over Iran? Will they claim Raul Castro has a death ray, that Robert Mugabe's third-rate military power constitutes a "threat to America," that some nasty little far-flung dictatorship like Turmenistan has designs on world domination?

If they don't have a boogeyman to scare voters with, what will Republicans run on? The problem with Republican ideology is that their positions on most issues are pretty unpopular. Everything boils down to sink or swim. Their idea of health care reform is removing restrictions on the industry to make it even more dominated by faceless corporations. Social Security reform is privatization, which is basically abolishment. Their economic policies are apparent in our current situation, which even Republicans aren't happy with...

[CLICK TO READ FULL POST]

Griper Blade: Holy Joe's Unholy Alliance

They call the only elected member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party "Holy Joe." Sen. Joe Lieberman is well-known for his faith -- specifically, his Jewish faith. After all, it was Sen. Joe who tried to out-holy Dubya in 2000, with a speech calling on Americans to "reaffirm our faith and renew the dedication of our nation and ourselves to God and God's purposes." Atheists like myself or Buddhists who's gods aren't real (they're karmic illusions) apparently have no place in American life -- although, I suppose we could pretend to pray, just to be polite. It wasn't quite the Orwellian nightmare that Mitt Romney's "Freedom Requires Religion" speech was, but it was scary enough in its own right.

Sen. Joe's faith is a deep, deep river, flowing straight into the heart of Israel. Holy Joe is wholly Zionist. His defection from the Democratic party comes largely from his dedication to fulfilling the neocon prophecy of Israel-friendly democracies sprouting like mushrooms in the middle east. In fact, if the spores of those mushrooms have to be sown with mushroom clouds, it'd be hard to believe that Lieberman wouldn't be proud to push the big red button himself. After all, it was Joe who suggested that we attack Iran. Like most neocons, Lieberman has gotten a little ahead of himself -- there's no real evidence that Iran's enriching uranium to weaponize it and, obviously, this means that Iran doesn't actually have nuclear weapons. But I guess a stitch in time saves nine.

All of which, to the casual observer at least, makes the following story from Max Blumenthal a little hard to figure.

Senator Joseph Lieberman is scheduled to headline Pastor John Hagee's 2008 Christians United For Israel Washington-Israel Summit this July 22. In accepting Hagee's invitation, Lieberman became the most senior elected representative confirmed to appear at the annual gala. Last year, when Lieberman spoke at Hagee's summit, he compared the Texas televangelist to the biblical prophet Moses, dubbing him "an Ish Elochim," or "a man of God." Unless he rescinds his pledge to appear at this year's summit, Lieberman can be expected to deliver another soul-stirring tribute.

He may very well rescind his pledge. Hagee, as you may remember, is the end times nutbag who had endorsed John McCain until it was revealed that Hagee thought Hitler had been sent by God and that the Holocaust was part of God's plan for the Jews.

But the weird thing is that if Joe drops the Hagee event, it'll be because of what it would look like for McCain -- who Lieberman supports -- not because Hagee's a freak. It's extremely likely that Lieberman knows all about Hagee's crazy-assed belief system. In fact, it's extremely likely that McCain has Holy Joe to thank for bringing him to Hagee. Lieberman and the end times nut are tight. John Hagee is a pro-Israel Hitler enthusiast. That may seem contradictory, but with faith, all things are possible...

[CLICK TO READ FULL POST]

Griper Blade: A Tale of Two Headlines

Without a doubt, the big story this week was the National Intelligence Estimate that shot down Bush administration claims that Iran was developing nuclear weapons. The NIE changed the face of American politics immediately and destroyed what was left of neocon credibility. After months and months of frightening people with an atomic Ahmadinejad, Bushies found their scary monster story completely discredited. You can stop hiding under the covers now.

With the entire Middle East narrative changed, Bush found himself playing Baghdad Bob. In the face of plain fact, the president tried to convince us that the old story still worked. The NIE was a warning, he said, the world was still in peril and everyone should be scared, scared, scared. Iran was Germany, Ahmadinejad was Hitler, and Bush was -- I don't know -- Churchill or someone. He sure as hell isn't FDR.

There are probably a lot of reasons why Iran abandoned their nuclear weapons program. Most important among these would be that it was incredibly expensive and more than a little pointless. Iran isn't pursuing nukes because Iran doesn't need nukes. If Iran used a nuke, it's a sure bet they'd be nuked by either the US or Israel -- probably both. It'd be pretty much the same thing as nuking themselves. Why spend that kind of money on a weapon you could never use? Simple pragmatism -- a concept that the neocons clearly don't understand -- probably kept Iran out of the nuclear club.

What has become clear is that the intelligence community and the Pentagon have learned the lesson of Iraq, while the Bush administration has not. This is the tale of two headlines. One demonstrating a sadder, wiser intelligence wing and the other demonstrating just how stubborn, stupid, and unwilling to learn a damned thing the neocons are...

[CLICK TO READ FULL POST]

Griper Blade: Two News Stories. One President. A Whole World of Suck

There were two big foreign policy stories yesterday. The first -- and most widely covered -- is an ambitious effort that's very, very likely to go nowhere. The second is a just as ambitious effort that's all about going nowhere.

Both stories are about the middle east and how the Bush administration seems to believe that the things they do have no effect on other things they want to happen. In the first case, Bush is hosting a meeting with key middle eastern leaders to discuss peace in the region. This was yesterday's big FP story.

The Guardian:

The time is right to relaunch peace talks on the Middle East, George Bush said today at the opening of the Annapolis conference of leaders from the region.

In optimistic comments prepared for delivery to diplomats from more than 40 countries gathered at the US naval academy, the US president struck a positive note about the new peace effort, something his administration had previously shied away from.

The talks are aimed at jump-starting negotiations for creating a Palestinian state, and Bush emphasised that the meeting marked the beginning of a difficult process.

Two problems with this "big story" -- one, Condoleezza Rice, who sucks, will be heading up the effort. She hasn't been able to swing a single consequential deal for the US since she took over from Colin Powell. She's a lousy diplomat and a lousy Secretary of State.

Two, the idea that Bush can succeed where every other president has failed is laughable. This is an administration that seems to value incompetence -- I point you again to Condi Rice...

[CLICK TO READ FULL POST]

Griper Blade: Who's Afraid of Ahmadinejad?

Move over MoveOn.org.

That organization's ad questioning whether Gen. Petraeus might "betray us" was once the worst thing to happen in human history. But history has a way of marching on and what was an unimaginable outrage one week becomes overshadowed by outrages the next.

So, the worst thing that ever happened in human history is now Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's appearance at Columbia University. Ask the reliably histrionic Newt Gingrich.

"I think it is an outrage against civilization for Columbia University to lend its prestige and its status to a man -- to a dictator... I think that Columbia University is being very foolish to allow that kind of person to have a venue like an American university," Gingrich said. "And I do not believe that that is an appropriate invitation."

Never mind that Ahmadinejad's experience at the school was hardly pleasant or welcoming, that questions were posed to him that he'd never have had to answer (and that no one would've dared ask) in his own country, or that he generally came off as a ridiculous boob. Asked a question about his country's oppression of gays, Ahmadinejad denied that there were gays in Iran -- an incredible claim that drew hoots and ridicule from the audience.

Apparently, being shown up as a posturing ass, an intellectual lightweight, and the aforementioned ridiculous boob in front of the whole world (cable networks carried the appearance live) is a bad thing -- for America, not Ahmadinejad. I'm not really sure I'm following the reasoning here...

[CLICK TO READ FULL POST]