Wednesday, August 1, 2007

Cheney's Summer Break/On Stage...Me





He's kidding, right? In an interview with CNN's Larry King on Tuesday night, Dick Cheney found the good news in the Iraqi parliament's decision to take a summer break for the entire month of August, while American GIs continue fighting and dying. The vice president said:

It's better than taking two months off, which was their original plan.


And Cheney took credit for this positive development:

I made it clear, for example, when I was there in May that we didn't appreciate the notion that they were going to take a big part of the summer off and they did cut that in half.


What clout. Now if he could only apply it in such a way as to encourage the Iraqi legislators to pass some of the laws that might help with national reconciliation. After all, what Cheney did not mention is that most of these measures have not even reached the parliament because they are still being fought over by the various political parties. The bottom line: there are precious few signs of political progress in Iraq, and the Iraqi lawmakers do not seem to be moving with any alacrity.

But no big deal, Cheney said. He noted that the U.S. Congress adjourns for the month of August: "I don't think we can say that they (Iraqi lawmakers) shouldn't go home at all." Then how about this deal? If the Iraqi political leaders can take the summer off, U.S. soldiers should be allowed to go home for August. If it's too hot in Baghdad to pass legislation, perhaps it's too hot to kill--or be killed.

CORN: THE STAGE VERSION. For anyone who is fortunate enough to be on or near Cape Cod this weekend, here's news-you-can-use: I will be doing my annual gig at the Payomet Performing Arts Center in Truro on Sunday night. The show/performance/lecture is titled "A Night of Outrage, Gossip and Insight From D.C." Each year it's different, but something of a cross between a seminar, standup, and performance art. I'll admit there's more "outrage" than "gossip"--and "insight" is for the audience to judge. Of course, I take questions and--unlike Alberto Gonzales--actually answer them. If you're nearby, come by. Click here for more info.

Posted by David Corn at August 1, 2007 07:39 AM

21 comments:

Gerald said...

Whenever I look at Cheney's face, I have that "gut feeling" of having to puke.

Degrees

Dear Posters:

I have been thinking of two words in recent days and these words are Petraeus and September. When Petraeus was elevated to his current position, we heard a great deal about his doctorate degree or Ph.D. We also heard how intelligent he is. The spin masters were preparing us for the September Report and when Petraeus says something, we should believe him. Posters, what we did not hear from the pundits is that rankings from Colonel through Generalships are political appointments because these people have played the game well for the Commander-in-Chief and they are promoted. These military personnel have learned how to spin with the rest of the politicians.

But, I am here to discuss degrees and so let me take sometime to share with you the meaning of degrees. A B.S. degree means Bull Shit; a M.S. degree means More Shit; and a Ph.D. degree means that the shit has been Piled higher and Deeper. A person has learned a whole lot about shit. In time, the person will feel so self-important that the person will become full of shit. So, degrees have come to mean that a person has been able to digest a whole lot of shit.

The meaning of degrees and shit reminds me of a poem. “I looked up in the air and I spotted a robin and the robin looked down and he spotted me. Me no worry, me no cry, me glad that GOP elephants don’t fly.”

Sincerely,
Gerald

capt said...

Mr. David Corn,

Break a leg.




Kirk

Gerald said...

Rudy: Worse than Bush?

Gerald said...

We will be in Iraq for the long haul

capt said...

Barack Obama comes out in favor of attacking Pakistan?

Hard to forget his mentor was Joe Lieberman (neocon through and through).

So is Obama really that hawkish or does his statement just give cover for Busheney to take action in Pakistan before they leave office?

Consider the suppport Obama seems to get from warmongering democrats.

Maybe this will bring out the neo-hawk in Hillary?

I still wonder what she did for the little people - the employees of Walmart when she sat on the board for six years?

Her "pet project" as first lady was healthcare - did she ever do or say anything while on the board of Walmart in favor of healthcare coverage for Walmart employees?


capt

Gerald said...

We are waking up too late

Gerald said...

Barack Obama is nuts!!!

capt said...

Wal-Mart’s First Lady



Hillary’s Past Belies Her Support of Labor


Twice in three days last week, Hillary Rodham Clinton basked in the adulation of cheering union members. Her record of supporting collective bargaining, however, is considerably worse than wobbly.
Pity the thousands of unionists at last Tuesday's state Democratic convention who chanted her name, and the hundreds of retired Teamsters at Thursday's luncheon in midtown who had interrupted their Founder's Day meal to hear the corporate litigator turned union-loving Democrat deliver a campaign speech.

They would have dropped their forks if they had heard that Hillary served for six years on the board of the dreaded Wal-Mart, a union-busting behemoth. If they had learned the details of her friendship with Wal-Mart, they might have lost their lunches.

She didn't mention Wal-Mart. Instead, she praised the Teamsters and other unionized workers as a "key movement in creating the middle class," and she pledged to "prevent anyone from turning the clock back," reminding them that "the Republicans are trying to do away with collective bargaining."

As she was leaving the dais, she ignored a reporter's question about Wal-Mart, and she ignored it again when she strode by reporters in the hotel lobby.

But there are questions. In 1986, when Hillary was first lady of Arkansas, she was put on the board of Wal-Mart. Officials at the time said she wasn't filling a vacancy. In May 1992, as Hubby's presidential campaign heated up, she resigned from the board of Wal-Mart. Company officials said at the time that they weren't going to fill her vacancy.

So what the hell was she doing on the Wal-Mart board? According to press accounts at the time, she was a show horse at the company's annual meetings when founder Sam Walton bused in cheering throngs to celebrate his non-union empire, which is headquartered in Arkansas, one of the country's poorest states. According to published reports, she was placed in charge of the company's "green" program to protect the environment.

But nobody got greener than Sam Walton and his family. For several years in the '80s, he was judged the richest man in America by Forbes magazine; his fortune zoomed into the billions until he split it up among relatives. It's no surprise that Hillary is a strong supporter of free trade with China. Wal-Mart, despite its "Buy American" advertising campaign, is the single largest U.S. importer, and half of its imports come from China.

Was Hillary the voice of conscience on the board for American and foreign workers? Contemporary accounts make no mention of that. They do describe her as a "corporate litigator" in those days, and they mention, speaking of environmental matters, that she also served on the board of Lafarge, a company that, according to a press account, once burned hazardous fuels to run its cement plants.

Wal-Mart, though, was the crown jewel of Arkansas, the state's First Company fit for a first lady. During her tenure on the board, she presumably helped preside over the most remarkable growth of any company until Bill Gates came along. The number of Wal-Mart employees grew during the '80s from 21,600 to 279,000, while sales soared from $1.2 billion to $25.8 billion.

And the Clintons depended on Wal-Mart's largesse not only for Hillary's regular payments as a board member but for travel expenses on Wal-Mart planes and for heavy campaign contributions to Bill's campaigns there and nationally. According to reports in the early '90s, before Bill and Hillary moved to D.C., neither was raking in the big bucks, but prominent in their income were her holdings of between $50,000 and $100,000 worth of Wal-Mart stock.

A press report on the Clintons' finances during the early stages of Bill's 1992 run for the presidency showed that most of their income came from her $109,719 annual salary from the Rose Law Firm and tens of thousands of dollars in fees she received from serving on corporate boards. (She was on two others besides Wal-Mart's.) Her honoraria and director fees grew almost as fast as Wal-Mart's profits during the '80s—rising from $111 in 1980 to $6500 in 1986 to $64,700 in 1991, according to the same source.

During the same period, small towns all over America began complaining that Wal-Mart was squeezing out ma-and-pa stores and leaving little burgs throughout the Midwest and South with downtowns that featured little more than empty storefronts.

But selected small companies were doing quite well, thanks to the Clintons' friendship with Wal-Mart. The Boston Globe reported in January 1992 that Bill Clinton had introduced a brush company's executives to Wal-Mart executives, hoping that the two could do bidness. Executives of the brush company had been rebuffed in previous attempts to sell their products to Wal-Mart. Lucky for the company, it happened to be located in New Hampshire, where Clinton was trying to win a presidential primary. At the time, Hillary Clinton was still on Wal-Mart's board, and the retail giant was still resisting the unionization of any of its workers.

Last week, Hillary was wearing a different hat. She stood in solidarity with the elderly Teamsters as Local 237 president Carl Haynes greeted her warmly, endorsed her, and then left early on what other union officials described as "AFL-CIO business."

But the AFL-CIO was thinking of other business only a few months earlier when the union's leaders, including its chief, John Sweeney, marched specifically against Wal-Mart's oppression of its meat-market workers. According to a Web site run by activists at the AFL-CIO affiliate United Food and Commercial Workers, Wal-Mart "has profited by pushing its workers to the bottom of the wage scale." The union points out that hourly wages "average $2 to $3 per hour less than at unionized supermarkets." More grave for workers everywhere in the United States are these figures spouted by union activists: Wal-Mart is the largest private employer in the country, "yet fewer than 40 percent of its workers are covered by the company's health plan."

The union notes that Wal-Mart's "hometown" judge in Arkansas issued a nationwide temporary restraining order against the UFCW, barring anyone associated with the union from entering Wal-Mart facilities to educate workers about their legal rights in the workplace. The union, however, successfully appealed the order—noting that the judge holds more than $500,000 in Wal-Mart stock. The case remains in litigation.

Meanwhile, Wal-Mart's first lady, who also benefited from Wal-Mart stock, solicits support from union workers.

Which makes her words to the elderly Teamsters last week especially poignant: "You can count on me to stand up for the right to collectively bargain!"

Right on, sister!



More HERE

capt said...

Hillary Clinton Feels Heat Over Wal-Mart Ties



Hillary Clinton was paid $18,000 each year she served on the board, plus $1,500 for each meeting she attended. By 1993 she had accumulated at least $100,000 in Wal-Mart stock.


NEW YORK -- With retailer Wal-Mart under fire for its labor and healthcare policies, one Democrat with ties to the company, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, has started feeling her share of the political heat.

Clinton served on Wal-Mart's board of directors for six years when her husband was governor of Arkansas. And the Rose Law Firm, where she was a partner, handled many of the Arkansas-based company's legal affairs.

Hillary Clinton had kind words for Wal-Mart as recently as 2004, when she told an audience at the convention of the National Retail Federation that her time on the board ''was a great experience in every respect."

But in recent months, as the company has become a target for Democratic activists, she has largely steered clear of any mention of Wal-Mart. And late last year, Clinton's reelection campaign returned a $5,000 contribution from Wal-Mart, citing ''serious differences with current company practices."

As Clinton sheds her Arkansas past and looks ahead to a possible 2008 presidential run, the Wal-Mart issue presents an exquisite dilemma: how to reconcile the political demands she faces today with her history at a company many consumers depend upon but many Democratic activists revile.

''The interesting question is not just Hillary Clinton's history at Wal-Mart, but why it's delicate for her to talk about Wal-Mart," said Charles Fishman, author of ''The Wal-Mart Effect," a book on the company's impact on the national economy. ''Plenty of Democrats denounce Wal-Mart, but there are also plenty of people who need it, love it and rely on it."

In 1986, when Wal-Mart's founder, Sam Walton, tapped Clinton to be the company's first female board member, Wal-Mart was a fraction of its current size, with $11.9 billion in net sales.

Today, Wal-Mart is the world's largest retailer and largest private employer, with over $312 billion in sales last year and 1.3 million employees in the US alone. But recently, the company has drawn intense scrutiny for its labor practices -- from its wages to the lack of affordable health coverage for employees, to its stiff resistance to unionization.

Throughout the 1980s, both Bill and Hillary Clinton nurtured relationships with Walton, a conservative Republican and by far Arkansas' most influential businessman.

Among other things, Hillary Clinton sought Walton's help in 1983 for Bill Clinton's so-called Blue Ribbon Commission on Education, a major effort to improve Arkansas' troubled public schools. The overhaul became a centerpiece of Clinton's governorship.

And Wal-Mart's Made in America campaign, which for years touted the company's sales of American products in its stores, was launched after Bill Clinton persuaded Walton to help save 200 jobs at an Arkansas shirt manufacturing plant. The Made in America campaign has virtually vanished in recent years, as the company's manufacturing has gradually moved overseas -- another point of criticism by many Wal-Mart critics.

The Clintons also benefited financially from Wal-Mart. Hillary Clinton was paid $18,000 each year she served on the board, plus $1,500 for each meeting she attended. By 1993 she had accumulated at least $100,000 in Wal-Mart stock, according to Bill Clinton's federal financial disclosure forms that year.

Wal-Mart has little to say about Hillary Clinton's board service, and will not release minutes of the company's board meetings during her tenure.

Lorraine Voles, Clinton's communications director, turned down a request for an interview with the senator.

Still, details have come to light over the years.

Bob Ortega, author of ''In Sam We Trust," a history of Wal-Mart, said Clinton used her position to urge the company to improve its gender and racial diversity. Because of Clinton's prodding, Walton agreed to hire an outside firm to track the company's progress in hiring women and minorities, Ortega said.

Clinton proved to be such a thorn in Walton's side that at Wal-Mart's annual meeting in 1987, when shareholders challenged Walton on the company's lack of female managers, he assured them the record was improving ''now that we have a strong-willed young lady on the board."

Clinton was particularly vocal on environmental matters, pressing the company to boost its sale and use of recycled materials and other ''green" products.

Still, critics say there was little tangible change at Wal-Mart during Clinton's tenure, despite her apparent prodding.

''There's no evidence she did anything to improve the status of women or make it a very different place in ways Mrs. Clinton's Democratic base would care about," said Liza Featherstone, author of ''Selling Women Short: The Landmark Battle for Worker's Rights at Wal-Mart."


More HERE

Gerald said...

I have concluded that David Corn is a sadistic person with his enlarged picture of Cheney that heads his current blog. Mr. Corn tear down that picture!!!

capt said...

Meet Senator Slither


The slithery junior senator from Illinois, Barack Obama is ensuring himself a steady political diet of publicity by refusing to take his name out of consideration as a possible candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008. We're entering the timeframe when all such aspirants have to make up their minds whether they can find the requisite money and political base. Sen. Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, the obvious peace-and-justice candidate, has already decided that he can't, which gives us a pretty revealing insight into the weakness of the left these days.

It's a no-brainer for Obama to excite the political commentators by waving a "maybe" flag. It keeps the spotlight on him, and piles up political capital, whatever he decides to do in the end.

It's depressing to think that we'll have to endure Obamaspeak for months, if not years to come: a pulp of boosterism about the American dream, interspersed with homilies about "putting factionalism and party divisions behind us and moving on." I used to think Sen. Joe Lieberman was the man whose words I'd least like to be force fed top volume if I was chained next to a loudspeaker in Camp Gitmo, but I think Obama, who picked Lieberman as his mentor when he first entered the U.S. Senate, is worse. I've never heard a politician so desperate not to offend conventional elite opinion while pretending to be fearless and forthright.

We're nearly 13 months on from a fateful moment in our national political affairs. Last November, Rep. Jack Murtha had just given a savage jolt to the White House. This former chairman of the House Armed Services committee had publicly delivered the actual opinion of the generals: "I believe we need to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis. … The United States will immediately redeploy -- immediately redeploy. All of Iraq must know that Iraq is free, free from a United States occupation. And I believe this will send a signal to the Sunnis to join the political process."

And who knows, if Murtha's counsel had been followed, maybe it would have saved Iraq from the horrors now unraveling. But Democrats fled Murtha, few with more transparent calculation than Obama, who voyaged to the Council on Foreign Relations on Nov. 22, 2005, to soothe the assembled elites with such balderdash as "The president could take the politics out of Iraq once and for all if he would simply go on television and say to the American people, 'Yes, we made mistakes … " or "we need to focus our attention on how to reduce the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Notice that I say 'reduce,' and not 'fully withdraw' … or "2006 should be the year that … the various Iraqi factions must arrive at a fair political accommodation to defeat the insurgency; and three, the Administration must make available to Congress critical information on reality-based benchmarks that will help us succeed in Iraq."
A couple of weeks ago, Obama unleashed another cloud of statesmanlike mush about Iraq to an upscale foreign policy crowd in Chicago. Trimming to new realities he's now talking about a four-to-six month timeframe for beginning withdrawal from Iraq. Don't mistake this for any real agenda. It's a schedule that can be pulled in any direction, like a rubber mask from a Christmas stocking.

This week, many Americans have stared aghast at the photos of Jose Padilla, manacled hand and foot, blinded by special goggles, being escorted by his U.S. military jailers from his isolation cell to the dentist. His lawyers say that his horrible treatment, four years of total isolation and sensory deprivation, have rendered him incapable of defending himself.

The treatment of Padilla -- classed as "an enemy combatant" until the U.S. government prosecutors were forced to reclassify him as a criminal defendant earlier this year – was obviously a diligent exercise in torture, akin to what has been meted out to "enemy combatants" held in the U.S. concentration camp at Guantanamo. Last year, Illinois' senior U.S. senator, Dick Durbin, bravely got into trouble for likening conditions at Guantanamo to those in a Nazi or Stalin-era camp. This was one of Durbin's finer moments, as he read an FBI man's eyewitness describing how he had entered interview rooms "to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more.

"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners. It is not too late. I hope we will learn from history. I hope we will change course."

The right-wing mad-dog crowd jumped on Durbin, and eventually he paid the penalty of having to eat crow on the Senate floor. His fellow senator from Illinois, Obama, did not support him in any way. He said, "we have a tendency to demonize and jump on and make mockery of each other across the aisle, and that is particularly pronounced when we make mistakes. Each and every one of us is going to make a mistake once in a while ... and what we hope is that our track record of service, the scope of how we've operated and interacted with people, will override whatever particular mistake we make."

That's three uses of the word "mistake." Obama had his fingers stuck in the wind as always. He bends to every breeze, as soon as he identifies it as coming from a career-threatening quarter. This man is no leader.



More HERE

Gerald said...

I guess David Corn read my comment about Cheney's face.

'something's in the works'

capt said...

Obama's Game


I was harsh about Senator Barack Obama of Illinois here a couple of weeks ago, and the very next morning his press aide, Tommy Vietor, was on the phone howling about inaccuracies. It was an illuminating conversation, indicative of the sort of instinctive reflexes at work in the office of a man already breathlessly touted as a possible vice presidential candidate in 2008 and maybe a presidential candidate somewhere down the road from there.

Obama's man took grave exception to my use of the word "distanced" to describe what his boss had done when Illinois' senior U.S. senator, Dick Durbin, got into trouble for likening conditions at Guantanamo to those in a Nazi or Stalin-era camp. This was one of Durbin's finer moments, as he read an FBI man's eyewitness describing how he had entered interview rooms "to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more."

"If I read this to you", Durbin told his fellow senators, "and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime  Pol Pot or others  that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners. It is not too late. I hope we will learn from history. I hope we will change course."

So Durbin paid the penalty of having to eat crow on the Senate floor. His fellow senator, Obama, did not support him in any way. Obama said, "we have a tendency to demonize and jump on and make mockery of each other across the aisle and that is particularly pronounced when we make mistakes. Each and every one of us is going to make a mistake once in a while... and what we hope is that our track record of service, the scope of how we've operated and interacted with people, will override whatever particular mistake we make."

That's three uses of the word "mistake". This isn't distancing?

Nor did Obama's man like my description of Obama's cheerleading for the nuke Iran crowd. Obama recently declared that when it comes to the U.S. posture on Iran, all options, including military ones, should be on the table. Now, if Obama had any sort of guts in such matters he would have said that if Iraq is to teach America's leaders any lesson, it is that reckless recourse to the military "option" carries a dreadful long-term price tag.

He did nothing of the sort, which is not surprising to anyone who read his speech to the Council of Foreign Relations last November. Remember the context. Rep. Jack Murtha had just given a savage jolt to the White House. This be-medalled former chairman of the House Armed Services committee had publicly delivered the actual opinion of the generals: "I believe we need to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis The United States will immediately redeploy  immediately redeploy. All of Iraq must know that Iraq is free, free from a United States occupation. And I believe this will send a signal to the Sunnis to join the political process."

And who knows, if Murtha's counsel had been followed, maybe it would have saved Iraq from the horrors now unraveling. But Democrats fled Murtha, few with more transparent calculation than Obama who voyaged to the Council on Foreign Relations on November 22, there to ladle out to the assembled elites such balderdash as "The President could take the politics out of Iraq once and for all if he would simply go on television and say to the American people 'Yes, we made mistakes'", or "we need to focus our attention on how to reduce the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Notice that I say 'reduce,' and not 'fully withdraw'", or "2006 should be the year that the various Iraqi factions must arrive at a fair political accommodation to defeat the insurgency; and , the Administration must make available to Congress critical information on reality-based benchmarks that will help us succeed in Iraq."

Obama is one of those politicians whom journalists like to decorate with words as "adroit" or "politically adept" because you can actually see him trimming to the wind, the way you see a conjuror of moderate skill shove the rabbit back up his sleeve. Above all he is concerned with the task of reassuring the masters of the Democratic Party, and beyond that, the politico-corporate establishment, that he is safe. Whatever bomb might have been in his head has long since been dis-armed. He's never going to blow up in the face of anyone of consequence.

There are plenty of black people like that in the Congress now. After a decade or so of careful corporate funding, as the Black Congressional Caucus is sinking under the weight of Democratic Leadership Copuncil clones like Artur Davis of Alabama, Albert Wynn of Maryland, Sanford Bishop and David Scott of Georgia, William Jefferson of Louisiana, Gregory Meeks of New York, all assiduously selling for a mess of pottage the interests of the voters who sent them to Washington. Obama has done exactly the same thing. He lobbed up the first signal flare during the run-up to his 2004 senate race, when his name began to feature on Democratic Leadership Council literature as one of the hundred Democratic leaders to watch . That indispensable publication The Black Commentator raised a stink about this. "It would be a shame," wrote the Commentator's Bruce Dixon, " if he is in the process of becoming 'ideologically freed' from the opinions of the African American and other Democrats whose votes he needs to win."




More HERE

Gerald said...

Ted Stevens of Alaska has always made me feel that he is a scumbag

capt said...

"I guess David Corn read my comment about Cheney's face."

No, Mr. Corn is not able to change the pictures here. I get all the pictures from Google image search.

As always, no reasonable request will ever go unnoticed.



capt

Gerald said...

Is pursuing peace in the Middle East anti-God?

Gerald said...

capt, thank you for the clarification! The ten pictures of Cheney are more reasonable. A blow-up picture of Cheney or Bush is very unsettlingly for my stomache.

capt said...

Dear Kirk,

Thank you for using the Union of Concerned Scientists Action
Center to let us know that you called your representative about
the Energy Bill. Any details you can provide us with about your
call will help us advocate for this critical legislation. You
can email us details at: ucsaction@ucsusa.org

The automakers and utilities are lobbying hard against the
passage of a strong bill, so we need everyone who cares about
clean energy and more fuel-efficient cars to contact their
representatives today. Please help spread the word by forwarding
this urgent message along to your friends and family. It will
only take a moment and will help to ensure the House hears loud
and clear that constituents want a strong Energy Bill.

http://ucsaction.org/campaign/8_1_07_energy_bill/forward

To learn more about the Union of Concerned Scientists, visit our
website at http://www.ucsusa.org

To see other action alerts visit the UCS Action Center at
http://www.ucsaction.org

David B. Benson said...

South Asia: up to 17 million people need clean drinking water, due to recent flooding.

BBC

David B. Benson said...

Its started.

The big near-space satellite breakup.

Making more space junk.

Which hits even more satellites.

Making even more space junk...

capt said...

New Thread