Cindy Goes to War!

Yep just in time for the Democratic Convention Cindy McCain is going to Geogia!

Why you ask?

To assess the civilian casualties due to the Russian invasion.

I have always be bugged that the US taxpayer subsidized McCain's campaign plane which was owned by Cindy's corporation and all expenses were a tax write-off, but not only do we subsidize McCain's campaign plane, but his residences as well?

According to the New York Times:

link

Mr. McCain’s Senate financial disclosures do not list McCain's resisdences among his assets, because, according to public records, the homes and condominiums are in the name of a corporation trust called the 'Dream Catcher Family' which lists his wife Cindy as the owner.

Maybe my accounting education has gone a little stale but if the corporation owns McCain's residences they must be getting some very nice tax breaks from them.

They can deduct everything, condo association fees, utilities, cleaning, everything including taxes.

I met an amazing woman at an Obama organization meeting.  She is the county voter registration coordinator.  She says carry your clip board everywhere (with an Obama bumper sticker on the back) and ask everyone if they are registered to vote at their current home address.

When you go to the grocery store ask the check out clerk, ask in the line at the post office.  Ask everyone when you get on the bus in the morning and evening.  

Why?

The Washington Post/ABC poll shows that a bigger turnout benefits Obama.

Obama has an three-point lead among likely voters (49%-46%) (Older voters make up a lot of this group).

Obama has an eight-point lead among registered voters (50%-42%).

And Obama has a twelve-point lead when you expand it to include all adults (51%-39%).

With "One Stop Early Voting and Registration" we here in the Tar Heel State can vote Monday through Saturday for over a week and a half.  I work near the polling place so I usually go over sometime in the afternoon and there is usually no one else voting at that time.   Even during Presidential General elections I am usually the only one there. Yes there is the Democratic Party table with their voting guide, but usually that is it.  

But this time was different.  Approaching the polling place there was a well staffed Obama for President table with lots of staff and lots of people milling around asking questions.  They were giving out "One Stop Voting Stickers", Obama Posters, tickets to a party a week from Friday.  I asked a couple of questions and they had very well informed answers.

Walked a little further and there was someone asking me to sign a petition to get Governor Easley to endorse Obama along with information on how to call the Governor.

Inside there was lots of people voting (I am sure this is Obama country).  I asked the poll worker about turn out and she laughed "very, very, very heavy", she said.

Oh yea I almost forgot, no presence at all for the "tide is turning" Hillary.

Check out this interview of Mick Huckabee:

The Today Show Interview with Mike Huckabee

"That floating cross is a bookshelf...We were all amused, probably the production crew more than anyone"

"So you didn't see that image when you put that spot together?"

"Absolutely not....somebody is going to figure out that as I was blinking my eyes I was saying some special code, Morse code and telling people a subliminal message.  It is just beyond ridiculous..."

Now when you first saw that ad did you see that cross in the background?

I saw that cross right away.

How could everyone on the Huckabee staff miss something so obvious.  These ads take a lot of time to put together and are inspected very carefully.

I thought what our Democratic Congress should have done the last time around when they "had" to vote to approve the additional war funding was at least spend the money in a "fiscally responsible/sharing the sacrifice/pay as you go" way.  That is to add a War Tax to pay for the war instead of just increasing the deficit. If the Republicans want this war so bad then they should at least vote to pay for it.

It is not too late to make this happen for this coming year.

Democratic candidates out raised Republicans by $30 million this quarter. But when it came to spending the funds, the GOP candidates spent like the foolish money wasters that they are.  

This election is a historical moment, it is a great struggle for freedom.  What would you give up to win this battle?  To sleep easier at night knowing you are safe.  Your life?  Your liberty?  How about sacrificing a Franklin  ($100) for freedom this week.

A Franklin is the seed of Freedom's tree.  ~Thomas Campbell

Who speaks of liberty while a Franklin remains in their wallet?  ~Francis Wright, 1828

I think it ironic that the argument du jour is that, no matter what the merits of the result, Roe was wrongly, or ineptly, decided.

When I was in college in the early 1970s, an American history professor taught me what had become the accepted wisdom of that period--that Brown v. Board was a weak and wrongly-argued decision--even though it may have been the right thing to do.  This very same argument, now being used against Roe, is unfortunately giving pause even to those who favor a woman's right to have control over her own body.

This continuing battle by the right wing over whether one should promote Christianity by saying Merry Christmas or honor diversity by saying Happy Holidays has had the unintended effect of undermining everything that Christmas used to represent to me.

 

With all of the gossip and rumors flying around in the past days and weeks, two things are consistent.  First, the leaks, when even vaguely sourced, are always coming from "lawyers close to the case".  Since we know that they are most likely not coming from Fitzgerald's office--he's  said to run a leak-free ship--that means, most likely, that the leaks are coming from a person or persons who very well might be in legal jeopardy.

The second consistent thing about these leaks and this gossip is that it is consistently anti-Libby and anti-Cheney, and consistently pro-Rove and pro-Bush.  That leads me to a couple of conclusions.

Even though we didn't.  It just struck me, although I've seen it many times:

CHICAGO, Oct. 23 -- Patrick J. Fitzgerald's final witness was behind bars, refusing to testify, and no one was budging. Hunting for room to maneuver, the special counsel talked with one side, then the other. He drafted a letter that nudged the witness and needled I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the vice president's chief of staff.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/23/AR2005102301028.html

Today on MTP, there was a general consensus that Democrats could not use the argument that going to war with Iraq was a mistake.  Pundits including republicans and liberal hawks said that since Democrats themselves voted to go to war in Iraq, they could not very well criticize the administration for the war.

But Democrats did not "vote for war with Iraq." The resolution that passed Congress in October of 2002 gave President Bush discretion to go to war, but only if Saddam would not allow weapons inspections, if wmds were found in Iraq and not given up, if the UN approved, if Bush certified that the war in Iraq would not detract from efforts against al Qaeda and ONLY AFTER all attempts to peacefully resolve the crisis had been exhausted. Bush also got the vote he wanted because he insisted that if Americans "spoke with one voice," he was more likely to get the UN to promote a peaceful resolution to the problem.

Gosh, with Richard Cohen's initial support of the Iraq War, with his belief that it is no big deal to out a CIA agent, with his assertion that women do not have an inherent right to control their own bodies, it looks like lately he's been bending over so backward he's fallen right off his chair.

I guess that for him, a man's home is his castle, but a woman's body is still a place where  government soldiers have the right of trespass. (see his latest column on the subject--http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/19/AR2005101901974.html)

Guess what.  Abortion was legal when they wrote the Constitution.  And the Catholic Church also said it was okay back then.  You can even be a so-called originalist and believe that.  Because it is not a matter of faith.  It is a fact.

A library card is a wonderful thing.  If you have a library card for most if not all North Carolina public libraries, you can get a password that will give you access to multiple databases through NC Live (nclive.org)  The password can be used from remote locations (i.e. home computers).

NC Live provides access to more than one database (infotrak, proquest) that offers the New York Times.  You may get the columns a little later (the same day), but you'll get them for free.

Go to the above site, scroll through the libraries.  If you find your library on the list, call or go in and ask your librarian how to get the password and how to find columnists in the New York Times through NC Live  (PS.  Public libraries in other states may have similar deals)

Richard Burr, senator from North Carolina, recently released the following press statement on Iraq:

Statement by Senator Richard Burr on President Bush's Remarks to Airborne and Special Operations Forces at Fort Bragg  

June 28th, 2005 - Fort Bragg, North Carolina - "I applaud President Bush for coming to Fort Bragg to speak to our men and women in uniform. I think it was important for the President to remind us of the challenges ahead and to reiterate the importance of our work in Iraq. We owe it to the people of Iraq, and to those who have bravely given their lives in this war, to keep our word by helping the Iraqis prepare to defend their freedoms. The next generation cannot afford for us to waver in our resolve to finish this important job."  

There's one way of putting the Democratic argument about Roberts into perspective that I haven't heard yet.

Roberts continues to insist that he cannot answer any questions because of implications for his future position.

But his lack of respect for the powers of Congress, inherent in his failure to seriously respond to the questions of Senators, also has implications for the power of Congress.  Democratic Senators must say that they cannot vote for Roberts. If they do, they risk encouraging witnesses that come before them not to respond to their questioning. They risk weakening the very branch of government they are charged to protect.

Bush's recent comment that there would be zero tolerance for criminals in the recent disaster boggles the mind.

First, his lack of compassion is staggering.  He cannot seem to tell the difference between people foraging food and water to survive, and those who are true criminals, shooting at rescuers.

Secondly, his stupid comment just highlights a huge lack of competence. This guy is promising zero tolerance at a time when the opposite is happening with no end in sight.  Just like his promise to get Osama dead or alive, he is totally ineffective in bringing the anarchy in the disaster area to an end.

If he wants to walk the walk of zero tolerance, why doesn't he establish order in this mess so that law-abiding citizens can survive and rescuers can do their job without fearing for their lives?