Fast Times with Bushie logic. How many reason have we had for going to war in Iraq so far? The latest [I talked about it earlier this week] “Bush’s great big pile of shit in Iraq” strategy, or as some are calling it the “Fly paper” strategy, you know the one about bringing the battle to the terrorists so we don’t have to fight them here. In either case the terrorists are like flies that we are luring into Iraq to kill them. If the London bombing proved anything it is that this strategy is badly flawed. Not all terrorists are falling for the trap, they are worldwide, and can strike anywhere. As I keep saying, the more terrorists that you kill the more you create. At the same time the Bushies are still telling us that they are turning Iraq in to a bastion of freedom and democracy, a shining example for the Middle East. So my question is how can you create a terrorist battleground, while at the same time having this glorious democratic Iraq, don’t the two fly in the face of each other? Of course they do, but as usual the Bushies are talking out of both sides of their mouths and the sheepole eat it up. This whole contradiction got me thinking of an analogy to one of my all time favorite movies “Fast Times At Ridgemont High,” staring that hated liberal Sean Penn. In the movie Sean Penn’s character Jeff Spicoli is recklessly driving football star Charles Jefferson’s car with Jefferson’s little brother, of course he wrecks it, and here is the ensuing dialogue:

Jefferson's Brother:

My brother's gonna kill us! He's gonna kill us! He's gonna kill you and he's gonna kill me, he's gonna kill us!

Jeff Spicoli:

Hey man, just be glad I had fast reflexes!

Jefferson's Brother:

My brother's gonna shit!

Jeff Spicoli:

Make up your mind, dude, is he gonna shit or is he gonna kill us?

Jefferson's Brother:

First he's gonna shit, then he's gonna kill us!

Jeff Spicoli:

Relax, alright? My old man is a television repairman, he's got this ultimate set of tools. I can fix it.

The analogy being, Spicoli represents thinking intelligent Americans [albiet not stoned like Spicoli], while Jefferson’s little brother represents a highly excited Bushie, Intelligent informed Americans are asking, “Hey dudes, Is it a terrorist battleground, or is it a shining Democracy” Oh, and by the way what about bin Laden, WMD’s, and all those other reasons, which is it? The reasons keep changing so fast that my head is spinning!

Calm and controlled rhetoric from OxyContin boy Rush Limbaugh
Sheepole herder Sean Hannity is always going on and on about the “shrill and unhinged” rhetoric of the left, hey Sean is this recent commentary from drug addled Rush Limbaugh the civil rhetoric the epitomizes the conservative right?

"I’m tired of these Democrats acting like they won the election I mean somebody needs to stand up and say when you win the election you pick the nominees, until then SHUT-UP [shouting emphasis added] JUST SHUT-UP, just go away and bury yourself in your rat holes and don’t come out until you win an election, when you win an election you can put all these socialist wackos like Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Steven Breyer all over the courts but until then shut up, you are really irritating me."

Wow Rush must still be weaning off the OxyContin or can’t find a dealer, he was so shrill and unhinged that he even lost his customary stuttering and stammering. I don’t even know where to begin with this sorry "shrill and unhinged" excuse of civil discourse, but here goes:

Hey Rush, let me begin with a civics lesson. The President doesn’t get to just appoint anyone he wants without the advise and consent of the Senate, ever hear of the democratic concept of checks and balances? Correct me if I’m wrong Rush but doesn’t the minority have a voice in such matters, oh I forgot we are now in a Right Wing Dictatorship. While we are on the subject of winning elections, I’m assuming from your rant that Bush won by a landslide, got a real mandate. WRONG, since when does 51% of the vote translate to a sweeping majority and a free-ride for judical mominations? As for the “socialist wacko” comment, I’m shocked, since when did the right-wing begin to resort to name-calling and sweeping generalizations?

Excuse me while I crawl back into my rat hole! In the meantime, I will be waiting for Sean Boy to condemn this example of shrill and unhinged rhetoric. Confession: I took the Limbaugh rant from The Stephanie Miller Show, I would rather gouge my eyes out with sharp sticks than listen to OxyContin boy stutter and stammer incoherently.

Babbling Moron - "Screw the dead, lets get back to the Killing"
Fox News shows its true values. The horrific and senseless bombings in London yesterday caused FOX to be extremely candid in two very different ways. First, brain dead Brain Kilmeade [why is a guy with a background in sports allowed to be a news commentator?], one of the trio of babbling name-calling clowns on the Fox and Friends gabfest, saw the London bombing as a good thing:

And that was the first time since 9-11 when they should know, and they do know now, that terrorism should be Number 1. But it's important for them all to be together. I think that works to our advantage, in the Western world's advantage, for people to experience something like this together, just 500 miles from where the attacks have happened.

So in essence Kilmeade was saying screw the real purpose of the G8 Summit (world poverty and global warming) lets get back to what is really important, blowing up shit and killing the terrorists. From Kilmeade's line of thinking we should be grateful to the terrorists for slaughtering 50 plus innocent people because they refocused our attention to what really counts - the never-ending war on terror. Wake up Sheepole - Kilmeade wants you to be very very scared and forget about trivial stuff like world poverty and the environment - killing is what it's all about in Kilmeade's perverted world.

The other sick but honest view was expressed by Britt Hume, whose take was, oh well shit happens, maybe I can make some money off this tragedy:

I mean, my first thought when I heard -- just on a personal basis, when I heard there had been this attack and I saw the futures this morning, which were really in the tank, I thought, "Hmmm, time to buy."

One thing that this tragedy showed us was that in an unfolding tragedy when there is no script with talking points and these talking-heads let their mouths run their true values come shinning through.

Added to this post later: Then of course there was this gem from John Gibson expressing his compassionate conservatism:

By the way, just wanted to tell you people, we missed -- the International Olympic Committee missed a golden opportunity today. If they had picked France, if they had picked France instead of London to hold the Olympics, it would have been the one time we could look forward to where we didn't worry about terrorism. They'd blow up Paris, and who cares?

Wow - these people are sick!

New York Times part of the corporate conservative media (CCM)? In recent days several Sheepole said I was loony for claiming that the New York Times was turning conservative. One going as far as saying, “Obviously you're an extreme leftwing nut job who should be behind the bars of the Democratic Underground.”

I have one word for you Sheepole - Judith Miller. Judith Miller who claims to stand behind a basic tenant of journalistic ethics, protecting an unnamed source. In Miller’s case she is protecting a source (likely Karl Rove) who perpetrated the crime of treason by outing CIA agent Valerie Plame. Miller is not protecting an unnamed source who is traditionally a whistleblower, who reveals a crime. The same Judith Miller who was one of the Bushies big cheerleaders of fear and WMD’s in the run-up to this illegal war and quagmire we now find ourselves in. As Jack Shafer noted in Slate:

In the months running up to the war, Miller painted as grave a picture of Iraq's WMD potential as any U.S. intelligence agency, a take that often directly mirrored the Bush administration's view.

If Judith Miller belongs in jail for anything it is for her false and over the-top pre-war reporting, and being just another corporate conservative media mouthpiece for the Bushies.

Thought for the Day: If Boy Karl Rove goes to jail Bush will really be without a brain?

What real Iraqi's are saying about Bush's recent speech, from the Iraqi blogger Riverbend, here is an excerpt:

Bush said:
“The troops here and across the world are fighting a global war on terror. The war reached our shores on September 11, 2001.”

Do people really still believe this? In spite of that fact that no WMD were found in Iraq, in spite of the fact that prior to the war, no American was ever killed in Iraq and now almost 2000 are dead on Iraqi soil? It’s difficult to comprehend that rational people, after all of this, still actually accept the claims of a link between 9/11 and Iraq. Or that they could actually believe Iraq is less of a threat today than it was in 2003.

We did not have Al-Qaeda in Iraq prior to the war. We didn’t know that sort of extremism. We didn’t have beheadings or the abduction of foreigners or religious intolerance. We actually pitied America and Americans when the Twin Towers went down and when news began leaking out about it being Muslim fundamentalists- possibly Arabs- we were outraged.

Now 9/11 is getting old. Now, 100,000+ Iraqi lives and 1700+ American lives later, it’s becoming difficult to summon up the same sort of sympathy as before. How does the death of 3,000 Americans and the fall of two towers somehow justify the horrors in Iraq when not one of the people involved with the attack was Iraqi?

Go here to read the rest, amazing stuff, scroll down past "Unbelievable" to find the body of the text. And if there are any Sheepole out there who would dare to attack the words of a real Iraqi post them in the comment area.

Part II- Bush's great big pile of SHIT in Iraq strategy. Yesterday I laid out two questions related to this NEW, in a long list of ever changing reasons for the war in Iraq, the “terrorist shit trap in Iraq.” The two questions that come out of this strategy: are the terrorists as dumb as flies and why haven’t we been attacked since 9/11 under the Sheepole’s glorious leader Bush? First, are the terrorists that dumb as to be lured like flies to the great big pile of shit we have laid down upon Iraq to their slaughter and elimination? Sure some/many are coming in, but why would they? Because they know they can help the Iraqi insurgents (the larger number) cause enough havoc and death upon our soldiers so that they drive a wedge into the heart of this country, so that we continue stripping away freedoms in the name of this illegal war. But what the Sheepole seem to ignore is that the terrorists are well established through out the world, and they are growing stronger again in Afghanistan – remember Afghanistan Sheepole? We never finished the job there and we never captured bin Ladden when we should have! Remember bin Laden Sheepole? This great big pile of shit strategy assumes that we can kill All or a significant number of terrorists and insurgents is absurd and misguided. Here is the real key here, listen carefully Sheepole, THE MORE WE KILL THE MORE WE CREATE – violence begats violence. You can bet that in the Arab media only the death (especially of innocent civilians) and destruction is being shown, so those once moderate Arabs are now turning against us – exactly what bin Laden and the terrorists wanted in the first place. Bin Laden wanted a recruiting poster and we gave it to him by invading Iraq. Again, I hate to say it but bin Laden is playing Bush like a cheap violin.

So why haven’t we been attacked on our soil since 9/11? I think that even the Sheepole would agree that there are terrorists in this county, so they could easily strap on a suicide bomb and walk into a Wal Mart in Topeka – right? So why haven’t they? I hate to break it to you Sheepole but it isn’t because of your blind notion of Bush’s heroic leadership. Simply put it is because they don’t need to, they got what they wanted, by their one horrific act. Bush over reacted, yes Afghanistan was right, but by invading an Arab country unprovoked we have given the terrorists the recruiting poster and a war on Islam. bin Laden is out there somewhere laughing his ass off at Bush. After 9/11 we had all of the world behind us, the terrorists had everyone against them, now Bush has managed to reverse that in world opinon. They won’t strike as long as we continue this illegal folly because we now are the bad guys, we are the ones with the torture chambers, destroying lives, and killing innocent civilians, and the whole world is against us, that is except for the blind Sheepole. With that said, I'm not against this country or the troops, I'm against what Bush has done to this great nation.

Excellent read, Fake News Is Better Than FOX News, in fact I am adding this to my Essential Reading for Sheepole links.

Part I - Bush's great big pile of SHIT in Iraq strategy. New Reason for Bush’s illegal War in Iraq, just one of an ever cascading number of reasons. Remember way back when Bush’s folly was just beginning, it was all about WMD’s and mushroom clouds, then it was about liberating the Iraqi people, then it was about removing a brutal dictator, who gassed his own people (never mind Sheepole that we supplied the gas and gave Saddam our blessing). Now it seems that the current reason of the moment is that we are fighting them in Iraq so we don’t have to fight them in America, it’s popping up all over the place:

Dick “Prostitute Toe-Sucker” Morris – or as liberal talk-show host Stephanie Miller (give her a listen) calls him the “human bean-bag chair.” The Toe-Sucker recently laid out this absurd strategy in some FAUX News propaganda show.

Iraq has become an employment agency for terrorists, which is fine; I would rather fight them in Iraq than in New York any day. And what is basically happening is that all of the suicide bombers, the homicide bombers, the airplane hijackers that would be hitting us in the United States are buying tickets to Iraq and fighting us there. And if we can use Iraq as a method of luring in terrorists and defeating them there that’s great.

Ah, the create a great big pile of shit in Iraq and attract the flies (terrorists) strategy - brilliant - NOT. Correct me but didn’t we go into Afghanistan to close it as a breeding ground for terrorists? But, we didn’t finish the job there because we were in a hurry to go to Iraq and create a new breeding ground for terrorists, were is the logic in that plan?

Then in Bush’s recent address he alluded to this absurd strategy in one of his frequent shameless 9/11 references:

After September 11, I made a commitment to the American people: This Nation will not wait to be attacked again. We will take the fight to the enemy.

Wait I thought the enemy was bin Laden and al Qaeda and they weren’t in Iraq to start with but now they are there big time, and where is bin Laden – bin Forgotten?

I see it popping up in Letters to the Editor, the Sheepole have definitely been drinking the Kool-Aid, here is a recent such reference.

If they all were to return home, we would be fighting these battles on our own U.S. soil!

This fight them in Iraq so we don’t have to fight them in America strategy is also popping up all over the Right Wing Media Echo chamber. Sean Boy Hannity and the others have definitely got their talking points and like good little sheepole are repeating it slowly and clearly for the Sheepole.

Robert Scheer in today’s Los Angeles Times has picked up on this new excuse for the war in Iraq when he writes:

The "war on terror" is turning out to be nothing more than a recycled formulation of the dangerously dumb "domino theory." Listen to the way President Bush justifies the deepening quagmire of Iraq: "Defeat them abroad before they attack us at home." If we didn't defeat communism in Vietnam, or even tiny Grenada, went the hoary defense of bloody proxy wars and covert brutality in the latter stages of the Cold War, San Diego might be the next to go Red.

At the heart of this absurd strategy is the argument that Bush has kept us safe because we are fighting them there instead of here in America. The Sheepole love to repeat over and over, “we haven’t been attacked since 9/11 on Bush’s watch.” What the Sheepole conveniently and blindly forget is we WERE ATTACKED on Bush’s watch. Hey Sheepole Bush was President on 9/11 not Clinton, Clinton warned the Bushies but Bush went on Vacation, even after the 8/6 CIA briefing, and just what was the title of that briefing Sheepole? Let me refresh your short-short Sheepole attention spans: “bin Laden intent to strike inside the United States.”

Why haven’t we been struck since 9/11? Has the great Sheepole leader Bush truly protected us? I would argue that the answer is a resounding NO, we haven’t been struck on our soil because Bush is doing exactly what bin Laden and the terrorists want. bin Laden is playing Bush like a cheap violin. Also, are the terrorists as dumb as flies attracted to shit? I'll explain both tomorrow in Part II.

Just Say "No!" to the Magnetic Ribbon Go here and read this, I couldn't have said it any better than this blogger!

Have a happy, safe, and realisitic 4th of July, or as our little girl used to say, "Happy North of July." Avoid the phony patriotism of the sheepole, some food for thought:

You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.
Malcolm X

Patriotism is the willingness to kill and be killed for trivial reasons.
Bertrand Russell

Blind Faith In Bad Leadership Is Not Patriotism
Bumper Sticker soon to be on my car