The Saturday Cartoons

Most Democrats Voting For Bush Torture Bill Silent Today

As someone who spends a lot of time on the official web sites of our U.S. Senators, I can tell you without hesitation that if one of them casts a vote they are proud of, a press release will be up faster than George Felix Allen can spit out a racial slur.

Yet today, the 12 Democrats who checked their consciences at the Senate cloakroom and voted in favor of the Bush Administration's torture bill, have almost nothing to say about their votes. In case you haven't seen the roster of who voted with Republicans on this, here they are:

• Thomas Carper (D-DE)
• Tim Johnson (D-SD)
• Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
• Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
• Joe Lieberman (D-CT)
• Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
• Bill Nelson (D-FL)
• Ben Nelson (D-NE)
• Mark Pryor (D-AR)
• Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)
• Ken Salazar (D-CO)
• Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)

Of these, only four have issued press releases commenting on their vote and, amazingly, those who are talking spend most of the time sounding apologetic for a vote they obviously know they should not have cast.

"I think there are some unknown constitutional issues and it may take a review by the Supreme Court before we really know whether this approach has towed the line in terms of protecting the civil-liberties of American citizens or whether it has gone over the line," said Tim Johnson (D-SD), in a brief statement that can only leave us wondering why the hell he voted for it then.

Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) expresses a whole bunch of concerns as well and yet voted to make Bush Torturer-in-Chief anyway.

“The bill I voted for today was the best bill we could reasonably expect in this highly charged political environment," said Salazar. "Due to the many controversial and far-reaching implications of this bill, I believe it would be appropriate to force Congressional review of this bill in five years. I have concerns with this bill, but on balance it meets my personal view of what America needs to get the job done.”

But some things never change, and here was the biggest DINO (Democrat in name only) in the Senate, Nebraska's Ben Nelson crowing about what a wonderful vote he cast and making this strange statement: “This compromise goes a long way in protecting the principles of the Geneva Conventions and establishes a standard of treatment that the world will follow.”

Yeah, I'm sure most other countries are gathering right now to rewrite their laws to follow our sterling example.

Finally, we have Joe Lieberman, who has a press release announcing his vote and setting the bar awfully low for what it takes for him to follow George W. Bush.

“I voted for this bill because I believe it is better than the Administration's original proposal to respond to the Supreme Court's Hamdan decision," said Lieberman. "I would have much preferred the bill we reported out of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and I supported amendments to this bill because they addressed concerns I had. I regret that they were rejected by the Senate.”

But Joe clearly did not regret it enough to vote the right way on the torture bill.

There's currently a big argument going on in the Progressive community on the tension between calling Democrats on stances that are so antithetical to what being a Democrat is supposed to mean and making Republicans positively gleeful by bashing our own side six weeks before a crucial election.

That's a tough call to make. But it seems reasonable to question why, on a vote that is such a bellwether on where American democracy stands in 2006, these 12 Senators cast deciding votes that they were unsure about or that, deep down, they flat-out knew were wrong.

Democratic primary voters will certainly ask that question when these Senators' terms have expired.

Friday Poll Dancing

Let's take a look at what's happening in the latest polls for the 2006 Senate races:

Arizona

Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Kyl (R) 51% Pederson (D) 44%
Ariz. State 09/21 - 09/24 Kyl (R) 49% Pederson (D) 38%
Rasmussen September 20, 2006 Kyl (R) 50% Pederson (D) 39%

California

SurveyUSA 09/24 - 09/26 Feinstein (D) 55% Mountjoy (R) 35%

Connecticut

Quinnipiac 09/21 - 09/25 Lieberman (I) 49% Lamont (D) 39%
Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Lieberman (I) 46% Lamont (D) 44%

Delaware

Fairleigh Dickinson 09/14 - 09/19 Carper (D) 63% Ting (R) 23%

Florida

Strategic Vision 09/22 - 09/24 Nelson (D) 59% Harris (R) 31%
Rasmussen 09/19 - 09/19 Nelson (D) 56% Harris (R) 33%
Research 2000 09/18 - 09/20 Nelson (D) 55% Harris (R) 37%

Maryland

Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Cardin (D) 52% Steele (R) 39%
Potomac 09/15 - 09/18 Cardin (D) 51% Steele (R) 40%

Michigan

Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Stabenow (D) 49% Bouchard (R) 42%

Minnesota

SurveyUSA 09/25 - 09/27 Klobuchar (D) 51% Kennedy (R) 43%
Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Klobuchar (D) 49% Kennedy (R) 40%
Mason-Dixon 09/18 - 09/20 Klobuchar (D) 52% Kennedy (R) 37%
U. of Minnesota 09/13 - 09/18 Klobuchar (D) 52% Kennedy (R) 36%

Missouri

Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Talent (R) 47% McCaskill (D) 45%

Montana

Rasmussen 09/20 - 09/20 Tester (D) 50% Burns (R) 43%

Nebraska

Rasmussen 09/20 - 09/20 Nelson (D) 55% Ricketts (R) 32%

Nevada

Mason-Dixon 09/19 - 09/21 Ensign (R) 58% Carter (D) 35%
Rasmussen 09/06 - 09/06 Ensign (R) 50% Carter (D) 41%

New Jersey

Rutgers-Eagleton 09/24 - 09/26 , Menendez (D) 45% Kean (R) 44%
Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Menendez (D) 47% Kean (R) 41%
Rasmussen 09/22 - 09/22 Kean (R) 41% Menendez (D) 40%
Monmouth/Gannett 09/18 - 09/21 Kean (R) 44% Menendez (D) 38%

Pennsylvania

Strategic Vision 09/22 - 09/24 Casey (D) 50% Santorum (R) 40%
Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Casey (D) 46% Santorum (R) 40%
Quinnipiac 09/19 - 09/24 Casey (D) 54% Santorum (R) 40%
Greenberg Quinlan 09/18 - 09/19 Casey (D) 53% Santorum (R) 39%
Phil. Inquirer 09/14 - 09/20 Casey (D) 49% Santorum (R) 39%
Issues PA/Pew Poll 09/11 - 09/18 Casey (D) 54% Santorum (R) 31%

Ohio

Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Brown (D) 45% DeWine (R) 41%
Columbus Dispatch 09/09 - 09/22 Brown (D) 47% DeWine (R) 42%

Tennessee

Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Corker (R) 48% Ford (D) 42%

Vermont

Rasmussen 09/24 - 09/24 Sanders (I) 64% Tarrant (R) 32%

Virginia

SurveyUSA 09/24 - 09/26 Allen (R) 49% , Webb (D) 44%
Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Allen (R) 49% Webb (D) 44%

Washington

Zogby Interactive 09/19 - 09/25 Cantwell (D) 50% McGavick (R) 43%
Strategic Vision 09/22 - 09/24 Cantwell (D) 49% McGavick (R) 40%
SurveyUSA 09/21 - 09/25 Cantwell (D) 54% McGavick (R) 42%
Rasmussen 09/20 - 09/20 Cantwell (D) 48% McGavick (R) 42%

Notes and Random Thoughts: I would love to see Pederson and Carter pulling closer to their GOP opponents in Arizona and Nevada, respectively, but that doesn't seem to be happening… Lamont and Lieberman is far closer than the Quinnipiac poll would suggest and, as election day gets closer, Lieberman's total inability to get any Democrats to work for him on the ground will sink him -- if he's still even in the race by then…. Steele's cute "puppy" ads don’t appear to be helping in Maryland.

What were Stabenow and Menendez thinking, voting for the Bush's administration's hideous torture bill yesterday? Stabenow will survive in Michigan -- Menendez, maybe not so much, as Democrats register their utter disgust by simply staying home on November 7. Menendez's vote yesterday must have had them cracking champagne bottles at the headquarters of opponent Thomas Kean Jr.

Amy Klobuchar needs to really stumble hard to lose to Kennedy in Minnesota, while the Talent-McCaskill contest in Missouri remains perhaps the tightest race this year…. There's a lot of polling this month in Pennsylvania, but they all say the same thing -- Rick Santorum is burnt toast.

And I'd really like to see more polling out of Tennessee -- I sense major momentum building for Democrat Harold Ford Jr.

Republicans The Real Cut-And-Run Cowards

Republicans have become so accustomed to using the phrase "cut and run" that they probably mumble it while sleeping and their childlike leader, George W. Bush, babbled it again yesterday, saying at yet another GOP fundraiser that "the party of FDR and the party of Harry Truman has become the party of cut and run."

That takes a ton of nerve coming from a Chickenhawk like Bush, who used Daddy's connections to avoid Vietnam and then went AWOL from his cushy stateside post. But we've heard that empty phrase from the cretins in the right-wing of the Republican party so many times that it barely even registers any longer.

They like to question the courage and patriotism of Democrats for being unwilling to shed more American blood and waste billions more on a pointless war, that the country was lied into and that's made us far less safe and more despised throughout the world. Aside from the fact that the majority of Americans no longer support the Iraq war -- and, thus, they must all be cut-and-run defeatists as well -- it is the Republicans who have shown themselves to be the lily-livered cowards among us.

Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their whole craven cabal are scared stiff -- and they want us to all be very afraid as well. How frightened are they? They're so afraid that they are willing to go against everything this country stands for, in a blind panic that they think will somehow protect their sorry asses from the big, bad terrorist bullies.

They are so damn scared that they're willing to take a country that was founded on individual liberty and turn it into a police state -- all out of fear.

So they respond to Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda attacking our country -- and, according to Bush, "our way of life" -- by putting their collective tails between their legs and abandoning the very core principles crafted by the founding fathers to embody "our way of life."

I didn't realize it at the time, but the hideous losses we suffered on 9/11 would truly test our national character more than any event of my lifetime. Do we stick with the values and hard-learned lessons of our past in the face of these new challenges or do we let Osama bin Laden truly ruin our country by becoming a shadow of the nation we have always been?

Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), arguing against the Bush torture bill that passed both the House and the Senate this week, said it quite well yesterday:

“What has changed in the last five years that our Government is so inept and our people so terrified that we must do what no bomb or attack could ever do by taking away the very freedoms that define America? Why would we allow the terrorists to win by doing to ourselves what they could never do, and abandon the principles for which so many Americans today and through our history have fought and sacrificed?”

Whether he's in a cave, a nice hotel in Karachi or a CIA safe house, bin Laden must be laughing himself silly over the crisis of heart, soul and character he has so easily inflicted on the Bush Administration and, thus, our country.

It's trivial for a nation to stand by its creed when times are easy. But it's times like these, when circumstances and conditions are tough, that give us the real test of our national strength, courage and resolve.

Under Republican leadership, we are failing that test in the most miserable and pathetic way.

A great nation uses a horrendous event like September 11 to reinforce the things that have always made us the envy of the world and that, at least until our recent history, made us, in our best moments, the standard to which other countries aspired. A people of character suck it up and strive to remain a beacon of hope, equity and civil rights, while fighting those who attack us as strongly as we can.

The only thing Bush and his team of sissies have been right about is saying that we're not a nation that cuts and runs -- which is why all Americans should hate how our chicken-hearted, reactionary government has consistently done exactly that ever since we were attacked.

What we've seen happen in the last five years is not something that should invoke pride or flag-waving jingoism in Americans. We've watched a president and vice president whose lies have become so commonplace that they seldom even make the news. We've watched as our military men and women are killed or maimed in a war that has nothing to do with terror and everything to do with Bush and his mindless supporters selling fear to suit their ideological and financial agenda.

We've seen a world go from loving us on September 12, 2001 – many governments declared "we are all Americans today" – to us becoming a global pariah, with nary a friend who believes in our word or the promise of our deeds. We saw astounding pictures come back from Abu Ghraib, in which prisoners under our watch were tortured and, in some cases, killed.

And just this week, we have watched the Republican-led Congress affirm that all of that -- and more -- is just fine with them. At the same time, we have become willing to let the president mortgage our present and our children's financial future to spend money on a war that did not need to be fought, while ruining a reputation that previous generations worked so hard to build.

So tell every Republican you know that they can take their 'cut and run' garbage and shove it.

In the face of challenge and terror, George W. Bush and the Republican party have continued to debase our nation's spirit and trash the values that have made us great. In other words, the Republicans are allowing a few terrorists to change the very essence of our country and make us so afraid that we no longer even know who we are -- or what we stand for.

When the going has gotten tough, and our nation's heart and soul are on the line, it's the cowardly Republicans who have truly cut and run.

Republicans Hell-Bent on Passing Bush Torture Bill

In an almost straight party-line vote, the Republican-led U.S. Senate yesterday shot down an effort by Democrats to substitute legislation for the White House's Military Commissions Act of 2006, which passed the House of Representatives on Wednesday. The White House-backed bill will allow the Bush administration to continue down the path of secret prisons, cruel treatment of prisoners and allowing evidence obtained through torture to be used against detainees.

Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) proposed S.Amdt. 5086 -- which passed the Senate Armed Services Committee by a bipartisan 15-9 vote -- to replace the Military Commissions Act, but Levin's bill was swept aside by a vote of 54-43. Every Republican except Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) voted against the Levin bill. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and, as we've come to expect, Ben Nelson (D-NE) voted with the GOP to move forward with the harsher, Republican bill on Thursday.

"The changes that appear in the bill which is now before us, taken together, will put our own troops at risk if other countries decide to apply similar standards to our troops if they are captured or detained," said Levin, in arguing against the White House bill.

Levin also commented that the compromise reached between President Bush and three Republican Senators -- John Warner, John McCain and Lindsey Graham -- has produced legislation that enables an administration that “has been relentless in its determination to legitimize the abuse of detainees and to undermine some of the cornerstone principles of our legal system."

The Military Commissions Act, which passed the House 253-168, is being widely protested by human rights groups as institutionalizing the use of torture by America and was written by Republicans in response to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June that struck down the Bush administration's military tribunal system, as a violation of both U.S. and international laws.

Levin admitted that his substitute bill, based on the original legislation proposed by Warner, McCain and Graham and approved by the Armed Services Committee, had its own flaws -- such as an unacceptable provision on the writ of habeas corpus for detainees who believe they have been unlawfully detained. But he also maintained that his bill was the best Democrats could hope for and better than the one being pushed through by the White House.

"The military commissions that it established would have met the test of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Hamdan case and provided for the trial of detainees for war crimes in a manner that is consistent with American values and the American system of justice," said Levin.

"Unlike the Administration bill, the Committee bill would not have allowed convictions based on secret testimony that is never revealed to the accused," Levin continued. "The Committee bill would not have allowed testimony obtained through cruel or inhuman treatment. The Committee bill would not have allowed the use of hearsay where a better source of evidence is readily available. The Committee bill would not have attempted to reinterpret our obligations under international law to permit the abuse of detainees in U.S. custody."

But that's now off the table and the Senate convenes today to debate and vote on the Republican bill, with only five amendments to be considered that may water it down.

Among those amendments are one from Arlen Specter (R-PA) that would provide for some rights of Guantanamo Bay detainees to have court hearings on their incarceration and treatment and another by Ted Kennedy (D-MA) to define acceptable interrogation methods for the CIA.

“The Senate Armed Services Committee produced bipartisan legislation supported by America’s uniformed military lawyers that would have ensured the President has the tools he needs to fight terrorism and would have finally brought the accused masterminds of 9/11 to justice," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) in reacting to yesterday's defeat of the Levin bill. "It is regrettable that the Republican Congress has rejected this tough and smart plan to give the American people the real security they deserve.”

Indeed. And it's also regrettable that it now looks like we're going to have a law passed that, barring intervention from the courts, will leave it to George W. Bush to interpret what types of interrogation techniques violate the Geneva Conventions.

And just how scary is that?

Line of The Week (So Far) in Senate

On the Senator floor yesterday, while ridiculing claims from his Republican colleagues about how much work they've done legislatively this year, Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) borrowed from Harry Truman and gave this description of the accomplishments of the do-nothing, GOP Congress:

"As thin as the homeopathic soup made by boiling a shadow of a pigeon that had been starved to death."

Ha!

NIE Finds Iraq War a “Cause Célèbre” for Islamic Militants

George W. Bush has, under media duress, declassified three pages of a 30-page National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), completed in April 2006 and showing yet more proof that Bush's war of choice in Iraq has made America less safe. The brief excerpt of the report, which reflects the consensus of the nation’s 16 intelligence agencies, makes clear that the continued American occupation of Iraq has increased Islamic radicalism and worsened the global terrorist threat.

“The Iraq conflict has become the ‘cause célèbre’ for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement,” the declassified document said.

While conceding that America's counterterrorism efforts have put a serious dent in Al-Qaeda's capabilities, the report concluded what most Americans already know: That we've taken our eye mostly off Osama bin Laden and his crew in favor of the Iraq quagmire.

"We judge that Al-Qaeda will continue to pose the greatest threat to the homeland and U.S. interests abroad by a single terrorist organization,” the report said.

Further, the report excerpts declared that “The Iraqi jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives" and said that global terrorist activity will increase over the next five years -- hey, I thought we were winning this war? -- and “if this trend continues, threats to U.S. interests at home and abroad will become more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide.”

Bush, of course, will continue to say he's right, even in the face of all evidence to the contrary and he reinforced that yesterday, saying that people who believe the Iraq war is a mistake are the clueless ones.

“I think it’s naïve," said Bush. "I think it’s a mistake for people to believe that going on the offense against people that want to do harm against the American people makes us less safe.”

Meanwhile, Representative Jane Harman (D-CA), the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said the Iraq war has “made the global jihadist threat more dangerous.”

“We created a failed state by removing Saddam Hussein and established a recruiting tool and training ground for global jihadists,” she said.

Here's more from leading Congressional Democrats:

Said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV):

“The declassified findings contained in the National Intelligence Estimate confirm what the American people have long believed – the Bush Administration’s failed policies in Iraq are fueling global terrorism and making America less safe. These results are the unfortunate consequences of the Administration’s decision to cherry pick pre-war intelligence, ignore our senior military leaders, and completely fail to plan for the post-Saddam occupation.

"With such a devastating and authoritative analysis of the Bush Administration’s failures in Iraq, the President and the Republican-controlled Congress now have a choice to make. Will they stubbornly follow a failed stay the course strategy that America’s intelligence community has concluded makes America less safe, or will they finally admit their mistakes and change course? On behalf of our troops and the security of the American people, it is time to change course. We need a new direction in Iraq so that America can finally win the war on terror.”

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):

“Rather than reducing the number of terrorists worldwide and lessening the motivation of terrorists to attack the United States, the war in Iraq is having precisely the opposite effect. We did not invade Iraq to fight terrorism, as the President would now have us believe. Instead, we are less safe today because the war in Iraq has hindered our ability to make progress in combating terrorism."

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI):

“The views of the intelligence community, as expressed in the National Intelligence Estimate declassified today, confirm what has been obvious for a long time -- that the war in Iraq is fueling international terrorist organizations and is making us less safe.

In addition, the NIE confirms the need to go ‘well beyond’ the Administration’s current efforts to track terrorist leaders by strengthening multilateral efforts and addressing the underlying conditions that are strengthening terrorist organizations. The war in Iraq, along with the Administration's other unilateral actions, is hurting these efforts. We must redeploy our troops from Iraq, and focus more attention on the threats identified in the NIE, including al Qaeda, the growth of other terrorist organizations, and the safe havens that are being exploited by terrorists around the world."

Inhofe: Global-Warming Scientists, Media "Doomsayers" and Tools of "Hysterical Left"

It seems somewhat appropriate that a social dinosaur like Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) would find it hard to believe that the earth's climate has changed since the Jurassic Period, but there he was on the floor of the United States Senate earlier this week, like a crazy man on a street corner, decrying the focus these days on the effects of climate change -- or, as Inhofe calls it, "the most media-hyped environmental issue of all time."

Inhofe gave a speech on Monday to vent his frustration over what he believes is an overblown non-issue and to take the media to task for covering it.

"I want to challenge the news media to reverse course and report on the objective science of climate change, stop ignoring legitimate voices in this scientific debate, and stop being used by the hysterical left," said Inhofe. "Breaking the cycles of media hysteria will not be easy since hysteria sells and it is very profitable, but I really believe the issue is getting worn out."

The Oklahoma Republican also took a considerable amount of time to minimize former Vice President Al Gore's work on climate change and, in particular, to thoroughly ridicule Gore's new film, An Inconvenient Truth.

"In May, our nation was exposed to perhaps one of the slickest science propaganda films of all time -- former Vice President Gore's 'An Inconvenient Truth,'" said Inhofe, who, in what typifies the twisted, GOP-led Congress, chairs the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee. "In addition to having the backing of Paramount Pictures to market this film, it had the full backing of the media, and leading the cheerleading charge was none other than the Associated Press, and of course they had the elitists, from Hollywood."

I won’t even bother to refute Inhofe's babbling by quoting Gore and the Climate Crisis web site extensively. After all, people like Inhofe will only sneer at Gore and the filmmakers saying things like "the vast majority of scientists agree that global warming is real, it’s already happening and that it is the result of our activities and not a natural occurrence." And having Al Gore cite facts such as the number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes almost doubling in the last 30 years is just plain tiresome to a guy like Inhofe.

Instead, I'll go straight to the Bush Administration's own Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which is clearly also in bed with Gore on this one. Apparently -- and obviously unbeknownst to the crack research team in Inhofe's legislative/climatological office -- the EPA's web site gives a description of global warming that could very well have come right out of one of Gore's books.

"There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. Human activities have altered the chemical composition of the atmosphere through the buildup of greenhouse gases – primarily carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide," says the EPA web site. "Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide have increased nearly 30 percent, methane concentrations have more than doubled, and nitrous oxide concentrations have risen by about 15 percent."

Those hysterical leftists at Bush's EPA go on to say that "The 20th century's 10 warmest years all occurred in the last 15 years of the century. Of these, 1998 was the warmest year on record. The snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere and floating ice in the Arctic Ocean have decreased. If emissions of greenhouse gases continue unabated, scientists say we may change global temperature and our planet's climate at an unprecedented rate for our society."

And even if Inhofe manages to smear the EPA's analysis, we can take a look at the scientific research the EPA cites in their Global Warming and Our Changing Climate FAQ. For that document, they use as their primary authority, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which, according to the EPA, "brings together the world’s top scientists in all relevant fields, synthesizes peer-reviewed scientific literature on global warming studies, and produces authoritative assessments of the current state of knowledge of climate change."

Which leads to the following answer from the EPA when their frequently-asked-questions document addresses this question: "What are the potential impacts of global warming and a changing climate?" Here's their answer:

"Our health, agriculture, water resources, forests, wildlife and coastal areas are vulnerable to global warming and the climatic changes it will bring. The IPCC concluded that 'climate change is likely to have wide-ranging and mostly adverse impacts on human health, with significant loss of life.'"

Now, I'm not trying to get any of the young College Republicans on Senator Inhofe's staff fired, but it's got to be tough enough on Inhofe to look like such a nut case when his rantings on the Senate floor are taken at face value -- much less, when compared to the government's own assertions as reported from within the Bush administration.

But that doesn’t stop Chief Climatologist Inhofe.

"During the past year, the American people have been served up an unprecedented parade of environmental alarmism by the media and entertainment industry, which links every possible weather event to global warming," said Inhofe on Monday, adding "I firmly believe that when the history of our era is written, future generations will look back with puzzlement and wonder why we spent so much time and effort on global warming fears and pointless solutions, such as the Kyoto Protocol."

Of course, what's got to add to the Senator's ire is the Clinton Global Initiative, which just last week, raised $7.3 billion from 215 wealthy donors to help with the "most serious issues affecting the world today" including Energy and Climate Change. And, among those contributing, were those wacky liberals Laura Bush and Rupert Murdoch.

It's a world gone mad, isn't it, Senator Inhofe?

Olbermann on Bush: A Textbook Definition of Cowardice

Keith Olbermann's commentary on MSNBC's Countdown is quickly becoming something that the next generation will study when they look at how the media gave George W. Bush a free pass on the conduct of the Iraq war, with Olbermann held up as an example of how a real journalist seeks -- and speaks -- truth.

Here's Olbermann last night on former President Bill Clinton getting blindsided with right-wing spin on Fox News over the weekend, after he had been promised the interview would be primarily about his Global Initiative project.

"It is not essential that a past president, bullied and sandbagged by a monkey posing as a newscaster, finally lashed back.

"It is not important that the current President’s portable public chorus has described his predecessor’s tone as 'crazed.'

"Our tone should be crazed. The nation’s freedoms are under assault by an administration whose policies can do us as much damage as al Qaida; the nation’s marketplace of ideas is being poisoned by a propaganda company so blatant that Tokyo Rose would’ve quit."

On Bush and the total failure to get Osama bin Laden, the man the administration said they would bring to justice "dead or alive.":

"The Bush Administration did not try to get Osama bin Laden before 9/11.

"The Bush Administration ignored all the evidence gathered by its predecessors.

"The Bush Administration did not understand the Daily Briefing entitled 'Bin Laden Determined To Strike in U.S.'

"The Bush Administration did not try.

"Moreover, for the last five years one month and two weeks, the current administration, and in particular the President, has been given the greatest 'pass' for incompetence and malfeasance in American history!"

And the attempt by the Right Wing to blame this administration's failure in the true war on terror on Bill Clinton:

"After five years of skirting even the most inarguable of facts—that he was president on 9/11 and he must bear some responsibility for his, and our, unreadiness, Mr. Bush has now moved, unmistakably and without conscience or shame, towards re-writing history, and attempting to make the responsibility, entirely Mr. Clinton’s.

"Of course he is not honest enough to do that directly.

"As with all the other nefariousness and slime of this, our worst presidency since James Buchanan, he is having it done for him, by proxy.

"Thus, the sandbag effort by Fox News Friday afternoon.

"Consider the timing: the very weekend the National Intelligence Estimate would be released and show the Iraq war to be the fraudulent failure it is—not a check on terror, but fertilizer for it.

"The kind of proof of incompetence, for which the administration and its hyenas at Fox need to find a diversion, in a scapegoat.

"It was the kind of cheap trick which would get a journalist fired—but a propagandist, promoted: Promise to talk of charity and generosity; but instead launch into the lies and distortions with which the Authoritarians among us attack the virtuous and reward the useless.

"And don’t even be professional enough to assume the responsibility for the slanders yourself; blame your audience for 'e-mailing' you the question.

"Mr. Clinton responded as you have seen.

"He told the great truth untold about this administration’s negligence, perhaps criminal negligence, about bin Laden.

"Mr. Clinton was brave.

"Then again, Chris Wallace might be braver still. Had I in one moment surrendered all my credibility as a journalist, and been irredeemably humiliated, as was he, I would have gone home and started a new career selling seeds by mail."

And directly at Bush:

"You have failed us—then leveraged that failure, to justify a purposeless war in Iraq which will have, all too soon, claimed more American lives than did 9/11.

"You have failed us anew in Afghanistan.

"And you have now tried to hide your failures, by blaming your predecessor.

"And now you exploit your failure, to rationalize brazen torture which doesn’t work anyway; which only condemns our soldiers to water-boarding; which only humiliates our country further in the world; and which no true American would ever condone, let alone advocate.

"And there it is, Sir:

"Are yours the actions of a true American?"

Here's the full video -- it will absolutely make your day.

More Batiste on Rumsfeld

"Secretary Rumsfeld's dismal strategic decisions resulted in the unnecessary deaths of American servicemen and women, our allies and the good people of Iraq. He was responsible for America and her allies going to war with the wrong plan and a strategy that did not address the realities of fighting an insurgency."

Wow.

Retired military officer: Administration "… did not tell the American people the truth" about Iraq war

Three retired military officers, all of whom are Veterans of the Iraq war, called for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to resign, in testimony yesterday before an oversight hearing called by Congressional Democrats -- in the absence of any move by Republicans to observe those responsibilities.

Retired officers Major General John R. S. Batiste, Major General Paul Eaton and Colonel Paul X. Hammes testified in brutally honest terms before a panel convened by Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND). Dorgan said of the Republican failure to perform any oversight whatsoever over the Bush White House "if they won't ... we will."

And the retired Iraq-war leaders got right to the point in their opening statements.

"I believe that Secretary Rumsfeld and others in the administration did not tell the American people the truth for fear of losing support for the war in Iraq," said Batiste, who described himself as a "lifelong Republican" who was so discouraged with the military under Bush and Rumsfeld that he chose to retire.

"I left the military on principle on November 1, 2005, after more than 31 years of service," said Batiste. "I walked away from promotion and a promising future serving our country. I hung up my uniform because I came to the gut-wrenching realization that I could do more good for my soldiers and their families out of uniform."

"Our nation is in peril," Batiste continued. "Our Department of Defense’s leadership is extraordinarily bad, and our Congress is only today, more than five years into this war, beginning to exercise its oversight responsibilities."

Batiste then went directly after Rumsfeld, characterizing him as a failed leader who has allowed the military to deteriorate, while making America less safe.

"Donald Rumsfeld is not a competent wartime leader. He knows everything, except how to win. He surrounds himself with like-minded and compliant subordinates who do not grasp the importance of the principles of war, the complexities of Iraq, or the human dimension of warfare.

"Secretary Rumsfeld ignored 12 years of U.S. Central Command deliberate planning and strategy, dismissed honest dissent, and browbeat subordinates to build 'his plan' which did not address the hard work to crush the insurgency, secure a post-Saddam Iraq, build the peace, and set Iraq up for self-reliance. He refused to acknowledge and even ignored the potential for the insurgency, which was an absolute certainty. Bottom line, his plan allowed the insurgency to take root and metastasize to where it is today."

Here's the full video (about 10 minutes ) of General Batiste's opening remarks:



Retired Major General Paul Eaton, who has two sons currently serving in Iraq, lashed the Bush administration, calling the planning for the latter stages of the Iraq occupation "amateurish at best" and describing Rumsfeld himself "incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically."

"There is a failure on the part of this administration to understand what strategic planning is all about," said Eaton. "Mr. Rumsfeld and his immediate team must be replaced or we will see two more years of extraordinarily bad decision-making."

"The president is not well served by this Secretary of Defense, a man history will not treat kindly."

Major General Eaton's opening statement is roughly eight minutes:



Retired Colonel Thomas Hammes said that the Bush administration has called the war in Iraq the central front in the war on terror and such a major threat to U.S. security and yet has done nothing to lead Americans to address that risk.

"The administration has repeatedly stated that the war in Iraq is critical to the security of the United States and yet has made no effort to mobilize the American people or industry," said Hammes. "We have left the war to less than one percent of our population that has served or is serving in Iraq -- and we have failed to support them.

"I find it remarkable that a nation that could produce 4,000 aircraft a month in World War II, is limited to 48 armored vehicles per month today," he said. "The disconnect between our rhetoric and our actions is both astonishing and immoral."

Hammes, who was in charge of establishing bases for the Iraqi armed forces and served in Iraq in 2004, joined Batiste and Eaton in calling for Rumsfeld to resign.

"Senior military leaders have failed to speak out for their troops. At a more senior level, the Secretary of Defense has not acknowledged the numerous, serious mistakes made to date. His refusal to see the problems means he cannot solve them. It is time for him to provide the nation with the last of a long series of services and step down.

Hammes's opening statement (about seven minutes) is here:



Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) put the icing on the cake by once again calling Bush and Dick Cheney on their total failure to provide true security for the American people.

"When the U.S. intelligence community confirmed that America is losing the war on terror because of Bush failures in Iraq, this White House lost all credibility on matters of national security," said Reid. "With Iraq in a civil war, Afghanistan moving backwards and our own borders unsecured, it's clear George Bush and Dick Cheney are desperate to hide their record and distort the truth."

September War Dead the GOP Wants You to Forget

With just six weeks until the 2006 midterm elections, one would never know to look at the media -- or by where the White House or Republican Congress direct their focus -- that the United States is still involved in a bloody war that has continued almost as long as our country's entire involvement in World War II. September 20 marked three years and six months since America invaded Iraq under the pretense of weapons of mass destruction and the imminent threat the Bush administration claimed Saddam Hussein posed to us.

All of that and the contrived links between Iraq and Osama bin Laden have since been proven false and yet no oversight or investigations have been performed by the Republican-led, do-nothing Congress and, to watch the news and the actions of the GOP in Washington, one could easily miss how much American and Iraqi blood is still being shed for nothing.

Almost 2,700 Americans troops have been killed in Iraq and 20,000 have been wounded -- many with limbs missing and life-changing brain injuries -- and Iraqi civilians continue to die at a horrifying clip that I guess, at this point, is just too boring for the American media to cover.

It must be nice for Team Bush to be able to start a war for no reason, be responsible for such hideous, ongoing violence and not be held accountable by Congress or an American press that, amazingly, some idiots still have the nerve to say operates with a liberal bias. Do the American people want to be so numb to all of this that they simply forget our troops are in the middle of a civil war, on a mission that does not have -- nor did it ever have -- a damn thing to do with our national security?

If the corporate media won’t cover it, we in the blog world should and I believe most Americans do care about the horrible losses we continue to sustain.

In the first three weeks of September alone, 44 of our troops have been killed in the Iraq war. That's 44 American families forever changed, wives and husbands who will never again feel the embrace of their spouse and children who will never feel the love of a Mommy or Daddy forever lost.

George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld don’t want you to know who they are -- but I do. Here's all 44 and the sterile, Defense Department explanation for how they died.

Lance Cpl. Cliff K. Golla, 21, of Charlotte, N.C., died September 1 from wounds received while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Staff Sgt. Angel D. Mercado-Velazquez, 24, died in Yusifiyah, Iraq, on September 1 of injuries suffered from mortar fire during dismounted combat operations.

Sgt. Ralph N. Porras, 36, of Merrill, Mich. died in Yusifiyah, Iraq, on September 2 of injuries suffered from mortar fire during dismounted combat operations.

Pfc. Justin W. Dreese, 21, of Northumberland, Pa. died in Yusifiyah, Iraq, on September 2 of injuries suffered from mortar fire during dismounted combat operations.

Staff Sgt. Eugene H.E. Alex, 32, of Bay City, Mich., died on September 2 in Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Landstuhl, Germany, of injuries suffered on Aug 30 in Baghdad, Iraq, when he encountered enemy forces using small arms fire.

Lance Cpl. Shane P. Harris, 23, of Las Vegas, N.M., died September 3 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Lance Cpl. Philip A. Johnson, 19, of Hartford, Conn., died September 3 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Sgt. 1st Class Richard J. Henkes II, 32, of Portland Ore., died on September 3 of injuries suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle during combat operations.

Pfc. Nicholas A. Madaras, 19, of Wilton, Conn., died on September 3, in Baqubah, Iraq, of injuries suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his dismounted patrol during combat operations.

Sgt. Jason L. Merrill, 22, of Mesa, Ariz. died on September 3 in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle during combat operations.

Pfc. Edwin A. Andino II, 23, of Culpeper, Va. died on September 3 in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle during combat operations.

Pvt. Ryan E. Miller, 21, of Gahanna, Ohio, died September 3 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Cpl. Jared M. Shoemaker, 29, of Tulsa, Okla., died September 4 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Lance Cpl. Eric P. Valdepenas, 21, of Seekonk, Mass., died September 4 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Lt. Col. Marshall A. Gutierrez, 41, of New Mexico, died on September 4 in Camp Virginia, Kuwait, from non-combat related injuries.

Sgt. Germaine L. Debro, 33, of Omaha, Neb., died on September 4 in Balad, Iraq, of injuries suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle during combat operations.

Petty Officer 2nd Class Christopher G. Walsh, 30, of St. Louis, Mo. died September 4 while his unit was conducting combat operations against enemy forces in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Pfc. Hannah L. Gunterman, 20, of Redlands, Calif., died on September 4 in Taji, Iraq, from injuries suffered when she was struck by a vehicle.

Pfc. Jeremy R. Shank, 18, of Jackson, Mo., died on September 6 in Balad, Iraq, of injuries suffered in Hawijah, Iraq, when he encountered enemy forces using small arms fire during a dismounted security patrol.

Sgt. John A. Carroll, 26, of Ponca City, Okla., died on September 6 in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, of injuries sustained when he came in contact with enemy forces using small arms fire during a dismounted security patrol.

Pfc. Vincent M. Frassetto, 21, of Toms River, N.J., died September 7 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Sgt. Luis A. Montes, 22, of El Centro, Calif., died on September 7 in Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, Texas, of injuries suffered on September 1 in Abu Ghraib, Iraq, when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle during combat operations.

Sgt. David W. Gordon, 23, of Williamsfield, Ohio, died on September 8, in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries sustained when an improvised explosive device detonated near his HMMWV during combat operations.

Pfc. Anthony P. Seig, 19, of Sunman, Ind., died on September 9, in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries sustained when he encountered indirect fire from enemy forces while on base.

Cpl. Johnathan L. Benson, 21, of North Branch, Minn., died September 9 from wounds suffered on June 17 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Cpl. Alexander Jordan, 31, of Miami, Fla., died on September 10 in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries suffered when he encountered enemy forces using small arms fire during combat operations.

Spc. Harley D. Andrews, 22, of Weimar, Calif., died on September 11 in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, of injuries suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle during combat operations.

2nd Lt. Emily J.T. Perez, 23, of Texas, died on September 12 of injuries sustained in Al Kifl, Iraq, when an improvised explosive device detonated near her HMMWV during combat operations.

Capt. Matthew C. Mattingly, 30, of Reynoldsburg, Ohio, died on September 13 in Mosul, Iraq, when he encountered enemy forces using small arms fire during combat operations.

Pfc. Jeffrey P. Shaffer, 21, of Harrison, Ark., died of injuries sustained in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, on September 13 when an improvised explosive device detonated near his M2A2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle during combat operations.

Sgt. David T. Weir, 23, of Cleveland, Tenn., died on September 14 in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries suffered on September 13 when he encountered enemy forces using rocket-propelled grenade and small arms fire during combat operations.

Sgt. Jennifer M. Hartman, 21, of New Ringgold, Pa. died in Baghdad, Iraq, on September 14 of injuries suffered when a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device detonated in the vicinity of a West Baghdad Substation where she was located.

Lance Cpl. Ryan A. Miller, 19, of Pearland, Texas, died September 14 while conducting combat operations against enemy forces in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Sgt. Aaron A. Smith, 31, of Killeen, Texas died in Baghdad, Iraq, on September 14 of injuries suffered when a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device detonated in the vicinity of a West Baghdad Substation where he was located.

Spc. Russell M. Makowski, 23, of Union, Mo., died of injuries suffered in Taji, Iraq, on September 14 when an improvised explosive device detonated near his dismounted patrol during combat operations.

Sgt. Clint E.Williams, 24, of Kingston, Okla., died on September 14 of injuries suffered in Baghdad, Iraq when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle during combat operations.

Cpl. Marcus A. Cain, 20, of Crowley, La. died in Baghdad, Iraq, on September 14 of injuries suffered when a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device detonated in the vicinity of a West Baghdad Substation where he was located.

Petty Officer 2nd Class David S. Roddy, 32, of Aberdeen, Md., died September 16 while his unit was conducting combat operations against enemy forces in the Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Sgt. Adam L. Knox, 21, of Columbus, Ohio, died on September 17 in Baghdad, Iraq, of injuries suffered when his patrol encountered enemy forces using small arms fire during combat operations.

Sgt. David J. Davis, 32, of Mount Airy, Md., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on September 17, of injuries sustained when an improvised explosive device detonated near his Stryker Armored Vehicle during combat operations in Sadr City, Iraq.

Sgt. James R. Worster, 24, of Broadview Heights, Ohio, died from a non-combat related incident on September 18 in Baghdad, Iraq.

Sgt. Christopher M. Zimmerman, 28, of Stephenville, Texas, died September 20 while conducting combat operations against enemy forces in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Master Sgt. Robb G. Needham, 51, of Vancouver, Wash., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on September 20, of injuries suffered when his patrol came in contact with enemy forces using small arms fire during combat operations.

Cpl. Yull Estrada Rodriguez, 21, of Alegre Lajas, Puerto Rico, died September 20 while conducting combat operations against enemy forces in Al Anbar province, Iraq.

Imagine the constant, JonBenet Ramsey-like media coverage that would occur if Al-Qaeda killed 44 Americans by bombing a Burger King in Peoria. And yet the same number of Americans dying for absolutely nothing -- and similar bloodshed guaranteed for next month -- disappears almost entirely from view, garnering less ink and broadcast time than an appearance of Suri Cruise or the box office ranking of 'Jackass Number Two.'

We have an election coming up in six weeks and why these 44 people died, at an average age of 25, is not a "single issue" this campaign season -- it is the only issue.

Boxer Proposes Blast-Proof Air Cargo Containers

In yet another attempt by Senate Democrats to get the Republican leadership to devote time and money to real national security measures, Barbara Boxer (D-CA) introduced legislation last week to require commercial airliners to store cargo in blast-resistant containers.

Boxer's S. 3927 was read on the Senate floor on Thursday and referred to the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee, on which the California Senator is also a member.

"Transportation Security Administration, TSA, has implemented new security procedures since we learned of the London terror plot to detonate liquid explosives on flights from Great Britain to the United States," said Boxer in introducing her bill. "While I support these new procedures, TSA is asking passengers to give up their lip gloss, yet we are not examining cargo loaded on board our passenger planes."

"We should be doing this at every airport to ensure the security of the flying public and the solvency of the airline industry. But until that time, at the very least, we need to use at least one blast resistant cargo container on passenger planes that carry cargo. This was one of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission."

Boxer pointed out that the Senate's GOP leadership would not allow the recently-passed port security bill to be amended to include air cargo and proposed this legislation in response.

"Addressing port security is critical. However, security for other transportation modes is important, but the Republican leadership wanted us to do port security and nothing else," said Boxer. "The final bill the Senate approved does not contain any major provisions for aviation security. Yes, aviation security has improved greatly in the last five years. But, as we recently found out with the aviation terrorist plot uncovered by the British authorities, there are still holes in the system."

The 9/11 Commission recommended that every passenger aircraft carrying cargo deploy at least one hardened container to carry any suspect cargo -- one of the many things about the Commission's report totally ignored by Congressional Republicans and the White House.

Boxer made it clear that, in addition to being a measure the majority of Americans would solidly support, the cost is minimal -- especially when compared to what is being spent on the pointless Iraq war.

"To place one blast-resistant container on each plane, would cost about $75 million -- this is equal to the cost of a little more than 5 hours in Iraq. Imagine the impact on the security of the country and the financial outlook for the airline industry if a plane were to explode during a flight."

"We owe this to the American people."

Monday Check Of The Osama Clock

Hey, if it's Monday, it's time to check the BobGeiger.com Osama clock.

It has now been over five years since our country was attacked on September 11, 2001 and exactly 1,834 days since George W. Bush (The Resolute One) said that he would get Osama bin Laden dead or alive.

And so, as we ask every week... Mr. Bush: Where's Osama?

Akaka Wins Hawaii Senate Primary

In the last primary for the 33 Senate seats being contested in 2006, Hawaii Senator Daniel Akaka survived a challenge from conservative Democrat Ed Case Saturday to take the state's Democratic Senatorial nomination. The winner of the Democratic primary was to take on Republican Jerry Coffee, but Coffee withdrew from the race in August after having emergency heart bypass surgery.

Coffee remained on the ballot, besting the other five Republican candidates with 41 percent of the vote, after Hawaii's Republican Governor Linda Lingle urged voters to support Coffee so that the state Republican party could have the option of replacing him on the general election ballot. At this point, it is unclear who Akaka will face -- if anyone -- in the November 7 general election, but Hawaii Republicans have until Tuesday to replace Coffee as the nominee.

The 82-year-old Akaka, the first senator of Native Hawaiian descent and the only Chinese American in the Senate, handily defeated Case 54 percent to 45 percent.

"I'm really humbled to be here with you," said Akaka, bedecked with numerous flower leis and joined by supporters and Hawaii's congressional delegation. "There is nothing but gratitude in my heart for all of you."

"This is a great day for Hawaii and a great day for the United States," said the state's other Democratic Senator, Daniel Inouye, at Akaka headquarters. "Dan Akaka is going back to Washington."

Given that Akaka voted against giving George W. Bush approval to go to war in Iraq and Case said explicitly that he would have voted for giving the president that authority, Democratic voters in Hawaii made exactly the right decision during such a critical time in our country.

We already have one Joe Lieberman too many in the United States Senate and Hawaiians clearly decided yesterday that we do not need another.

Dodge GOP Slime With the Bernie Sanders Arcade Game

Here's a nice weekend diversion from the man who will be elected Vermont's next United States Senator on November 7. Bernie Sanders' web site has a new game up that, as Bernie does every day in Washington, allows you to dodge Republican fat cats, right-wing extremists, mud-slingers and big-money lobbyists on the way to doing something good for America.



Guide Bernie's hydrogen-powered airplane around all of this -- look out for the falling fat cats! -- and pick up extra points when you grab a fact sheet, while making your way through an onslaught of special interests and dishonest attacks.

Check it out at the Sanders for Senate web site.

The Saturday Cartoons

Reader Mail: The Friday Fruitcakes

Well, it's Friday, which means it's time to look in the old BobGeiger.com mailbag and see what conservative Nobel Laureate or Fox News devotee tries to give me my comeuppance this week.

The hate mail has been a bit slow lately and I'm attributing that to the fact that even delusional Republicans can sense that their party is about as welcome by the American people as Joe Lieberman at a Progressive blogger party.

But one guy I can always count on, is a cowardly little man, who goes only by "V" and who writes to me with mindless drivel and threats on a regular basis.

Here's Mr./Ms. "V" from my inbox just this morning:

You're a friggen asshole. Still up to your old tricks? How about I come to New York and kick your ass?

Needless to say, I was so concerned that I forwarded the V-man's terrifying message to my wife and then called her to talk about it. It went something like this:

Wife: So, another right-winger who's tough enough to anonymously challenge you to a fight, but so gutless he can't even give his real name?

Bob: It's to be expected. They're ashamed of who they are.

Wife: Are you afraid?

Bob: Right now, I'm much more afraid that the corner deli will run out of hot pastrami by the time I get there at lunch.

Wife: Do you think he'll come to New York to "kick your ass"?

Bob: If he's like most redneck Republicans, the only way he'll find New York is if he hocks his double-wide trailer and gets a GPS device for his pickup.

Wife: Do you think he ever served in the military and is a fellow Veteran?

Bob: [Laughing uncontrollably for 30 seconds…] Oh, you're serious?

Wife: Well, there's a chance…

Bob: True, but this guy strikes me very much as "Cheney-tough."

Wife: Cheney-tough?

Bob: You know, likes war as long as someone else fights it. Makes threats with no risk and no stake in the outcome… That kind of thing.

Wife: What if he actually shows up in Manhattan? Will you meet him and beat him to a pulp?

Bob: Of course not. How do I follow-up on smacking around a loud-mouth, Chickenhawk Republican? Beat out an old lady for a subway seat? Kick a blind man's cane? Steal a little girl's ice cream cone? C'mon.

Wife: Where's this guy from?

Bob: I have no idea. That's the thing with these cowards -- they sound tough, but only when you don’t know who they are or where to find them.

Wife: So you're not worried?

Bob: About the pastrami? Hell, yeah. I gotta go.

Wife: No, about Mr. V.

Bob: No. I figure a yokel like that will either get killed driving in Manhattan or get run down on the street because he can't figure out our complex walk/don't walk system.

Wife: Well, I'm glad you're not afraid.

Bob: Wait, I am. What if the deli runs out of rye bread?

* * * * *Tune in next time for another edition of the Friday Fruitcakes. And, for you hateful, self-loathing Republicans – keep those cards, letter and e-mails coming.

More Updates on Hot Senate Races

We took a brief look yesterday at some of this year's most hotly-contested U.S. Senate races and today we'll examine a bunch more.

New Jersey: Robert Menendez (D), Tom Kean Jr. (R)

Latest Polls:

• Quinnipiac September 20, 2006: Menendez 45% Kean 48%

• Strategic Vision September 14, 2006: Menendez 40% Kean 44%

• Zogby Interactive September 11, 2006: Menendez 40.4% Kean 40.2%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Menendez 41% Tom Kean Jr. 44%

Comments: This is getting way too close for comfort, despite my thinking that whatever slim lead Kean has is based solely on confusion among dumb Republican voters who think the elder, well-known Kean is running and not his vacuous son. The Menendez camp needs to make some major strides in the next few weeks, as the national GOP is seeing this as their best chance to snatch a Democratic seat and it's only a matter of time before the big swift-boat money starts coming into play in the Garden State. Menendez has $5 million more than Kean in his campaign warchest and he needs to start using it now, not in late October.

* * * * *Maryland: Ben Cardin (D), Michael Steele (R)

Latest Polls:

• SurveyUSA September 20, 2006: Cardin 47% Steele 48%

• Rasmussen September 13, 2006: Cardin 50% Steele 43%

• Zogby/WSJ September 5, 2006: Cardin 49% Steele 40%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Cardin 48% Steele 42%

Comments: There's been a debate in the Progressive blog world over how good Steele's quirky television ads are and I'm one of the people who thinks they are not only effective, but they're partially responsible for his surge in the polls. This may not end up being as close as it looks right now -- this is true-blue Maryland, after all -- but Democratic nominee Ben Cardin needs to get his primary foe Kweisi Mfume into a back room and beg for some very visible support in the black community. Maryland's voter base is almost one-quarter African-American and the charismatic and respected Mfume may be just what Cardin needs to keep Steele from being this competitive.

* * * * *Missouri: Claire McCaskill (D), Jim Talent (R)

Latest Polls:

• Rasmussen September 15, 2006: McCaskill 45% Talent 42%

• SurveyUSA September 14, 2006: McCaskill 48% Talent 47%

• Zogby/WSJ September 11, 2006: McCaskill 45% Talent 48.9%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: McCaskill 46% Talent 47%

Comments: This is going to be one of the down-to-the-wire races and could go either way at this point. Talent is your standard-issue, rubber-stamping Republican, but hasn’t managed to do anything overt to anger Missouri voters -- except side with Bush on the stem-cell research veto, while the majority of voters support that science. Missouri also has a stem-cell initiative on the ballot this fall, which should help McCaskill. This race is totally deadlocked but Talent has a ton more money than McCaskill, which means the Democratic nominee could be in trouble when they crank up the television slime machine.

* * * * *Montana: Jon Tester (D), Conrad Burns (R)

Latest Polls:

• Rasmussen September 13, 2006: Tester 52% Burns 43%

• Gallup September 5, 2006: Tester 48% Burns 45%

• Rasmussen August 8, 2006: Tester 47% Burns 47%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Tester 48% Burns 44%

Comments: Conrad Burns can't get any positive press to save his life and, between being dogged by constant appearances of being corrupt and his general lackluster performance as a Senator, he is in massive trouble. Every poll has Democrat Jon Tester ahead or in a statistical tie and, despite Burns having way more money for the stretch run, I think Montanans are just flat-out tired of him and Tester will prevail on November 7.

* * * * *Ohio: Sherrod Brown (D), Mike DeWine (R)

Latest Polls:

• SurveyUSA September 21, 2006: Brown 52% DeWine 42%

• University of Cincinnati September 20, 2006: Brown 51% DeWine 47%

• Quinnipiac Univ. September 17, 2006: Brown 45% DeWine 44%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Brown 47% DeWine 43%

Comments: This is another one in that handful of races that, seven weeks out, is just practically too close to call. Brown is well known and popular in Ohio, while DeWine is the poster boy for a do-nothing GOP Congress in a year where being a Republican is something you try to hide. The DeWine campaign is also failing miserably in their attempts to paint Brown as some wild-eyed radical, who is out of step with Ohio voters -- Brown still comes out looking like an energetic populist. The economy is a huge issue in the state and Brown needs to hammer DeWine mercilessly about that and how out of touch DeWine is to keep saying the economy is good when Ohio families simply don't feel that way.

* * * * *Rhode Island: Sheldon Whitehouse (D), Lincoln Chafee (R)

Latest Polls:

• ARG September 20, 2006: Whitehouse 45% Chafee 40%

• Brown University September 8, 2006: Whitehouse 40% Chafee 39%

• Rasmussen September 17, 2006: Whitehouse 51% Chafee 43%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Whitehouse 44% Chafee 41%

Comments: This is a key chance, along with Tennessee, for Democrats to snag a Republican seat. Sheldon Whitehouse is well-liked by Rhode Island voters and has nearly twice as much money as Chafee for the final month of the campaign. Chafee got no polling bounce whatsoever from his primary victory, still trails Whitehouse in every poll and, with Rhode Island being one of the bluest of the blue states, I like the way this is shaping up heading into October.

* * * * *Tennessee: Harold Ford Jr. (D), Bob Corker (R)

Latest Polls:

• SurveyUSA September 11, 2006: Ford 48% Corker 45%

• Zogby/WSJ September 11, 2006 : Ford 42.6% Corker 45.3%

• Rasmussen September 5, 2006 : Ford 44% Corker 45%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Ford 45% Corker 45%

Comments: With the closeness of some of the other races and with Menendez struggling in New Jersey, this has become a critical race for Democrats as they attempt to take the seat being vacated by the retiring Bill Frist. While Ford's television ads are way too conservative for my tastes, they are very well done and Ford is an undeniably engaging presence on TV and in person. It's also important for we Northeast liberals to remember that it's not us Ford is appealing to, but people in a deep-red state and he is clearly doing the right thing, based on how, according to Pollster.com's five-poll average, this race is now deadlocked at 45% to 45%.

This is going to be very close and very exciting and, for once, I'm happy about Ford's membership in the House's Blue-Dog (Conservative Democrat) coalition as it makes it much harder for the Karl Roves of the Republican party to define him as something he's not -- of course, that's never stopped them before.

* * * * *Minnesota: Amy Klobuchar (D), Mark Kennedy (R)

Latest Polls:

• Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune September 17, 2006: Klobuchar 56%
  Kennedy 32%

• Zogby/WSJ September 11, 2006: Klobuchar 49.1% Kennedy 40.4%

• Gallup September 5, 2006: Klobuchar 50% Kennedy 40%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Klobuchar 51% Kennedy 39%

Comments: Nobody with the name Kennedy should ever be allowed to serve in Congress as a Republican -- it's not fair, but that's the way it has to be. Amy Klobuchar has been widening the lead she had in every poll during the summer, which is not a good sign for Kennedy coming into the stretch run. It also looks like the national Republican party has all but conceded this race and, without a financial infusion from them, Kennedy has no hope of prevailing.

* * * * *Vermont: Bernie Sanders (I), Richard Tarrant (R)

Latest Polls:

• Garin-Hart-Yang September 17, 2006: Sanders 66% Tarrant 27%

• ARG September 14, 2006: Sanders 55% Tarrant 40%

• Rasmussen August 3, 2006: Sanders 62% Tarrant 34%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Sanders 61% Tarrant 33%

Comments: Put this in the bank as an easy victory for Sanders and an effective Democratic seat. Sanders is a liberal, will caucus with the Democrats and retain essentially the same position held by Independent Jim Jeffords after he bolted the Republican party. If you see any poll showing Republican Tarrant even coming close to Sanders, it's not accurate.

Stupid Senator Tricks With the GOP's Conrad Burns

The wags and rascals at Democrats.com have spoofed the popular Vonage television ads by producing a funny take-off that spotlights Montana Republican Senator Conrad Burns' little problem with accepting lavish gifts from the same people he helps with legislation -- like, in this case, Vonage!

Take a look:

Thursday Poll Dancing: Senate Updates

Let's take a brief look at where we stand with some of the most hotly-contested U.S. Senate races this year:

Michigan: Debbie Stabenow (D), Michael Bouchard (R)

Latest Polls:

• Strategic Vision Sept 20, 2006: Stabenow 51% Bouchard 44%
• Survey USA Sept 18, 2006: Stabenow 54% Bouchard 41%
• EPIC-MRA Sept 14, 2006: Stabenow 54% Bouchard 34%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Stabenow 52% Bouchard 41%

Comments: With less than seven weeks to go before the November 7 election, these are too much like every poll has looked in the last six months for Bouchard to make up enough ground to win.

* * * * *
Washington: Maria Cantwell (D), Mike McGavick (R)

Latest Polls:

• Rasmussen September 12, 2006: Cantwell 52% McGavick 35%
• Zogby/WSJ September 11, 2006: Cantwell 50.2% McGavick 42%
• Strategic Vision August 29, 2006: Cantwell 48% McGavick 43%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Cantwell 52% McGavick 39%

Comments: This race is not as close as the occasional poll, like the Strategic Vision results of August 29, might suggest. Cantwell may not excite Washington Progressives, but she hasn't had the outright blunder -- think Joe Lieberman -- to lose to McGavick.

* * * * *
Connecticut: Ned Lamont (D), Joe Lieberman (I), Alan Schlesinger (R)

Latest Polls:

• ARG September 19, 2006: Lamont 45% Lieberman 47% Schlesinger 3%
• Rasmussen September 19, 2006: Lamont 43% Lieberman 45% Schlesinger 5%
• SurveyUSA September 12, 2006: Lamont 38% Lieberman 51% Schlesinger 7%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Lamont (D) 41%, Lieberman (I) 48%, Schlesinger (R) 4%

Comments: Of course, this is the race everyone is watching and one that sets a dangerous precedent in a guy like Lieberman thinking he can simply turn the primary election, and his party's rightful choice, into a complete mockery. Lamont is closing the gap every day and, with the timely revelations that Lieberman's support for the Iraq war now includes tacitly endorsing war profiteers who are cheating both the troops and American taxpayers, Lamont will win -- and that's even if my prediction of Lieberman dropping out by November 7 doesn’t come true.

* * * * *
Arizona: Jim Pederson (D), Jon Kyl (R)

Latest Polls:

• Rasmussen September 20, 2006: Pederson 39% Kyl 50%
• SurveyUSA September 19, 2006: Pederson 43% Kyl 48%
• Zogby/WSJ September 11, 2006: Pederson 43.5% Kyl 50.2%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Pederson 41% Kyl 48%

Comments: Pederson took good advice from somebody and, in the last month, has been hammering on Kyl about his opposition to a minimum wage increase and his close ties to the big-money pharmaceutical industry. And recent polls show Pederson drawing closer to it being a statistical dead heat. If the image of the national Republican party continues to be tarnished even more -- is that possible at this point? -- Pederson may be able to pull off a major surprise.

* * * * *
Virginia: Jim Webb (D), George Felix Allen (R)

Latest Polls:

• Rasmussen September 15, 2006: Webb 43% Allen 50%
• SurveyUSA September 13, 2006: Webb 45% Allen 48%
• Mason-Dixon September 10, 2006: Webb 42% Allen 46%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Webb 46% Allen 47%

Comments: One year ago, nobody in the GOP power elite would have guessed in their wildest nightmares that Allen would be fighting for his political life in this election. This one is a pure dead heat and, while Allen still has the edge, who knows what Macaca Man will say or do to hurt himself in the next seven weeks?

* * * * *
Pennsylvania: Bob Casey (D), Rick Santorum (R)

Latest Polls:

• Rasmussen September 21, 2006: Casey 49% Santorum 39%
• Franklin & Marshall College September 21, 2006: Casey 45% Santorum 38%
• Zogby September 11, 2006: Casey 47.0% Santorum 42.9%

Pollster.com average of last five polls: Casey 51% Santorum 40%

Comments: Santorum is toast. Even if the Santorum team Photoshops a picture of Casey marrying a gay couple, while performing an abortion, with a burning flag in the background -- and I think we know, with Republicans, that's not out of the question -- this seat goes to the Democrats on November 7.

We'll take a look at the other hot races tomorrow.

Tuesday Senate Primary Results

Just for the record, there were actually two Democratic Senate primaries on Tuesday, in Massachusetts and Washington. They were of very little consequence, which is why I'm just getting around to updating you on them now.

In Washington, Senator Maria Cantwell got 91 percent of the vote to easily best challenger Hong Tran for the Democratic nomination and will face Republican nominee Mike McGavick in the November 7 general election for the seat she has held for one term.

Ted Kennedy, the unabashed liberal stalwart from Massachusetts, ran unopposed in the Democratic primary and will face an entirely meaningless challenge from Republican Ken Chase. Political observers believe that Chase has as good a chance of beating Kennedy in November, as Karl Rove does of being named People Magazine's next "Sexiest Man Alive."

Announcing: Wait! Don't Move to Canada!

I had the pleasure of attending the book-release party on Monday night in Manhattan for Bill Scher's excellent new book, Wait! Don't Move To Canada! and had a tremendous time.

In addition to being a top-notch political mind and an all-around great guy, Bill is a wonderful writer -- if his LiberalOasis.com is not on your daily-visit list, it should be -- and this book, as the title implies, spells out how it's not too late to save our country and provides simple, concrete steps we can all take to snatch America back from the true evil-doers in the Republican party.

As the book jacket suggests, Bill's book is an outstanding "step-by-step plan to rally support for a better, more effective, and more liberal vision of government" and is such an easy read even a Republican could plow right through it. (I'm about halfway through after only three days of reading it on the train.)

You can get Wait! Don't Move To Canada! at Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble. Also, please go to Liberal Oasis to find out when Bill's book tour will be coming to your neck of the woods.

I got my copy and I strongly recommend that you get yours too!

Frist Blames Democratic Minority for Do-Nothing Congress, Gets Spanked

How did Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) commemorate Constitution and Citizenship Day, when he returned to the Senate floor on Monday? In an odd twist of logic, he blamed the minority party for how little work has been done in the 109th Congress.

September 17, which fell on Sunday, celebrated the ratification of the United States Constitution and Frist used that occasion to announce that Senate Democrats are actually the reason that the last 20 legislative months have been proclaimed the "Do-Nothing Congress."

"Too often my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have inhibited the fulfillment of our duty," said Frist, after a stirring reading of the preamble of the Constitution. "They have relied on obstruction and thrown up roadblocks at every opportunity. They have let politics get in the way of sound policy and purpose. That is unacceptable."

Frist read a laundry list of issues he believes are important and that will be left on the back burner after the Senate's scheduled October 6 adjournment and urged Democrats to "…review our Constitution's Preamble, to consider anew our purpose here in the Senate, and to let that purpose guide our debate and action here on the Senate floor."

Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), who has endured this Congress with control of no committees, an inability to pass any meaningful legislation and no say over the Senate's legislative agenda, was on Frist faster than Halliburton snaps up a no-bid contract.

"For more than 3 years, this Congress, which has been given the name of the "do-nothing Congress,'' has turned a blind eye to the intractable war in Iraq, ignoring the administration's many mistakes and allowing it to stay on a failed course," said Reid. "Here we are, with 6 days left in the 109th Congress, and the Republicans, who control the House and Senate and the White House, have not held one hearing -- not one -- into the President's wartime failures."

Given how little attention the White House and Congressional Republicans have actually paid to the Constitution in the last few years, I'm sure Frist was blindsided by Reid actually invoking that old checks and balances thing that schoolchildren all over America were probably learning about last week.

Reid went on to give the Senate leadership a quick history lesson on how Congress is suppose to work and how it indeed operated before the current crop of Bush rubber-stampers took over:

"During the Civil War, President Lincoln was faced continually with oversight hearings by his Congress. Of course, we know during World War II, there were a number of commissions. The most famous was that conducted by Senator Harry Truman of Missouri, which led to his becoming Vice President. Some say, but for that he would not have been chosen as Vice President.

"What was the Truman Commission? It was to determine what was going on with World War II. Was money being wasted? Were troop levels right? Korean war hearings were also held, and the same for the Vietnam war. But for this war, none--even though this war has taken longer than it took to settle the differences in the European theater in World War II. Soon it will be the same amount of time that we were able to beat Japan."

Reid then let loose the frustration that's no doubt been building after watching Republicans shoot down three attempts by Democrats to raise the federal minimum wage in this Congress and killing many pieces of legislation designed to bolster homeland security -- including the 528-page, Democratic-sponsored Real Security Act of 2006, which was snuffed by Republicans just last week.

"This Republican Congress has wasted 20 months on horse slaughtering; the Schiavo case, dealing with someone's personal relationship, which should not even have been before this body; gay marriage; the nuclear option; flag burning; repealing the estate tax," said Reid. "But they could not find a day for some time to look at the President's mistakes, missteps, and misconduct, which have hurt American security and plunged Iraq into a civil war -- not a day."

I guess you just have to call Reid an old-school kind of guy, hanging in there, against such great Republican opposition, with his insistence that the Senate maintain its mandated oversight of the executive branch.

But the real show-stopper came when Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Il) stepped up to the microphone to engage Reid is a dialog that must have had Republican teeth gnashing all the way to the White House. Here it is, straight from the Congressional Record:

Mr. Durbin: Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. Reid: I will be happy to yield for a question.

Mr. Durbin: Can the Senator refresh my memory? Was Mr. Bremmer the recipient of a gold medal or something from the President? Didn't he receive some high decoration or medal for his performance in Iraq?

Mr. Reid: The answer is, yes, he received that. I assume one would expect that from somebody who had a throne while he was over there.

Mr. Durbin: Isn't it also true that George Tenet, who was responsible for the intelligence that was so bad that led us into the war in Iraq, got a medal from the President the same day?

Mr. Reid: That is true.

Mr. Durbin: Did Michael Brown with FEMA receive a gold medal from the White House before he was dismissed?

Mr. Reid: I don't think he did. Even though he was doing a heck of a job, I don't think he obtained a medal from the White House.

Mr. Durbin: Apparently, these gold medals were being awarded for incompetence. They missed Mr. Brown, but they did give one to Mr. Bremmer. Will the Senator yield for another question?

Mr. Reid: I will be happy to.

Mr. Durbin: I am trying to recall the exact number -- it was in the billions of dollars -- that we gave to the President for the reconstruction of Iraq; is that not true?

Mr. Reid: It started out at $18 billion. But as the Senator from Illinois will remember, part of that money, stacks of one-hundred-dollar bills, was used by some of the contractors who were sent over there to play football games -- some of these same people.

Mr. Durbin: It is also true, is it not, that the Democratic policy conference has been holding hearings -- in fact, I think it is the only agency on the Hill holding hearings -- on this waste and abuse, this profiteering and corruption at the expense of American taxpayers and even, equally important -- more importantly -- at the expense of our troops?

Mr. Reid: I say to my friend, this war is approaching 3 1/2 years, and there has not been a single congressional oversight hearing on the conduct of the war. This war has now cost us, the American taxpayers, about $325 billion. There has not been a single congressional oversight hearing on the war.

Mr. Durbin: I ask the Senator from Nevada if he might comment on this as well: Are we not in a situation where the President has told us that he wants to "stay the course'' in Iraq, and Vice President Cheney, when asked a week ago, said he wouldn't change a thing in the way they have done this war in Iraq? Is it very clear that unless there is a change in leadership in this town soon, we are going to continue down this disastrous course, exposing our soldiers to danger every single day, their families to the anxiety of separation, and the taxpayers of this country to billions and billions of dollars more being spent that don't make us any safer?

Mr. Reid: I say to my friend, I spent the weekend reading a book. I did other things. I spent a lot of time on an airplane. The book is called "Fiasco,'' written by a man named Thomas Ricks who has spent his life covering the military. He has written books on the military. I don't know his political persuasion. This book is on the best seller's list of the New York Times.

In this book, he talks in such detail about what has happened as a result of the incompetence of this administration to our valiant fighting men and women over there. I recommend the book to anyone. It is a searing indictment of this administration.

Reid then thrust the final dagger on his own saying, "The war in Iraq has been a diversion from the real war on terror. But this administration and this do-nothing Congress are content to stay the course, even as it makes America less safe and Iraq less stable. We need a new direction. This Congress has failed."

At this point, I'm sure Bill Frist was sitting at his desk writing something along the lines of "Note to self: do not ... bring ...toothpick ... to a knife fight."

Update: AlterNet has the video of the Reid-Durbin show from the Senate floor -- go take a look. It's even better than reading it.