Weekend Watchdog

Impeach Bush.

Interrelated’
Barack Obama fans are quick to compare their candidate to President John F. Kennedy. In fact, the two are much alike: pro-business, imperial-minded politicians who are undeservedly tagged as progressives by folks who should know better. "JFK inhabited much the same power-serving faux-progressive ideological space in his time as Obama does today." On foreign policy, Obama supports increased military spending, as did Kennedy. And "just like JFK, Obama has falsely sold this conservative economic agenda as a form of neutral ‘get things done' pragmatism emphasizing ‘technical expertise' over and beyond mere ‘ideology.'"

John Kennedy, Barack Obama and the ‘Triple Evils That Are Interrelated'

by Paul Street

"The cunning, corporate and imperial Kennedy legacy is actually what Obama is all about."

In completing a recent book on the Barack Obama phenomenon, I found much to dispute in the Obama campaign's description and marketing of the junior U.S. Senator from Illinois. Among the more dubious aspects of his biography and "branding" that I criticize and expose as deceptions are his claims to: come from a disadvantaged and alienated background; to be "from the South Side of Chicago;" have been conceived as a result of the early victories of the Civil Rights movement; have been consistently against the Iraq War from the beginning; represent a popular challenge to big money and corporate control of American politics and policy; "transcend race;" lack an ideology; and embody the spirit and lessons of Dr. Martin Luther king, Jr.

The Obama portrayed in my study is an openly (for those able and willing to look beneath the marketing campaign) imperial and corporate-neoliberal symbol and agent of business rule, Superpower hegemony, and racial accommodation and denial. Obama, I show, has consistently lined up on the conservative, that is, power-friendly side of each of what Dr. King called "the triple evils that are interrelated": racism (deeply and institutionally understood), economic exploitation (capitalism), and U.S. militarism.

It's all very consistent with mainstream journalist Ryan Lizza's statement at the end of a recent New Yorker article on Obama's early political career in Chicago: "Perhaps the greatest misconception about Barack Obama," Lizza notes, "is that he is some sort of anti-establishment revolutionary. Rather, every stage of his political career has been marked by an eagerness to accommodate himself to existing institutions rather than tear them down or replace them" [Ryan Lizza, "Making It: How Chicago Shaped Obama," The New Yorker, July 21, 2008]. (Revealingly enough, this does not stop Lizza from saying that Obama is "ideologically a man of the left.")

"JFK inhabited much the same power-serving faux-progressive ideological space in his time as Obama does today."

One aspect of the Obama mystique I do NOT question, however, is the Obama campaign's effort, largely successful, to link its candidate to the record and "Camelot" legacy of John Fitzgerald Kennedy (JFK). It's a reasonable linkage, I think, but not for admirable reasons. Besides also being a relatively young, agile, telegenic, and articulate, Harvard-educated U.S. Senator with little record of substantive policy accomplishment and a taste for the lofty and outwardly idealistic, JFK inhabited much the same power-serving faux-progressive ideological space in his time as Obama does today. Also worshipped by many liberals and enjoying a strong following with academics and intellectuals, the proto-neoliberal President Kennedy spent much of his time on the cunning, right (starboard), and power-serving side of King's "triple evils." This hardly prevented him from being adored as a man of peace and justice by millions at home and abroad - something worth recalling as Obama embarks on his explicitly Kennedy-esque tour of Europe and the Middle East and as preparations continue for Obama to accept his presidential nomination before 70,000-plus chanting fans in a mile-high football stadium that will have to suffice since Mount Sinai is unavailable.

Class: "In the service of corporate capitalism"

Take JFK and economic injustice, the second of King's "triple evils." More than a decade before officially neoliberal Democrats emerged to explicitly steer the Democratic Party to the corporate center, JFK's frequently declared sympathies for the poor and working class took a back seat in his White house to what political scientist and Kennedy chronicler Bruce Miroff called "the real determinants of policy: political calculation and economic doctrine." As Mirroff noted in his brilliant and largely forgotten study Pragmatic Illusions: The Presidential Politics of John F. Kennedy (New York: Longman's, 1976), "political calculation led Kennedy to appease the corporate giants and their allies in government. Economic doctrine told him that the key to the expansion and health of the economy was the health and expansion of those same corporate giants. The architects of Kennedy's ‘New Economics' liked to portray it as the technically sophisticated and politically neutral management of a modern industrial economy. It is more accurately portrayed as a pragmatic liberalism in the service of corporate capitalism" (Miroff, p. 168).

Numerous Kennedy administration economic programs followed closely along lines that favored and had already been marked out by the corporate sector. As Miroff noted:

"His wage guidelines, and other efforts at terminating labor-management conflict over the distribution of income, fit neatly with business's longstanding objective of holding wage costs steady. His liberalization of depreciation allowances furnished business with a tax break which it had sought unsuccessfully from the Eisenhower administration. His proposed reduction in corporate income and personal income taxes in the higher brackets approached tax reductions earlier proposed by the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Corporate executives may not have had Kennedy's ear, but the functional result was not so different than if they had. Economic doctrine and political calculation were enough to make him respond more often to business desires than to those of the economic constituencies that actually supported him."

"JFK's administration's record on economic equity was less than progressive."

The Kennedy administration's "economic growth" policies conferred significantly greater advantage on the affluent than they did to working-, middle- and lower-class Americans. Seen against the backdrop of JFK's frequently expressed empathy for America's underdogs, his administration's record on economic equity was less than progressive. The regressive nature of his "New Economics' was cloaked by his recurrent, much-publicized spats with certain members of the business community (the executives of U.S. Steel above all), his repeated statements of concern for labor and the poor, and his claim to advance a purely "technical" and "pragmatic" economic agenda that elevated "practical management" and administrative expertise above the "grand warfare of ideologies" (Miroff, pp. 182-183, 217-218). It was for doctrinal as well as for emotional and calculated political reasons that many of the early proponents of what later came to be known as the Democratic neoliberals (e.g. Senators Gary Hart and Bill Bradley, Governors Bruce Babbit, James Hunt, Richard Lamm, and Bill Clinton, Congressmen Al Gore and Timothy Wirth) made JFK their inspiring role model (see Randall Rothenburg, The Neoliberals: Creating the New American Politics [New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984]).

Consistent with the JFK legacy on class, "Obamanomics" has been business-neoliberal from the start. The Wall Street-sponsored Obama appointed the pro-corporate Democratic Leadership Council and University of Chicago economist Austan Goolsbee (the fellow who told Canadian diplomats to discount Obama's "campaign rhetoric" against the North American Free Trade Agreement) as his chief economic adviser during the primary campaign. "Obama, Inc." has brought in the Wal-Mart-applauding economist Jason Furman from the corporatist and aptly named Hamilton Group to serve as his economic policy director. Obama's health care, economic stimulus and mortgage/foreclosure crisis proposals have all been positioned to the right of those of John Edwards and even the centrist Hillary Clinton, not to mention Dennis Kucinich, the only actually Left candidate in the primaries. And just like JFK, Obama has falsely sold this conservative economic agenda as a form of neutral "get things done" pragmatism emphasizing "technical expertise" over and beyond mere "ideology."
...

instead of basing your campaign on provoking "conflict" and "harsh political disagreements?" and boring.

No boom boom Barack

Race: Caucasian-Friendly Caution and Calculation

JFK inhabited the same centrist, cautious, cunning, and "pragmatic" place on race, the first of King's triple evils. He found it politically useful to intervene on Dr. Martin Luther King's behalf during the latter's jailing in the election year of 1960 and, later, to wrap himself in the aura of racial progress and equality by offering some partial and belated federal protections to participants in the Civil Rights Movement (CRM). But the Kennedy administration worked hard to discourage, dilute, and divert the CRM and gave some elementary shelter to activists and southern blacks only when Jack and (his youthful brother and Attorney General) Bobby Kennedy calculated that rabid white southern reaction was undermining their ability to sell America's capitalist and imperial concept of "democracy" in the non-white Third World. Along the way, the Kennedy brothers were inordinately obsessed with alleged Communist connections to King and the CRM.

Subsequent "Mississippi Burning" iconography and revisionism aside, Kennedy was no great friend of the struggle for black equality during the late 1950s and early 1960s. His response to the movement was dominated by the tension between two competing calculations of political pragmatism: (i) the threat of politically alienating white Americans (especially traditionally Democratic white Southerners; (ii) the risk of losing Third World hearts and minds in the supposed U.S. struggle to advance "freedom and democracy" (falsely conflated with capitalism and subjugation to U.S. influence) against supposed Soviet-sponsored "communism" (national independence and social justice in the "developing world"). The actual lives and struggles of black Americans were not an especially relevant consideration in the Kennedy administration's behavior. When southern racist authorities managed to defeat the black struggle for equality without excessive televised bloodshed and bitterness, as in Albany Georgia, JFK was more than happy to withhold support for the CRM.

"Obama has made numerous speeches and comments suggesting the black Americans are personally and culturally responsible for their disproportionate presence at the bottom of the nation's steep socioeconomic and institutional hierarchies."

Walking in JFK's cautious and calculating footsteps on race, the technically black Obama has been careful to distance himself from the fact and claim that racial oppression and white supremacy continue to pose steep barriers to black advancement and racial equality in the U.S. He talks about the racism that stokes the fires of living black anger as if it was merely a troubling overhang from the past (Rev. Jeremiah Wright's ancient era). Obama advances no relevant or explicit policy agenda to take on the deeply entrenched institutional racism that lives on beneath white America's readiness to elect a president who is "black but not like Jesse." He has made numerous speeches and comments suggesting the black Americans are personally and culturally responsible for their disproportionate presence at the bottom of the nation's steep socioeconomic and institutional hierarchies. He has failed to link himself strongly to contemporary Civil Rights struggles around the small-town southern white prosecution of the "Jena 7" and the monstrous 50-shot New York City police murder of Sean Bell. Obama responded to the exoneration of Bell's killers with a terse statement lecturing black New Yorkers on the need to respect "the rule of law." Such behavior has provoked the understandable ire of Reverend Jackson, whose psycho-sexualized revenge fantasies are music to the politically pragmatic ears of Obama's handlers in the "post-Civil Rights era" - when racism is officially over.
...

Empire: "The American moment must be seized anew"

JFK's foreign policy record is militantly imperial and militarist, contrary to his subsequent hagiographers' laughable efforts to re-invent him as some sort of Sixties peacenik. That record includes the Kennedy administration's decision to dramatically and dangerously escalate the international arms race after Kennedy campaigned on the deceptive claim that the U.S. was on the wrong side of a mythical Soviet-American "missile gap." Kennedy's nuclear machismo helped bring the world to the brink of annihilation on at least two occasions.

Referring arrogantly to the U.S. as "watchtower on the walls of [global] freedom," JFK undertook numerous provocative actions meant to overthrow the popular revolutionary government of Cuba. He supported numerous Latin-American dictatorships and oligarchies in the name of "progress" and "democracy." He "raised the level of [U.S.] attack [on Indochina] from international terrorism to outright aggression in 1961-62" (Noam Chomsky), justifying the use of U.S. airpower to napalm social revolutionaries, defoliate Vietnamese countryside, and "kill a lot of innocent peasants" (Roger Hillsman) with the false claims that "we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless [Soviet-Marxist] conspiracy" and that failure to stop "Communism" in Vietnam would open the gates to Soviet world domination. Contrary to subsequent myths trumpeted by JFK-worshippers like Oliver Stone (who needed to do a movie on the execution of Dr. King) and Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., Kennedy had no intent of pulling back from his mass-murderous assault until "victory" was attained (see Noam Chomsky, Rethinking Camelot: JFK, the Vietnam War, and US Political Culture [Boston, MA: South End Press, 1993], Chapter 1: "From Terror to Aggression").

"Kennedy's nuclear machismo helped bring the world to the brink of annihilation on at least two occasions."

Kennedy epitomized the strictly conditional nature of "democracy" as a U.S. foreign policy objective when he remarked that while the U.S. would prefer democratic regimes abroad, it will choose "a [pro-American dictator] Trujillo" over "a ["anti-American" dictator] Castro" if those were the only choices. "It is necessary only to add," Noam Chomsky noted in 1991, that Kennedy's "concept of ‘a Castro' was very broad, extending to anyone who raises problems for the ‘rich men dwelling at peace with their habitations,' who are to rule the world according to [Winston] Churchill's aphorism, while enjoying the benefits of its human and material resources."

Walking in JFK's imperial footsteps, Obama has advanced mealy-mouthed and ever-shifting positions on Iraq, clearly (however) indicating that an Obama White House will maintain the criminal occupation of oil-rich Mesopotamia for an indefinite period of time. He takes brazenly imperial positions on Israel/Palestine, Columbia, Cuba, Afghanistan, Iran, the "defense" (Empire) budget, and the broad role of the United States (which Obama absurdly calls the "last and best hope of the world") in the world. Here is an interesting formulation from an essay Obama published in the U.S. Council of Foreign Relations' journal Foreign Affairs in the summer of 2007:

"The American moment is not over, but it must be seized anew... A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace.... we must become better prepared to put boots on the ground in order to take on foes that fight asymmetrical and highly adaptive campaigns on a global scale...I will not hesitate to use force unilaterally, if necessary, to protect the American people or our vital interests ...We must also consider using military force in circumstances beyond self-defense, in order to provide for the common security that underpins global stability - to support friends, participate in stability and reconstruction operations, or confront mass atrocities."

The article in which these words appeared was published while liberal and left peaceniks all over my home town (Iowa City) were putting up Obama signs next to peace posters quoting Dr. King on how "War is Not the Answer." Ronald Reagan or JFK couldn't have given more brash forewarnings of imperial adventurism to come!
...

In the openly imperial foreign policy chapter of his Kennedy-esque campaign book The Audacity of Hope, Obama criticized "left-leaning populists" like "Venezuela's Hugo Chavez" for thinking that developing nations "should resist America's efforts to expand its hegemony" and for daring (imagine!) to "follow their own path to development." Such dysfunctional "reject[ion] [of] the ideals of free markets and liberal democracy" along with "American" ideas like "the rule of law" and "democratic elections" - interesting terms for the heavily state-sponsored U.S. effort to impose authoritarian and corporate-state capitalist policy imperatives on impoverished nations - will only worsen the situation of the global poor, Obama claimed. Obama's bestselling book and supposed proclamation of "progressive" faith (the candidate used that word to describe himself on numerous occasions in the volume) ignored a preponderance of evidence showing that the imposition of the "free market" corporate-neoliberal "Washington Consensus" has deepened poverty across the world in recent decades. Billions are forced to live in ever-more extreme poverty as Obama's book audaciously instructed poor and exploited states that "the system of free markets and liberal democracy" is "constantly subject to change and improvement."

"Obama criticized ‘left-leaning populists' like ‘Venezuela's Hugo Chavez' for thinking that developing nations ‘should resist America's efforts to expand its hegemony.'"

Obama did not comment in Audacity on the remarkable respect the U.S. showed for "democratic elections" and "the rule of law" when it supported an attempted military coup to overthrow the democratically elected Chavez government (because of his opposition to the U.S neoliberal agenda) in April of 2002. It is doubtful that Obama's concept of the democratically elected Chavez is much different than Kennedy's concept of "a Castro."

Those who have the time and energy to examine the overwork-plagued U.S. "homeland" might want to note the ever-escalating inequality of U.S. society and the related, ever-deepening insecurity experienced by American working people. Such is the ugly reality of "life," even in the U.S. - home to what Obama's book obsequiously called "a prosperity that's unmatched in history" - under the rule of the neoliberal doctrine that big business upholds and which Kennedy helped advance before the last embers of the social democratic and New Deal traditions had died out in U.S. political culture. Those traditions were snuffed out with no small help from the criminal Vietnam War that Kennedy did so much to escalate.

Obama can have the Kennedy mantle that he craves and hopes to don for the world to see at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin (or some other suitable historic location in Germany). Look for Obama to be crowned the new King of Camelot by the last living Kennedy brother on the centrist 50-yard line in Denver next month - a sight to be anticipated with trembling souls by hopeful and dreamy masses at home and abroad. The cunning, corporate and imperial Kennedy legacy is actually what Obama is all about, morally and ideologically speaking, something that would cause trepidation in a western political culture that hadn't been subjected to the relentless Orwellian erasure of the richly bipartisan crimes of American Empire and Inequality.

Bill O'Reilly Has A Serious Heart Condition
Reported by Deborah - July 25, 2008
News Hounds

In his weekly column, Bill O'Reilly expresses his opposition to what he claims is Barack Obama's plan for "income redistribution". O'Reilly, fond of reminding people that he is very rich and also very generous, doesn't believe he should pay more taxes. He especially doesn't want his money spent on those nasty poor people. Here's how he put it.

"That means that people who drink gin all day long will be getting some of my hard-earned money. Folks who dropped out of school, who are too lazy to hold a job, and who smoke reefer 24/7 will all get some goodies in the mail from Uncle Barack and Aunt Nancy, funded by me and other rich folks."

O'Reilly has been using this "income distribution" theory as a campaign tool for quite some time spreading the notion that Democrats want to take the money from good people and give it away to people he thinks don't deserve it. However, BOR claims he makes sure his money goes to people he has decided deserve it.

"And then there's the accountability factor. Without being forced by the federal government, I give plenty of cash to folks who need a hand. But I check out the charities before the check goes in the mail. I make sure my donations go directly to people who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in difficult circumstances."

According to O'Reilly, Barack Obama and Democrats have plans to take his money and " dole out entitlements" to the undeserving without asking questions.

http://www.newshounds.us/2008/07/25/bill_oreilly_has_a_serious_heart_con...

OK, I'll try:

For McCain: When discussing "The Surge" in the cheese aisle in Bethlehem Pa last week, a low rumbling sound was heard. Sir, did you cut the cheese?

For Obama: You opted out of public financing stating you already have public financing with your many small donors. You do, in fact have large donors, who are they and what are they asking in return?

For Rove: Do you ever tire of being a lying sack o' crap? How do you keep it so fresh....so to speak? Finally, how do you look in stripes??

___
bluerootsradio

or did you fill some bag in your pants?

MONEYNETDAILY
McDonald's hears: 'I'm NOT lovin' it!'

In front of local restaurants, fed-up Christians protest company's support of same-sex marriage

By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

The corporate headquarters for McDonald's is hearing from store managers in California that customers are upset over the company's pro-homosexual advocacy and they aren't going to take it any longer.

Yuriy Popko, one of several Christians who staged a sign-waving protest at the Golden Arches in Citrus Heights today, said the protest at that location was suspended when store officials agreed to convey protesters' objections to the corporate office.

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=70344

... admittedly, back in the day when I thought he really was a Maverick, I liked the guy. ( Who couldn't help it? Former POW, acting like he was somewhat speaking truth to power...)

2. Even more, I can't believe more of the media is not busting his chops for the shameless flip-flopping and outright revisionist histrionics he's using to keep in the race.

3. Poopy, poopy, poop jokes always work!

___
bluerootsradio

G'nite
G'bloggin'
G'otta get up at 4 fucking o'clock in the morning, again..
I'm too old for this shit! ;-)

... never mind. I already signed off.

___
bluerootsradio

so much better in next post. No need for my simple comment now.

I have been meaning to express my heartfelt thanks to Randi for utilizing the superior talents of Marc and Sam Seder as substitute hosts during her recent vacation time.

It just shows how un-petty and secure she is in her great intellect and analysis and hosting to permit talent superior on almost every level to take her place to maintain the high level of excellence of her wonderful program.

I guess it also shows who ‘wears the pants’ at NovaM now.

I doubt that there is a future for Marc/Sam there. She has sucked all of the money and the air out of the place and the business models.

Hope those Founders’ Club memberships keep on chugging along. That will really make the thing blow up.

I'm watching him for the first time.

9/11 was an inside job.

Free Democracy

NYT

First the Iraqi government gave Senator Barack Obama a boost by seeming to embrace his proposal for a 16-month timetable for withdrawing American troops from Iraq. But could Senator John McCain, who built his candidacy in large part on his opposition to a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, possibly be following suit?

“I think it’s a pretty good timetable,” Mr. McCain said Friday in an interview on CNN’s “The Situation Room,’’ before adding that it should be based “on the conditions on the ground.’’

For months Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, has railed against setting timetables for withdrawing from Iraq, and has criticized Mr. Obama, his Democratic rival, for suggesting one......

McCain Follows Obama, Now Supports Timetables

because they are afraid it might be used in rendition.

Exec Pwr & Bush Admin today Fredrick A.O. Schwarz

Portrait of Dorian McCain: Fox MAGICALLY HALTS aging process by running campaign footage from 2000

Raw Story

MSNBC's Dan Abrams was all smiles on Thursday as he aired what he described as proof of Fox News going over the line in an attempt to make Republican presidential candidate John McCain look good.

"If you have any question whether Fox News is in the tank for McCain," exclaimed Abrams, "this should wipe any doubt from your mind. Fox is actually trying to make John McCain look younger."

MSNBC and Fox have recently been at war over their respective coverage of the presidential campaign, with Fox being particularly critical of Keith Olbermann's apparent partisanship. Earlier this month, Fox anchor Chris Wallace accused MSNBC of being "in the tank" for Obama -- and Abrams was clearly thrilled at the chance to hit back.

Over a "Beat the Press: Fox Anti-Aging Fix" graphic, Abrams urged, "Take a good look at the senator and the video they use." He then showed a clip in which Fox ran video of a strangely youthful and vigorous-looking McCain at a campaign rally to accompany a story about McCain's current campaign schedule. However, the video also prominently features a sign reading "www.mccain2000.com," which at one point is even waved in front of McCain's face.

"Fox is actually using eight year old video to discuss today's activities," Abrams marveled. He concluded cheerfully, "They report -- you decide."

Pentagon Confirms That It Told Obama He Couldn't Visit Army Base With Campaign Staff

TPM - Greg Sargent

I've just gotten clarification from the Pentagon on what really happened with regard to Barack Obama's canceled visit to an Army base in Germany, something the McCain campaign has been using to hit Obama since yesterday.

A Pentagon spokesperson confirms to me that because of longstanding Department of Defense regulations, Pentagon officials told Obama aides that he couldn't visit the base with campaign staff. This left Obama with little choice but to cancel the trip, since the plan to visit with campaign aides had been in the works for weeks.

The Obama campaign yesterday announced that it had decided to cancel the visit to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, saying that it would be "inappropriate" to make such a visit as part of a campaign trip.

The McCain camp has nonetheless been using Obama's canceled trip to insinuate that he's anti-troops. "Barack Obama is wrong," McCain spokesperson Brian Rogers said in a statement yesterday. "It is never 'inappropriate' to visit our men and women in the military."

But it turns out that the Pentagon did in fact tell Obama that in this case, it was not only "inappropriate," but against DOD rules, for him to conduct the visit with campaign staff.

"We have longstanding Department of Defense policy in regards to political campaigns and elections," Pentagon spokesperson Elizabeth Hibner told me. "We informed the Obama staff that he was more than welcome to visit as Senator Obama, with Senate staff. However, he could not conduct the visit with campaign staff."...........................

Vote Vets For Peace
what a studdering hero.

What he said was amazing.

Crooks and Liars

This just in from the Department of the Obvious: Scott McClellan admits to Chris Matthews that the White House made a deliberate effort to use FOX News commentators like Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly to disseminate White House talking points.

Matthews: “Did you see FOX television as a tool when you were in the White House? As a useful avenue to get your message out?”

McClellan: “I make a distinction between the journalists and the commentators. Certainly there were commentators and other, pundits at FOX News, that were useful to the White House.” <…> That was something we at the White House, yes, were doing, getting them talkng points and making sure they knew where we were coming from.

Matthews: “So you were using these commentators as your spokespeople.”

McClellan: “Well, certainly.”

Straight from the source. Enough with the “fair and balanced” crap already.

VIDEO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0Sk6csiah0

He's a complicated loser.

The redacted Bill of Rights was cool evidence though.

This one I had as a bank a long time ago:

First Heritage Bank, NA, Newport Beach, CA

http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/heritage.html

First National Bank of Nevada, Reno, NV

http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/fnbnv.html

There is a new report from the International Crisis Group about the Taliban and Afghanistan.

-----------

From the executive summary and recommendations of the report -

Taliban Propaganda: Winning the War of Words?

Excerpts:

The Taliban has created a sophisticated communications apparatus that projects an increasingly confident movement.

Using the full range of media, it is successfully tapping into strains of Afghan nationalism and exploiting policy failures by the Kabul government and its international backers.

The result is weakening public support for nation-building, even though few actively support the Taliban.

The effectiveness of aerial bombardment, even if strictly exercised within the bounds of international law, must be considered against the damage to popular support.

Greater efforts are needed in Western capitals to explain to their own populations the necessity of staying for the long haul rather than yielding to the pressure of quick fixes that give only the appearance of action.

The Taliban is not going to be defeated militarily and is impervious to outside criticism.

Rather, the legitimacy of its ideas and actions must be challenged more forcefully by the Afghan government and citizens.

Its killings of civilians and targeting of community leaders need to be highlighted, including a public accounting for actions by the militants through open trials – something that has not yet happened.

Strengthening the legitimacy of the Afghan government and ensuring that its actions – and those of its international backers – are similarly bound by the rule of law should be an important complement.

Ultimately, winning popular support is not about telling local communities that they are better off today. It is about proving it.

----
[Military action in Afghanistan is the focus of the plan proposed by Obama.

In comparison, McCain proposes that Americans continue with the military actions in both Afghanistan and Iraq (i.e., a continuation of the status quo plans of the Bush team.)

Although Americans continue to hear the "propaganda" that emphasizes military action in Afghanistan, there is no reason to believe that it will work based on the history of Afghanistan.

Military action is not a "quick fix" in Afghanistan.

I am especially concerned about the rhetoric and recent promises made by Obama.

For the record, I hope Obama made some real connections with the soldiers during his recent trips. I hope Obama remembers the real people who are fighting and dying in the wars -- especially when he proposes and/or supports military actions anywhere.]

p.s. Although I strongly disagree with Obama's "militaristic" rhetoric and plans, I do plan to vote for him.

-----------

Link:

http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?l=1&id=5589

Interviewing Jane Mayer writer of the "Dark Side" on pbs All about torture.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07252008/watch.html

July 25, 2008

Ernest "Fritz" Hollings is used to shaking things up in Washington, DC. In his 36 years in the Senate he authored bills on issues from automobile fuel economy to deficit reduction. But now Hollings is working on a government reform project he can only conduct from the outside — getting the money out of politics and the politics back in to Congress.
It's no secret that the 2008 campaign will be the most expensive presidential race of all time — but the race for money is beleaguering all levels of elected officials.

The hardest working people in the world are the congressmen and senators. We work from early morning 'til late at night and all weekend and everything else. But we're working now, not for the country, but for the campaign.

Fritz Hollings outlines his plans for getting Washington off the money mill in a new book called MAKING GOVERNMENT WORK.

Below you'll find online tools for tracking your candidates finances — who's giving, and how much they're taking.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07252008/profile3.html

FRITZ HOLLINGS: As a senator in the last two or three years that's all I was doing was raising money. And working for the campaign and for the party. The hardest working people in the world are the congressmen and senators. We work from early morning 'til late at night and all weekend and everything else. But we are working now, not for the country, but for the campaign.

FRITZ HOLLINGS: All the time is fundraisers. All the time is money, money, money, money. In 1998, ten years ago, I ran and had to raise 8 an a half million. The record is there. Eight and a half million is 30,000 a week. Every week for six years. Each and every week for six years. Oh Dick Russell of Georgia-

BILL MOYERS: What do you mean, it's not working? You say you can't get anything done in Washington anymore. What's not getting done?

FRITZ HOLLINGS: Legislation. Anything meaningful. They fill up the tree both sides, it's nothing wrong with Harry Reid or Mitch McConnell, they're durn good leaders and they're doing what the senators want done. And they're all smart senators and they're all responsible people. But they're playing the game and the media hadn't exposed. That's why I wrote it. I'm trying to expose-

BILL MOYERS: The game? What's the game?

FRITZ HOLLINGS: The game is money. I got to get the money to heck with constituents, I gotta get contributors.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07252008/transcript3.html

toniD,

I saw Jane Mayer on Letterman (last night?) then saw her again on Moyers tonight.

I've fallen in love. (Don't worry. I'll get over it.)

Letterman kept pounding the question "Are Dick and his buddies awful, awful people?" and Jane Mayer kept answering, "I think that they were trying to protect the country but I also think that they knew that they were breaking the rules."
-----
On an unrelated note, you can't say Mayer, Moyers, Mayer, Moyers, Mayer, Moyers without spraining a lip.

I have to give you credit for good taste in women. She's impressive.

Oh, just don't say Mayer, Moyers, Mayer, Moyers, Mayer, Moyers :)

Submitted by toniD on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 11:33pm.
I have to give you credit for good taste in women. She's impressive.
--------
I try to limit my crushes to women who are good spellers and grammarians.

Otherwise there is a good chance that I would be murdered in my sleep.

nora should have a field day with this:

//Letterman kept pounding the question "Are Dick and his buddies awful, awful people?" and Jane Mayer kept answering, "I think that they were trying to protect the country but I also think that they knew that they were breaking the rules."//

crank!

if intelligent, articulate, well-meaning, NAIVE! women arouse you

she'll compliment your soft-cock attitude beautifully

(not me, dude)
(no square dancing for this dude)

//I think that they were trying to protect the country//

she subscribes to the "noble lie" explanation/excuse...

they're fucking ignoble lies

perpetuated by psychopaths, for pete's sake

speaking of which...

where's mr. dragon?

what a cartoon of a person.

David Letterman: “Can a case be made that George Bush’s administration is clearly guilty of war crimes?”
By: SilentPatriot @ 1:10 PM - PDT

Dave interviewed investigative journalist Jane Mayer Wednesday about her new book, The Dark Side, which chronicles the Bush administration’s use (and denial of use) of torture, and asks her a simple question that we all want to know the answer to.

During the Nuremberg trials Robert H. Jackson said:

“To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

By that standard — you know, the internationally agreed upon one — I think the answer is clear.

UPDATE: (Nicole) Actually according to George W. Bush himself, he agrees: (h/t JR)

President Bush signed an executive order on Friday to expand sanctions against what he calls the “illegitimate” regime of Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe and his supporters.[..]

“No regime should ignore the will of its own people and calls from the international community without consequences,” Bush said in a statement.

You heard him, Congress. Get to work.

Video at link:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/07/25/david-letterman-can-a-case-be-m...

Nora
Submitted by ellwort on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 5:57pm.
Do you know whether the placing of Kucinich's articles of impeachment in the record is sufficient to constitute a "case of impeachment"? As in the exception to the presidential pardon provision in Article II?

Anybody?

»
==========================================

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A2Sec1

Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

-------------------------------------------

http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#IMPEACH

Impeachment
Impeachment, in the U.S. and Great Britain, proceeding by a legislature for the removal from office of a public official charged with misconduct in office. Impeachment comprises both the act of formulating the accusation and the resulting trial of the charges; it is frequently but erroneously taken to mean only the removal from office of an accused public official. An impeachment trial may result in either an acquittal or in a verdict of guilty. In the latter case the impeached official is removed from office; if the charges warrant such action, the official is also remanded to the proper authorities for trial before a court. Source: FWE

==========================================

Since "Impeachment comprises both the act of formulating the accusation and the resulting trial of the charges...", it seems that impeachment would trump Presidential power to pardon as soon as the "act of formulating the accusation" occurs.

So WHO does THAT?

Did Kucinich do that already and the House Judiciary Committee must vote on it as it was delivered to them? Or does the Judiciary Committee have the ability to change it before they send it to the full House for a vote? Or is it necessary to conduct the investigative hearings and THEN formulate the final accusation?

'Somebody' MUST know (because it's NOT me).

They already did this with Clinton so recently, so the protocol must not be occult....

I don't have a guess for your first question. But it would seem as soon as the process of formulation commences the impeachment is in process.

Your second question, I'd say the Commander & Thief can't pardon as soon as the act of formulating the charges (based on the evidence collected one assumes) is commenced.

Whoa. My head hurts!

Let go of Steve King. That was this morning. If you're here. If any of this is really here. What's the diff?

look around you, dude

why is there no concerted effort at the federal level to combat global warming!?

money!

their modus operandi is "cash from chaos"
(as described in naomi klein's "shock doctrine")

once the infrastructure is in place

green energy is free, safe and sustainable

and Nancy Wilson and Eva Cassidy - sittin' here blubberin'....

so, how's all you folks?

We’re ‘fellow citizens of the world’
By: Steve Benen @ 12:20 PM - PDT
In Obama’s speech in Berlin yesterday, the presumptive Democratic nominee explained early on, “I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen – a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.”

The last four words seem to have caused a stir at McCain HQ and in far-right circles. Apparently, “citizen of the world” sounds like one-world government or something.

But before conservatives get too excited about this, they may want to remember that Obama’s not the first American to use the phrase. An Andrew Sullivan reader noted:

I’ve noticed that McCain, and the right in general, are latching on to Obama’s statement that he was speaking as a “proud citizen of the United States and a fellow citizen of the world.” I see an attempt at cultural warfare in the making, and it should be squelched fast. The argument from the right appears to be that only some squishy leftist would call himself a “citizen of the world,” or that using the term suggests less than a full attachment to one’s own country (even if accompanied by a statement like Obama’s that he’s a “proud citizen of the United States”). A reader over at Politico has already noted that John F. Kennedy used the same phrase in his famous inaugural address in referring to his global audience.

I also did a one minute Google search – and I’m sure I could find more if I did a 15-minute Google search – and discovered that President George H.W. Bush used the exact phrase “citizen of the world” in presenting the national medal of the arts to Vladimir Horowitz, the legendary Russian-born pianist who became a US citizen in 1940. Was he insulting Horowitz as a lefty? I don’t think so. Also, Ronald Reagan introduced himself in a speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations as “both a citizen of the United States and of the world.” Do McCain and the right really want to start this meme?

When McCain & Co. bash Reagan and Bush for using the same phrase, I’ll respect their intellectual consistency. But I have a hunch that’s not going to happen.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/07/25/were-fellow-citizens-of-the-wor...

World writes open letter to McCain
By Michael Bérubé - July 25, 2008, 8:28AM
EARTH, July 25, 2008 -- The entire world drafted an open letter to Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) today, asking him to drop out of the U.S. presidential race and concede the presidency to Senator Barack Obama (D-Illinois).

"Ordinarily we do not interfere in America's internal affairs," said a spokesman for the rest of the planet, "even when it has become clear, as in recent years, that American voters are about to elect ignorant, incoherent buffoons who will add immeasurably to our immiseration. But this time is different. We didn't think it was worth our while to step up for your Carter or Mondale or Dukakis or Gore or Kerry -- besides, we'd only be bombed or invaded for our trouble. But this time, I mean, come on -- you've got to be kidding me, right? Please tell me you're kidding."

Pointing to polls that show Obama leading McCain 94 percent to 6 percent everywhere on the inhabited globe except the United States, where most polls give Obama a narrow one- to three-point lead, the entire world suggested that Americans might not be sufficiently informed about the U.S. election.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/25/world_writes_open_letter...

I'm watching the replay. It was fun watching his eyeballs go round and round like a cartoon.

Submitted by air-ono on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 11:44pm.
...if intelligent, articulate, well-meaning, NAIVE! women arouse you...
------
I did not attempt to recreate Mayer's words from memory. She said, in effect, that Cheney and his ilk had, at the least, probably convinced themselves that they were acting on behalf of the good of the country. But she also said that Cheney and his ilk knew that they were acting outside of the boundaries.

If you are looking for a naive woman, Jane Mayer ain't your gal. Said another way, if Jane Mayer is a naive woman, I'll take a dozen of 'em.

Obama Is Saying The Wrong Things About Afghanistan

By Juan Cole

-----------

Excerpts:

Barack Obama's Afghanistan and Iraq policies are mirror images of each other. Obama wants to send 10,000 extra U.S. troops to Afghanistan, but wants to withdraw all American soldiers and Marines from Iraq on a short timetable.

But Obama's pledge to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan will not be easy to fulfill. While coalition troop deaths have declined significantly in Iraq, NATO casualties in Afghanistan are way up.

Key question:

By shifting emphasis from Iraq to Afghanistan, would a President Obama be jumping from the frying pan into the fire?

----------

Obama's determination to put down the tribal insurgencies in northwestern Pakistan and in southern Afghanistan reveals basic contradictions in his announced policies.

------

Stepped-up military action, however, is still the central component of his plan.

Before he jumps into Afghanistan with both feet, Obama would be well advised to consult with another group of officers. They are the veterans of the Russian campaign in Afghanistan.


Russian officers caution that Afghans cannot be conquered, as the Soviets attempted to do in the 1980s with nearly twice as many troops as NATO and the U.S. now have in the country, and with three times the number of Afghan troops as Karzai can deploy.

Afghanistan never fell to the British or Russian empires at the height of the age of colonialism.

Conquering the tribal forces of a vast, rugged, thinly populated country proved beyond their powers.

It may also well prove beyond the powers even of the energetic and charismatic Obama.

---------

Link:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/07/23/obama/index.html

(CIRCLE R!)
Submitted by Annette on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 11:59pm.
--------
A pirate ranch?

Holy shit!!!

I'm speechless....

Republican Senate Candidates Skipping Convention
According to Congress Daily, 9 of 12 targeted Republicans running in the most competitive U.S. Senate races this fall "are either skipping the Republican convention in St. Paul, Minn., or have not decided whether to attend."

Among those who will not attend: Ted Stevens of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Bob Schaffer of Colorado.

Six others have not yet decided: Roger Wicker of Mississippi, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, Gordon Smith of Oregon, John Kennedy of Louisiana and Steve Pearce of New Mexico.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/cda_20080725_6932.php

My head hurts too. I've been a litigation paralegal, which means either a) practicing law without a license or, a little more likely, b) a person who chases paramedics. In that capacity, I've collected requested facts (in discovery) and couched them, within the scope of relevant statutes, to respond to discovery requests.
So as I read the the current facts at hand and couch them in the scope of the Really Big Set of Statutes (=US Constitution), I would be pretty hard pressed to craft answers to interrogatories directed at the Cheneyman administration's evident malfeasance.
Thanks

It happens here alot. Eventually someone notices you are here.

Happiness Machines (part 6 of 6)

*

Imagine that! Only I am billed by the hour for my specialty...

I had alot of fun watching the former Undersecretary of Defense squirming under the questions being volleyed regarding torture, although the link was supposed to lead me to Jane Mayer. I was curious to see who she is as I cannot remember names. Numbers, I remember very well. Comes in handy in our line of work, eh?

The Democrats will never let impeachment hearings happen in an election year. Not in a gazillion years would they be that stupid. It's politics, pure and simple, and if you reason long enough on it,the logic will seep through the emotional layer.

Submitted by ellwort on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 5:57pm.
Do you know whether the placing of Kucinich's articles of impeachment in the record is sufficient to constitute a "case of impeachment"? As in the exception to the presidential pardon provision in Article II?

_____________________

No.

Additional action would be needed to build an "official" case of impeachment against government officials.

Generally, the president can pardon others.

--------
Q. What procedures does the House of Representatives follow in the impeachment process?

A. While the Constitution outlines the basic process for impeachment, the specific procedures are determined by the internal rules of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

To begin, the House of Representatives refers the investigation to its Judiciary Committee, which reviews the evidence and may conduct hearings.

It determines whether an official impeachment inquiry is warranted and, if so, asks the House for permission to proceed.

An official investigation follows, with the Committee deciding whether to offer articles of impeachment to the full House.

The House then votes separately on each of the articles, with a simple majority needed to impeach the official. Articles of impeachment approved by the House are then presented to the Secretary of the U.S. Senate for trial.

-------------

Reference:

http://www.abanet.org/publiced/impeach2.html

//She said, in effect, that Cheney and his ilk had, at the least, probably convinced themselves that they were acting on behalf of the good of the country.//

that's a cop out

they wilfully fleeced the country

and she is guilty of not calling fascism "fascism"

McMahon works as pitchman for Kimmel in-show spots
Fri Jul 25, 6:21 PM ET
LOS ANGELES - Ed McMahon has a job. The former "Tonight Show" sidekick is reprising his role as pitchman with several comical commercial segments during "Jimmy Kimmel Live." The first of four spots, which were filmed Thursday evening and feature McMahon and Jimmy Kimmel together, will air Monday during the late-night ABC talk show.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080725/ap_on_en_tv/people_ed_mcmahon;_ylt=A...

der...

Sometimes we feel taken for granite (I know, "granted") here and elsewhere. But your ideas have fed most of us, willy-nilly, here at the SederSaloon, I think. Stick around. It could get really fun soon. Or not.
Fernando: Warner Bros. (especially Chuck Jones & Mel Blanc ones) define our life. Maybe yours too. Gotta appreciate Congressman Whatsisname (R Somewhere) for doing such a deft impression of Wile E. Coyote just before the end-credit music plays.

i read here and there...

cheney invests holds euros
halliburton shifts its headquarters to dubai
(etc)

why!

do they have faith in //the good of the country//

or are they skipping town

but it looks like an 'American Masters' on Aretha and it is not to be missed.

Bush Will Issue a Mass Pardon (Brent Budowsky)
@ 10:44 am
Before leaving office George W. Bush will issue a mass pardon, the largest collection of presidential pardons in American history. Bush will pardon himself, Vice President Cheney, and a long list of officials involved in torture, eavesdropping, destruction of evidence, the CIA leak case and a range of potential crimes.

As George Bush signs the pardons and boards the helicopter to depart Washington as his presidency finally ends, even then, he and those pardoned will worry about the statute of limitations.

There is an important point to this, often not recognized in official Washington during the Bush years, where the unthinkable becomes a way of life, and acts have been done that have never been done by an American president or administration. > Read More

http://pundits.thehill.com/2008/07/25/bush-will-issue-a-mass-pardon/#mor...

For the last few weeks I've been trying to shake the idea that the rich are trying to find a new earth to live on so they can leave us poor people here in the filth they created once they have drained it of everything it has. That would be the fulfillment of classism - survival of the richest? - in its most pure and unrefined form, in my book..

Of course, a few philanthropists would stay behind. Or better yet, there'd be offers for free trips on rocketships on the inside of candybars for those who couldn't afford one, also known as a free guineapig process - much cheaper to replace than an astronaut...

Oh wait! They already did that...

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/discoblog/2008/07/17/candy-wrapper-sen...

for hitting the books and taking the tests when I just wanted to see my babies grow up. Your informed reading is disappointing, to say the least, and kind of explains a lot, like the "CIvil" War - or the War Between the States, depending on where you are.
If the dominant Congressional power can arbitrarily tip the playing field, it will lead to the kind of factionalism of which the founders professed such distrust.
No?
As disappointed as I am, I give credence to your informed reading, given the cocky confidence of those in the imperial circle.
Thanks again
- A

McCain Slanders Obama, Scarborough Slanders Olbermann (Brent Budowsky)
@ 10:31 am
John McCain, presumably advised by Karl Rove and definitely imitating the politics of George Bush, is now saying that Barack Obama would rather lose a war than lose an election.

This is a defamation; this is a slander; this is a lie. McCain should apologize to Obama. This is the latest in a long list of cheap-shot, low-blow politics. McCain has learned nothing about why the American people are rejecting the Republicans and why the Republican brand has been compared to the appeal of defective dog food.

This morning, right-wing former congressman Joe Scarborough essentially said that Keith Olbermann is "too stupid to be on television." > Read More

http://pundits.thehill.com/2008/07/23/mccain-slanders-obama-scarborough-...

Born in the USA, Sold to Foreign Buyers (Brent Budowsky)
@ 1:34 pm
America is being sold at a discount to foreign buyers at bargain basement prices and it is time for a serious discussion about why.

The Chrysler Building, large pieces of America's major banks and investment houses, Anheuser-Busch. What will be next? Will we sell the Lincoln Memorial to Saudi Arabian sovereign wealth funds?

America is now dependent on Chinese capital to buy our bonds to finance our debt. We are dependent on Middle Eastern oil to fuel our economy. This massive export of capital to foreign nations is used by them to buy our assets, often at dollar-store prices.

It is a scandal. How odd that neoconservative theoreticians hunger for war with Iran, while the Bush policies keep us addicted to oil, which finances Iran. How strange that the voices on the right hunger for the overthrow of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, while the Bush policies keep us addicted to oil, which finances Chavez.

It is pathetic to watch an American president virtually begging Saudi Arabia for more oil, and even more pathetic when the Saudi royals, whose hands he holds and whose cheeks he kisses, say no!

Meanwhile, we await the revelations of the Cheney energy task force, which will sooner or later emerge, detailing how oil companies used the White House to divvy up the oil bounty from the Iraq war, before the Iraq war.

http://pundits.thehill.com/2008/07/15/born-in-the-usa-sold-to-foreign-bu...

That "the rich are trying to find a new earth to live on." Let 'em go. Please. I like it here. If all the wealthy air-and-idea polluting swine catapulted themselves to another planet, that would be great. The expansion of the aggressive notion of private "property" has increasingly penned us in.

Let's get these holy horrors off the planet - air-conditioned luxury in plush suites (they'll love it) - then maybe could find each other crowdlessly.
- A

why was the subprime crisis allowed to occur

for shits & giggles

nah, holmes

for short-term gain

the government could easily have put the breaks on that runaway train

but they relied on this mirage

"the figures are great"

while they kept shovelling the loot in the bag for a quick getaway

see, there is no america

the nation state is dead

these demonic freaks are globalists, see

and i ain't takin' it no more, see

(photo of annette and me taken at breakfast)

[annette wears the pyjamas in the family]

: )

[it's half time in the footy, so time to tie up a loose end]

yes, crank...

i realised i took your "marry me" post way out of context

but when i saw "for the good of the country"

i saw red

[cue the split endz]

he ain't takin' it no more neetha, see

meanwhile, back at the pre-depression cocktail party

crank slowy bites off jane's dress straps, down

down

in the broom closet

"oh, crank - it's for the good of the country"

"yes...yes it is" - crank

(loL!!!)

WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!

Mexican peso strong against dollar
Posted: 10:26 PM ET
From CNN’s Krupskaia Alis

MEXICO CITY (CNN) — Not since October 2002 has a lone Mexican peso been worth a dime, and the Mexican currency’s strength is seen as a positive sign by many observers.

Various factors play a role in fortifying the peso, among them a return on investment of as much as 8 percent for deposits, about 6 points higher than is available in the United States.

Add to that the money sent home by Mexicans working abroad and the extra dollars the oil-rich country is getting for its petroleum products, and Mexico is raking in an extra $100 billion in resources this year, all of which go to strengthen the peso.

http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/25/mexican-peso-strong-against-doll...

The Great US Sell-Out
During the Reagan/Herber Hoover Bush Years, I could see from my 24th floor window the NY City real estate that the Saudis and the Emirates had bought up.
For actual day-to-day hardstruggling people, Clinton sucked as a president, but he managed to suspend the sell-off. Gore in 2000 would have been more of the same slow erosion of long-won human rights. We voted for Nader.
[Insert IRV spot here]
Really - Let 'em go: See the song "Everyone's Gone to the Moon," not Peter and Gordon, but that other duo, circa 1966.

2,000 evacuated in Greek fires
Posted: 05:39 PM ET
ATHENS (CNN) –Greek police on Friday evacuated more than 2,000 European vacationers from a strip of holiday resorts on Rhodes as fierce forest fires swept through the Greek island and thick plumes of smoke choked its most popular hotels

Authorities said the evacuation was a precaution as fires raged for a fourth day, scorching at least 7,400 acres of lush pine forest on one of the country’s most idyllic islands.

Police said the evacuation affected hotels in the Asklipios area, near the southeast coastline of Rhodes, a popular holiday destination for British tourists.

“Three hotels were evacuated as a precaution, mainly because smoke from the fire had created an unpleasant atmosphere,” said Charlambos Kokkinos, regional governor for the southern Aegean.

The officials declared southern Rhodes in a state of emergency earlier this week when the fires broke out and quickly swept through the island because of gale force winds.

Dozens of homes were destroyed in Laerma, the worst hit region, state media reported. No injuries or fatalities were reported.

http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/25/2000-evacuated-in-greek-fires/

to try to sleep

"to sleep, per chance to dream..."

Later

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_King

Ahh peace and quiet. This was a b - eh, very difficult to find:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU6nn4deuCQ

just came downstairs to tuck you all in for the night!

love ya.

ps

i scores a pretty nice air conditioner for 20 bucks!

heh! gonna be a screaming hot late summer here.

Flights of angels sing thee to thy rest

ZZZ (the treebu-ellwort duet - not exactly angels)