This Modern World nails Bush's bye-bye...

...as usual, Tom Tomorrow's political comic is spot-on. To visit the This Modern World home page, click here.

(click to enlarge)

Free higher education...

...like universal health care, is something that the newly empowered Democrats will deliver to Americans if the Democrats are worth a damn. One approach, advocated here, is to extend the G.I. Bill to all Americans. But regardless of how free higher ed is done, it must be done. Because the current system's costs are putting college out of reach of most Americans:

(click to enlarge)

Robert Rubin? Obama, we deserve better...

MarketWatch.com's David Weidner notes that the economic team Obama has assembled includes an awful lot of Clinton era faces - including Robert Rubin, one of the biggest baddies of the current credit crisis. The more things change, the more they stay the same:

Rubin is the Mole of today's economic crisis. Given the opportunity to protect the country from deregulation of financial services, at Treasury he worked with then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan to redesign or roll back Depression-era reforms.

Of course, the greatest beneficiary of deregulation was Citigroup. Formed in 1998 through the merger of Citicorp and Travelers Group, the new company combined some of America's biggest banks, investment banks and insurance companies under one roof.

So, when Rubin decided to step down at Treasury, yielding that post to Larry Summers, it wasn't long before Citi's chairman and chief executive, Sandy Weill, came calling. He offered Wall Street's equivalent of a no-show job. Rubin worked in the office of the chairman and led Citigroup's executive committee. He was paid $115 million over nine years.

Now, the government has been forced to invest $45 billion in Citigroup and backstop $270 billion of its $2 trillion balance sheet. How does Rubin respond when critics say he should bear some responsibility?

"Nobody was prepared for this," he told The Wall Street Journal. Was he overpaid? "I bet there's not a single year where I couldn't have gone somewhere else and made more," he said.

Yikes.

Let's not forget our Dream...

...here's an update from Bob Fertik of Democrats.com, who reminds us that our work isn't done - we still have to roast us some lame duck:

As we celebrate our new President-elect and all the changes he will bring to our nation, we must not turn a blind eye to the final actions of George Bush.

Incredibly, Washington is already buzzing with Bush's plans to block all investigations of his crimes and even to pardon everyone involved - including Cheney and himself. Chris Matthews is even counting down the days.

Does Bush have the power to pardon everyone in his administration? Yes. Will he abuse that power to stay out of jail? Only if we let him.

We must create a groundswell of opposition to any pardons by George Bush, so he understands that he will be impeached and prosecuted for issuing corrupt pardons.

Please help us launch a massive movement against pardons by signing our petition to Congress and telling your friends.

We will announce additional plans to stop Bush's pardons in the coming days. Read more about our efforts and join our discussion here.

Thanks for all you do!

The light at the end of the tunnel...

...is finally in view. Though the Bush years made me question whether politics would ever make me smile, today, I'm brimming with happiness and hope. Yes we can, baby, yes we can.

World opinion on our presidential race...

...can be summed up in seven words: Obama good, McCain bad, Bush the worst.

From an LA Times blog entry:

Katie Couric skewers Sarah Palin...

...in this off-the-hook exchange (full interview here), which ends with a jaw-dropper of a dumb line from Palin:

Couric: You've said, quote, "John McCain will reform the way Wall Street does business." Other than supporting stricter regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, can you give us any more example of his leading the charge for more oversight?

Palin: I think that the example that you just cited, with his warnings two years ago about Fannie and Freddie - that, that's paramount. That's more than a heck of a lot of other senators and representatives did for us.

Couric: But he's been in Congress for 26 years. He's been chairman of the powerful Commerce Committee. And he has almost always sided with less regulation, not more.

Palin: He's also known as the maverick though, taking shots from his own party, and certainly taking shots from the other party. Trying to get people to understand what he's been talking about - the need to reform government.

Couric: But can you give me any other concrete examples? Because I know you've said Barack Obama is a lot of talk and no action. Can you give me any other examples in his 26 years of John McCain truly taking a stand on this?

Palin: I can give you examples of things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight, his pragmatism, and his leadership abilities. And that is what America needs today.

Couric: I'm just going to ask you one more time - not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation.

Palin: I'll try to find you some and I'll bring them to you.

One great view into McCain vs. Obama....

...comes in this Washington Post graphic on tax policy:

There are definitely some differences between these guys.

Cindy Sheehan tells it like it is...

...in an awesome email to supporters of her campaign against Nancy Pelosi. On a recent international flight, Cindy met Walter Mondale - a former hero of hers who inadvertently demonstrated how our nation's two-party system, and the stranglehold it gives on power, are key enablers of the rot that afflicts our political leadership. The bold accent is mine:

After we established who I was and that he supported "Nancy" even though I was a "wonderful person," he looked at me and said: "Boy wasn't the FISA thing awful?" I said, "Yes, it's awful and my opponent supported it." He returned with: "Oh, I don't think she was really for it." My last question went unanswered: "Well if she was against it, why would she allow it to go to a vote, as Speaker, and then vote for it, as a member?" Note: On many controversial votes, Pelosi often does not vote, on the FISA Act she voted the wrong way.

Our chat was then over because he said: "Nice to meet you, good luck with everything," and looked back down at the paperwork he was reading. I had been dismissed for asking a question that has no reasonable answer. Nancy allowed the Act to come to a vote and voted for it, against the wishes of our liberal district, because SHE WAS FOR RETROACTIVE IMMUNITY. Not only are telecoms some of Pelosi's biggest donors, she has been in on the illegal wiretapping crimes from the beginning. As a member of the Democratic minority leaderhip's "Gang of Four" with Jane Harman (D-CA), Steny Hoyer, (D-MD), Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), not only was the gang briefed on Bush's FISA felonies, they were also briefed on torture. There was and is a rightful outcry on the FISA abuses (if the crimes weren't retroactively legalized, the penalites for breaking FISA laws are steep), but to me, torture is a crime against humanity and, in my opinion, that issue, and lying to a nation about going to war and funding war, are the ones on which the Gang of Four and the Bush Crime Mob should be held accountable.

Ever wonder why "impeachment" has always been inexplicably "off" of Pelosi's table?" Ever wonder why the most criminal and corrupt administration, in this country's long and checkered history that is liberally peppered with corruption and violence, is going to walk away and be allowed to live the rest of their lives in relative comfort and ease? Ever wonder why Pelosi's Congress has an approval rating under double digits? It's because the twin parties of corruption are the "Lawmakers" and the "Lawbreakers." How can Mondale credibly say that Pelosi did not "support" the legislation when she voted "Yea?" Did he mean that it is common for one to sell out his/her constituents and his/her principles when money and crime and punishment are involved?

Walter Mondale (a man whom I voted for three times) has been a political insider for generations and would not even broach the subject of accountability with me. Ever wonder why the system was allowed to decay so far that it appears that only a miracle can save it now from total socio-economic destruction?

This nation is in dire straits partially because of blind allegiance to a two-party monopoly (I used to say "duopoly," but what's the use?) that only exists to perpetuate itself and the unscrupulous system that supports it. That system built of popsicle sticks and set on a shaky foundation will soon go the way of all Empires unless our "leadership" becomes more responsive to the people's needs and less concerned with their bank accounts and personal power trips.

"Change" will not come from inside the monopoly. How much more proof do we need?

Vote for true change.

Vote for Cindy.

Big kudos on our I Have A Dream shirt...

...from a satisfied customer named Ann, who is doing a great job spreading the message that Bush and Cheney must be held accountable for their actions:

I wear my I Have A Dream as often as I can. I own three of them. This past month I wore it to Sea World in Orlando, through the airports in Tampa, Atlanta and San Francisco, on BART and to the grocery store, to the Hiroshima protest event in SF. It gets exposure. I tell everyone I got my shirt at wavelengthclothing.com. I hope it is helping you to get more shirts out there being worn. When I wear it, it is well-loved!!!!!

Thank goodness for The Onion...

...for being right there with The Daily Show when it comes to the sly and soothing satire:

Powerful 'His And Hers' Towel Lobby Stalls Gay Marriage Legislation
WASHINGTON—Gay rights activists protested the defeat of bill S. 743 Monday, saying that the proposed legislation giving homosexuals the right to marry was derailed by the National Association of Semi-personalized Linens Manufacturers (NASLM), a powerful lobby representing the nation's gender-specific bath-towel makers. "The special interests of those producing matching knickknacks for traditional heterosexual couples have been over-represented in this debate for far too long," said GLAAD president Neil Giuliano, citing the influential lobby's contribution of more than $95 million in campaign funds during the last election cycle. "We cannot allow the outdated values of a profiteering minority of towel makers stand in the way of social change." NASLM released a statement in response to Giuliano's criticism that expressed the organization's belief that "marriage is a sacred bond between a his and a hers."

Related Articles
* New Bill Would Defend Marriage From Sharks September 19, 2006
* Wedding Catering Cart Videotaped For Posterity August 18, 1999

A priceless photo from the Olympics...

...kudos to the ladies of USA softball, for pulling a sweet prank on Beijing Bush. I'm just sorry someone had to lay hand on that sweat-nasty shirt of his.

Here's Dennis Kucinich on impeachment...

We did it!

Dear Friends,

Last week, Congressman Dennis Kucinich delivered a petition bearing more than 100,000 names to the Speaker of the House urging that impeachment proceedings begin into the conduct of President Bush. In a special video message, Dennis is asking for your help to deliver an even more powerful message to Congress when it reconvenes in September.

With new disclosures that the Administration tried to "cook the books at the CIA" by creating a phony, forged link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, "We cannot step back and let this President escape accountability."

If you have already signed the impeachment petition at www.kucinich.us, thank you. If you haven't, please do. And, in the next few weeks, please ask just one more person to sign so we can let the members of Congress hear our collective demand that they meet their obligation to uphold the Constitution.

Thank you.
The Re-Elect Congressman Kucinich Committee

Congress considered impeachment...

...at a hearing on Capitol Hill last Friday. Here's the story from Democrats.com:

Chairman John Conyers insisted it was not an "impeachment hearing." But he also said, "I believe the evidence on these matters is both credible and substantial and warrant the response of the executive branch, under oath if at all possible... Let me add, we are not done yet, and we do not intend to go away until we achieve the accountability that Congress is entitled to and the American people deserve ."

And by the end of the hearing, even the see-no-evil Republican witnesses admitted Congress should consider impeachment. So what stands in the way of real impeachment hearings?

1. 228 Democrats (and 199 Republicans) who have not co-sponsored Articles of Impeachment against George Bush. Tell your Representatives to co-sponsor Rep. Kucinich's 35 Articles of Impeachment:
http://democrats.com/35-articles-of-impeachment

2. Key Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee who do not support impeachment.

a. Impeachment Hamlets: Bobby Scott, Zoe Lofgren, and Jerry Nadler believe Bush committed impeachable offfenses, but they are terrified to support impeachment. Call them to find out why they can't make up their minds:
http://www.causecaller.com/wiki/Judiciary_Impeachment_Hamlets

b. AWOL Democrats: These members showed their contempt for the Constitution (and their constituents) by not even attending the July 25 hearing: Howard Berman, Rick Boucher, Artur Davis, Bill Delahunt, Luis Gutierrez, Linda Sanchez, Betty Sutton, Maxine Waters, Anthony Weiner. Call them to find out why they failed to do their jobs - and when they will support impeachment:
http://www.causecaller.com/wiki/Judiciary_Impeachment_AWOL

c. Impeachment opponents: Adam Schiff, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and Mel Watt believe none of Bush's High Crimes are impeachable. Call them to find out why they have betrayed their Oath of Office:
http://www.causecaller.com/wiki/Judiciary_Impeachment_Opponents

3. House Democratic "Leaders" who oppose impeachment: Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Caucus Chair Rahm Emanuel, Whip Jim Clyburn, and DCCC chair Chris Van Hollen believe impeachment would hurt Democrats in November. Call them to say serious impeachment hearings will expose Republican High Crimes and help Democrats at all levels:
http://www.causecaller.com/wiki/Democratic_Leaders_Should_Impeach_Bush

4. The Corporate Media

Despite six hours of in-depth hearings, there was no substantive coverage in any Corporate Media outlet. Call your favorite TV/radio talk shows and write to your favorite newspaper to demand coverage of impeachment.

A recent email from Democrats.com...

Support the Kucinich Impeachment Hearing on Friday Tell your Representatives to support impeachment by cosponsoring H. Res. 1345: http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/142 Rep. Dennis Kucinich has led the fight for impeachment since April 2007, when he courageously introduced 3 Articles of Impeachment (H.Res. 333/799) against Vice President Cheney. On June 10, Kucinich introduced 3 5 Articles of Impeachment (H.Res. 1258) against President Bush. When Speaker Pelosi refused to allow hearings on any of the 38 Articles, Kucinich returned to the floor of Congress to introduce one more Article of Impeachment against President Bush (H.Res. 1345). Thanks to massive pressure from Democrats.com and our pro-impeachment allies, Speaker Pelosi finally allowed Chairman Conyers to hold a hearing this Friday. Kucinich will get a few minutes to argue for impeachment along with Rep. Robert Wexler, former Rep. Liz Holtzman, and former Salt Lake City mayor Rocky Anderson. Kucinich made a video to thank us for our efforts. H.Res. 1345 focuses on Bush's ultimate crime - invading Iraq on the basis of lies. The evidence is overwhelming that George Bush and other top officials manufactured those lies to "sell" an invasion whose real purpose was to gain control of Iraq's oil and establish military bases in the heart of the Middle East - the agenda of the Project for a New American Century that Bush and McCain fully embraced.

Paul Krugman is my favorite columnist...

...and in his latest number, Krugman - a Princeton economist and a tell-it-like-it is hero of the progressive cause - beautifully breaks down the economic challenge facing Barack Obama.

Krugman has long been a champion of universal health care, and in this column, he makes a great point: enacting a universal plan would do wonders toward improving the economic well-being of millions of Americans, even in the face of a slump in growth of GDP. From L-ish Economic Prospects, published July 18, 2008:

Given the state of the economy, it’s hard to see how Barack Obama can lose the 2008 election. An anecdote: This week a passing motorist shouted at a crowd waiting outside a branch of IndyMac, the failed bank, “Bush economics didn’t work! They are right-wing Republican thieves!” The crowd cheered.

But what the economy gives, it can also take away. If the current slump follows the typical modern pattern, the economy will stay depressed well into 2010, if not beyond — plenty of time for the public to start blaming the new incumbent, and punish him in the midterm elections.

To avoid that fate, Mr. Obama — if he is indeed the next president — will have to move quickly and forcefully to address America’s economic discontent. That means another stimulus plan, bigger, better, and more sustained than the one Congress passed earlier this year. It also means passing longer-term measures to reduce economic anxiety — above all, universal health care.

If you ask me, there isn’t much suspense in this year’s election: barring some extraordinary mistakes, Mr. Obama will win. Assuming he wins, the real question is what he’ll make of his victory.

Here's one way the money rolls in...

...and with this article, ugh, my frustration with the Democratic Party mounts. From The New York Times:

Democrats Look to Lobbyist to Finance Convention
By LESLIE WAYNE

In terms of lobbyists, few are more connected — both west of the Mississippi and in the corridors of power in Washington — than Steve Farber, a Denver lawyer whose political contacts have thrust him into a central fund-raising role for the Democratic National Convention.

Mr. Farber’s vast contact list could prove crucial in raising the millions of dollars needed by the Denver host committee to showcase Senator Barack Obama and the Democratic Party in August in Denver. But Mr. Farber’s activities are a public display of how corporate connections fuel politics — exactly the type of special influence that Mr. Obama had pledged to expunge from politics when he said he would not accept donations from lobbyists.

For two years now, Mr. Farber has parlayed his love for Denver and his ability to call on a network of lobbying clients to help him with the daunting task of raising the $40 million, or more, that Democrats need to run their convention. As the host committee’s chief fund-raiser, he is on the phone 10, 20 times a day, twisting arms and cajoling potential donors — a task made more difficult by the fact that Denver has few hometown companies with enough resources to help foot the bills.

Yet, as Mr. Farber hops on planes, hosts breakfasts and pulls out the stops, he at least can draw on the resources of his law firm, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, one of the fastest-growing lobbying shops in Washington and one of the most powerful firms in the West, thanks to some recent strategic mergers that have only fattened his roster of blue-chip corporate clients.

Cheney censored the EPA on global warming...

...if this ain't impeachment-worthy, what is? (Oh yeah - all that other stuff is, too...)

Cheney's office tried to alter greenhouse gas testimony, former official says
By Richard Simon, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
7:38 PM PDT, July 8, 2008 WASHINGTON -- Vice President Dick Cheney's office worked to alter sworn congressional testimony provided by a federal official in order to play down the threat of global warming and head off regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, a former government official said in a new accusation Tuesday.

Jason K. Burnett, a former Environmental Protection Agency official, cited the behind-the-scenes efforts by unnamed officials in Cheney's office in a letter to congressional investigators regarding testimony in January by his former boss, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson.

Burnett appeared at a news conference Tuesday with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who said his statements could boost efforts by California and other states to implement their own vehicle emission standards over White House opposition. Boxer plans to call Burnett to testify later this month before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which she chairs.

His charges are likely to give Bush administration critics new ammunition in their efforts to portray executive-branch actions on the environment as driven by politics, rather than science.
(click for the full article from the Los Angeles Times)

More of Bush's Approval Rating Nosedive...

...and similarly tepid perceptions of his economic stewardship, in this amazing polling data from the LA Times.

It took nearly 8 years of the guy, but by now, pretty much everybody has figured out how bad he sucks.

(click to enlarge)

Kucinich again calls for impeachment...

...and he remains at the top of my list of inspirational American politicians. From Congressman Dennis Kucinich's website:

Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich released the following statement upon House action today which approved his motion to refer to committee Articles of Impeachment concerning President George Bush. "The sheer volume of the Articles required a referral to provide Members with an opportunity for review," Kucinich said.

"It is now imperative that the Judiciary Committee begin a review of the 35 Articles. I will be providing supporting documentation to the committee so that it can proceed in an orderly manner. The weight of evidence contained in the Articles makes it clear that President Bush violated the Constitution and the US Code as well as International law.

"It is the House's responsibility as a co-equal branch of government to provide an effective check and balance to executive abuse of power. President Bush was principally responsible for directing the United States Armed Forces to attack Iraq," Kucinich said. "The June 5th Senate Intelligence report convinced me it was time to act."

Senate: "Turns out Bushies overstated Iraq threat"

So the U.S. Senate makes it official, five years too late. From the News Hour with Jim Lehrer:

A U.S. Senate report today directly accused the Bush administration of distorting evidence to justify the war in Iraq. The Intelligence Committee's long-delayed report echoed similar charges made in recent years. The committee said President Bush and top aides exaggerated links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida. And it said they ignored doubts by U.S. intelligence agencies about Iraq's weapons capabilities.

The Democratic chairman, Senator John Rockefeller of West Virginia, underlined the importance of the findings. "You don't get to tell the truth just some of the time when going to war. The American people expect the government to tell the truth all the time. In too many instances in making the case for war, administration officials distorted the facts or said things that were not supported by the facts, said things that they knew or should have known were not true."

Republicans charged the Democrats on the committee were playing partisan gamesmanship. Senator Kit Bond of Missouri insisted faulty intelligence, not the administration itself, was to blame."The report released today by the majority is an attempt by my friends on the other side of the aisle to score election-year points. Even with the majority-only drafted report that twists the statements of policymakers and cherry-picks the intelligence, the report essentially validates what we've been saying for years, that the intelligence was flawed. The majority consistently leaves that out of their conclusions."

Congrats, Senator Obama...

...you're on the fast track to the presidency. Once you get there, you're going to have a hell of a lot of work to do. In the meantime, us progressives will be waiting with our fingers crossed, hoping you turn out to be one of us. From politico.com:

Sen. Barack Obama's quest for the Democratic presidential nomination ended in a historic victory Tuesday night, as the Illinois senator achieved the magic number needed to make him his party's standard-bearer. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile, signaled that her once seemingly invincible campaign was coming to a close — though she pointedly did not concede and broadly indicated her interest in the vice presidency.

"Tonight, I can stand before you and say that I will be the Democratic nominee for president of the United States," Obama said told a cheering throng of supporters in St. Paul, Minn. "America, this is our moment. This is our time. Our time to turn the page on the policies of the past."

If one chart explains high gas prices...

...this is probably it. From the good capitalists at The Wall Street Journal, this chart shows how growth in demand for gas has dwarfed growth in supply. Here's why, for a lot of us Americans, our next car is going to be a bicycle:

See you in the bike lane.

Cool chart on housing prices versus rents...

...from a blog post by Princeton economist/New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.

Some charts grab you right away, like this one, which highlights how crazy things got during the home-buying mania that swept America in the early 2000s. As home prices soared, rents stayed flat - an indication that buyers were being motivated by factors other than the fundamental one of the relative costs of renting versus owning. Now the fallout from home-buying mania is currently rippling through our economy - and causing a great deal of distress to many homeowners.

Some people will tell you that renting a home
is like throwing your money away.
People who sell homes, for example.

A blast from Wavelength's past...

...here's a quartet of captioned photos we emailed to our email list members back in September 2005. Plucky, weren't we?

(click to enlarge)

Another ominous 5-year landmark reached this March...

...it's of the dismal economic variety. Seems you're not the only one who is a bit nervous about the financial outlook in the days ahead. Today from AP:

Consumer confidence drops to 5-year low on pessimism about jobs, income
by Eileen Alt Powell, Associated Press
NEW YORK – American consumers are gloomier about the economy than at any point since just before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, as slumping housing prices and soaring fuel costs depress consumer confidence to its lowest level in five years.

The Conference Board, a business-backed research group, said Tuesday that its Consumer Confidence Index plunged to 64.5 in March from a revised 76.4 in February.

The March reading was far below the 73.0 expected by analysts surveyed by Thomson/IFR and was the worst reading since the gauge registered 61.4 in March 2003, just ahead of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Weakening consumer confidence foreshadows weakening consumer spending, which could hurt the already faltering economy.

The good news in high gas prices...

...is that expensive auto fuel pushes us to use more public transportation. From a quick article from Reuters:

U.S. mass transit use hits 50-yr high on pump prices
By Rebekah Kebede, REUTERS, March 10, 2008

NEW YORK – The number of Americans hopping buses and grabbing subway straps has climbed to the highest level in half a century as soaring gasoline costs push more commuters to take mass transit.

U.S. mass transit ridership began to surge when gasoline hit the $3 a gallon level in 2005 and has continued to rise steadily ever since as pump prices top record after record, according to a report released Monday by the American Public Transit Association.

“As people are struggling with the increase in fuel prices, they have to make adjustments, and one of the ways they are doing that is driving less and taking public transportation more,” said William Millar, the president of the APTA.

Mass transit use increased by more than 2 percent in 2007 to the highest level in 50 years, with Americans taking more than 10 billion trips on public transport while the number of vehicle miles traveled was flat in the first 10 months of the year.

Congresswoman Susan Davis scored a nice one...

...she wrote the legislation that saved a popular Southern California surfspot from intrusion by toll road. Here's one where the good guys win, from Davis's website:

Susan Davis Toll Road Language Becomes Law
Defense bill with provision removing special exemption from state law signed

WASHINGTON – Congresswoman Susan Davis’s amendment requiring a proposed toll road through a state park to follow state environmental laws became law when President Bush signed the defense authorization bill (H.R. 4986) last night.

“This has always been about maintaining the integrity of the process that we follow for proposed transportation projects in the state,” said Davis, a member of the Armed Services Committee. “There is no reason why it should have received a special exemption from the standard process and environmental safeguards, especially when such unique natural resources are at stake.”

The proposed toll road would have a devastating impact on the unique environmental and highly utilized recreational resources at San Mateo campground and Trestles Beach.

Impeaching Cheney is still a possibility...

...and members of Congress are currently in their home districts, so now is an excellent time to contact your representative and let him or her know that you want impeachment. For all the details you need about impeachment, including your rep's phone numbers, visit AfterDowningStreet's terrific impeachment site. We've still got 11 months!

Cindy Sheehan is running for Congress...

…she's challenging House speaker Nancy Pelosi, who assumed the role of Speaker of the House when the Democrats took control of Congress after the 2006 elections.

I wasn't familiar with Nancy Pelosi until those elections thrust her into the national spotlight, and when I first started paying attention to her, I thought, "Wow – for the most visible face of the Democratic Party, she sure looks like a Republican." In my experience, people with Pelosi's sense of style – power suits, fancy hairdos, and plastic surgery – tend to lean right of center and to put the will of the big bucks in front of the will of the people. But in the warm glow of the optimism of November 2006, I told myself that appearances can be deceiving and began hoping for the best.

It didn't take long for Pelosi and her fellow Democratic party leaders to let me down. Instead of stepping up as the antidote to Bush's poison and delivering the leftward pendulum swing so many of us were hoping for, Pelosi's House largely has failed to distinguish itself from the delegations that bowed to Bush from 2001 through 2006. And I'm not the only one who isn't digging Nancy's chili: approval ratings for Congress overall are even lower than approval ratings for Bush and have been for some time.

Back in July 2007, Cindy Sheehan promised that she would run against Nancy Pelosi if Nancy failed to pursue the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Well, Nancy failed, and Cindy is following up by running against Pelosi this November.

I think that campaigns like Cindy's – where real Americans run against the rich insiders who currently control Washington – are the clearest path to the big changes Americans are hungry for. I've donated to Cindy's congressional campaign, and I hope you will, too.

the key numbers from Super Tuesday...

...at least for me, are the ones below. These numbers aren't getting top billing in the good old MSM, probably because they suggest that the Republican presidential primaries are essentially meaningless, and that the Democratic nominee will stomp in November.

from a Time Magazine network blog:

Democratic votes for Clinton and Obama: 14,622,822 (63.6%)
Republican votes for McCain, Romney and Huckabee: 8,370,022 (36.4%)

Put another way, the Clinton/Obama race drew 76% more voters than the McCain/Romney/Huckabee race.

Wexler, a Dozen Housemates say the "I" word...

(LETTER TO CHAIRMAN CONYERS)

January 16, 2008
John Conyers, Jr., Chairman
House Judiciary Committee
2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairman Conyers:

You have been a tireless champion of providing oversight to an Administration that has run roughshod over our constitution, that operates with s no limits on executive branch authority and one that has repeatedly flouted the investigations and oversight the 110th Congress has tried to provide over the past year. We have the greatest respect for the work you have done and believe that impeachment hearings pertaining to Vice President Cheney are the best way to move that work forward.

Impeachment hearings will allow for the exact kind of oversight that you and the Democratic leadership have provided regarding the actions of the Administration but without the opportunity for the Bush Administration to ignore lawful requests for information, refuse subpoenas and effectively limit its own oversight.

Impeachment hearings can provide the opportunity to cut through the executive privilege defenses and force this Administration to answer a Congress it has clearly chosen to ignore. We know you would agree that as Members of Congress, we can not allow legitimate oversight to be thwarted or such a dangerous precedent to stand...As you know, the charges against Vice President Cheney include providing Congress and the American people false intelligence leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens.

We trust that you will hold a sober investigation and let the facts determine the outcome as you have as Chairman this past year. We sincerely believe that impeachment hearings are the appropriate and necessary next step given what we have seen of this Administration. Chairman Conyers, we are respectfully asking you join us and concerned citizens around the country in supporting impeachment hearings.

Sincerely,

Clarke, Yvette D., NY, 11th
Clay, Wm. Lacy, MO, 1st
Cohen, Steve, TN, 9th *
Farr, Sam, CA, 17th
Grijalva, Raúl M., AZ, 7th
Moore, Gwen, WI, 4th
Moran, James P., VA, 8th
Towns, Edolphus, NY, 10th
Wynn, Albert Russell, MD, 4th
Baldwin, Tammy, WI, 2nd *
Capuano, Michael E., MA, 8th
Gutierrez, Luis V., IL, 4th *
Thompson, Mike, CA, 1st
Wexler, Robert, FL, 19th *

(*= member of the Judiciary Committee)

Here's Ralph Nader on impeachment...

Some say Ralph Nader is a key reason why we ended up with Bush and Cheney in the first place. For many years after the 2000 election, I thought Bush was disproving Nader's main argument: that there wasn't enough difference between the leaderships of the Democratic and the Republican parties. But given that Hillary and the majority of the Democrats in Congress supported the Iraq War - and that most of those same Demos won't pick up the impeachment ball - I'm not so sure that Nader was wrongheaded in his run against Bush/Cheney and Gore/Lieberman.

In this 3-minute YouTube snippet from a 2007 Nader speech, he shares the bizarre reason one Democratic congressman cited when asked why he won't support impeachment despite the fact that a majority of his constituents do:

Need proof of media's anti-change bias?

Here it is, amigos. Fox did it to Ron Paul, too. If I owned a TV, this would make me destroy it:

NBC unplugs Kucinich from Presidential debate

Less than 44 hours after NBC sent a congratulatory note and an invitation to Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich to participate in the Jan. 15 Democratic Presidential debate in Las Vegas, the network notified the campaign this morning it was changing it announced criteria, rescinding its invitation, and excluding Kucinich from the debate.

NBC Political Director Chuck Todd notified the Kucinich campaign this morning that, although Kucinich had met the qualification criteria publicly announced on December 28, the network was “re-doing” the criteria, excluding Kucinich, and planning to invite only Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and former senator John Edwards. The criteria announced last month included a fourth-place or better showing in a national poll. The USA/Gallup poll earlier this month showed Kucinich in fourth place among the Democratic contenders.

In an email to the Kucinich campaign at 2:35 p.m. on Wednesday, January 9, Democratic Party debates consultant Jenny Backus wrote: “Congratulations on another hard-fought contest. Now that New Hampshire is over, we are on to Nevada and our Presidential Debate on Tuesday January 15. This letter serves as an official invitation for your candidate to participate in the Nevada Presidential Debate at Cashman Theatre in downtown Las Vegas. You have met the criteria set by NBC and the Debate.”

Todd notified the Kucinich campaign this morning that the network had decided to change the criteria and limit participation in the debate to only three candidates.

Osama Bin Laden has been dead for years...

...that's the argument explored in a fascinating post on LittleCountryLost, an superb blog focused on stories left out of the mainstream media. The discussion starts with the clip below, an excerpt of a November '07 interview with Benazir Bhutto, in which she names people who she thinks want to kill her. According to Bhutto, one of these people - Omar Sheikh - "murdered Osama Bin Laden." Watch for yourself:



LittleCountryLost offers a timeline of Bin Laden-related events, and points out a troubling change in Bush administration rhetoric regarding Bin Laden. If he did die some time in the 18 months after 9/11, the case for the war on terror would have suffered, right? In that time period, Bush & Co. certainly shifted the emphasis away from Bin Laden:

September 15, 2001 – President Bush says of bin-Laden, “If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he will be sorely mistaken.”

September 17, 2001 – President Bush says, “I want justice. And there’s an old poster out West, I recall, that says, ‘Wanted: Dead or Alive.’”

November 7, 2001 - Pakistani reporter Hamid Mir interviews Osama bin-Laden in person.

November 16, 2001 - Battle of Tora Bora begins.

November 25, 2001 - Osama bin-Laden gives his last known public speech to his followers in Milawa, Afghanistan, a village located on the route from Tora Bora to the Pakistani border.

November 28, 2001 - Osama bin-Laden reportedly escapes Tora Bora

December 15, 2001 - Osama bin-Laden's voice is reportedly intercepted for the last time communicating with his fighters in Tora Bora via his shortwave radio

December 17, 2001 - US Intelligence and Pentagon officials admit they have lost Osama bin-Laden

December 17, 2001 - United States declares victory at Tora Bora

December 26, 2001 - Article about Osama bin-Laden's funeral is published in Pakistan and Egypt. The funeral allegedly takes place about 10 days earlier. The article is also discussed by Fox News.

December 28, 2001 – President Bush says, “Our objective is more than bin-Laden”

January 18, 2002 – Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharraf tells CNN that he believes Osama bin-Laden to be dead

January 27, 2002 - Vice President Dick Cheney says that Osama bin-Laden "isn't that big of a threat. Bin Laden connected to this worldwide organization of terror is a threat."

January 27, 2002 – White House Chief of Staff Andy Card tells CNN, “"I do not know for a fact that he's alive. I happen to believe he's probably alive… Our overall objective is to defeat terrorism, wherever it is around the world. And so, our objective is not to get Osama bin Laden."

January 29, 2002 – President Bush delivers his first State of the Union address since 9/11. While he labels Iraq, Iran, and North Korea the “axis of evil”, he fails to mention Osama bin-Laden at all.

March 13, 2002 – President Bush says, “Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all… He’s a person who’s now been marginalized.… I just don’t spend that much time on him.… I truly am not that concerned about him.”

April 4, 2002 - Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Richard Myers says, "The goal has never been to get bin-Laden"

October 14, 2002 – President Bush says, “I don’t know whether bin-Laden is alive or dead”

October 16, 2002 – Middle East Newsline reports that Israeli Intelligence officials confirmed that Israel and the United States believe Osama bin-Laden was killed in mid-December 2001 during the Tora Bora bombing campaign.

This timeline, with Osama bin-Laden's death allegedly occurring in the middle of December 2001, makes it possible that Omar Sheikh could have committed the murder. From October 2001 through January 19, 2002, Omar Sheikh was living openly in his home in Lahore, Pakistan. His positions as leader of Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (a Taliban and Osama bin-Laden partner) and ISI agent (the source of funds for Harkat-ul-Mujahideen) would also have given him means for access to Osama bin-Laden.

Tony, Tony, Tony...

...congrats on your new job. I always suspected you were working for a higher power, and now I know for sure. And now all your connections are really gonna pay off!

Tony Blair starts $1M bank job

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, who left office last June, has taken up a part-time job with a Wall Street bank on an estimated $1 million salary.

Blair will work with JP Morgan Chase, a firm with assets of $1.5 trillion and operations in more than 50 countries. He will advise the bank on global political and strategic issues, a company statement said.

"We operate our business all over the world, and Tony Blair will bring our leaders and clients a unique and invaluable global perspective that is especially critical in turbulent times like these," said Jamie Dimon, chairman and CEO of the company, in the statement.

Neither Blair nor the bank would say how much the former PM would be paid. A New York recruitment consultant though told the Financial Times that the job was likely to be worth more than $987,000 (£500,000) a year.

Advisory jobs such as the one Blair has accepted are popular among former world leaders. His predecessor as prime minister, John Major, took a position with the Carlyle Group, a private investment house, as did former U.S. President George H.W. Bush.

Poems written by Guantanamo inmates...

...read by Hadi Jawad, one of the founders of the Crawford Peace House.

Interesting email from Dennis Kucinich...

...who still strikes me as the only candidate who is talking about the substantive changes our country needs. John Edwards' anti-corporate bluster belies his big-money ties to the Fortress Investment Group. And ABC/Disney's decision to exclude Kucinich from the New Hampshire debate is telling...Kucinich is the candidate that the corporates are really afraid of!

RE: New Hampshire, Iowa and Edwards

Dear Supporter,

For the record:

1. New Hampshire is the first state where we are aggressively campaigning. Due to the Party lockout in Iowa, we chose to focus on New Hampshire.
2. I am the only person running for President who voted against the war, against funding the war 100% of the time, against the Patriot Act, and who stands for a universal single-payer not-for-profit healthcare system. Nevertheless I was excluded from Saturday night's ABC Presidential debate, or four tone monologue as it was.
3. In answer to your questions about why I didn't support former Senator John Edwards on the second ballot in Iowa: I have serious concerns about his connections to a Wall Street hedge fund, Fortress Investment Group. While attacking others for accepting campaign money from Washington lobbyists, he is up to his ears in money from Wall Street special interests.

He made half a million dollars in a single year for attending a few meetings for Fortress and has invested a substantial part of his own personal wealth in the hedge fund whose portfolios are responsible for sub-prime predatory lending practices, Medicare privatization, and an entire range of corporate sharp dealings that are driving the middle class into poverty.

While I indicated Senator Obama as a preferred second choice in Iowa, Progressives have fundamental disagreements with him and all of the other Presidential candidates on most of their major positions on the issues.

We must have the courage of our convictions to fully support and vote for what it is we really want. For once, we must realize our power, stop playing tactical games, and vote as a bloc - which, as you know, is what the religious right does and why they often win.

We Progressives are in the majority in this election. We will win only when we refuse to compromise and vote with integrity.

--Dennis Kucinich

To close 2007...

...a couple members of the Wavelength crew took a trip to Malaysia, visiting cities such as Kuala Lumpur and Melaka. Malaysia is a wondrous country, from jungles to beaches and everything in between. And the people's affectionate respect for citizens of other countries was evident in the many smiles and greetings we received in each area we explored.

Of the many contrasts with the United States, perhaps the most striking to me was Malaysia's lack of free speech, which manifests in forms such as censorship of the press and criminal penalties for critics of the government. A website like Wavelength's would never fly in Malaysia, for example, and the country's citizens could get in trouble for wearing t-shirts like the ones we offer. With this in mind, we feel quite lucky to be Americans, and quite proud of the USA.

Of Malaysia's many similarities with the United States, one that I noticed repeatedly was the sharp differences in living standards across the upper, middle, and lower classes. From gleaming office towers to high-rise dormitories to aluminum-roofed shanties, Malaysia's citizens - like those in the United States, and perhaps all countries - live their lives in a wide range of conditions, and with a broadly varying command of resources.


I hope to write more on Malaysia in future posts. For now, I'll just add that the country was warm, welcoming, beautiful, and steeped in history. And fans of either Indian or Chinese cuisine will love Malaysia's authentic and affordable restaurants.

It took me awhile to figure out Greenspan...

...back in the short-lived era of the in-the-black federal budget, Greenspan told Congress it had to start giving back taxpayer money, lest a ballooning surplus weigh down the economy. When deficits returned a couple years later, he told Congress that Social Security was suddenly in crisis, and only savable with private accounts.

Why hadn't he said anything about Social Security's needs during the surplus? Shenanigans. Greenspan was not on our side on Social Security, and now this NY Times eye-opener shows where he stood on subprime lending:

Edward M. Gramlich, a Federal Reserve governor who died in September, warned nearly seven years ago that a fast-growing new breed of lenders was luring many people into risky mortgages they could not afford. But when Mr. Gramlich privately urged Fed examiners to investigate mortgage lenders affiliated with national banks, he was rebuffed by Alan Greenspan, the Fed chairman.

In 2001, a senior Treasury official, Sheila C. Bair, tried to persuade subprime lenders to adopt a code of “best practices” and to let outside monitors verify their compliance. None of the lenders would agree to the monitors, and many rejected the code itself. Even those who did adopt those practices, Ms. Bair recalled recently, soon let them slip.

And leaders of a housing advocacy group in California, meeting with Mr. Greenspan in 2004, warned that deception was increasing and unscrupulous practices were spreading. John C. Gamboa and Robert L. Gnaizda of the Greenlining Institute implored Mr. Greenspan to use his bully pulpit and press for a voluntary code of conduct.

“He never gave us a good reason, but he didn’t want to do it,” Mr. Gnaizda said last week. “He just wasn’t interested.”

Some fairly heavy promotional activity...

...including an email contact to all of our previous customers, plus links in emails sent by our friends at Democrats.com, generated a wave of site visits. I'll share more on the resulting bump in sales, but for now, here's a look at visits to the page with I Have A Dream, Impeach Bush & Cheney, and Arrest Bush:

The screenshot above came from Wavelength's Yahoo account.

Some new clamoring for Impeach Cheney...

...amongst a trio of members of Congress:

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)...and two of his colleagues on the House judiciary committee - Florida's Robert Wexler and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin - have penned an op-ed piece calling for committee hearings on a bill to impeact Dick Cheney on a variety of charges, including allegations of manipulating intelligence to boost the case for war with Iraq.

"The issues at hand are too serious to ignore, including credible allegations of abuse of power that if proven may well constitute high crimes and misdemeanors under our constitution," the op-ed says. "The charges against Vice President Cheney relate to his deceptive actions leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens."

It's heartening to see a few members step up like this. What's discouraging is the response line out of Democratic leadership: "it'll take us away from other, more important things." Ah, love to see them flash that old killer instinct.

Another frustrating note on matter is the response from His Majesty's Media the Mainstream: the three Congressfolks tried but couldn't get their editorial published in any big papers. Fortunately, I found a smaller independent willing to point the finger at Cheney:

"Look into my eyes," Cheneybot commanded,
"And repeat after me: impeachment is not an option."

All we want for Christmas...

...is some justice, in the form of impeachment of Bush and Cheney.

To let everybody know, we've added a shirt that borrows an immortal line from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. In the spirit of Dr. King's rallying cry against the scourge of racial oppression, this shirt calls out the impeachable crimes of the Bush administration.

That justice will prevail, and that Bush and Cheney will be held accountable for their crimes...

A cool map of Demo campaign stops...

...makes for a few moments of interactive and informative fun, courtesy of the New York Times.

Check the map for more candidate-by-candidate info, for candidates from both major parties.

Kucinich supporters like me often lament how the media seems to ignore his campaign, but the maps slices at right offer a different perspective on why he isn't getting much voter traction. He's got New Hampshire covered, but the top 3 candidates seem to be stumping much harder in Iowa and elsewhere.

A note, however: it could be that Kucinich is not hitting Iowa hard because he has bigger plans, beyond the Democratic nomination. Stay tuned...

When a senator bows out...

...with 4 years left in a term, do the voters who elected him get any recourse?

Today, Trent Lott announced he would retire from the U.S. Senate by the end of this year, though he'd just been re-elected in 2006. The reason? To paraphrase MSNBC, it's so he can become a lobbyist before tougher lobbying rules take effect in the next few months. More specifically, here's how one commenter sums it up:

"If you retire after January 1, 2008, you must wait 2 years before becoming a lobbyist. That's the reason Hair Helmet is resigning now. It's all about continuing to enrich himself at the taxpayer's expense."

To me, this is one more example of how we need more than just the money out of our political system - we need to get money fiend personalities out of our political system. In my opinion, congresspeople should take vows of penury; once elected, they should receive the median income of the district they represent - for the rest of their lives.

That would certainly shift the D.C. personality mix a bit. For example, I don't think Bush would have thrown his hat into such a ring. Which is practically grounds for resting the case.

The Best of Bush

"I gotta go to Vegas...Somethin' about - what happens in Vegas stays there or something?"

Outsourcing the military means big bucks...

...for companies like Halliburton, a firm whose stock market value currently totals $35 billion. Recently, I listened to a public conference call between Wall Street analysts and Dyncorp, sort of a mini version of Dick Cheney's HAL. Here are some excerpts from the call, which was led by Dyncorp's CEO Herbert Lanese and offered a firsthand view of the business of war:

"...our CIVPOL program in Iraq was extended through November of this year, and we’ve since been informed that a further extension through February of 2008 will be funded soon. Our CIVPOL program in Afghanistan has been extended through August of 2008, while the Afghanistan Poppy Eradication Program has been extended through September of 2008. We’ve also been re-awarded extensions on both our Contract Field Teams program, our CFT program, and our War Reserve Materiel or WRM contracts, both of those through September of 2008."

"The CIVPOL, or Civilian Police Program, in Iraq and Afghanistan, is a very large and complex program. And as you might imagine, as with other large complex government contracts, it’s not unusual for the contractor and its government customer to identify and address a number of issues that may arise during the course of contractor performance. We are, above all else, serious about the integrity of our operations. Neither I nor any of the people who work for me at this point in our careers are going to damage our good reputations with something silly."

"It is very important for our shareholders to understand that we compete with Blackwater in a very narrow field that currently represents 2% of our revenue. I want to repeat that: 2% of our revenue. So when you compare us to Blackwater, 2% of our revenue is on the same basis as Blackwater. Unfortunately, it is very visible work that tends to attract a disproportionate amount of attention that I believe unfairly distorts the image of Dyncorp."

Herbert Lanese: Yeah, and the Marine Corps has just put out it’s own solicitation for [armored vehicles] and it’s in the 20-some-thousands as well, too, and that’s not in any of the numbers I am talking about yet. So look, I just think it’s got great opportunity for us. It’s something I am really excited about.
Wall Street analyst: Your enthusiasm is palpable.Thank you very much.
Herbert Lanese: [laughter] Yes, thank you. Sorry to be emotional on these calls, but I do get excited about this stuff. I love this stuff I do.

Key facts on Iraq...

...compiled by the Associated Press:

U.S. TROOP LEVELS:
January 2007: 137,000
October 2007: 170,000

CASUALTIES as of 10/31/07:
Confirmed U.S. military deaths: 3,838
Confirmed U.S. military wounded: 28,385
Deaths of civilian employees of U.S. gov't contractors: 1,073
Iraqi civilian deaths from war-related violence: more than 75,000 (est.)
Assassinated Iraqi academics: 336
Journalists killed on assignment: 122

COST:
Stepped-up military operations are costing about $12 billion a month, with Iraq accounting for $10 billion per month, according to congressional analysis. Total cost to the U.S. government so far is more than $464 billion. A January 2007 study by Linda Bilmes of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government put the total projected cost of providing medical care and disability benefits to veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan at $350 billion to $700 billion.

OIL PRODUCTION:
Prewar: 2.58 million barrels per day
Oct. 21, 2007: 2.36 million barrels per day

ELECTRICITY
Prewar nationwide: 3,958 megawatts. Hours per day (est.): four to eight
Oct. 23, 2007, nationwide: 4,790 megawatts. Hours per day: 13.1
Prewar Baghdad: 2,500 megawatts. Hours per day (est.): 16-24
Oct. 23, 2007, Baghdad: Megawatts not available. Hours per day: 8.9
Note: Current Baghdad megawatt figures are no longer reported by the U.S. State Department's Iraq Weekly Status Report.

TELEPHONES:
Prewar land lines: 833,000
March 13, 2007: 1,111,000
Prewar cell phones: 80,000
March 13, 2007: 8,720,038

WATER:
Prewar: 12.9 million people had potable water
Oct. 18, 2007: 19.6 million people have potable water

SEWERAGE
Prewar: 6.2 million people served
Oct. 18, 2007: 11.3 million people served

INTERNAL REFUGEES:
Oct. 23, 2007: At least 2.3 million people have been displaced inside Iraq...Iraqis have made some 19,800 asylum claims during the first six months of 2007, a 45 percent increase compared to the previous six months, when 13,600 applications were received.

EMIGRANTS:
Prewar: 500,000 Iraqis living abroad.
Oct. 23, 2007: More than 2.2 million in neighboring countries.

Dennis Kucinich rolled into San Diego...

... this past weekend, to speak at a gathering at the home of a UCSD biology professor. Kucinich, his wife Elizabeth, and her mother all turned out for the occasion, and the crowd responded warmly to Dennis's calls for strength through peace, a national health care system, and a "Works Green" Administration.

I was happy to note that the Union-Tribune saw fit to cover the event with a reporter, who filed an article that captured the event quite nicely.

For more on Dennis Kucinich's views, check his website, and maybe even his video updates. If you're in San Diego, join his San Diego team.

Here comes a big day of protest...

...with big regional rallies scheduled for Saturday, October 27. For more info, click here.

Anti-war sentiment up, protests down...

...that's the moral from a Reuters article on dwindling turnout at recent anti-war events, particularly in DC. Issues include fatigue, frustration, in-fighting among activist groups, and the Internet, which may have eclipsed the street corner as the place to protest:

U.S. protests shrink while antiwar sentiment grows
By Andy Sullivan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Crowds at antiwar rallies in Washington have dwindled even as U.S. opinion has turned against the war in Iraq, as organizers feud and participants question the effectiveness of the street protests. Rival antiwar groups, which in years past jointly sponsored massive rallies on the National Mall, have promoted separate protests recently or decided to steer clear of the capital altogether...

United for Peace and Justice, which has tried to focus on ending the Iraq war, drew 100,000 people to a January protest. The group plans 11 regional demonstrations later this month, but none in Washington. ANSWER has called for antiwar groups to join forces for a large rally in the spring...

Antiwar leaders say recent smaller protests reflect new tactics, not disorganization. Smaller activist groups like Code Pink have been a colorful, disruptive presence at congressional hearings and appearances by Bush administration officials. "There's times when we've had half a million people out in the streets, and there's times when it's important just to be there," Langley said.

But others said it is less likely they'll head to Washington at all. "People are tired, they are frustrated because they didn't expect this to go on so long," said Laura Bonham, a spokeswoman for Progressive Democrats of America, which lobbies lawmakers to support a withdrawal. "It's like, well, we can stay home."

Largely absent from the actions are young people, who were the majority of Vietnam-era protesters -- perhaps because they do not risk being drafted into the military or from a sense that they can express their opposition to the war on the Internet, rather than on the streets, [Hamilton College history professor Maurice] Isserman said.

Cindy Sheehan, Bree Walker, and Camp Casey...

...are the highlights of this 20-minute video from back in July, when peace movement hero Cindy Sheehan celebrated her 50th birthday at Camp Casey in Crawford, Texas, and passed the camp's deed to Air America's Bree Walker. Here's some footage from a special weekend, including music from Jesse Dyen and Hank Woji.

A chilling summary of U.S. foreign policy...

...comes in the prologue to Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, a fascinating 2004 confession by John Perkins, who built a career of furthering the international interests of what he now calls "the corporatocracy." His story sheds light on the self-serving motives behind much of the push for globalization and offers a behind-the-scenes look at how the corporatocracy asserts its power in developing countries around the world:

We economic hit men are crafty; we learned from history. Today we do not carry swords. We do not wear armor or clothes that set us apart. In countries like Ecuador, Nigeria, and Indonesia, we dress like local schoolteachers and shop owners...We visit project sites and stroll through impoverished villages...We cover the conference tables of government committees with our spreadsheets and financial projections, and we lecture at the Harvard Business School about the miracles of macroeconomics. We are on the record, in the open...

However - and this is a very large caveat - if we fail, an even more sinister breed steps in, ones we economic hit men refer to as the jackals...The jackals are always there, lurking in the shadows. When they emerge, heads of state are overthrown or die in violent "accidents." And if by chance the jackals fail, as they failed in Afghanistan and Iraq, then the old models resurface. When the jackals fail, young Americans are sent in to kill and to die.

Fresh numbers on Americans' approval...

...of both President Bush and the Democrats' Congress. Guess I'm not the only one who's having trouble telling the difference:

Bush, Congress at record low ratings: Reuters poll
By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush and the U.S. Congress registered record-low approval ratings in a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday, and a new monthly index measuring the mood of Americans dipped slightly on deepening worries about the economy.

Only 29 percent of Americans gave Bush a positive grade for his job performance, below his worst Zogby poll mark of 30 percent in March. A paltry 11 percent rated Congress positively, beating the previous low of 14 percent in July...

The national survey of 1,011 likely voters, taken September 13 through September 16, found barely one-quarter of Americans, or 27 percent, believe the country is headed in the right direction. Nearly 62 percent think the country is on the wrong track...

Most of the polling was done after a speech by Bush and testimony to Congress by the top commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, indicating the United States would make some reductions but planned to keep high troop levels in Iraq for the foreseeable future.

From the John Edwards website...

...this satisfying press release, with an interesting challenge to Senator Clinton. Key excerpts:

"During the Slate/Yahoo/Huffington Post debate, which aired online today, Senator Clinton said the difference between lobbyists and regular Americans is an 'artificial distinction.' She is wrong. These lobbyists are legally required to register with the government to influence legislation. And, more than most, Senator Clinton should know that Washington is awash with campaign money from these lobbyists. It is wrong and it has to stop...

"John Edwards believes it's time to end the game and be honest with the American people. It's time for us to have the strength to say no to Washington lobbyists' money so we can deliver the real change America deserves. That's why, once again, John Edwards renews his challenge to Senator Clinton to join with him in demanding the Democratic Party lead the way to real reform by refusing, as a party, to take campaign contributions from Washington lobbyists."

For more news from the Edwards camp, check here.

Checking the oddsboard...

...at my favorite online casino reveals the following payouts for bets on who's going to win the Democratic nomination:

Hillary Clinton 2 - 3
Barack Obama 3 - 2
John Edwards 5 – 1
Al Gore 7 – 2
Bill Richardson 10 - 1
Joe Biden 15 - 1
Chris Dodd 60 - 1
Dennis Kucinich 60 - 1
John Kerry 50 – 1

How to interpret these odds? It's easy: the first number is the amount you win if you bet the second number and your candidate is victorious. So you'd win $2 for every $3 you bet on Hillary, $3 for every $2 you bet on Obama, $5 for every $1 you bet on Edwards, and so on.

Now, I'm a Dennis Kucinich supporter, and I will vote for him in Cali's primary on February 5. But for reasons I don't understand, most of my fellow Democrats are not down with Kucinich For President, even though many admit that he is the candidate whose views most closely reflect their own. Apparently sheep, like horses, can be led to water but not counted on to drink it. Anyway, with a heavy heart, I crossed Kucinich off my list of potential bets.

Somehow it was much easier to cross off Joe Biden and Chris Dodd. And I crossed off Al Gore and John Kerry with enthusiasm; those losers have had their shot at the presidency and couldn't even win against George W. Bush. I could have won against George W. Bush! (Spare me the whining about Florida, Ohio, and election theft - if either Gore or Kerry were worth a damn, they would have blown Bush away, whether Kathleen Harris was stuffing ballots in her bra or not.)

So I got down to Hillary, Barak, and John Edwards, and I took another long, hard look at the odds above. I tried my best to envision Hillary or Barak winning the nomination. Then I plopped $100 on Edwards.

Edwards is no slam dunk, but he's a man, he's white, and he's a household name - a formula that has met with some success in the past. Add the fact that Edwards is a Southern boy with a made-for-TV smile, and 5-1 starts to look awful compelling. Then again, Hillary does have Rupert Murdoch in her corner...

Saw Congressman Bob Filner the other day...

...heard him speak at a meeting of the San Diego County Young Democrats. Filner had just returned from Iraq, a trip he made in conjunction with his new role as chairman of the House's Veterans Affairs committee. Filner seemed tired, but he was still interesting, primarily speaking to the group about the amazing work of the people in our armed forces, and how those people deserve as much government attention on the way home from war as they do on the way to it.

Filner peppered his talk with some great stats on the military and on the entrenchment of politicians in Congress. One interesting stat on the latter topic, for instance, is that - in the House of Representatives - only about 25 of 435 seats are seriously contended each election cycle. And we wonder why the people's will is stymied?

Here are some other mind-boggling tidbits Filner shared:

--Members of the Soviet Union's Communist Party won re-election 97.0% of the time.
--Members of the United States Congress win re-election 98.6% of the time.

--The average soldier in Iraq sustains 7 (seven) concussions per tour of duty.

--58,000 U.S. soldiers were killed in the Vietnam War.
--A higher number have killed themselves since coming home from the War.

--Roughly 50%* of our nation's homeless are veterans of the Vietnam War.

*Update 11/7/07:
Study: 1 out of 4 homeless are veterans

By KIMBERLY HEFLING
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Veterans make up one in four homeless people in the United States, though they are only 11 percent of the general adult population, according to a report to be released Thursday.

And homelessness is not just a problem among middle-age and elderly veterans. Younger veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan are trickling into shelters and soup kitchens seeking services, treatment or help with finding a job.

Too good to make up...

...are these gems from dear President Bush, on his plans for the post-presidency era of his life. From a NYTimes.com article on Dead Certain, a forthcoming book with a lengthy Bush interview, by Robert Draper. Don't miss the part toward the end, where he describes the central goal of remaining time in office.

First, Mr. Bush said, “I’ll give some speeches, just to replenish the ol’ coffers.” With assets that have been estimated as high as nearly $21 million, Mr. Bush added, “I don’t know what my dad gets — it’s more than 50-75” thousand dollars a speech, and “Clinton’s making a lot of money.”

Then he said, “We’ll have a nice place in Dallas,” where he will be running what he called “a fantastic Freedom Institute” promoting democracy around the world. But he added, “I can just envision getting in the car, getting bored, going down to the ranch.”

For now, though, Mr. Bush told the author, Robert Draper, in a later session, “I’m playing for October-November.” That is when he hopes the Iraq troop increase will finally show enough results to help him achieve the central goal of his remaining time in office: “To get us in a position where the presidential candidates will be comfortable about sustaining a presence,” and, he said later, “stay longer.”

But fully aware of his standing in opinion polls, Mr. Bush said his top commander in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus would perhaps do a better job selling progress to the American people than he could.

Boo this article...

...and boo the White House, boo Congress, boo Duke University. From an article on NYTimes.com today:

White House Is Gaining Confidence It Can Win Fight in Congress Over Iraq Policy
SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
WASHINGTON, Aug. 29 — The White House is growing more confident that it can beat back efforts by Congressional Democrats to shift course in Iraq, a significant turnabout from two months ago, when a string of Republican defections had administration officials worried that President Bush’s troop buildup was in serious danger on Capitol Hill.

Current and former administration officials say they realize that the September battle over the troop buildup will be difficult. But they also say the president’s hand is stronger now than it was in early July, when Republican senators like Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana publicly called for a change of course.

“There is a tonal shift, and that is important, but there is always the chance that it could be ephemeral, in the same way that the panic of early July proved ephemeral,” said Peter D. Feaver, who helped draft the buildup strategy as an official with the National Security Council but recently returned to his post as a political science professor at Duke University. “I don’t detect any triumphalism in the White House.”

A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid upstaging the president, said there was “a sense the dynamic has changed.” But the official was also cautious, adding: “I don’t want to portray overconfidence. This is a very important debate, and September is going to be a very important month.”

Here's a Bush report card of sorts...

...from the perspective of the people, it ain't exactly a record to pin up on the refrigerator. And speaking of inflation, you seen the price of milk lately?!

UPDATE Aug21: A very well-informed reader clued me in on a fascinating critique of the New York Times article mentioned above. As I read the critique, I grew increasingly hostile at what began to seem like clear bias on the part of the Times. Then I read the comments below the article - and was delighted to note that the author of the Times article had weighed in with a thorough response.

After making my way to the end of the unusually candid back and forth, I was a bit confused as to who to believe (though the Times reporter scores big points when he describes the exposes he's written on, well, biased reporting). Both sides make their cases skillfully, each offering perspectives that educated people could adopt without suffering from cognitive dissonance. Perhaps it's because the issue isn't a clear cut one...I mean, the numbers show that, while many people's incomes haven't gone anywhere in years, many other people's incomes have. But the only glaring takeaway I got from the exchange is a new appreciation for how delicate the truth really is.

The discussion of the Times article is a quick and deep look into the controversy surrounding media bias, featuring a blogosphere no-name taking a swing at a mainstream media heavyweight, and earning a response. Give it a read - regardless of which side you shake out on, the debate will remind you of how important it is to have your B.S. detector set on high at all times.

On the economics tip...

...an astute, comprehensive, and unemotional hypothesis regarding the current situation - from a local commenter on an AP article in San Diego's Union-Tribune:

By KirkH on 08/15/2007

From Wikipedia:
"In monetary economics, a liquidity trap occurs when the economy is stagnant, the nominal interest rate is close or equal to zero, and the monetary authority is unable to stimulate the economy with traditional monetary policy tools. In this kind of situation, people do not expect high returns on physical or financial investments, so they keep assets in short-term cash bank accounts or hoards rather than making long-term investments. This makes the recession even more severe."

We're all probably going to hear a lot about "pushing on a string" as rates drop. Most of the Fed's liquidity injections are flowing straight into T-Bills because this is a solvency crisis not a liquidity crisis. The odds of people paying back these Alt-A, subprime, and even prime loans are so low because prices are high. If you owe $500,000 on a home worth $300,000 you're highly likely to walk away, regardless of your credit score.

The Fed will cut rates but banks will continue to refuse to make these toxic loans. Because they're toxic. Housing prices will absolutely drop by half in the absence of these loans and the resultant negative wealth effect will kick our 70% consumer spending based economy squarely in the nads.

The Fed knows this hence the rate cuts we're about to see. I don't think it'll make much of a difference but you never know, now could be a huge buying opportunity.

"Hillary Clinton: The Right's Choice?"

...argh, the chills this LA Times op-ed piece will give you:

Hillary: the right's choice?
Clinton's free-trade economics and posturing on security could endear her to conservatives unimpressed by the GOP field.
By Bruce Bartlett, LA Times, August 10, 2007

Is hell freezing over? One might think so after reading recent comments from editors at National Review and the Weekly Standard, America's leading conservative magazines. Over the last 15 years, both magazines seldom have passed up an opportunity to excoriate Hillary Rodham Clinton as some kind of crypto-communist.

No more. Today, Sen. Clinton is rapidly becoming not merely acceptable to many right-wingers but possibly even their candidate of choice...

Clinton's unwillingness to pander to her own party's base on Iraq has won her grudging respect from another unlikely source as well: William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard. On Aug. 7, he was quoted in the Washington Post saying that compared with Sen. Barack Obama, who is trying to energize the left to raise his falling poll numbers, she is looking quite presidential.

"Obama," Kristol said, "is becoming the antiwar candidate, and Hillary Clinton is becoming the responsible Democrat who could become commander in chief in a post-9/11 world."

China hosts the Olympics in one year...

...and what an ethical conundrum it represents. Given the country's disgusting human rights record, is it right to bestow the Olympics upon China? At what point do you reach out to an offender, and at what point do you start thinking embargo? Or might the Olympics question be a moot point, given the ringing endorsement the rest of the world gives China in the form of all the business we do there? Hmmm...

Beijing accused of unfair play
By Mitchell Landsberg, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 7, 2007

BEIJING — If there were an Olympic medal for irony, this might have been a contender:

An international press freedom organization held a demonstration Monday to complain that China has failed to live up to promises that it would give foreign journalists the unfettered ability to cover the news in the run-up to the 2008 Summer Games. The result? Not long after the demonstration ended, police roughed up and briefly detained the journalists covering the event.

The almost perfect incongruity of Monday's face-off reflects a discordant side of the Olympics that is sure to grow as the Games draw closer. To China, the Olympics represent a golden opportunity to showcase the world's most populous nation and demonstrate how far it has come. To international human rights organizations, it is an opportunity to show how far it still has to go...

Interesting contrast in Portugal...

...where, unlike here at home, abortion laws are liberalizing - although not without the emotion that also surrounds the issue in the United States. From the LA Times:

Until this month, heavily Catholic Portugal remained one of the last countries in Europe forbidding most abortions. In addition, it was the rare country that criminally prosecuted women who had abortions and doctors who performed them — a legal regime that the Portuguese prime minister described as a "national disgrace" and that critics elsewhere branded as "medieval."

Abortions can now be performed without restriction during the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, and under some circumstances through the second trimester...Even with the law, numerous doctors are refusing to perform the procedure and are declaring themselves "conscientious objectors." Several public hospitals said they would not be able to offer abortions, despite the legal obligation to do so, because they lacked the doctors or necessary equipment...

The powerful Roman Catholic Church in Portugal condemned the proposed law as a "blow against civilization" that would authorize "an abominable crime"...The debate cleaved distinct lines in Portuguese society: Along with the refusenik doctors and the church hierarchy, conservative rural Portugal opposed lifting the restrictions, while the urban elite, the young and many women supported the legislation.

Nearly 60% of voters in a February national referendum approved of liberalizing the abortion law, but the poll was declared invalid because of a low turnout. The Socialist-led government of Prime Minister Jose Socrates, with a majority in parliament, decided to draft and enact the measure anyway. "We all thought we were behind the times," said Maria de Belem, a former health minister and congresswoman in Socrates' Socialist Party who championed liberalizing the abortion law as an urgent public health issue.

Without better family planning and access to birth control as a first step, and abortion as a last resort, she said, Portugal cannot fight a growing epidemic of unwanted children who end up on the streets, abused or crowding into the few government-run institutions. "We cannot deny the social reality when women cannot practice their reproductive rights," Belem said. "We cannot close our eyes to a very difficult situation for Portuguese families and couples with real problems, who cannot support the children they already have."

Wore the Impeach shirts to OTL...

...OTL being Over The Line, a 3-on-3 version of softball that San Diego celebrates with a massive tournament every July. Of about 10 reactions, 9 were positive, in the form of waves or comments like "that's right!" The only dissenter who spoke up wasn't really that enthusiastic. As he passed us, he said "it's only a year, dude."

Anyway, the San Diego Union-Tribune had a few photographers at the event, and one of them liked our shirts:

The war machine marches on...

...just think, if it weren't for Bush and his cronies, this type of news item - from an LA Times article with the counter-headline U.S. troop deaths down in Iraq - would simply not be part of our world today:

An additional 28,500 U.S. troops have flooded Iraq this year, the vast majority of them taking up residence in Baghdad neighborhoods as part of Washington's strategy to stabilize the country.

The latest reported U.S. military deaths included a soldier killed in a gun battle in southern Baghdad on Wednesday. Three Marines and a sailor also were killed Tuesday in Diyala, the site of a massive campaign in June and July to reclaim the provincial capital, Baqubah, from Sunni Arab militants.

A soldier was killed in a bomb blast Tuesday in Baghdad, and a Marine died Sunday of noncombat injuries in the western province of Al Anbar.

These fatalities raised the American military death toll in the Iraq theater to 3,645 since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003, according to icasualties.org, a website that tracks the number of troops killed and wounded.

The string of deaths were a reminder that the number could still mount substantially before the end of July or in subsequent months.

In September, for instance, 72 U.S. troops died in Iraq, but the following month 106 were killed.

Here's an inspirational story...

...of one person doing their best to make a difference:

No Regrets For Walking War Opponent
by Michael Stetz, San Diego Union-Tribune Staff Writer, July 16, 2007

Think of it this way: A man is on the verge of walking across the United States more quickly than the United States can find a way to wrap up the war in Iraq.

Bill McDannell, 58, of Lakeside is about 350 miles from Washington, D.C., the end of the cross-country trek he is making in protest of the war. McDannell figures he'll be in Washington by the middle of August, ending a walk that began Nov. 4...

And the war? It goes on and on.

“I wasn't holding my breath,” McDannell said of the possibility that the war would end before he completed his walk. McDannell and his wife sold their home – a double-wide trailer – and many of their possessions to fund the walk, which he figures has cost him $30,000 so far. He quit his job as a chauffeur and now is almost penniless.

He has no regrets, he said.

“I feel good,” McDannell said. “I have the satisfaction of knowing that my grandchildren can look back at this tragic era and say my grand-pop tried to do something about it.” McDannell, a former Methodist minister, feels a tipping point has been reached and the war will end soon...

McDannell said he usually receives positive feedback from the people he meets as he walks. “There's been no hostility,” he said. “People are fed up and disgusted.” When McDannell left Lakeside, about 2,870 U.S. troops had died in Iraq. The number now has topped 3,600.

McDannell will take a short break from his effort on July 23 and drive to Washington, D.C., to join anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan. Sheehan, who lost a son to the Iraq war, is spearheading an effort similar to McDannell's. She is stopping at cities on a trip from Texas to New York. She calls it a “Journey for Humanity."

After he meets up with Sheehan, McDannell will drive back to Ohio and start walking again. He is asking his friends and supporters to come to Washington and lend their voices to his anti-war effort. He thinks people now can make a real difference.

When McDannell restarts his walk and finally reaches Washington on foot, he plans to hand over a petition calling for an end to the war to anyone in Congress who will receive it. After 2,800 miles of walking he has about 4,000 signatures. Then? He's not certain.

“When the war is over, I'll celebrate,” he said. “But the work won't be over. We have an entire republic to reclaim.”

Just got back from Crawford, Texas...

...where I spent a wonderful weekend with Cindy Sheehan, Bree Walker, and about 100 feisty and friendly peace activists, many of whom have been working with Cindy since August 2005, when she began railing against the injustice of Bush's war. It was my first visit to Camp Casey, but the group warmly welcomed me. I made about 100 new friends and came out of the experience with fresh enthusiasm for ending the war, for impeaching Bush, and for the potential power of the peace movement.

Below, I've pasted an excerpt of a poem I wrote at Camp Casey - an homage to Cindy and her devotion to peace and diplomacy, which has served as a guiding light for millions of people across the country and around the world. I'll share more from my Camp Casey visit - including some video - in future posts.

So folks went down to Crawford by the thousands,
drawn by the courage Cindy had shown
And though my country's war still puzzled me,
I knew I was anything but alone

Check the polls today: most Americans
are fed up with what George Bush has been doing
And maybe I'm just a hopeful hippie,
but I think there's a storm of peace a-brewing

It seems to me the seeds sown at Camp Casey
will soon flower,
And the gusts of change will blow through DC
and sweep the warhawks out of power

Sure, that hasn't happened as of yet --
but it's starting to get windy...
And when Bush and Dick finally get their due,
the whole world's going to thank you, Cindy.

Happy B-day, USA...

...what a nice gift an impeachment would make! From Democrats.com:

There's only one reason why Bush kept Libby out of jail: to keep him from ratting on Cheney and Bush about their direct involvement in the felonious outing of Valerie Plame....That means it's time for us to demand impeachment. Let's make this "Impeachment Summer!"

1. Don't waste your time calling the White House (the switchboard is closed anyway). Call your Representative to impeach Cheney and Bush:
   1 (800) 828 - 0498, 1 (800) 459 - 1887, 1 (800) 614 - 2803
   1 (866) 340 - 9281, 1 (866) 338 - 1015, 1 (877) 851 - 6437
2. Email your Representatives to Impeach Cheney: http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/73
3. Email your Representatives to Impeach Bush:
   http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/88
4. Email the House Judiciary Committee to Start Hearings on H.Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment for Vice President Cheney
   http://www.democrats.com/topelosiandjudiciary
5. Organize a Honk to Impeach on July 4 and throughout the summer:
   http://democrats.com/honktoimpeach
6. Join our new Facebook group, The Nationwide Movement to Impeach Cheney and Bush
   http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=3079705569
7. Join your local Congressional District Impeachment Committee:
   http://democrats.com/cdic-find
8. Youtube Your Rep. and Earn $100:
   http://www.democrats.com/youtube-your-rep

Cindy Sheehan celebrates her 50th...

...in Crawford Texas on the weekend after the 4th of July, and Wavelength Clothing will be there. It'll be my first Crawford pilgrimage, and in addition to celebrating, I'll be working to document the festivities on video. Bree Walker recently purchased Cindy's property in Crawford and plans to turn it into a memorial of those lost in Iraq and a commemoration of peace and diplomacy.

The photo at right accompanied an October 2006 article on Cindy in The Rocky Mountain News.

As usual, The Onion rules....

White House Used Third Party Email

According to a report by the oversight committee, at least 88 White House staffers used outside e-mail accounts for official business, thus circumnavigating archival requirements. What do you think?

Tom Zangara,
Delivery Driver
"Wait, I'm confused.
What exactly is the difference
between circumnavigating federal law
and shitting all over it?"

One angle of the immigration debate...

...that always drives me nuts is the idea that undocumented immigrants take jobs that Americans "just won't do." Ruben Navarette, a nationally syndicated Hispanic columnist often featured in San Diego's daily paper, is one of those pundits who frequently uses this angle to defend the exploitation at the core of Bush's guest worker idea. Here's a note I recently wrote to Mr. Navarette on the issue, as well as his promptly emailed reply.

Mr. Navarette, a quick question for you about those jobs that Americans won't do at any wage: "?Como?"

You think Americans wouldn't pick strawberries if it paid $20 an hour? You think Americans wouldn't clean houses if it meant earning a comfortable wage and gaining health coverage? You think Americans wouldn't work in a slaughterhouse if the job offered the chance for advancement and a path to comfortable retirement?

Balderdash.

I'm reminded of the ridiculousness of your assertion every time I see the show "World's Most Dangerous Catch," which features boatloads of American fishermen who labor in extremely uncomfortable, extremely dangerous conditions. Why do they do it? As the fishermen tell it, there's one central reason: the pay is sufficiently lucrative to compensate for the blood, sweat, and tears demanded by the job.

The chief reason why Americans don't take jobs that often go to undocumented immigrants is that the employers in question don't have to compete to hire Americans. Instead, the employers take advantage of the desperation of non-citizens, who don't have the benefit of the social safety nets Americans enjoy.

By asserting that jobs taken by undocumented immigrants are jobs Americans won't do, you're insulting both undocumented immigrants (by implying they will do anything for a buck) and Americans (by implying they are lazy, conceited, or both). You're also helping perpetuate economic exploitation. Please, for the sake of a healthy discussion of how to make progress on this issue, spare us the establishment-serving rhetoric and start talking about reality.

Mr. Navarette's reply:

Thanks for the note. Glad the piece stirred you. Best, Ruben Naverette.

Wavelength's web statistics...

...help illustrate how interest in anti-Bush shirts tends to ebb and flow. Take the page that offers our "Impeach Bush & Cheney" shirt. Just under 30,000 people have visited that page since we created it in February 2006. This is an average of about 2000 visitors a month - but as the chart below shows, the actual number of visitors in a given month has varied widely.


What factors make months like April and May such standouts? Some of it is due to the timing of promotions by our partner websites like AfterDowningStreet.org, who will sometimes include a link to our page in emails to their registrants. But I think the biggest push is breaking news and the W-related anxiety it stirs up. Recently, events like the inquiry into Alberto Gonzalez's attorney tampering and the showdown over Iraq war funding seem to have driven people to sites like ADS.org. And the more frustrated these folks are, the more likely they are to click-through on ads to our t-shirts.

On the lighter side...

...over the years, I have gotten gobs of spam via Wavelength Clothing's various email addresses and submission forms. Usually these messages are unremarkable pitches for bootleg software or penny stocks. But occasionally the subject lines, and even the senders' names, get creative to the point of making me laugh out loud. I never open the emails to view their contents - the name and subject alone are enough to get the comedy going.

Here are the best spam headers to grace the Wavelength inbox.

from: Benjamin Dominguez
subject: One chin is enough, get rid of the rest!

from: Elmer Gary
subject: in-line skate Buddhism

from: Morales Bobby
subject: feverish guesstimate

from: H. Stiles - News Service
subject: Must be fit, have nice face to get Chinese baby

from: painful
subject: sex all day long? you can do this!

from: Holley G. Leopold
subject: if you do not have any pressing career goals, fine.

from: rarrus@****.com
subject: because the documents were copied at a Kinko's in Texas

from: Martiza Garret
subject: The Superficial Emptiness

from: L. Raymond - News Service
subject: Man in hot pants struts in boots, cheers city

National Impeachment Day

So my reports of Wavelength's "winding down" were greatly exaggerated, or at least one month premature. Thanks to publicity from sites like AfterDowningStreet.org and Democrats.com in the weeks leading up to April 28's National Impeachment Day, thousands of people visited our pages, and a significant portion of them ordered shirts. It required a couple extra printing runs and a copious amount of envelope-stuffing, but we shipped hundreds of shirts in April, making it the busiest month in Wavelength's two years of operations.

Some folks even ordered multiple shirts and indicated that they planned on wearing them often in the days ahead. Thanks to everyone who purchased shirts - and to all who participated in yesterday's impeachment festivities. Let's keep the heat on Dick and Dubya!

Winding down Wavelength Clothing

A couple years back, I designed some anti-Bush t-shirts, had a bunch of them printed at a local shop, and began selling them via the Internet under the brand name Wavelength (as in "we're on the same wavelength") Clothing. Back then, most Americans somehow approved of George W. Bush and believed his Iraq fiasco was going somewhere. I was exasperated, I wanted to do something, and vending anti-Bush t-shirts was what I came up with.

Since then, I've put about 1000 shirts out on the streets, mostly via Internet sales, though I've sold dozens at farmer's markets, street fairs, and the like. Along the way, many former Bush believers have woken up to his incompetence, his arrogance, his malice, or all three. I don't think the 1000 shirts had much to do with that wake-up call, but they couldn't have hurt. And I know the shirts helped hundreds of people express their disdain for the policies of our cheerleader-cowboy-in-chief.

As Bush's popularity has faded, demand for anti-Bush shirts has waned, at least judging by search engine queries, visits to the Wavelength Clothing website, and shirt sales themselves. This makes sense, I think. It now appears that Bush and his ilk are losing their grip on our nation, and that history will look back on the Bush presidency with a painful, embarassed grimace. This shift has probably taken the urgency out of wearing an anti-Bush shirt for many people. Now that most of our fellow countrymen get the message, why continue to shout it all over town?

This doesn't mean our job is done, of course. The U.S. is still in Iraq. Fiscal policy continues to redistribute wealth towards the wealthy. One in five American children currently live in poverty. And more than 40 million people in the United States lack health insurance today.

No, our job ain't done, not by a long shot. The anti-Bush t-shirt business, however, does appear to be tailing off. With that in mind, I expect to close down the Wavelength website pretty soon, leaving this no-cost blog behind as a bit of a memoir of the experience.

And what an experience it has been. I've met great people, learned about running a small business, and gotten more familiar with San Diego's progressive community. Barbara Cummings, a local activist who supplied Wavelength's hot-selling "Impeach Bush & Cheney" shirts, and who has dedicated the last few years to working to end Bush's war, has opened my eyes to just how active an activist can be. Her tireless spirit and her wide range of tactics - from visiting congressional reps to freeway blogging to civil disobedience that would make Thoreau proud - are true inspirations.

Thanks to Barbara, thanks to everyone who purchased a Wavelength Clothing t-shirt, and thanks to the dozens of other folks who helped me out in one way or another along the way. To quote Ernest Hemingway, "The world is a fine place, and worth fighting for." I think each of you would agree. And that's what this whole thing is really all about.

A funny but stinging critique of Guantanamo...

...from David Hicks, an Aussie whose sharp wit apparently is matched by his political consciousness:

Fascinating poll data from Iraq...

...courtesy of a clutch Reuters article:

The poll of more than 2,000 people, commissioned by the BBC, ABC News, ARD and USA Today, indicated Iraqis have become less optimistic about the future compared to a similar survey in 2005 when respondents were generally hopeful, the BBC said.

Asked whether their lives were overall better or worse than before the invasion, 43 percent said better, 36 percent worse and the rest about the same. Expectations for how things will be in a year were much lower than in 2005, with only 35 percent expecting improvement compared to 64 percent in a 2005 survey.

The survey showed sharp geographical variations, with confidence in U.S.-led forces highest in the north, at 46 percent, and non-existent in Baghdad, where 100 percent said they had not very much or no confidence in U.S.-led forces. Overall, 18 percent of Iraqis expressed confidence in U.S. forces and 69 percent said their presence made security worse.

U.S. and Iraqi forces launched a major crackdown in Baghdad in mid-February that commanders say has already halved civilian deaths, largely through a reduction in the number of victims of death squad killings blamed on militias.

In Baghdad, the poll showed 100 percent said U.S. and other foreign forces had done a bad job in Iraq, opposed the presence of U.S.-led forces and said the presence of U.S. forces was making security in the country worse.

Despite that, only 35 percent of all Iraqis and 36 percent in Baghdad said U.S. forces should leave now.

Ah, the tide has turned...

...and while the Iraq situation remains agonizing, it's reassuring to know that - finally - most people seem to be hungry for peace. From today's San Diego Union-Tribune:

Hundreds gather to mark four years since war began
by Elizabeth Fitzsimons, Union-Tribune Staff Writer

DOWNTOWN SAN DIEGO – Four years ago, when the United States invaded Iraq, they gathered for candlelight vigils and stood on street corners, and people drove by and called them un-American.

It's different now, the seasoned peace demonstrators say. Now, most of the passing cars honk their horns in support, and they hold up two fingers, instead of one, in the peace sign. This makes them think they are making progress.

LAURA EMBRY / Union-Tribune

“It's getting better and so we come and we make a difference,” said Tony Orth, 43, one of hundreds of people who attended a peace rally and march downtown yesterday. San Diego's demonstration, and one in Oceanside, coincided with 400 planned across the country yesterday to mark the fourth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

The crowd assembled in Horton Plaza and lined both sides of Broadway before beginning a march to nearby Pantoja Park. Organizers estimated that there were 800 to 1,000 people; police put the number at 500 to 700.

Nice work, Vermont...

Vermont towns seek to impeach Bush
By Jason Szep

BOSTON (Reuters) - More than 30 Vermont towns passed resolutions on Tuesday seeking to impeach President Bush, while at least 16 towns in the tiny New England state called on Washington to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq.

Known for picturesque autumn foliage, colonial inns, maple sugar and old-fashion dairy farms, Vermont is in the vanguard of a grass-roots protest movement to impeach Bush over his handling of the unpopular Iraq war...

After casting votes on budgets and other routine items, citizens of 32 towns in Vermont backed a measure calling on the U.S. Congress to file articles of impeachment against Bush for misleading the nation on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and for engaging in illegal wiretapping, among other charges. (full article here)

A new measure of the pulse of the people...

...reveals deep emotion among Americans over the situation in Iraq. From a fascinating AP poll of sentiments regarding the war:

Given a range of possible words to describe their feelings about the overall situation in Iraq, people were most likely to identify with “worried,” selected by 81 percent of those surveyed. Other descriptive words selected by respondents:

Compassionate: 74 percent.
Angry: 62 percent.
Tired: 61 percent.
Hopeful: 51 percent.
Proud: 38 percent.
Numb: 27 percent.

The Onion comes through again...

Radical Islamic Extremists Snowboard Into U.S. Embassy

February 14, 2007 | Issue 43•07

BAGHDAD—Extremist board-trick crew Al-J'Aqasse, the Middle East's most prominent Islamic radical snowboard posse, is taking full props for destroying the American embassy when a member nailed a goofyfoot 720 nosehook from a security-barrier railgrind into its offices while carrying 25 kilos of C4 plastic explosives, Thrashzeera magazine reported Tuesday. more

Here's a novel policy idea...

...that labor advocate Jonathan Tasini suggests the Democrats adopt. I think he's on to something:

Spend $5 billion to set up a free wireless Internet network across the country for every American. My friend, sociologist Joel Rogers, calculates that wireless for a typical city of 150 square miles costs about $20 million to set up and, if you figure 200 such cities cover about 30,000 square miles, you cover 80 percent of the population at a total cost of $4 billion. Throw in another billion for the less populous areas and, presto, you've just lowered peoples' cost of living by hundreds of dollars a year (a whole lot more than the majority of people got from the Bush tax cuts). Now, do you think that might endear a whole lot of young people to the Democratic Party for a very long time ("Like Your Free Wireless? Thank The Democrats!")?

Check Tasini's full article as well as his blog, Working Life.

More gems from Banksy...

...including three of the verbal variety. From his book, Wall and Piece:

"Anyone who believes in capital punishment should be shot."

"People who get up early in the morning cause war, death, and famine."

"You don't have to an illegal immigrant to work here - but it helps."

And finally, a piece he painted on a barrier in the West Bank (more):

Paul Krugman dropped a great column today...

...tying partisan bickering to economic polarization. Here's an extended excerpt:

You see, the nastiness of modern American politics isn’t the result of a random outbreak of bad manners. It’s a symptom of deeper factors — mainly the growing polarization of our economy. And history says that we’ll see a return to bipartisanship only if and when that economic polarization is reversed.

After all, American politics has been nasty in the past. Before the New Deal, America was a nation with a vast gap between the rich and everyone else, and this gap was reflected in a sharp political divide. The Republican Party, in effect, represented the interests of the economic elite, and the Democratic Party, in an often confused way, represented the populist alternative. ...

[T]he G.O.P.’s advantage in money, and the superior organization that money bought, usually allowed it to dominate national politics. ... Then came the New Deal. I urge ... everyone ... who thinks that good will alone is enough to change the tone of our politics — to read the speeches of Franklin Delano Roosevelt...

F.D.R. faced fierce opposition as he created ... Social Security, unemployment insurance, more progressive taxation and beyond ... that helped alleviate inequality. And he didn’t shy away from confrontation.

“We had to struggle,” he declared in 1936, “with the old enemies of peace — business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering. ... Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me — and I welcome their hatred.”

It was only after F.D.R. had created a more equal society, and the old class warriors of the G.O.P. were replaced by “modern Republicans” who accepted the New Deal, that bipartisanship began to prevail.

The history of the last few decades has basically been the story of the New Deal in reverse. Income inequality has returned to levels not seen since the pre-New Deal era, and so have political divisions in Congress as the Republicans have moved right, once again becoming the party of the economic elite. The signature domestic policy initiatives of the Bush administration have been attempts to undo F.D.R.’s legacy... And a bitter partisan gap has opened up between the G.O.P. and Democrats, who have tried to defend that legacy.

What about the smear campaigns, like Karl Rove’s...? Well, they’re reminiscent of the vicious anti-Catholic propaganda used to defeat Al Smith in 1928: smear tactics are what a well-organized, well-financed party with a fundamentally unpopular domestic agenda uses to change the subject.

So am I calling for partisanship for its own sake? Certainly not. By all means pass legislation, if you can, with plenty of votes from the other party: the Social Security Act of 1935 received 77 Republican votes in the House, about the same as the number of Republicans who recently voted for a minimum wage increase.

But politicians who try to push forward the elements of a new New Deal, especially universal health care, are sure to face the hatred of a large bloc on the right — and they should welcome that hatred, not fear it.

A fine This Modern World...

...from a couple weeks ago. The inanity of the troop surge seems almost like conventional wisdom now, and Tom Tomorrow sums it up with a zing. (click to enlarge)

On the economics tip...

...I saw this morsel and had to pounce on it. It's from a New York Times article profiling Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's warnings to Congress about the long-term funding status of Social Security and Medicare. Bernanke drops a tidbit on an unrelated story: the relationship between tax cuts and tax revenues.

Asked by Republicans to echo their view that tax cuts lead to increased revenues, Mr. Bernanke said that tax cuts spur economic growth but that they “usually do not pay for themselves” by generating more tax revenue than they drain from the Treasury.

See, in recent months, conservatives have been talking up the fact that the U.S. budget deficit came in much lower than expected for 2006, as big gains in corporate profits and personal income meant that tax receipts swelled, even with lower tax rates. To many, this short-term phenomenon is proof that tax cuts pay for themselves by stimulating economic growth. Bernanke's comments help remind us that this axiom packs about as much intellectual credibility as, say, intelligent design.

Here's a scoop from The Onion...

...it seems old Rummy, not content with retirement, is back on the job hunt.

Rumsfeld Leaves Most Recent Job Off Resume

"I felt that, in today's job market, the administrative work I did in the 1950s for several congressmen would be especially resonant. Employers these days are looking for practical, versatile skills, not flashy titles."

"'Defense Secretary? Great. Can he type 85 words per minute?' That's what they're thinking," Rumsfeld added.

"What's most important about the last six years is that I discovered what I definitely don't want to be doing," Rumsfeld continued.

Bush, you bumble-headed boob...

...your troop surge bullshit flies right in the face of the will of the American people, who have wised up to the chicanery and shortsightedness of your administration and your political party. So when will we rise up? When will we tar you, feather you, and toss you out on your priveleged, pretentious ass?

WASHINGTON - Americans overwhelmingly oppose sending more U.S. forces to Iraq, according to a new AP-Ipsos poll that serves as a strong repudiation of President Bush's plan to send another 21,500 troops.

The opposition to boosting troop levels in Iraq reflects growing skepticism that the United States made the right decision in going to war in the first place and that a stable, democratic government can be established there. Just 35 percent think it was right for the United States to go to war, a new low in AP polling and a reversal from two years ago, when two-thirds of Americans thought it was the correct move.

Sixty percent, meanwhile, think it is unlikely that a stable, democratic Iraqi government will be established.

Fully 70 percent of Americans oppose sending more troops, and a like number don't think such an increase would help stabilize the situation there. The telephone survey of 1,002 adults was conducted Monday through Wednesday night, when the president made his speech calling for an increase in troops. News had already surfaced before the polling period that Bush wanted to boost U.S. forces in Iraq. (more from AP here)

A great montage from Jimmy Kimmel...

...featuring some clips of our fearless leader speechifying like only he can. He's the decider, he's read three Shakespeares, and he wants to give you some thoughts about what he's thinking about...click here.


Post-script: Laughing at him helps ease the pain for a few moments, but when the giggles are finished, the painful reality remains: we're still stuck with this joke of an elder statesman, at least for now.

Kudos to AfterDowningStreet.org...

...and David Swanson, the site's tireless manager, for being recognized as Progressive MVPs of 2006 by John Nichols, a columnist for The Nation. The ADS.org entry is below; for the full article - which includes some Republicans, believe it or not - click here.

* MVP – ACCOUNTABILITY BRANCH

When Russ Feingold moved to censure Bush, the activists of the AfterDowningStreet.org coalition – who had been pushing for the better part of a year for a congressional inquiry into the administration's warping of intelligence to fit its Iraq War goals – adjusted their focus to promote an even broader and more aggressive critique of the Bush presidency.

Nancy Pelosi may have tried to take impeachment off the table, but the AfterDowningStreet.org crew, led by the indomitable David Swanson, kept forcing it back on. Their coalition's website remains the "go-to" place for the latest on investigations, inquiries, subpoenas, legal actions and every other move to hold this president and vice president to account. And their passion for empowering citizens to promote "impeachment from below" and other accountability initiatives has forged a loose-knit but very real national movement.

Watch for this movement to get a lot more attention in March, when a drive organized by Newfane, Vermont, town selectman and impeachment impresario Dan DeWalt and others will see dozens of town meetings endorse articles of impeachment.

Good news on capital punishment...

...which strikes me as perhaps the most unpleasant aspect of our country's domestic policy, from an article today by AP's Robert Tanner:

With more scrutiny over capital punishment, death sentences fall to lowest level in 30 years

The number of death sentences handed out in the United States dropped in 2006 to the lowest level since capital punishment was reinstated 30 years ago, reflecting what some experts say is a growing fear that the criminal justice system will make a tragic and irreversible mistake.

Executions fell, too, to the fewest in a decade.

“The death penalty is on the defensive,” said Richard Dieter, director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a Washington organization that looks at problems with the capital punishment system.

Death sentences fell in 2006 to 114 or fewer, according to an estimate from the group. That is down from 128 in 2005, and even lower than the 137 sentences the year after the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976. It is also down sharply from the high of 317 in 1996.

A total of 53 executions were carried out in 2006, down from 60 in 2005. Executions over the past three decades peaked at 98 in 1999.

With Gerald Ford's passing yesterday...

...we're currently being treated to dozens of stories that feature some riff on the angle of "Ford stepped in after Nixon and healed America." Not surprisingly, Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States posits a different view.

Zinn points out that, for starters, Nixon's resignation was designed to avoid an inevitable impeachment, which would have dragged sordid details into the public eye - including Nixon's ultra-cozy relationship with the corporate world, and his secret, year-long bombing of Cambodia. Ford then took over, and as Zinn puts it, "Nixon's foreign policy remained. The government's connections to corporate interests remained. Ford's closest friends in Washington were corporate lobbyists." And, of course, "One of Ford's first acts was to pardon Nixon, thus saving him from possible criminal proceedings and allowing him to retire with a huge pension."

How would Ford compare today? Based on one of Zinn's anecdotes, at least, Ford seems like he suffered from the same type of militaristic myopia that plagues the neo-cons currently running our show. Even with American troops finally home from Vietnam, he continued to cheerlead for victory, and to ask for money to support the South Vietnamese:

On April 16, 1975, Ford said: "I am absolutely convinced if Congress made available $722 million in military assistance by the time I asked - or sometime shortly thereafter - the South Vietnamese could stabilize the military situation in Vietnam today." Two weeks later, April 29, 1975, the North Vietnamese moved into Saigon, and the war was over.

My biggest beef with Bush...

...is his seeming indifference to the sanctity of human life. From the 130 executions he oversaw as governor of Texas to nearly 3,000 American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqis, the guy has played a lead role in extinguishing so many existences that sometimes I wonder how anyone can be in the same room with him, let alone shake his hand, laugh at his jokes, or allow him to continue leading our country.

Of course, if you think about the ripples of pain that emanate from each of Bush's deaths, his indifference grows exponentially more callous. For each executed criminal, each lost soldier, and each Iraqi casualty, there are friends and family members who have to suffer the unnecessary loss.

Personally, I'm lucky enough to not have experienced this type of pain, so I can only imagine its true depth. But I think it's important to try to imagine, to try to understand how the actions of our leader and our nation have affected others. With that in mind, I'm grateful for poems like the one below, recently published in The Sun. It's a different context - a mother facing the possible loss of her infant daughter - but to me, it helps drive home how much we've all got riding on each and every human life on this planet.

from Infant Pneumonia, by Cheryl Gatling:

When they handed her back,
I wouldn't lay her down again.
I slept that night in a chair,
holding her up so the mucus would drain.
In sudden, sharp focus, I cherished it all:
the sweaty spikes of her damp hair,
the rattling vibrations of every breath.
I hold no moments more precious than these,
the nearly unbearable,
a pain so pure, it was almost like happiness.

So here's some great news from DC...

...Kirsten Gillibrand, a new congresswoman from New York (she pulled off an upset victory on November 7, with a campaign my uncles Bill and Brian worked for), will publish the details of her daily calendar online - every day of her term. This is a great idea, and an encouraging opening gambit from Gillibrand, who could be one to watch. From an opinion page column in The New York Times:

At first, the innovation sounds simple enough: Representative-elect Kirsten Gillibrand has decided to post details of her work calendar on the Internet at the end of each day so constituents can tell what she is actually doing for their money.

In fact, it is a quiet touch of revolution. The level of transparency pledged by Ms. Gillibrand, Democrat of New York — down to naming lobbyists and fund-raisers among those she might meet with — is simply unheard of in Congress. The secrecy that cloaks the dealings of lawmakers and deep-pocket special interests underpinned the corruption issue that Ms. Gillibrand invoked as voters turned Republicans from majority rule last month.

For all the worthy proposals for ethics reform being hashed out by the incoming Congress, a heavy dose of Internet transparency should not be overlooked in the effort to repair lawmakers’ tattered credibility. The technology is already there, along with the public’s appetite for more disclosure about the byways of power in Congress.

I don't know what it is about Brits and graffiti...

...but between Banksy and this other guy, Moose (aka Paul Curtis), the streets of Britain are sure home to some interesting portfolios. From a 2004 article on NPR.org:

July 15, 2004 · A British street artist known as Moose creates graffiti by cleaning dirt from sidewalks and tunnels -- sometimes for money when the images are used as advertising. But some authorities call it vandalism.

Moose, whose real name is Paul Curtis, tells NPR's Steve Inskeep that he got the idea when he saw that people had written their names with their fingers on dirty tunnel walls in his hometown of Leeds. Moose does some freehand drawing, but also uses the grid from wall tiles to create perfect shapes and letters.

The tools are simple: A shoe brush, water and elbow grease, he says.

British authorities aren't sure what to make of the artist who is creating graffiti by cleaning the grime of urban life. The Leeds City Council has been considering what to do with Moose. "I'm waiting for the kind of Monty Python court case where exhibit A is a pot of cleaning fluid and exhibit B is a pair of my old socks," he jokes.

One place where paperless isn't cool...

...is the voting booth, and thankfully, it looks like we'll be headed back to casting ballots that can be recounted if necessary. As the New York Times reports, purely electronic voting machines will be out by November 2008:

New federal guidelines, along with legislation given a strong chance to pass in Congress next year, will probably combine to make the paperless voting machines obsolete, the officials say. States and counties that bought the machines will have to modify them to hook up printers, at federal expense, while others are planning to scrap the machines and buy new ones.

Motivated in part by voting problems during the midterm elections last month, the changes are a result of a growing skepticism among local and state election officials, federal legislators and the scientific community about the reliability and security of the paperless touch-screen machines used by about 30 percent of American voters...

Many of the paperless machines were bought in a rush to overhaul the voting system after the disputed presidential election in 2000, which was marred by hanging chads. But concerns have been growing that in a close election those machines give election workers no legitimate way to conduct a recount or to check for malfunctions or fraud.

Money, money, money...

...is the elephant in the room in this New York Times excerpt on a Barak Obama elbow rub in NYC. Money still means access, that's for sure. Isn't it this kind of cozy money-grubbing that voters spoke out against last month?

One of the donors who met with Mr. Obama, and who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to offend Mrs. Clinton, said that he and several others had supported Mrs. Clinton’s Senate campaigns but were not committed to her as a presidential candidate.

“I like Hillary a lot, but I’m also impressed with Obama — his message, the way he connects to people,” said the donor, a prominent businessman. “It’s a little too early for Democrats to be certain that Hillary is the strongest bet for 2008. There are a lot of good people interested in running.”

Mr. Obama’s reconnaissance mission came as Mrs. Clinton was starting to talk about 2008 not only with New York elected officials, but also with some prominent donors whom she would like to lock in for a possible White House bid.

Now it's the City of San Diego vs. Wal-Mart...

...from an article on the San Diego Union-Tribune site:

In a move that pits the city squarely against the nation's largest retailer, San Diego yesterday joined a growing list of cities nationwide to place restrictions on large retail developments. The City Council voted 5-3 to ban stores with more than 90,000 square feet that use 10 percent of their space to sell groceries and other merchandise not subject to sales tax. The ban excludes membership stores, such as Costco and Sam's Club, which sell grocery items in bulk...

Although the council is nonpartisan, the vote was along party lines. Those supporting the ban are Democrats; those opposed are Republicans...A group of labor leaders and grocers proposed the ban three years ago, while pro-business organizations, including the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce, fought it.

Kevin McCall, a Wal-Mart spokesman, said each Supercenter would potentially create 350 jobs and sell groceries at prices up to 20 percent below what traditional supermarkets offer. “Why would this council turn away a company that is seeking to bring full-service grocery stores to communities with limited shopping options?” he asked...

Former City Councilwoman Valerie Stallings said she reluctantly supported the construction of a Wal-Mart in Serra Mesa while in office because she was convinced it would not hurt local businesses. After watching a number of businesses fold in Wal-Mart's wake, she said that she made the wrong decision. “It's true that the big boxes may be less expensive and they do offer affordable prices to many families, but they do not provide the kind of friendly and individual service that a smaller business can,” she said.

Some excerpts from The Crisis of Islam...

...by Princeton's Bernard Lewis, who The Wall Street Journal called "the world's foremost Islamic scholar." In one passage that enlightened me, Lewis gives some historical backdrop to the ongoing alliance of sorts between the United States and Israel. Apparently, this alliance first gelled in the mid-1950s, after the Soviet Union and Egypt announced an agreement to supply Cairo with Russian arms:

The spread of Soviet influence in the Middle East and the enthusiastic response to it encouraged the United States to look more favorably on Israel, now seen as a reliable and potentially useful ally in a largely hostile region. Today, it is often forgotten that the strategic relationship between the United States and Israel was a consequence, not a cause, of Soviet penetration.

In another excerpt, Lewis summarizes our current leadership's overall approach to the Middle East, in a manner that - at least judging by the WSJ accolade - appears to be acceptable to that leadership:

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, a new American policy has emerged in the Middle East, concerned with different objectives. Its main aim is to prevent the emergence of a regional hegemony – of a single regional power that could dominate the area and thus establish monopolistic control of Middle Eastern oil. This has been the basic concern underlying successive American policies toward Iran, Iraq, or to any other perceived future threat within the region.

Importantly, Lewis is careful to note that both suicide bombers and any perpetrators of attacks on civilians are in blatant defiance of Islam principles:

Two features mark the attacks of September 11 and other similar actions: the willingness of the perpetrators to commit suicide and the ruthlessness of those who send them, concerning both their own emissaries and their numerous victims. Can these in any sense be justified in terms of Islam? The answer must be a clear no. [Both suicide and the killing of non-combatants are strictly prohibited in Islamic teachings like the Qur'an.]

Here's a link to Amazon's page on The Crisis of Islam, a superb - and easy to read - briefing on the history of Islam and on Islam's role in today's world.

I'm at Houston Bush Airport at 5:30am...

...and at Terminal E's Fox News store, the top story - projecting from 9 different HD displays - is Rupert Murdoch's decision to drop the O.J. Simpson's If I Did It. Weird.