Ok, I promise never to quote Noam Chompsky again. And I proimise not to use Common Dreams as source material again either -- as long as you read this, it changes your mind about supporting Bush, and you vote Kerry into office -- I promise.

War Crimes and Imperial Fantasies: "The group around Bush are real fanatics. They're quite open.

They're not hiding it; you can't accuse them of that. They want to destroy the whole array of progressive achievements of the past century. They've already more or less gotten rid of progressive income tax. They're trying to destroy the limited medical care system. The new pharmaceutical bill is a step towards that. They're going after Social Security. They probably will go after schools. They do not want a small government, any more than Reagan did. They want a huge government, and massively intrusive. They hate free markets. But they want it to work for the rich. The Kerry people will do something not fantastically different, but less so. They have a different constituency to appeal to, and they are much more likely to protect some limited form of benefits for the general population. "

Yahoo! News - Russia prepared for pre-emptive strikes on 'terror bases' worldwide

MOSCOW (AFP) - Russia is prepared to make pre-emptive strikes on "terrorist bases" anywhere in the world, the Interfax news agency cited the country's chief of staff as saying.

Can't say that I really blame them, In it's way, the school seige was worse than our 9/11. Not in causualty count, but for the fact that so many of the victims were children and because the drama played out over such a longer period of time.

In Russia, the terrorists were well prepared for a long seige and took their time to terrorize those inside and outside the school. They were methodical and tore at the psyche of every parent worldwide with the thought that, "it could happen here...". 9/11, although not to minimize it for one minute, was more akin to a quick stab at the heart, not a prolonged bloodletting.

"With regard to preventive strikes on terrorist bases, we will take any action to eliminate terrorist bases in any region of the world.

I wonder how comfortable former Soviet expert Conoleeza Rice is about this development? Can you imagine how Reaganites would react to Russia engaging in pre-emptive strikes and preventative wars?

Not well to be sure. This is hauntingly similar to the Brezhnev Doctrine which gave us the Czechoslovakian and Afghanistan invasions. However, I can think of little that I would consider an overreaction to the tragic results of the school seige.

But this does not mean we will carry out nuclear strikes," General Yuri Baluyevsky said Wednesday.

OK, that probably would be going too far. How disturbed are you that Russia's Military Chief of Staff felt he had to reassure anybody that they weren't going nuclear, yet?

Of course in the topsy-turvy world created by Gworge W. Bush and his fanatical neo-conservative minions, nothing should surprise you anymore; not in a world where paleoconservative Pat Buchanan who rails against imperial America, is accused of finding common cause with the nation's most endearing libretarian/socialist/anarchist, Noam Chomsky.

There's something very wrong in the world when the far left and far right join hands with a moderate position compared to the administration, and the Pentagon and the Kremlin are at odds with Foggy Bottom.

Maybe it's too late. Maybe America has Jumped the Shark. I do long for the time where things made sense, where I could lightly dismiss as radical the polemics of Buchanan and Chompsky; where an America and the world were united by tragedy, were in no danger of being furhter divided by a leader professing to be a "uniter, not a divider." I long for the days when I only disagreed with some of our official policies, not every single stinking decision our president makes.

And make no mistake, my vision is not clouded by constant Bush-bashing, except the times where they insist on pulling the wool over my eyes.

Read this, seriously. Just do it. You'll be glad you did.

The Blogging of the President: 2004 | 1968, The Sequel by Stirling Newberry.

The only thing I can think of in response to Mr. Newberry's profound analysis, is that what you, and I, and he are doing, blogging, may be the answer -- maybe.

HAT TIP: Hal

Ironic, isn't it.

Roy F. "Latch" Hoffman, one of the co-founders of the pro-George W. Bush group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, had publicly criticized Kerry, a former Swift boat commander, for having brought back stories about alleged war crimes by U.S. forces -- often carried out, Kerry said in 1971, "with the full awareness of officers at all levels."

Hoffman himself, the Navy Captain in charge of the entire Swift boat task force in Vietnam, while "hitching a ride up the coast aboard their Swift boat, had ordered the crew to fire on a small group of unarmed Vietnamese fishermen working their nets in unrestricted waters."

The account of one of the crewmen as well as the boat's skipper -- who was punished for upholding the Geneva Convention by refusing Hoffman's order -- is more than interesting reading about the man who heaped high praise on Lt.(jg) Kerry in 1969, but lately has called Kerry a "loose cannon," and chastized Kerry for having "bugged out," after securring his "specious medals."

This guy wasn't angry at Kerry for lumping him in with the likes of Lt Calley and Tiger Force. He had no inclination to act any different. He's upset with Kerry for blowing the whistle on his own actions.

HAT TIP: Atrios

I'm sensing a pattern here. So does Maureen Dowd (the liberal version of the Queen of All Evil).

The Manichaean Candidate's convention was a brazen bizarro masterpiece. The case to sack John Kerry featured the same shady tactics used to build the case to whack Saddam - cherry-picked facts, selective claims and warped contexts.

Swift-boated again.

Didn't we learn the first time around? If this administration will over-inflate a non-existent threat, personalize a clash of ideologies, create a boogeyman out of an opponent lacking comparable resources, and promise a rosey post-conflict future with vague plans and unrealistic projections of the cost -- do you believe for one minute that Bush would hesitate to use these tactics to win an election when he used them to justify the sacrifice our troops?

The so-called liberation of Iraq, where we would be greeted with flowers, has transformed into a catastrophic money-pit. So has the treasury of the United States. Do you honestly have any faith his policy proposals will not do the same in a second term?

Do you honestly believe that Bush is sincere in his desire to eliminate 527's, especially since the 60-day window has arrived where they can no longer run ads like the ones we have seen? Do you honestly believe that the Swift Boat tapestry of lies and distortions did not meet with the White House's full approval?

Do you have any doubt that nothing would have stopped Bush from invading Iraq, regardless of whether WMD's or terrorists where there? Likewise, do you honestly believe that Bush and his operatives will stop at anything to win reelection?

There are no limits Bush will acknowledge in his quest to remain in power, nothing. He has absolutely no honor in the normal sense of the word. Any and all means are justified in his warped mind to further his desired ends. That is more thereatening to America and the world than anything Saddam could have done, Osama did, or Kerry will do.

To Bush, Kerry is no differenct that Saddam -- an enemy to be eliminated by any means necessary. This is the sad state of American politics, and it is clinically insane. If you agree with any part of what I write daily, you are an insurgent or enemy sympathizer to the mind of the Bush Bundesreich -- watch your back comrade. We sill be marginalized as whackos for demagoguery. Dismissed as zealots by the faithful. But one thing they won't do is counter the logic of our beliefs -- they cannot.

What's Compassionate or Conservative About This? VIA: The Washington Monthly

Medicare Premiums to Jump a Record 17% Bush administration announces the increase for 41.8 million disabled and elderly beneficiaries as the capital empties for the holiday weekend

Funny, Bush didn't mention this in his speach.

::Overheard in a Karaoke Bar last night.::

"All hurricanes suck dick, which is why most are named after women. Hugo and Andrew were of course militantly gay."

I was filling in for the KJ last night, watching Frances destroy West Palm and half of FloriDUH with a customer who owns a 30 foot sailboat she left anchored in the intercoastal there. She laughed, and cried, and sang and drank enough to enjoy the show. Thank goodness for insurance. And yes, I was the smart-ass who described the sexual preferences of hurricanes. You had to be there. What a fricking amazing storm.

Iraq Closes Al-Jazeera Office Indefinitely

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP)--The Iraqi government shut down Al-Jazeera's Baghdad operations indefinitely on Saturday, extending a one-month closure order imposed after the pan-Arab channel was accused of inciting violence.

OR HERE

Osama could be arrested soon: US official

Islamabad: Al-Qaeda head Osama bin Laden and his other top associates could be arrested anytime now, as the recent spate of Al Qaeda arrests in Pakistan have provided significant clues, a senior US official has claimed.

This Ladies and Gentleman is the freedom we brought to the so-called liberated people of Iraq. And this is the cynicism the administration deals with 9/11, timing the capture of the worlds most notorious terrorist just in time for the October Surprise.

Cheney Says Kerry Suffers 'Fundamental Misunderstanding'

Mr. Cheney said. "Terrorist attacks are not created by the use of strength. They are a result of the perception of weakness."

Baloney! How weak do you think Israel is? Russia? Spain? Or even the pre-9/11 U.S.of A. Gimme a break already. Quit with the word games and just admit you're out to conquer the Middle East for the betterment of our Commercial Empire.

Flag! 15 yard Penalty for flagrant bullshit!

The White House not only disavowed any coordination with the Swift Boaters, they claimed no connection whatsoever.

By MATT KELLEY, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Two former Vietnam prisoners of war who appear in ads attacking Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry were appointed by the Bush administration to a panel advising the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The former POWs in the ad, Kenneth Cordier and Paul Galanti, serve on the VA's 12-member Former POW Advisory Committee. VA Secretary Anthony Principi appointed Cordier in 2002 and Galanti in 2003.

Cordier said the VA panel has nothing to do with the Bush campaign or the anti-Kerry group. "It's totally apolitical, and we meet twice a year to bring to the secretary's attention problems from around the country in VA hospitals," he said.

Cordier and Galanti appear in an anti-Kerry ad saying their Vietnamese captors used news of anti-war protests, such as ones Kerry organized, to taunt the prisoners. Cordier also was a member of a Bush campaign veterans' committee but quit earlier this month after that role was revealed.

So how else do you define front group or pay off?

The rest of the article is a concise wrap-up of the whole Swiftboat flack, including the unrefutted evidence that their claims were completely discredited and biased due to their fervent hatred of what Kerry did after the came home. And yes, the Oh-So-Crucial unsubstantiated question of whether Kerry was ever in Cambodia is mentioned, as if that makes all the difference to the Bush Zealots.

The President says he wants all the 527's abolished, even going to court to stop them. Yet, the party's chief hatchet man, Tom DeLay, pent the entire Convention shaking down big doners to fund even more of them. Bush is the head of the party isn't he. Are you telling me that he couldn't make a simple phone call to the Republican whip and say, "knock it off." and not expect results.

Let me try to make things perfectly clear. There is absolutely no equivalence here, morally, ethically, legally, logically or tactically. There is a difference, a profound difference between the nature of the GOP and Democrats. There is an indisputable difference in the integrity, honesty, motives and fairness of the two candidates, their surrogates and supporters.

The GOP is run by men with no regard for decency or making America or the world better. Their motives are purely self-serving. It has been this way since Nixon.

• If you are satisfied with Zell Miller as a representative of your beliefs. vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with your candidate having to distance himself from his hand-picked keynote speaker instead of quoting him, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with bitterness and lies dating back 35 years as the best way to chart the future of America, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with broken promioses, intolerance, and failed policies, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with unapolegetic misuse of the power of the office of the Presidency, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with basing a war on a tissue of lies, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with the way that war and it's aftermath was prosecuted, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with our place in the world as viewed by the rest of the world, then vote for Bush. I find it inexcusable that this great Nation is looked upon by others as anything less than unambiguous admiration.
  
• If you are satisfied with and administration that has never stopped campaigning since the inaguration, continually minimized bad news and inflated the importance of good news, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with the prosepect of having to retrain yourself for a new career two or three times in the next 10 years, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with having to take any spare income you have (if you have any) and putting it in a savings account to pay for a possible catastrophic illness while insurance companies make record profits and nothing is done to curb the inflating costs of medical care, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with negative job growth, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with dismantling the wall between church and state, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with completely irresponsible managment of your tax dollars, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with your grandchildren inheriting crippling debt, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with a government that has absolutely no accountability, and with no need even to pretend it's accountable after the election, then vote for Bush.
  
• If you are satisfied with theories rather than results, then vote for Bush.
  

If you are satisfied that the last four years are the best that America can do, then vote for Bush.