Not only does President Bush play politics with our military, he lies about it too.  When field commanders in Iraq have requested additional troops, contrary to what Bush has said in the past, the request was denied.  Ezra Klein reminded us of Bush's most recent promise to give our troops everything, including required manpower, that they ask for.

QUESTION: ...what's your answer to General John Abizaid's statement that, "I think we will need more troops than we currently have"? BUSH: "If that's what he says -- he was in my office this morning; he didn't say that to me, but if he were to say that, I'd listen to him, just like I've said all along, that when our commanders say that they need support, they'll get support, because we're going to succeed in this mission." (Bush Remarks, Rose Garden Press Conference with Interim Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi, 9/23/04)

He never listens.  That or it is already understood that no such request should be made.  According to the soldiers of LSA Anaconds who are under constant attack, "there is no indication the soldiers will get the help they want to deal with their nagging and deadly problem."

Pandagon and Talk Left alerts us to the interview Brig. Gen. Oscar B. Hilman, commander of the 81st Brigade Combat Team as reported in Baltimore Sun, 10/11/04:

“Because the enemy is persistent, we need additional forces. We asked twice."
...
“But Hilman said he was told that "there are no additional forces," and that U.S. soldiers are needed elsewhere, particularly to battle insurgents and cover a large area to the north that includes the rebellious cities of Tikrit and Samarra.” .
...
"Hilman said he requested additional forces in the spring and again in the summer from 13th Corps Support Command, which is responsible for LSA Anaconda and all other multinational supply and transportation facilities in Iraq.  Maj. Richard W. Spiegel, a spokesman for the 13th Corps, confirmed that Hilman put in the request and that it was endorsed by the command's top officer, Brig. Gen. James E. Chambers. The request was forwarded to Multi-National Corps Iraq headquarters, which assesses troop requirements and makes the final decision, Spiegel said. The request was denied, he said, declining to provide details. Sharon Walker, a spokeswoman for the U.S. military headquarters in Baghdad, said officials had no comment on why the request was not approved.

I find it absolutely unbelievable that even though a majority of those polled by a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup believe that the Iraq war wasn't worth the cost in blood and treasure (54%), Bush still commands a 17 point edge on Kerry when it comes to handling the War on Terror.

My god people, pay attention.  This stuff is not funny.  Well, maybe it is if I just lightened up a bit.

I wonder how America will feel after Bush and the corporate board of directors he calls a cabinet are indicted for war crimes and malfeasance in office.  If your local school board superintendent had behaved as this crowd does, s/he wouldn't be thinking how to stay our of jail, rather s/he'd be wondering about just how much time s/he'd do. 

One way or another, Bush has got to go.  Rejecting his reelection bid is the easy way, but if they insist on stealing another election, impeachment will do.  The quality and quantity of the mendacity of this administration surpasses George Orwells worst nighmare.  Epistemological Relativism.  (Sigh) Don't bother looking it up, just follow the links and you will gather a bit more insight as to why the left is so absolutely furious with Bush and why everybody else should be too.

Hat Tip: Talk Left and Pandagon and of course Josh.

The bloviating Bush campaign adviser, Rush Limbaugh, had a final today caller who expressed her unspecific but very real fear of a world with John Kerry as President,  Instead of comforting her, he actually said:

"Fear is a great motivator. I want you afraid"

His Snydley Whiplash chuckle could be heard softly as he closed his show on that note.

Sick freak.

These guys know better, but the depth of their cynicism is boundless. The wholesale manipulation of the American public by the Orwellian tactics of the GOP through a complicit media is staggering at times.

For example, devoid of a moral core, Bush attacks Kerry for desiring a reduction in the amount of terrorists incidents to where they are no more than annoying, and not the all consuming fear inducing tool of conservative politicians.

Oh no cry brain-benders who beam slogans into Bush's skull from some grassy knoll. That would be like some pansy-assed law enforcement approach, unfathomable to the cro-magnons who prefer more subtle, more "lets blow everything up." more "shoot first" tactics.

Reactionaries like Gary Bauer insist that is the same as waiting until after a school gets bombed and then going after the bad guys -- the bad old days of Clinton's alleged ineffectiveness.  Dick Cheney calls it a pre-9/11 mindset.

However, this twisted logic illicits the same false dichotomy presented by Dave Pell when he says that Bush and Cheney's attacks prove that instead of a desire to reduce terror, their goal is to maintain the fear factor at its current levels in order to cow a frightened electorate into foolishly keeping them in office, hoping that paralysis will set in making us incapable of moving away from their Machiavellian schemes. 

Dave of course was being transparently facetious.  I'm not.

Bush/Cheney'04 has reached a new level of stubborn and willful ignorance today in their juvenile attempt to portray John Kerry as out of touch and equating terrorism with prostitution, deliberately failing to grasp the idea that terrorism may in all likelyhood never be completely erradicated, but the goal, the objective of the "War on Terrorism" would be  sufficiently satisfied if terrorism were no more troubling than prostitution and not the overwhelming concern it is today.

 Jesse Taylor also has the termerity to suggest that victory in this so-called war might be something less than total erradication of the muslim world, but he's really tired of explaining simple concepts to moraons.

The Kerry campaign is specifically chastised for "claiming the war on terror isn't really a war."  Well, it isn't, so bite me.

Toledo Tube War: 14,273 Ads and Counting (washingtonpost.com)

Toledo ranks as the most advertised-to market of any in the big battleground states.

Despite the "cacophony" of TV ads here in the Glass City for the Presidential Candidates, they get completely undermined by local non-television media outlets which swarm the area's electorate.

Noteworthy is the Toledo Blade which leans towards Bush bashing by merely reportintg the news (how dare they) and blankets the area with bird cage liners, versus the Clear Channel Radio affiliate WSPD which not only features the usual line-up of fascists: Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, etc., but home-grown drive-time guys who know diidly squat about politics, but spend their time between political commercials (yes of course) and traffic/weather/news updates, distorting everything that comes out of John Kerry's mouth.

These two area media giants reach more voters every day than all the TV ads combined. My biased fur gets especially ruffled when a 60 second ad is run by the Democratic challenger on the 50,000 watt mega talker, which is immediately followed by ten minutes of filibustering lies about Kerry's positions and statements beamed into the skulls of anyone wondering if it will rain, or if the latest construction will force them to change their rush hour commute. It never stops.

I did have some hope when a new talk radio station recently popped up,

WTOD, but naturally their idea of "balance" is running Laura Ingram against Rush and putting Bush Apologist Bill Bennet's show on in the mornings. Arrgggghhh! Bill Bennet: The Moral Hooker of the Right Wing.

Conservative Talk Radio: It's cheap, it's powerful, and it's everywhere.

Presidential campaign priorities trump military campaign.

Major Assaults on Hold Until After U.S. Vote

"When this election's over, you'll see us move very vigorously," said one senior administration official involved in strategic planning, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"Once you're past the election, it changes the political ramifications" of a large-scale offensive, the official said. "We're not on hold right now. We're just not as aggressive."

What is most important to George W. Bush, winning reelection or the war? Is doing right by our troops and the Iraqi people his priority, or is consolodating his personal power base his overwhelming focus?

How can anyone ever trust these guys?

Joe Gandelman asked:

I thought ALL Presidents since LBJ had learned the lesson -- that we don't handcuff our military for politics...because if we do it probably means U.S. officials have to order extra body bags. So tell me if I'm reading this correctly:

Joe, if Bush had done more than drink himself comotose instead of reporting for duty, he might have understood what the rest of us had branded on our psyches long ago.

UPDATE: Kevin Drum reminds us of the profound statement George W. Bush made at the last debate about making policy decisions on the basis of political conswquences.

What was it Bush said during last Friday's debate? Oh yeah: "I don't see how you can lead this country in a time of war, in a time of uncertainty, if you change your mind because of politics."

Not even Bush believes his own rhetoric.

Anna Marie Cox certainly is making the rounds on TV talk and despite protestations to the contrary she is slurping up the publicity, good and bad.  We jealous and more lowly bloggers around the net have various takes on her phenomenon.

While grudgingly acknowledging that her rising popularity is good for bloggers overall,  rising tide raises all boats as it were, all too often, especially when tagged to debate the likes of Insta-Pompous, the CW is that while she is "attractive and articulate", she is mainly a humorist and hardly a "serious" voice from the left.

Get real people.  She's not merely "attractive," she's fucking gorgeous! 

The Republipukes shovel bimbo after vacuous bimbo at us to feed at the trough of daily talking points issued from on high.  Gimme Wonkette any day, and as long as vapid wonders like Anne Coulter or Laura Ingram aren't borrowing Shrubs ear piece, she'd mop the floor with them, steal their boyfriends, make them cry, make us laugh, and order the perfect wine to go with dinner; all without any unnecessary hair-flip/flops  You go girl.

Speaking of Insta-Pompous,  he notes with approval Eugene Volokh's thoughts on John Kerry, terrorism, and prostitution:

But what remarkable analogies Kerry started with: prostitution and illegal gambling. The way law enforcement has dealt with prostitution and illegal gambling is by occasionally trying to shut down the most visible and obvious instances, tolerating what is likely millions of violations of the law per year, de jure legalizing many sorts of gambling, and de jure legalizing one sort of prostitution in Nevada, and de facto legalizing many sorts of prostitution almost everywhere; as best I can tell, "escort services" are very rarely prosecuted, to the point that they are listed in the Yellow Pages.

These are examples of practical surrender, or at least a cease-fire punctuated by occasional but largely half-hearted and ineffectual sorties.

Ugh.  In the wake of such other rousing ideological "wars" like the "war on drugs," the "war on poverty," against inflation, illiteracy and certainly other mislabeled struggles to improve the human condition, one can conclude that the best we have ever been able to do is draw a line and fight a battle of attrition against such phenomenon.  The War on Terror is no different.  And we have been massively distracted by the Iraq war, to a point where it will take years to regain the ground we had taken against them.

While the AQ gang plots their next strike against innocent soft targets, our country's National Security Adviser spends her time chit-chatting on a Sunday morning for the umpteenth time about aluminum tubes.  No, there's no distraction from the job at hand there.  Instead of thinking up ways to infiltrate or destroy the terrorists where they live, of actually putting UBL's head on a stick and parading it in front of the Lincoln Memorial, Ms Rice spends her days spinning the ever-changing reasons for the war in Iraq. 

Between reading Courts Martial reports about his prison guards in abu Ghraib and figuring out how to stretch 9 army divisions to do the work of 20, the Secretary of Defense waxes poetic about what latest unknown he is unknowing about.  Personally, I'd like to hear more about the latest successes we made in consort with our allies to eradicate the last Taliban-al Qaeda strongholds that remain for Un-Frickin'-Knowable reasons.  No news is bad news on that front, and the Florida-esque election in Afghanistan, while indeed historic and a proper step in the right direction, didn't lead to any arrests.

Bush had one unguarded moment of clarity when he said that he wasn't sure if the War on Terror was winnable.  But such a nuanced position didn't fit in with the simplistic memes packaged by the Madison Avenue types who run what passes for political discourse in this country.  If it's not a black and white position which fits in an eight second sound byte, they want no part of it.

Until we as a people reject simplistic slogans for complex social problems, we are doomed to a series of numbskull ideas which have no more effect than band-aides on a gunshot wound touted by politico's more interested in retaining and solidifying power than actually accomplishing anything.

But Boy!  Wonkette sure is hot!

I'm too wordy. My thoughts don't fit on bumper-stickers.  My favorite T-Shirt is my wife's, written in Braille saying, "If you can read this, it's sexual harassment." 

That is why when someone writes a succinct, easily remembered, spin-free take on why George Bush is no longer worthy of the great trust placed in the hands of the office he did not earn, I have to take my hat off to Nick at Morons.org:

1. Bush told the UN if it did not enforce its resolutions against Iraq, the US would do it on its own.
2. Congress authorized the use of force against Iraq a month later.
3. UN Weapons Inspectors returned to Iraq on November 18.
4. Inspectors were told to leave Iraq. They had not finished their inspections.
5. Bush started the war on Iraq on March 20, 2003.

Those are the facts. They are a matter of historic record.

Rush to war?  After twelve years?  That's how the right mocks this simple concept.  The even simpler retort is that after 12 long years of dealing with a belligerent Iraq, what difference would another couple of months made?  What changed, other than Bush's child-like patience ran out and his advisers recognized that they had reached a plateau of support and would never get any more?

Revisionist justification for war number 29 seems to be that Saddam was bribing his way out of the sanction regime and once that happened it would only be a matter of time before he got as close to making nukes as . . . Brazil?  Moreover, the sanctions were still in place at the time of the invasion,  Indeed we had to ask the UN to lift those sanctions during out occupation, which required a vote which, if brought up while Saddam was in power we would have vetoed.

Someday, after a few years, IF he was left alone without no-fly zones and nobody paying any attention to him, Hussein might have reconstituted his chem/bio capabilities and started up some nuclear project not nearly as sophisticated at N. Korea's and several years behind Iran's.  Time enough to present a united front of world powers, unanimous in their determination that the status quo was no longer acceptable.  Time enough to take advantage of America's newfound solidarity with the free nations of the world in the wake of 9/11, instead of pissing it away like last night's beer.

Was your son or daughter's life worth waiting another couple of months?  Of course it was.  It was to the families who have lost children, brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers to this recklessness.  Reaching the goals identified as being within your national interest, without resorting to war is called statesmanship.  Senator Kerry said this was a "gut check" question.  If you're reading this I'll assume you are a thoughtful person with the intellectual capacity for introspection. 

You know in your gut that the Iraq war was not the "last" resort.  You know that George Bush has acted recklessly, refuses to acknowledge that he too was caught up in the fever of the post-9/11 emotions, and without the restriction of having to answer for his actions to an electorate, this sitting duck will cook all of our geese.

That's wired weird.
Electoral Vote Predictor has a hell of a picture showing what looks to be a square bulge with a wire snaking up to Bush's ear at the first debate.

Salon.com reports that Bush had a radio receiver taped to his back during the first debate so he could receive messages via a tiny hearing-aid-like device in his ear. They back this up with a photo. I have no way of verifying the story, but the Commission on Presidential Debates has verified that one of the rules of engagement the Bush campaign insisted on was no camera shots of the candidates from behind (which one of the pool cameras did anyway). This story is either investigative journalism at its best or wishful thinking. If you are not a Salon.com subscriber, you have to sign up for a free day pass to read the full story.

I obtained a copy of the debate video and the Red Hawk image intensification software (developed for NASA), which combines multiple images into a sharper image and then had the contrast enhanced with Photoshop. Other than cropping and resizing of the image, no other manipulation was done. I stand 100% behind the fact that this image was taken from the debate video, independently confirming the Salon.com photo, but interpretation is up to you.

Click for larger image


Kos points out that this story is officially leaving the Tin-Foil Chappeau Aficianado realm, into MSM:
This Photo
from and article in the New York Time shows what really looks like a radio receiver with a wire curling up Shrub's back towards his ear -- not a wrinkle in his suit which is stretched tight enough to even show the outline of the start of the curly-cue telephone cord style expansion wire starting midway up..

Yes, I re-did my configuration and added a second sidebar on the right. Contact link is on the top right where it can actually be found, tag board is moved as well as the headlines. And now I have a table of contents that actually works (yeah me!)

Natually all my favorite blogs are "on the left."

Let me know it this all meets wiith your approval.

Thanks

There still are about 10 electoral votes available in two states tied in the polls (Ark & N.H.) and who knows what's going to happen in Colorado with their vote on splitting their electors. Add to that another 96 electoral votes which are in states with poll numbers well within the margin of error, only "barely" supporting either candidate (the kind of support where a nasty rainstorm in key cities could throw the election either way).

This thing is FAR from over. Another 172 votes could shift in states with "weak" leanings if there are dramatic developments in the next couple of weeks. Regardless, I sure like the color of this map of things as they stand today

(size of state weighted for electoral vote count)

Reference: Current Electoral Vote Predictor 2004 Map info Here