I don't want war! All I want is peace...peace...peace...!

A little piece of Poland,

A little piece of France,

A little piece of Austria

And Hungary, perchance!

A little slice of Turkey

And all that that entails,

And then a bit of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales!"

-Mel Brooks, To Be Or Not To Be

I guess the news peg for this is the anniversary of the start of WWII in September 1939, but Pat Buchanan has gone ahead and apologized for Hitler, claiming he sought no empire or wider war with Europe, and had merely benign interests of German unification at heart:

Indeed, why would he want war when, by 1939, he was surrounded by allied, friendly or neutral neighbors, save France. And he had written off Alsace, because reconquering Alsace meant war with France, and that meant war with Britain, whose empire he admired and whom he had always sought as an ally.

As of March 1939, Hitler did not even have a border with Russia. How then could he invade Russia?

Matt Yglesias does quick work of the historical inaccuracies - Hitler invaded Russia as soon as he achieved a border with them by conquering Poland. And this is a decent riposte as well - Buchanan seems to expect a crazy person to also be a rational military strategist, and when he's not, searches for alternative explanation ("Hitler couldn't have wanted war because he didn't have enough planes! So it's Britain's fault!").

But I'll take the less dainty approach. In 1939, in a small town called Averduct on the German-Polish border, practically every member of my family was rounded up by Nazi authorities, herded into a local synagogue, and burned alive inside. This would fall in Buchanan's revisionism as part of the supposedly honest and forthright effort by Hitler to annex Danzig and restore the German homeland (hey, Hitler just wanted some Lebensraum - why not let him annex whatever he decided was part of Germany, right? Don't you want to save lives?). But my dead ancestors didn't live in Danzig (now Gdansk). They had nothing to do with such a conflict. Maybe that was the work of a few bad apple Nazis acting alone. That and the other 6 million incidents.

But the bigger point here to be made is that Pat Buchanan is paid by the allegedly liberal cable news network MSNBC, he has been on it for years, if you add up all his appearances throughout the day he probably spends as much time on the air as anyone outside of the Morning Joe crowd, and that's... OK. Calling Hitler misunderstood is not a firing offense at the liberal cable news network MSNBC.

Good to know.

My favorite comment in the Buchanan thread, by the way:

summarex

Great Article Pat.

But what’s your beef with general Pinochet?

Must be a follower of Milton Friedman.

So I'm skimming my bookmarked sites for post ideas and on CongressMatters (which, if you don't read regularly, you should), David Waldman blogged about this ridiculously slanted article in today's Washington Post:

Health-Care Activists Targeting Democrats

Sniping Among Liberals May Jeopardize Votes Needed to Pass Bill

By Ceci Connolly

Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Hmmmm....interesting spin. It's the liberals' fault. Not the obstructionist Republicans or centrist Democrats standing in the way of what the people want. Of course. It goes on:

Provided that the Democratic legislators in question were actually pressing for, you know, legislation that these constituencies actually agreed with and wanted to see passed. There's nothing "natural" about it, in the sense that support should be assumed or taken for granted. But that's the implication. I'm not the "natural" ally of anyone who insists that something supported by 76% of the population is really just some sort of "left-leaning" nonsense, and that we need to find "centrist" compromise with the other 24%.

But that's the underlying premise of the entire article, helped along by quotes from Democratic lawmakers and staffers who repeat the mantra, especially when it comes to the pressure being put on them (or rather, that they claim is not actually being put on them, because they all "ignore" ads and other "unhelpful" input from the grassroots).

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), for example:

"I do not think this is helpful. It doesn't move me one whit," she said. "They are spending a lot of money on something that is not productive."

That's a hell of a thing for a Member of Congress to say, don't you think? Spending a lot of money on something that is not productive? You don't say! At least it's private money, Senator. Gosh, sorry to bother you, Di!

Next graf:

Much of the sparring centers around whether to create a government-managed health insurance program that would compete with private insurers. Obama supports the concept, dubbed the "public option," but he has been vague on details. Left-of-center activists want a powerful entity with the ability to set prices for doctors and hospitals.

76% support for a public option. But only "left-of-center activists" want it.

But it gets better. Adam Green, with whom we've worked on his "Demand a Public Option" campaign, is one of the few liberals quoted for the article, and Connolly distorts that too:

When asking me about the Progressive Change Campaign Committee's TV ads (which begin airing Monday in DC) holding Senate Dems accountable for taking millions from insurance interests and being on the verge of opposing a public option supported by 76% of Americans, Connolly would ask me ridiculous questions like, "Why are you attacking your friends? Wouldn't you agree that these Democrats are better for you on most health care issues than Republicans?"

I had to patiently explain to her that the public option is the defining issue of the health care debate -- if Senators like Baucus and Nelson aren't with us on that, they are not our friends.

Connolly listened, and then chose to dismiss silly activists who are fighting for what 76% of Americans want:

Activists say they are simply pressing for quick delivery of "true health reform," but the intraparty rift runs the risk of alienating centrist Democrats who will be needed to pass a bill.

As if passing the bill is the goal, regardless of what's in it. Notice how she wrote "Activists say" for the side of an argument representing what 76% of Americans want and simply stated the other side as truth.

But just in case you weren't sure for whom Connolly was advocating:

Connolly then asked me why progressives were picking a political fight on the public option, as opposed to another issue. I guess the fact that it's the #1 domestic issue of the day -- one that affects millions of American families -- wasn't explanation enough.

I figured she was looking for a quote summarizing the political stakes, so I thought for a moment and said, "The public option has become a proxy for the question of whether Democrats will stand on principle and represent their constituents."

I was quite proud of that answer. It summarizes what a lot of people are feeling -- the public option is the "line in the sand" issue for Democrats, something Chris has written about here on OpenLeft several times.

Connolly's take on that quote:

Green, in an interview, was hard-pressed to articulate a substantive argument for the public plan but said that it "has become a proxy for the question of Democrats who stand on principle and represent their constituents."

WHAT? Connolly asked me a question on the politics, and when I gave her an answer on that, she said I didn't answer on the substance?

The Washington Post disinforming the public once again. You can email Ceci Connolly to give her feedback at connollyc@washpost.com or tweet her at @postdailydose.

The Seminal: McCain attacks ally once floated as his possible VP

GOPnot4me: John McCain's economic guru?

Wonk Room: This overpaid jackass failed to notice consumer purchasing trends, the rising price of oil, or the facts about climate change, but has the guts to demand that taxpayers bail him out.

The Washington Monthly: Obama's ideas are good enough to steal

MoJo Blog: The person who "knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the USA," drops down with some wisdom.

Hill's Country: Still made in the USA

(cross posted at Intoxination.net)

It appears that way:

Banana company Chiquita Brands International said Wednesday it has agreed to a $25 million fine after admitting it paid a Colombian terrorist group for protection in a volatile farming region.

The settlement resolves a lengthy Justice Department investigation into the company's financial dealings with terrorist organizations in Colombia.

In court documents filed Wednesday, federal prosecutors said several unnamed high-ranking corporate officers at the Cincinnati-based company paid about $1.7 million between 1997 and 2004 to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, known as AUC for its Spanish initials.

Not very GOP sounding, unless you know about Chiquita. Chiquita was run by Carl Lindner until March of 2002 (the time frame in which these crimes happened). If you are not from the Cincinnati area then you might not know old Carl, so let me fill you in:

Continue reading »

Reuters:

The United States thanked Syria on Tuesday for going after gunmen who attacked the U.S. Embassy in Damascus but ruled out any immediate improvement in the frigid ties between the two nations.

Four men shouting Islamic slogans tried to blow up the embassy in Damascus, but their car bomb failed to go off. Syrian security guards killed three in a shootout and captured the fourth. The state news agency SANA said a Syrian guard was also killed.

"The U.S. government is grateful for the assistance the Syrians provided in going after the attackers," White House spokesman Tony Snow said. "We are hoping they will become an ally and make the choice of fighting against terrorists."

But a senior State Department official, who asked not to be named because of the sensitive nature of his comments, said relations between the two countries were unlikely to change much in the near future.

He said the Syrian response "was their duty. The alternative would have been bad for U.S.-Syrian relations." Read on...

Winning hearts and minds in the Middle East every day...

Why wasn't he talking about this two years ago?

Download | play -WMP Download | play -QT

Matthews: Two years ago, King Abdullah of Jordan warned me of what was coming in the Mideast. His prediction was dead on. He spoke of his fears and what the United States was doing in Iraq, toppling one government, electing another, was creating what he called a Shi’a crescent, from Tehran through Baghdad to Beirut that threatened to dominate the Arab world, challenging modern Sunni governments in Egypt and Saudi Arabia and others with an axis of Shi'a power based in Iran.

Continue reading »

Mia Culpa: The new and improved Taliban nation-a must read-AFGHANISTAN was supposed to be the success story

The Dan Report: Isn't Yemen supposed to be an ally in the War on Terra?

Respectful of Otters: Opening a new front in their war on science, conservative hawks- far removed from combat- are suggesting that PTSD in soldiers and veterans is exaggerated and overdiagnosed.

A Liberal Dose: Cheney and Rumsfeld are old hands at covering up war crimes

Suburban Guerrilla: Somepeople were impressed when Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a former JAG lawyer, previously raised his voice about rights violations against the prisoners at Gitmo, but those principled times are apparently past.

Brilliant at Breakfast: Republicans...the party of "Let's Party"

Angry Bear: Plagiarism and Counting Footnotes

Yesterday's gaggle was no fun for McCLELLAN, as he tried to cover for the President's commenting on Tom Delay's trial, while remaining silent on PlameGate.
David: But it's hypocritical. You have a policy for some investigations and not others, when it's a political ally who you need to get work done?

MR. McCLELLAN: Call it presidential prerogative; he responded to that question. But the White House established a policy --

Download | play -QT Download | play -WMP (hat tip OneGoodMove)

Q: Doesn't it raise questions about his credibility that he's going to weigh in on some matters and not others, and we're just supposed to sit back and wait for him to decide what he wants to comment on and influence?

McCLELLAN: Congressman DeLay's matter is an ongoing legal proceeding --

Q As is the Fitzgerald investigation --

McCLELLAN: The Fitzgerald investigation is --

Q -- As you've told us ad nauseam from the podium.

(Full transcript here)

England pulls the Official Secrets Act against the press.

This story has found legs after the UK pulled a Patriot act on the press. Why isn't Karen Hughes flying over there and doing her job for once? What does she do anyway except get Middle Eastern women mad at her?

Brad Blog has this London story up. A new blog has been created.

Mark Kleiman says that:.."the apparent plot to bomb Al-Jazeera has apparently seriously annoyed the ruling family in Qatar. Not only is Qatar an ally of the U.S., but it has one of the less objectionable regimes in that part of the world: not at all democratic, but not kleptocratic, either, and with a strong liberalizing tendency. (Women were allowed to vote in elections for local councils last year.)...read on"

(Update)- Boris Johnson is a member of the Conservative Party in Britian, a member of Parliament, He says he'll print the memo.

The Moderate Voice has a right/left round up...

Tom Delay deliberately raised more money than he needed to throw parties at the 2000 presidential convention, then diverted some of the excess to longtime ally Roy Blunt through a series of donations that benefited both men's causes....read on