DOWNLOADS: (650)

PLAYS: (1071)

Embed

The bobbleheads sure are doing their part in the Bush Magical Legacy Rehabilitation Tour. First we have the mysterious "Miss me yet?" billboard, then Tweety "Doesn't he look yummy in a flight suit?" Matthews asks if the nation will feel "nostalgia" for Bush with his memoir coming out, and every time you turn around there's a Bushie or a Cheney promoting the failed policies that saw Bush leave office with a record disapproval rating. Talk about a disconnect--or maybe it's just willful misinformation. There are no Americans wishing back for the days of the Bush presidency, for crissakes. We're still scarred from it, why would Americans want to open those wounds again?

Whichever way you want to categorize it, there is nothing more ludicrous and absent of facts than Kathleen Parker insisting that Bush has acted "nobly" since leaving office.

Is that right?

So is criticizing his successor not once, but twice--even after saying that the new Commander-in-Chief "deserved his silence", noble? Don't forget one was when he went to a foreign country--his speech in Calgary, Canada--and took thinly veiled swipes at Obama, saying that the two month old presidency harkened back to Hoover?

Is saying that Jimmy Carter "made his life miserable" noble?

Bush's post-presidency life has been fairly low-profile, especially in comparison to his ever-present and compulsively vocal vice president. He's made a few paid speeches, wrote his memoirs (which garnered him a comparatively small advance--perhaps a better indicator of how much Bush is expected to be missed by the American people) and worked on his fundraising for his library housed at SMU, whose primary purpose appears to be to rehab his legacy, much to the consternation of the staff there:

Their objections stem from the fear that the Bush center will act like a private think tank for neoconservative ideologues. “They get the cover of a university without having to play by its rules,” says Benjamin Johnson, an associate professor of history whose Bush Library Blog detailed the controversy at its height, between 2007 and 2008. The plans for the Bush institute sailed through S.M.U.’s administration, however, with the help of people like Ray Hunt, the oilman and longtime Bush supporter and friend, who is on the university’s board of trustees.

“We’re not going to have any of the usual controls over teaching and research hires and reviews,” complains Johnson. “My concerns have actually been heightened by the collapse of the Bush administration because it seems to me he and his circle are intent on rehabilitating him, and he is held in such disrepute by so many people across the country and the planet. I’m afraid this is going to be the main vehicle by which they try and rehabilitate their reputation.”

And by no measure, Kathleen Parker, can that be considered a noble effort.

This is pretty big news. The big progressive groups hadn't yet spoken on the question of escalation in Afghanistan - their silence was pronounced. MoveOn finally broke that silence today, appealing to the President to commit to a clear exit strategy. It's a pretty big step.

U.S. policy in Afghanistan has reached a pivotal moment. President Obama is poised to make a critical decision about the Afghanistan war in the next few weeks. And there’s a big debate happening right now about what to do.

Pro-war advocates both inside and outside the administration—including John McCain and Joe Lieberman—are calling for a big escalation. The general in charge of Afghanistan is expected to request tens of thousands more troops, and that may just be the beginning. They’re cranking up the pressure for an immediate surge.

But other powerful voices are urging caution: Vice President Biden and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel have raised real concerns about the idea of sending more troops to Afghanistan without a clear strategy, as have Democrats in Congress. And a majority of Americans oppose increasing troop levels.

Can you write to the White House and tell them we need a clear exit strategy—not tens of thousands more US troops stuck in a quagmire? You can send the President a message by clicking below:

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51843&id=&t=1

Some administration officials are arguing for a smaller, nimbler approach with a narrow focus on the threat from al-Qaeda. But cheerleaders for the war refuse to acknowledge that there could be any viable strategy other than more and more troops. So they’re trotting out the same tired old lines and questioning the motives of those who disagree with them.

They figure they can cut off any debate about our ultimate goals in Afghanistan and the region. But President Obama has consistently shown a willingness to stand up for his more thoughtful approach to foreign policy, and that’s what he needs to do here, too.

The hawks are making their position heard. Now, the majority of Americans—those of us who are for as quick and as responsible an end to the war as possible—need to make our voices heard, too.

With Democrats opposing escalation by more than two to one, MoveOn is just reflecting the opinions of their membership. They're a bit late to the debate, but better than ducking it entirely.

Prairie Weather: It's all about timing

The Smirking Chimp: Lobby This, John Sidney: Another McCain aide out over Myanmar ties.

Tomgram: The defining moment for climate change

Cranky Cindy Changes the World: Helen Thomas is my hero.

The Poor Man Institute: The Amazing League of Pundits!

The Opinion Mill's Bookchat: George F. Will refutes himself while trying to refute Rick Perlstein's Nixonland. How a government attempt to silence a wartime dissident created an uproar -- and sparked the American Civil Liberties Union. How to explain Dick Cheney to your children.

Hmm...why do I feel sure that Dick Cheney is sitting in his undisclosed bunker trying to figure out if he could make this work in this country?

NYTimes (reg. req'd)

An outspoken Saudi blogger is being held for “purposes of interrogation,” the Saudi Interior Ministry confirmed on Tuesday.

Gen. Mansour al-Turki, an Interior Ministry spokesman reached by telephone, said that the blogger, Fouah al-Farhan, was “being questioned about specific violations of non-security laws.” Mr. Farhan’s blog, which discusses social issues, had become one of the most widely read in Saudi Arabia.

Mr. Farhan, a 32-year-old Jeddah resident, was arrested at his office on Dec. 10, local news sources reported. Two weeks before the arrest, Mr. Farhan wrote a letter to friends warning them that his detention was imminent.

“I was told that there is an official order from a high-ranking official in the Ministry of the Interior to investigate me,” read the letter, which is now posted in English and Arabic on Mr. Farhan’s blog.

Since his arrest, friends of Mr. Farhan have continued to blog on his behalf under a banner that reads “Free Fouad” and features his picture. The blog’s Web address is www.alfarhan.org.

“The issue that caused all of this is because I wrote about the political prisoners here in Saudi Arabia, and they think I’m running an online campaign promoting their issue,” the letter continued, noting that Mr. Farhan had been asked to sign a statement of apology.

“I’m not sure if I’m ready to do that,” Mr. Farhan wrote. “An apology for what? Apologizing because I said the government is a liar when they accused those guys to be supporting terrorism?”

Ahmad al-Omran, a fellow blogger and friend of Mr. Farhan’s, said that Mr. Farhan was the first Saudi blogger to be detained by state security. The arrest has created widespread anxiety among other Saudi bloggers and activists, he said.

I think it's important to note that many people justify their bigotry against Muslims by saying that they aren't hearing "peaceful Muslims" railing against terrorism done in their name. Farhan was just such a voice, so it's ironic that the Saudis are trying to silence him for not following their talking points.

I wasn't going to post about this, but what the heck. It's too funny ...Apparently, there's a "Save Tucker" movement trying to flourish and they have a website to prove it. And a three-time Democratic office seeker is helping out...I wonder how long it will take Howard Kurtz to do a feature on it, but I digress. Here's where the fun begins...

MSNBC executives are considering cancelling 'Tucker' with Tucker Carlson which airs on MSNBC at 6:00pm EST weekdays. This decision by MSNBC will silence a [bleating, whiny, intensely irritating-ed.] conservative voice, part of a move by MSNBC to swing left and become "FOX for the Liberals," dropping any pretense of objectivity or balance.

Any guy willing to go on "Dancing with the Stars" and treat guests both left and right with spirited but congenial debate should not be purged in some ideological marketing plan. We respectfully urge NBC to reconsider this decision and save TUCKER!

I think all his problems are essentially illustrated in this pesky little ratings graphic below....

(click pic to make it larger) h/t TV Newser...Anyway, TRex started a new blog and talks more about this...

PZ Myers at Pharyngula:

I'm not impressed with moments of silence or candlelight vigils or noble rhetoric about this event. If you want to do something to remember that tragedy, the best thing to do is to simply stop living your life in fear.

The Village Voice would have you believe that it paves the way for some sort of international tribunal. I'm just hoping it doesn't go down the memory hole unnoticed...

While the Democratic Congress has yet to begin a serious investigation into what many European legislators already know about American war crimes, a particularly telling report by the International Committee of the Red Cross has been leaked that would surely figure prominently in such a potential Nuremberg trial. The Red Cross itself is bound to public silence concerning the results of its human-rights probes of prisons around the world-or else governments wouldn't let them in.

But The New Yorker's Jane Mayer has sources who have seen accounts of the Red Cross interviews with inmates formerly held in CIA secret prisons. In "The Black Sites" (August 13, The New Yorker), Mayer also reveals the effect on our torturers of what they do-on the orders of the president-to "protect American values." Read on...

(see more signs like this at FreewayBlogger)

Via The Downers Grove Sun:

A Downers Grove man believes he is being prosecuted for his political views - and an area attorney has taken his case pro bono.

Jeff Zurawski, 39, of Downers Grove and Sarah M. Hartfield, 45, of Naperville were initially charged with disorderly conduct for displaying a banner that read "Impeach Bush and Cheney - LIARS" on May 6 on the Great Western Trail above Interstate 355.

But more charges were brought against the two war protesters last week in DuPage County Circuit Court in Wheaton: reckless conduct and unauthorized display of a sign in viewing of a highway, both misdemeanors.

The new charges each carry a penalty of up to one year imprisonment, while the original charge was up to a three-month sentence in the county jail.

"This is political prosecution," said environmental rights attorney Shawn Collins, who has taken on Zurawski and Hartfield's case pro bono. Read more...

The ACLU has more on the White House's ongoing efforts to silence dissent.

Robert Greenwald's Brave New Films has a new blog. Cliff Schecter will be "the blogger-in-chief and video content creator/manager in a large project to enact a clearing house for original content progressive video."

Blue Herald: Jim Swanson's "Week in Review" and other podcasts.

A Save Net Radio update: The Internet Radio Equality Act (H.R. 2060) now has 115 Congressional co-sponsors, but can still use more help. Webcasters are organizing a National Day of Silence for Tuesday, July 26.

Jon Swift: "Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Ann Althouse" puts it all in perspective.

The Aristocrats: The important Zygote-American voting block, because every sperm is sacred. Really. They even dance.

Poetry and Politics: A Poetic Justice, Poets for Peace, Poems From Guantanamo: The Detainees Speak, Mad Kane, and a piece imagining Fallujah.

Guest round up by Batocchio. That's it for me! Thanks! The next week is by Cernig of The Newshoggers (newshog AT gmail DOT com).

   SirotaBlog:

USA Today finally breaks the national media silence about the one-third of Fred Thompson's life that he spent as a high-paid corporate lobbyist in Washington, D.C. Thompson's campaign, which is being run by his fellow K Street lobbyists, responded by saying only that being a K Street lobbyist "is an honorable endeavor that goes back to the beginnings of this republic."

Huh? Honorable?  What are you smoking, Fred?

Not surprisingly, the National Association of Manufacturers has a post on its blog trumpeting Thompson's first major policy declaration: His decision to make enacting new corporate tax breaks the centerpiece of his campaign.

Oy.  Because with all that's going on--record deficits, outsourcing, real wages dropping, the middle class becoming extinct, what we should focus on is REDUCING CORPORATE TAXES?  Fred actually tells NAM:

"We have, you know-if you include state taxes-the highest corporate tax rate in the world. That makes us less competitive. All those things have to be looked at. And all those-especially as far as the corporate tax rate is concerned, need to be clearly reduced."  

Only problem, is that's not strictly true.  Conservative think tanks will say it is, but what they neglect to mention corporate tax rates are only paid on corporate income AFTER all tax credits, deductions and other loopholes have been applied.  This .pdf from Citizens for Tax Justice shows that 82 of the largest and most profitable US corporations paid NO tax for one or more years during the Bush Administration.  

So, Fred, how exactly does reducing nothing make us more competitive?