Donle’s Daily Dispatches

Volume 1 Issue 165              Today’s News and Views             Sunday, June 11, 2006

Sign My Guest Book

View My Guest Book

Get Your Free Guest Book

Donle's Daily Dispatches RSS News Feeds

Latest news and opinion headlines from NPR, BBC, NY Times, etc.

See the cost in your community

Update of US Casualties in Iraq: 2492

Update of US Casualties in Afghanistan: 299

Figures provided by

the Iraq Coalition Causality website

For Immediate Release                                                                                                June 10, 2006

2500 American Deaths in Iraq are Near:

We say, “Not one more.” Call for Peace Now.

Press Contacts:

Harold P. Donle, Veterans for Peace, Inc. #49, hdonle@insightbb.com 317/698-2450.

Heather Allen-Garde, Hoosiers for Peace, heather@hoosiersforpeace.org, 317/202-9302.

Jim Wolfe, Indianapolis Peace and Justice Center, jwolfe@butler.edu, 317/255-3857.

Members of Veterans for Peace, Chapter 49, Hoosiers for Peace and the Indianapolis Peace and Justice Center are asking Indiana citizens to assemble at the south side of Veterans Memorial Plaza  in downtown Indianapolis on the day that the 2500^th American is reported killed to mark this tragic occurrence. The target date at the current rate of KIAs is on or about Tuesday, June 13^th, three (3) days from today.

This action is to honor the soldiers who have lost their lives in Iraq and their families, and to give our fellow Indiana citizens a visual representation of what 2500 looks like. We are against war because it kills our family members, wreaks havoc on our national treasury, makes the world a more dangerous place, and psychically damages our humanity.

Hundreds of Hoosiers have been invited to participate in this event that will combine an installation of 2500 flags to honor the dead and a memorial ceremony to call for an end to war. If the number is reached on a weekday (Mon.- Fri.) the group will gather at 6 P.M and if the number is reached on a weekend the group will gather at 4 P.M. at Veterans Memorial Plaza  in downtown Indianapolis. (The Plaza is bounded by Michigan to the south, Meridian to the west, North Street to the north, and Pennsylvania to the west.) At that time, the assembled will create a field of flags on Veterans Memorial Plaza. There will be a period of brief remarks and a memorial ceremony in closing.

For more information contact Harold Donle at (317)698-2450.

Support Our Troops

IMPEACH Bush/Cheney

Hoosiers for Peace requests the honor of your presence…

What: Share Sunday Gravy with Local Progressives at Pasta for Peace. Good Food, Stimulating Conversation, Inspirational Music, Film, and Art and a Silent Auction. Did we mention the pasta was shaped like peace signs? To reserve your seat, call 202-9302 or e-mail heather@hoosiersforpeace.org. Seats are limited and going fast.

When: June 25, 2006 from 1 to 4 p.m. (with dinner at 2 p.m.)

Where: Indianapolis Peace and Learning Center (6040 DeLong Rd.) in Eagle Creek Park.

Why:  Now is the time to spread the word to mainstream America to unite and stand up for peace. Hoosiers for Peace is sponsoring a statewide advertising campaign, which is focused on uniting the community to call for peace. This campaign will cost $14,000. This money will be used to pay for a full-page ad in the Indianapolis Star to ask more than 700,000 Hoosiers to call for peace. To find out more visit www.hoosiersforpeace.org

Cost: Adults $20, Children 5-12 $7, Children under 5 eat free. All proceeds will go towards the advertising campaign. Seats are limited, contact Heather for tickets today: 202-9302 or e-mail heather@hoosiersforpeace.org.

Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal. 
-- Martin Luther King, Jr.

May 7, 2006

Dear Peacemakers,

Will you help to spread and encourage peace? With a record number of American soldiers dying in April 2006 and possible military action against Iran becoming daily news, now is the time to spread the word to mainstream America to unite and stand up for peace.

Hoosiers for Peace is sponsoring a statewide advertising campaign, which is focused on uniting the community to call for peace. This campaign will cost $14,000. This money will be used to pay for a full-page ad in the Indianapolis Star to ask more than 700,000 Hoosiers to call for peace. We are contacting dozens of organizations to make a proposal to form a coalition to raise funds and send a collaborative message to Hoosiers to Call for Peace. The message is: Call your friends, your family, and your representatives and ask them to support the Call for Peace.

Like most Americans, we oppose war based on the following, which will be reflected in the advertisement:

A.    War Kills. More than 2,400 American Soldiers have died and nearly 1,000 Hoosier soldiers are in harms way.

B.    War depletes our resources. Billions of dollars are going to sustain war efforts while ordinary citizens struggle for social services.

C.    War will not make us secure. Studies have shown that the U.S. is no more secure today than it was before 911.

Hoosiers for Peace, a website sponsored by Progressive Indiana, requests your support to make this advertisement a success. We will use the advertisement to call for peace. Each group in the coalition  working on this project will be listed in the ad. Each group will be asked to raise $1000 by October 1, 2006. Below are some suggestions for fundraising:

1.                Letter Writing Campaign: Contact your family and friends and ask them to support this call for peace. Tell them how many people we can reach and ask them to make a generous donation and spread the word. You may collect the money through your organization or you may refer them to Progressive Indiana. Donations may be sent through our secure online giving by going to www.progressiveindiana.org and click on donate now or log onto www.hoosiersforpeace and click on donate now. Checks may also be made payable to Progressive Indiana and mailed to:

                Progressive Indiana

                P.O. Box 55253

                Indianapolis, Indiana 46205-0253

2.                Host a house party. Go grassroots and organize a pasta dinner or backyard barbecue and ask for a donation from each guest. Play poker and donate half of each pot to the campaign for peace. Have a bake sale through your church or place of employment.

3.                Plan a small event.  Invite your community to an event and ask for donations for the ad. Small concerts, speakers, and socials are some ideas for these events. Get creative and network!

We need at least 14 groups to join the coalition and many more people to join the campaign to help fill in possible gaps. If we join together we can make this happen and we can bring Hoosiers together through this ad. As we Honor the Dead, Heal the Wounded, and call for an End to the War we can stand united for peace. We can make a difference by showing ordinary Hoosiers that there are many people like them working for peace. Please contact us as soon as possible if you would like to participate in this campaign. With a little work and collaboration we can make a large impact on our community.

In Peace,

Heather Allen-Garde

Director, Hoosiers For Peace

heather@hooisersforpeace.org

heatherreneeallen@yahoo.com

317/202-9302

It isn't enough to talk about peace. One must believe in it. And it isn't enough to believe in it. One must work at it – Eleanor Roosevelt

David Korten

Butler University

June 26, 2006

7pm

Reilley Room

Atherton Hall

Suggested Donation is $5.00

For more information

Click here

Listen to Air America Radio while reading today's news and views

Today's News and Views

Canada slams "ignorant" US comments on security

By David Ljunggren

Fri Jun 9, 2:58 PM ET

Canada's government and main opposition party united on Friday to condemn "completely uninformed and ignorant remarks" by a U.S. member of Congress who said Canada was a breeding ground for terrorists.

Last week police in and around Toronto arrested 17 Muslim men, five of whom are under the age of 18. Several of them are charged with plotting bombings in major Canadian cities and training militants.

John Hostettler, chairman of the House of Representatives subcommittee on immigration and border security, said on Thursday that Canada "hosts an abundance of terrorists and as many as 50 terrorist organizations."

Bill Graham, head of Canada's main opposition Liberal party, asked in Parliament what the government was doing to "stand up to these unjustified and abusive attacks on Canada, making sure that the American media and the politicians understand and speak the truth?"

Jason Kenney, parliamentary secretary to Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, described Hostettler as misinformed and called on him to withdraw the comments.

"I join with the leader of the opposition in repudiating those completely uninformed and ignorant remarks that we heard yesterday," he replied.

Hostettler also lashed out at "South Toronto," which he said was "the type of enclave that allows for this radical type of discussion to go on."

Toronto is Canada's largest city, but there is no area known as "South Toronto." Crimes rates in the southern part of the city -- which lies on the north shore of Lake Ontario -- are relatively low.

Hostettler's comments alarmed Canadian politicians, who are trying to persuade U.S. lawmakers to delay a law that would require all Canadian citizens crossing into the United States to carry a passport or a sophisticated identity card.

Canadian and U.S. communities along the border fear the rules -- due to come into effect on January 1, 2008 -- could damage a lucrative cross-border trade.

Hostettler said he opposed the idea of a delay, saying: "We do not want to have to worry about a neighbor that has a very different attitude than we do about terrorism."

Since the suicide attacks of September 11, 2001, U.S. critics have frequently accused Canada of not doing enough to crack down on militant groups -- a charge Ottawa denies.

"What is important is that ... there are many members of the U.S. Congress who understand and appreciate the strong actions of the Canadian security forces to maintain continental security," Kenney told Parliament.

Harper is due to meet President Bush on July 6 in Washington and the topic of cross-border security is bound to be on the agenda.

Kenney later told CBC television that Hostettler's comments were "completely way off base and I would like to see some kind of retraction for some of the more ignorant remarks we heard."

Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited.

Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc

Iraq War Critic Surprises Democrats
Murtha Says He Will Run for Majority Leader if Party Wins

By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, June 10, 2006; A06

Rep. John P. Murtha (Pa.), one of the Democrats' leading antiwar voices, startled his political colleagues yesterday by announcing he would seek a senior leadership position if the Democrats win control of the House in November.

In a letter that he circulated on the floor during a series of votes, Murtha said he is eyeing the No. 2 position. "If we prevail as I hope and know we will and return to the majority this next Congress, I have decided to run for the open seat of the Majority Leader," Murtha wrote.

The presumed favorite for that job had been the current No. 2 House Democrat, Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), with whom Murtha has long had testy relations. Hoyer, like many of his political colleagues, greeted Murtha's announcement with annoyance and exasperation, given that the election remains five months off and a Democratic victory is by no means assured.

"Mr. Hoyer has worked extraordinarily hard to unify the caucus and take back the House for Democrats, and that is his first focus," said Stacey Bernards, his press secretary. "As a result of that unity, he's confident that we will be successful in November, and intends to run for majority leader."

Bernards listed Hoyer's long résumé of political service, including his current post as Democratic whip, for which he was unopposed, and previous jobs as caucus chairman and head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Murtha did not explain the timing of the letter or why he was suddenly itching to climb the leadership ladder. Were Democrats to win House control, Murtha would be second in line to become chairman of the Appropriations Committee, one of the most powerful jobs in Congress.

He issued a brief statement to reporters that reiterated the two-sentence letter to his colleagues: "Our goal is to win the House back, and if there's an open seat, I'm the candidate."

One theory is that Murtha's candidacy could provide midterm voters with a tougher, more conservative contrast to the liberal minority leader, Nancy Pelosi (Calif.). A decorated Marine combat veteran, Murtha is strongly pro-military. But his call last year for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq was a pivotal moment in the war debate, emboldening many Democrats to speak out forcefully against the conflict.

Despite their ideological differences, Murtha and Pelosi have been close for years. The Pennsylvanian managed her successful campaign for whip in 2001 against Hoyer, and the two have worked closely on Democratic national-security strategy.

Several senior Democratic aides, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, said Pelosi was aware of Murtha's decision, and while she did not encourage him, she did not request that he stop, either.

A Pelosi spokesman said the Democratic leader had no official comment on Murtha's announcement.

© 2006 The Washington Post Company

The name change of the Zarqawi gang from its cumbersome original – "The Monotheism and Holy War Group" – to the more media-sexy "Qaeda" brand was thus a PR godsend for the Bush Administration, which was then able to associate the widespread native uprising against the Coalition occupation with the cave-dwelling dastards of the bin Laden organization. This proved an invaluable tool for the Pentagon's massive "psy-op" campaign against the American people, which was successful in sufficiently obscuring reality and defusing rising public concerns about what many experts have termed "the full-blown FUBAR" in Iraq until after the 2004 elections.

However, in the last year, even the reputed presence of a big stonking al Qaeda beheader guy roaming at will across the land has not prevented a catastrophic drop in support for President Bush in general and the war in Iraq in particular. Polls show that substantial majorities – even those still psy-oped into believing the conquest has something to do with fighting terrorism – are now saying that the war "is not worth it" and call for American forces to begin withdrawing.

With the Zarqawi theme thus producing diminishing returns, the Administration has had another stroke of unexpected luck with his reputed sudden demise. Moreover, the fact that Zarqawi was killed in a military action means that Mr. Bush will not have to cough up the $25 million reward placed on the head of the terrorist chieftain. That money will now be given to Mr. Bush's favorite charity, Upper-Class Twits Against the Inheritance Tax, an Administration spokesman said.

(More after the jump....)
Despite its fortuitousness, the reputed death of the multi-legged brigand came as no real surprise. After all, approximately 376 of his "top lieutenants" had been killed or captured by Coalition forces in the past three years, according to press reports, and some 5,997 lower-ranking "al Qaeda terrorists" have been killed in innumerable operations during that same period, according to Pentagon press releases. With the widespread, on-going, much-publicized decimation of his group, Zarqawi had obviously been rendered isolated and ineffective – except of course for the relentless series of high-profile terrorist spectaculars he kept carrying out, according to other Pentagon press releases.

News of the reputed rub-out brought bipartisan praise. "This enormous victory in the War on Terror is due entirely to the courage and wisdom of the president," squealed Senate Majority Leader Lick Spittle of Tennessee. "He has seen us through when so many of the flag-burning destroyers of marriage wanted to cut and run. I think this president is the best president the world has ever seen, and if I am ever fortunate enough to be chosen as president by the American people – minus the three million or so whose votes will be discarded, lost, inadvertently mangled or just ignored, of course – I promise I'll be a president just like him!"

"We must give credit where credit is due," said Democratic Sen. Joe Biden, in a rare television appearance. "I have my differences with the way the Administration is conducting this war, but the elimination of Zarqawi is, I believe, a turning point, comparable to the capture of Saddam Hussein, the first Iraqi elections, the second Iraqi elections, the formation of the first Iraqi government and the formation of the second Iraqi government. This is not the end, or even the beginning of the end, but it is, I believe, the end of the beginning. And no, I didn't plagiarize that. I made it up my own self."

The reputed end of Zarqawi's reign of terror comes a mere four years after U.S. forces had pinpointed his hideout and were prepared to destroy his entire operation, only to be forestalled by the White House. Before the war, Zarqawi and his band of non-Iraqi Islamic extremists had a camp in northern Iraq, in territory controlled by American-backed Kurdish forces, who had wrested it from the hands of Saddam Hussein. U.S. Special Forces, CIA agents and other American personnel had a free hand to operate there; indeed, anti-Saddam Iraqi exiles held open meetings in the territory, safe from the reach of the dictator.

In June 2002, American forces had locked in on Zarqawi's location. They prepared a detailed attack plan that would have destroyed the terrorist band. But their request to strike was turned down not once, but twice by the White House. Administration officials feared that such a strike would have muddied the waters in their public relations effort to foment war fever against Saddam's regime.

At every turn, the Bush team had painted a picture of Saddam Hussein as a powerful dictator able to threaten the entire world. They had implied, insinuated and sometimes openly declared that he was in league with al Qaeda. But this wildly successful psy-ops campaign would have been undermined by a raid on Zarqawi, which would have exposed the truth: that Saddam was a crippled, toothless despot who had lost control of much of his own land and couldn't even threaten vast enemy armies within his own borders – much less his neighbors or the rest of the world. It would have also exposed the fact that the only Islamic terrorists operating on Iraqi soil were in areas controlled by America and its allies – which, now that Mr. Bush's invasion has opened the whole country to extremist terror, is still the case.

With Zarqawi's Bush-granted liberty reputedly at an end, the Pentagon moved quickly to confirm the identity of the man killed in Hibhib today. At a joint press conference with Prime Minister Maliki, U.S. Gen. George Casey said Zarqawi's body had been identified by "fingerprints, facial recognition and known scars" after a painstaking forensic examination by Lt. Col. Gil Grissom and Major Catherine Willows.

In yet another amazing coincidence, the announcement of the death of Zarqawi or somebody just like him came just as Prime Minister Maliki was finally submitting his candidates for the long-disputed posts of defense and interior ministers, which then sailed through parliament after months of deadlock. The fortuitous death also came after perhaps the worst week of bad PR the Bush Administration has endured during the entire war, with an outpouring of stories alleging a number of horrific atrocities committed by U.S. troops in recent months.

Oddly enough, Zarqawi first vaulted into the American consciousness just after the public exposure of earlier U.S. atrocities: the tortures at Abu Ghraib prison in the spring of 2004. With story after story of horrible abuse battering the Administration during an election year, Zarqawi, or someone just like him, suddenly appeared with a Grand Guignol production: the beheading of American civilian Nick Berg. This atrocity was instantly seized upon by supporters of the war to justify the "intensive interrogation" of "terrorists" – even though the Red Cross had determined that 70 to 90 percent of American captives at that time had committed no crime whatsoever, much less been involved in terrorism, as the notorious anti-war Wall Street Journal reported. Abu Ghraib largely faded from the public eye – indeed, it was not mentioned by a single speaker at the Democratic National Convention a few weeks later or raised as an issue during the presidential campaign that year.

Today's news has likewise knocked the new atrocity allegations off the front pages, to be replaced with heartening stories of how, as the New York Times reports, Zarqawi's death "appears to mark a major watershed in the war." Thus in his reputed end as in his reputed beginning, the Scarlet Pimpernel of Iraq has, by remarkable coincidence, done yeoman service for the immediate publicity needs of his deadly enemy, the Bush Administration.

It is not yet known who will now take Zarqawi's place as the new all-purpose, all-powerful bogeyman solely responsible for every bad thing in Iraq. There were recent indications that Maliki himself was being measured for the post, after he publicly denounced American atrocities and the occupiers' propensity for hair-trigger killing of civilians, but he seems to be back with the program now. Administration insiders are reportedly divided over shifting the horns to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's already much-demonized head, or planting them on extremist Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, or elevating some hitherto unknown local talent – or maybe just blaming the whole shebang on Fidel Castro, for old times' sake.

The announcement of the new bogeyman is expected sometime in the coming weeks.
***

UPDATE: It looks like the Twits might not get that reward money after all. Prime Minister Maliki said that those who helped locate Zarqawi, or someone just like him, in Hibhib, would get their reward later: "We believe in honoring our commitments." However, the (London) Times' man in Iraq, Ned Parker, tells us that Zazqawi might have been shopped to the Americans by Iraqi insurgents:

One of the most interesting things about the news of his death is the timing. There have been talks going on since the election last December by US and Iraqi officials to try to bring the homegrown insurgency back into the political process. Certainly there was tension between the homegrown Iraqi insurgency and Zarqawi's foreign fighters. So it's possible a deal was finally cut by some branch of the Iraqi insurgency to eliminate al-Zarqawi and rid themselves of his heavy-handed influence.

So if Bush does decide to pay off the informants -- and it's his money, after all, not Maliki's; in fact, in today's Iraq, any money that Maliki's government might still have left after three years of occupation rapine is Bush's money too -- but if Zarqawi's rumblers are paid off, then it's likely that Bush will be forking over $25 million to Iraq's Sunni insurgents. That will certainly keep them flush with IEDs for a long time to come. It's FUBAR every which way you turn in Bush's Babylon.

© Copyright 2005 Chris Floyd

When word of the missing money first surfaced in 2004, Congress passed legislation creating an office of Special Inspector General, assuming that this new agency would root out the problem and figure why all that taxpayer money had disappeared, and why only minimal reconstruction was going on in destroyed Iraq, instead of a massive rebuilding program as intended.

The new inspector general, an affable attorney named Stuart Bowen, went to work and came up with a report in early 2006 that sounded scathing enough. Bowen found cases of double billing by contractors, of payments for work that was never done, and other scandals. But he never came up with more than $1 billion or so worth of problems.

Now we know why.

It turns out that Bowen was never really looking very hard.

When the Boston Globe, this past April, broke the story that President Bush has been quietly setting aside over 750 acts passed by Congress, claiming he has the authority as "unitary executive" and as commander in chief to ignore such laws, it turned out that one of the laws the president chose to ignore was the one establishing the special inspector general post for Iraq. What the president did was write a so-called "signing statement" on the side (unpublicized of course), saying that the new inspector general would have no authority to investigate any contracts or corruption issues involving the Pentagon.

Well, since most of the missing money has been going to the military in Iraq, that pretty much meant nothing of consequence would be discovered by the inspector general.

You might think that the inspector general himself would have complained about such a restriction on his authority to do the job that Congress had intended, but Bush took care of that. In his role as Chief Executive, he appointed Bowen to the post, a man who has a long history of working as a loyal manservant to the president. Bowen was a deputy general counsel for Governor Bush (meaning he was an assistant to the ever solicitous solicitor Alberto Gonzales). He did yeoman service to Bush as a member of the term that handled the famous vote count atrocity in Florida in the November 2000 election, and then worked under Gonzales again in the White House during Bush's first term, before returning briefly to private practice.

Bowen simply never mentioned to anyone that, courtesy of a secretive and unconstitutional order from the president, he was not doing the job that Congress had intended.

The deception was far-reaching. When Thomas Gimble, the acting inspector general of the Pentagon, was asked in 2005 during a congressional hearing by Christopher Shays (R-CT), chair of the House government reform subcommittee, why the Pentagon had no audit team in Iraq to look for fraud, Gimble facilely replied that such a team was "not needed" because Congress had set up the special inspector general unit to do that. He didn't mention that the president had barred the special inspector general from investigating Pentagon scandals.

This would all be pretty funny except for two things.

First of all, Americans and Iraqis are dying in droves because of the chaos that the U.S. invasion and occupation have created in Iraq-a problem that that $9 billion in missing Congressionally-allocated funds, and the bales of US dollars, were supposed to have solved.

Second, and I admit this is pretty speculative on my part, money being like water, it tends to flow to the lowest level, which, from a moral and ethical standpoint, would be the Bush/Cheney administration and the Republican Party machine that put them, and the do-nothing Congress that covers up for them, into office.

My guess is that a fair piece of those many billions of dollars is sloshing around back in the U.S. paying for things like Republican Party electoral dirty tricks, vote theft, bribing of Democratic members of Congress, and god knows what else.

If this seems far-fetched to anyone, remember that this administration has included a number of people who were linked to the Reagan-era Iran-Contra scandal, when the creative-and criminal-idea was conceived of secretly selling Pentagon stocks of shoulder-fired Stinger anti-aircraft missiles to Iran, and using the proceeds to secretly fund the U.S.-trained and organized Contra fighters who were fighting to topple the Sandinista government in Nicaragua (Congress had inconveniently banned any U.S. aid to the Contras).

It seems to me inconceivable that this corrupt and obsessively power-mad administration would have passed up an opportunity to get its hands on some of the easy money flowing into Iraq over the course of the last three years.

Given all this, it seems almost unfathomable that Democratic Party leaders would be insisting, as have Rep. Nancy Pelosi (R-CA) and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), Democratic leaders of the House and Senate, that there would be no impeachment hearings in Congress if Democrats were to succeed in winning back Congress this November.

What better way to follow that money than an impeachment hearing into why the president unconstitutionally subverted the intent of Congress in establishing an office of special inspector general for corruption in Iraq?

Dave Lindorff is the author of Killing Time: an Investigation into the Death Row Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. His new book of CounterPunch columns titled "This Can't be Happening!" is published by Common Courage Press. Lindorff's new book is "The Case for Impeachment",
co-authored by Barbara Olshansky.

He can be reached at: dlindorff@yahoo.com

With almost a week to go, McLeod, a 41-year-old father of two, predicts "huge swells'' of reinforcements will join warriors such as Jeff Richfield, who reads Scripture to the blindfolded "vision fasters." He also goes on incomprehensible, upbeat rants of encouragement. "I'm speaking in the spirit. Some call it in tongues. It can sound like gibberish, but it's a joyful sound when the Holy Spirit fills you up."

Pure Life's previous campaigns have had these warriors praying outside the state Supreme Court, reading Scripture by the "Musica" statues on Music Row and rallying on the Shelby Street bridge.

This latest gathering is similar in that "We've been praying for God's destiny over Nashville," McLeod says. "When the Christian conferences come to town, the (in-room hotel) porn rentals go higher than at any other time. … It has to be dealt with. If there's anyone we can call to a moral code, it's those who profess to Jesus. …

"But we believe Nashville is a special city. If the church arises and shines, there's hope for Nashville to be a city of light."

Dialogue, not confrontation, is one goal. And some, who exit the store with bags of bedroom paraphernalia and fetish films, chat hospitablywith the blindfolded.

Since this is a major thoroughfare, there are plenty of one-sided drive-by offerings from rolled-down windows and motorcycle seats.

McLeod says some honk horns and "give us a thumbs-up."

Others offer a different digit. "We get ladies who throw their shirts up, showing everything, and say 'Praise Jesus and we love porn.' ''

It's almost enough to make a pastor laugh, if he didn't think the stakes were so high.

"We aren't here to impress people. But there's perversion in the church. We've got mega churches here. Tons of churches. It's 'cool' to go to church."

MacLeod simply wants churchgoers who either enjoy or ignore pornography to come to Jesus, as the saying goes.

"We are appealing to heaven, to the Lord, so we can have a pure city, a clean city.

"This is the battle for Nashville."

Published: Saturday, 06/10/06

Copyright © 2006, tennessean.com.

I googled Sandy Rios and found that she was believed to have been booted out of the CWA by James Dobson. She now has her own website that is ranked 1,847,545 by Alexa.

This was a well crafted Talking Point for Bill as he weaves through Ann's ludicrous statements about the 9/11 widows. He tries to soften her motives with his audience by saying people on left do the same thing. (The Jonah Goldberg defense.)

He also brings Cindy Sheehan into the mix which Media Matters writes about. Bill did mention C&L (although not by name) when he said the 9/11 Widows responded to Coulter on a far left website. I was surprised the word smear wasn't included.

(Here's the full version Letterman clip that people have mentioned in the comment section of O'Reilly and Letterman on Sheehan and the war on Christmas)

(I'm a bit behind in my posts)

© 2006

SOAP BOX

By Bennet Kelley

Published on 02/24/2006

Bennet Kelley

Bennet Kelley is the former National Co-Chair of the Democratic National Committee’s young professional arm, the publisher of BushLies.net and a Santa Monica attorney. He can be reached at bennet@bennetkelley.com.) 

With baseball players reporting for spring training, this is the time of year in which fans of even the most hapless teams are hopeful that this might be their year. For Democrats, however, this air of hopefulness is limited to the baseball diamond since as they look ahead to the upcoming elections they are growing increasingly restive and fear that they will lose ground again as they have for every election since Sept. 11.

Of mice and Dems

By Bennet Kelley

With baseball players reporting for spring training, this is the time of year in which fans of even the most hapless teams are hopeful that this might be their year. For Democrats, however, this air of hopefulness is limited to the baseball diamond since as they look ahead to the upcoming elections they are growing increasingly restive and fear that they will lose ground again as they have for every election since Sept. 11. Those concerns will continue to escalate until the Democrats understand who and why they lost in 2004.

In 2004, John Kerry narrowly carried every age group in the five key battleground states — Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada and New Mexico — except for “Generation Jones.” Generation Jones covers those born during the end of the baby boom, or at the beginning of Generation X who came of age during the Carter and/or Reagan presidencies. Kerry would be president today were it not for the fact that Generation Jones voters, also known as “Jonesers,” overwhelmingly supported President Bush by margins of 9 to 19 percent in those key states.

Jonesers’ political views were shaped by Reagan’s success, Carter’s failures and the fact that Republicans constantly reminded them of both throughout the Reagan-Bush era. Today we forget the fact that the Republicans so effectively stigmatized the Democrats with the failures of the Carter administration that it was only after the passage of 20 years that the former president was permitted to address his own party’s convention.

Democrats now have the opportunity to return the favor in a way that should resonate with the Jonesers. President Bush, like Carter, has very low approval ratings due to a weak economy, rising gas prices, setbacks in the Persian Gulf that have left Americans feeling less secure and questions of competence. Even though President Bush will not be on the ballot in 2006 and 2008, Democrats must seize this opportunity to “Carterize” him and link the Republicans with the failures of this administration for years to come.

While Jonesers have been more comfortable with the Republicans on national security issues, they are not out of reach to the Democrats. Women Jonesers were one of the largest blocs of swing voters in 2004 and shifted between Bush and Kerry throughout the campaign. The Democrats’ biggest obstacle to winning the Generation Jones vote is themselves. This was illustrated by my recent exchange with a senior Democratic staffer who responded to my suggestion that Senate Democrats should, instead of filibustering the Alito nomination, block everything altogether and use Alito as a bargaining chip to get a special prosecutor named for at least one of the many current scandals plaguing the administration, by declaring it impossible since it would require something the Democrats simply lacked — a spine.

Throughout their voting lives, Jonesers have seen vertebrally challenged Democrats dodge fight after fight and respond to the Republicans’ success by abandoning the word “liberal,” embracing the death penalty and ducking any fight over gay rights. During the Bush administration alone, Democrats have rolled over like lap dogs on Iraq, tax cuts and bankruptcy “reform,” and then failed to effectively respond to the Swift Boat Veterans’ smear campaign in the 2004 race. It does not matter how many wars or weapons programs the Democrats support or war heroes they nominate, Jonesers will never trust them to defend their country if they continue to lack the courage or will to stand up to the Republicans and defend themselves.

The rub for the Democrats is that Jonesers and other voters supported Reagan and the current president, despite often disagreeing with them on the issues. What mattered most to them was that their president was authentic and they knew where he stood. That is why whenever Ronald Reagan was on the ropes politically — the sure fire solution was always to let Reagan be Reagan.

The 2005 Virginia governor’s race demonstrates that this also may be the solution for Democrats. Tim Kaine, a longtime opponent of the death penalty who openly discussed his moral views on the issue won a decisive victory in a state that is second only to Texas in executions.

Andrew Jackson once said that “one man with courage makes a majority.” If Democrats listened to Jackson more and their pollsters less they might solve their Generation Jones problem. “Letting Democrats be Democrats,” could make the difference between another long season and this finally being the Democrats’ year.

(Bennet Kelley is the former national co-chair of the Democratic National Committee’s young professional arm, the publisher of BushLies.net and a Santa Monica attorney. He can be reached at bennet@bennetkelley.com.)

Santa Monica Daily Press
Copyright © 2006 Santa Monica Daily Press.