The Independent (London) is reporting that US troops "refused" to guard the Al-Qaqa'a site.  

President Bush at his speech today in Onalaska, WI went well beyond his usual lies and distortions, this time he entered the territory of blood libel.  In a part of his speech, supposedly reaching out to undecided Democrats, Mr. Bush evoked the memory of three great Presidents, Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy.  But he did so in an egregiously false way that only a semi-educated bumpkin such as himself could possibly believe.

He said that Senator Kerry had "turned his back" on the great tradition of those three great men by "not showing the resolve and strength" that they did "in the face of war."  With all due respect Mr. President, you are a liar and have no understanding of our great American traditions that those Presidents represent.

His blood libel is not so much toward Senator Kerry as to the former presidents he mentions.  The blood libel is taking them as some sort of cover for his misadventure in Iraq.  We all now know the rush that Mr. Bush was in to attack Iraq, even though their threat was minimal or non-existent.  What  does history say about Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy?

Kossacks Unite!

Things are looking very good going into the final 10 days of our election season.  Although we have to be very vigilant and GOTV, it truly looks as though "hope is on the way."  And now is the time to prepare for the next step, what we can do after the election to keep our country moving on the right track.

To my mind the foundation for future victories is education.  We have all seen the surveys that show that a large number of our fellow citizens are, in fact, deluded.  The PIPA study that shows that Bush supporters don't even know what he stands for and previous studies that showed that Fox viewers are woefully ill-informed.  But you can help!

Its seems that, perhaps, the little sidebar of whether George was getting a little offstage help from the Man in the Yellow Hat is actually getting some attention here and there.  Apparently BaBa WaWa mentioned on her show and a few other stories have come out, like this one in the Register (UK) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/12/bush_wireless_coaching/

But the real fun comes in from a link in the Register story.  Enter one James M. Atkinson.  Mr. Atkinson, according to his website is: Founder, President, and Senior Engineer of Granite Island Group. He is the internationally recognized expert in the detection of eavesdropping devices, locating wiretaps, and the agressive stalking and hunting of spies and eavesdroppers.  

Our Esteemed and Exaulted Leader was here in the Northwoods today, and although I did not go to the event, I did hear some choice quotes on the radio.  And I have to admit, he changed my mind.  I am now sorry that I didn't get the chance to cheer our Esteemed Leader with the gathered masses.

When I heard what he had to say on the radio, I was moved to tears.  He said that in contrast to Kerry, he would not leave Iraq.  Under his Esteemed Leadership we will not leave while Iraqi freedom is under attack.  Tears welled up as I realized what this war is really all about: Iraqi Civil Rights.

It must have  been my partisanship that blinded me to what the other side (judging from their thunderous cheers) has always known.  This war is not about WMD.  This war is not about terrorism.  This war is not even about our own selfish desire for safety.  It is not even, as the cynics would have had us believe, about protecting Israel or even about oil.  It is all about seeing our Iraqi friends bathing in the sunshine of sweet freedom.

I have written up a little piece on the unbelievably stupid "tax gap" comment that Bush made during the debate.  Better late than never I suppose.  Feel free to comment or steal as appropriate.  I have submitted it to our local paper as a guest column.  With any luck at all it will be in the paper the day Bush arrives here to spread more lies.  

OK, I can dream anyway...

The column is in the extended...

A week or so ago I posted a story that said that a ground offensive against the Iraqi "insurgency" is being planned or comtemplated -- you be the judge -- for after the election.  Wouldn't want a body count to interfere with the polling here, I suppose.

Now here is another tidbit from the Christian Science Monitor:

Hmmm, an enduring base...kinda interesting in a very scary way.  Mr. Pike further estimates that a dozen bases in Iraq would require 50,000 military personnel to fill them.  And I heard today that the National Guard has not met its recruiting goals for the year.  Anyone feeling a draft?

You can read the entire article here:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0930/p17s02-cogn.html?s=hns

This just in from Wisconsin Public Radio where First Lady Laura Bush is stumping for her husband...

Fear not my fine feathered friends about freeps and forgers!  It matters not whether the CBS documents are genuine or not.  The facts are already plenty clear.

The speculation that Bush might replace Cheney with McCain is once again running high.  But I don't think it is going to happen.  Got no numbers in here, just some reasoning.

From Bush's standpoint adding McCain might swing the election his way, although I don't think it will result in a "Reaganesque landslide."  Adding McCain just doesn't change the math enough at this point to swing any Blue states Bush's way.  Swing state voters might vote for McCain, which could swing the election.  But it comes at a high price for both Bush and McCain.

It never ceases to amaze me how the "hardball" interviewers in this country can't even seem to ask the right questions!  It seems to me that the whole thing with Senator Dole should have  been followed up with something like this:

TV Hairdo Guy:  OK, Senator you seem not to be impressed by the fact that John Kerry actually served his country in combat in Vietnam.  That of course is your right.  Now, would you please comment on President Bush's service during Vietnam.  Perhaps you might have some comment on his checking the "hell no, I won't go" box on his enlistment forms.  Or maybe on the fact that he couldn't seem to find his base in Alabama.  Or how even the inside of a doctor's office seemed to be too dangerous for Lt. Bush.

Naturally, we won't know the answer to those simple questions as no one has the guts to actually ask them.

Ugh, now Dick Armey is going to be on Wisconsin Public Radio.  Is it just me or do an awful lot of Republicans seem to be "Dicks"?  Armey, Cheney, Nixon -- oh yeah, the morality crowd!  Wait, where was I?  Oh, yeah -- Dick Armey is going to be on WPR yakking about his new organization "Freedom Works."  Nothing really new here, but you can check them out at www.freedomworks.com.

Perhaps if you are not busy Monday morning, you can listen online (www.wpr.org, click on the Ideas Network and they have a listen online button somewhere) and even call in (they have an 800# good from anywhere.)  Here are some questions I was thinking of asking this Dick.

Yes indeed, education is, perhaps, the key.  Unfortunately, the Blues have not been on top of educating the electorate.  Or maybe the the electorate just isn't listening.  Here's a huge example -- tax policy.  

Now, anyone reading this is probably well aware that over the last 30 years progressivity has been pretty much gutted from our tax code.  The rhetoric that has gone with this gutting has been the mantra of "tax cuts."  Cutting taxes is fine and sometimes necessary for economic stability.  But, of course, you can cut overall taxes without making the tax system less progressive.  While some think tank types and columnists seem to understand this distinction, I can't say I have heard a lot of Blue politicians talking this way.  Maybe they get shouted down by the right wing media, but still I haven't heard much.

To be fair, the Clinton administration did try and restore some semblance of progressivity with the Earned Income Credit, which all in all has worked pretty well.  Unfortunately it didn't address the larger issue and leaves the Blue guys a huge opening, about which, for the most part, I have not heard peep one from the Democratic side.  That issue is payroll taxes.

I have been reading with considerable optimism the posts about the electoral chances of Kerry/Edwards.  Perhaps the move to Canada can wait just a little while longer and perhaps I will be able to face my Canadian friends this winter, without them laughing at me.  So far so good.  But is this movement an indication of a longer term trend?

I for one am hesitant to try and guess long term political trends, but we may actually be seeing something here.  First a little history.  Even though the pundits usually credit Reagan for the rightward shift of the country, it was actually Richard Nixon, of course.  It was Nixon who recognized the chance to move the Solid South from blue to red.  His appeal was quite simple of course -- race.  Trent Lott was but the latest to state explicitly, what has been sub rosa since the 60's.  

Read the rest in the extended entry...