Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Does Michelle Malkin Hate America?


About 200,000 Americans from all over the nation converged this weekend on Washington, D.C.'s North Mall to protest the Iraq war and demand its end. And according to right-wing pundit and Fox News commentator Michelle Malkin, they all did so because they hate America and its military.

On Monday's "The O'Reilly Factor" with Bill O'Reilly, Malkin said of the protestors: "Their opposition to the war is not rooted in principle, but in clear Bush hatred, and in a desire to see this country fail....It's a big temper tantrum, and that's all the left has to offer....If you listen very closely to...a lot of the rhetoric that you heard this weekend, it is very virulently anti-troops and anti-American. There's no doubt about that."

I am so sick of hearing this divisive right-wing garbage. Does Malkin actually believe this incendiary rhetoric she spews on Fox? Does she truly believe that people take to the streets of America to protest a war--in which 3000 U.S. soldiers have died--because they hate the troops? Not because of principle, but because they hate Bush and want America to fail? How could such ignorant, inciteful suppositions come from such a seemingly bright woman? Perhaps it is Malkin who hates America and the democratic principles for which it stands? Perhaps Malkin would rather just the Iraqis have the fruits of democracy and all the free speech trappings that go with it...and not America? Perhaps Malkin would rather see people like Jane Fonda, Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn stripped of their inaliable right to criticize their government? As O'Reilly lamented about Penn, "you shouldn't be up at the microphone, Mr. Penn. You have no reason to be there." So untrue, Mr. O'Reilly, he has every reason to be there. It's his right to be there. The same rights your deranged president sent 3000 to die obtaining for Iraq. To O'Reilly and Malkin, I guess the average Iraqi deserves more personal freedoms than we Americans do...that is of course unless we happen to agree them.

Tell us, Mr. O'Reilly and Ms. Malkin, do you hate America?


On another subject......we could use your help at The Adrienne Shelly Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated in my wife's honor to help carry out her spirit and passion, with the goal of providing film school scholarships and grants to women filmmakers. As many of you know, Adrienne was brutally killed here in NYC on November 1st. Please visit our website to learn more about our mission and to make a donation. Every little contribution helps preserve Adrienne's legacy, and to help create something positive out of this horrible tragedy. Thank you.

Friday, January 26, 2007

"Imagine How It Would've Been." Could This Be Candidate Gore's Campaign Theme?


Frank Luntz, perhaps the preeminent Republican political strategist and pollster, appearing on Air America's Al Franken show Friday, said former vice-president Al Gore would make a terrific presidential candidate. And he suggested that Gore will be able to stand before America and say, "Imagine how it would've been" had he become president in 2000 and not George W. Bush. In hindsight, he called Gore "right" about a lot of issues.

So, imagine an America without the Iraq war. Imagine an America that's respected among its allies, and feared by its enemies. Imagine an America that's concerned about global warming and the environment. Imagine an America that's not divided into two socio-economic groups, as John Edwards laments. Imagine an America where the middle class, not the wealthy, get the tax breaks. Imagine an America where the minimum wage is not a paltry $5.15. Imagine an America that's actually led by a brilliant, caring, diplomat who can string three words together in a sentence without sounding like a blathering idiot. Makes ya wanna weep, no?

So if you're listening Al, it's time. It's time to stop the coy routine and officially enter the race. You know you're gonna do it, we know you're gonna do it, so just do it. America needs you. The world needs you.
Yes, imagine how it would've been. America deserves to no longer imagine....


On another subject......we could use your help at The Adrienne Shelly Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated in my wife's honor to help carry out her spirit and passion, with the goal of providing film school scholarships and grants to women filmmakers. As many of you know, Adrienne was brutally killed here in NYC on November 1st. Please visit our website to learn more about our mission and to make a donation. Every little contribution helps preserve Adrienne's legacy, and to help create something positive out of this horrible tragedy. Thank you.

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Kerry Bows Out of '08 Race, Narrowing Pack for a Likely Gore Run


Former Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry took himself out of the running for president in 2008, choosing instead to devote his energies to ending the Iraq war. Call me crazy, but Al Gore's prospects just got even better than before. If he doesn't announce soon I'll eat my hat.

Kerry made his startling announcement on the floor of the U.S. Senate Wednesday during hearings on the IraQuagmire.

"Two years ago, I sought the presidency to lead us on a different course," Kerry said. "We came close . . . certainly close enough to be tempted to try again. There are powerful reasons to want to continue that fight now. But I have concluded this isn't the time for me to mount a presidential campaign."

The 64-year-old Massachusettes Senator said he's committed to spending the next two years helping shape America's Iraq policy so that Bush's successor will have "a reasonable prospect of success" in the war-torn nation.

"I don't want the next president to find that they have inherited a nation still divided and a policy destined to end as Vietnam did - in a bitter and sad legacy," he said.

With Kerry gone, Gore's main competition is Sen. Barack Obama (IL), Sen. Hillary Clinton (NY) and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards. Those of you who are regular readers here know my thoughts on Obama: all hype, no substance. Hillary? I like her and think she'd make a fine president. But as with Obama, when the time comes to close the curtain and vote, America's true sexism and racism will keep these two out of the White House. As for Edwards, no way in hell would he be elected president. Like Clinton, he'd make for a good prez, but he just doesn't have the gravitas to pull it off. I'm afraid the Repugs' "Breck Girl" tag has had a lasting effect. That leaves The Goracle. He's got the most experience; was anti-war from the start; and is the global warming/environmental guru. He's 'net savvy, would have instant access to massive funds, and would likely have Howard Dean's DNC behind him as payback for his staunch support of the former Vermont Governor's own presidential bid in 2004.

I suspect Gore's sitting back waiting to see the near-term reaction to both the Obama and Clinton semi-announcements. When the fallout comes, as it will, look for Gore to toss his sombrero into the ring. But what about all of Gore's denials that he's running, you say? You mean those half-hearted, less-than-convincing ones from the King of Coy? Stay tuned.....

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Condi Defends Her Madman Boss with Infuriating Psychobabble



It's not an increase. It's not an escalation. It's an "augmentation." No, we're not talking about fixing a pair of saggy boobs here folks, it's how Secretary of State Condescending Rice described Bush's planned 20,000 "troop surge" into Baghdad. When challenged by a bi-partisan panel of Senators this week, Condi lied, side-stepped and offered up nothing but a bunch of Bushevik bullshit. In one day this administration plays more word-parsing and semantics games than Bill Clinton ever did in eight years.

Consider this exchange between Rice and Nebraska's Sen. Chuck Hagel (R) before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

HAGEL: My question was the escalation of American troops in Iraq.

RICE: But I think you asked who was supporting it. And I said the Kurdish parties, Prime Minister Maliki and his Shia allies, and the IIP support a plan to do this. And they know that the augmentation of American forces is part of that plan.

Now, as to the question of escalation, I think that I don’t see it, and the president doesn’t see it, as an escalation. What he sees…

HAGEL: Putting 22,000 new troops, more troops in, is not an escalation?

RICE: Well, I think, Senator, escalation is not just a matter of how many numbers you put in. Escalation is also a question of, are you changing the strategic goal of what you’re trying to do? Are you escalating…

HAGEL: Would you call it a decrease, and billions of dollars more that you need for it?

RICE: I would call it, Senator, an augmentation that allows the Iraqis to deal with this very serious problem that they have in Baghdad.

Hagel has called the Iraq quagmire "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam."

Sorry Condi, but sending 20,000+ more troops into Iraq--about 15% of current totals--sure as hell constitutes an increase. And a pretty big one at that. But why should we expect truth and honesty from these liars now, after 3 1/2 years of their miserably failed war...a debacle that they're now desperately trying to salvage unfortunately at the expense of our young men and women.

Forget the fact that voters in November delivered a loud anti-war message to Bush. Forget that a new Washington Post-ABC News poll taken after Bush's January 10th speech showed that 61% of Americans now oppose such an increase. Forget the advice of the generals. And of even most Republicans now. Of any sane human being. No, this president is intent on carrying out his reckless, lethal plan for Iraq, no matter what anyone thinks or says.

Condi Rice is a walking, talking insult to every American. I'm not so sure she's merely a mouthpiece for Bush. I'm convinced she believes her own reprehensible rhetoric about peace, stability and Democracy in the region. She might even be more of a loon than her deranged boss, if that's at all possible.

Listening to Condi's incessant drivel makes me want to scream the line from that classic scene in 'Dog Day Afternoon" where Al Pacino's desperate bank-robbing character turns down a shady deal with cops by saying to the Detective, Charles Durning, "Kiss me. Kiss me. "Because I like to get kissed before I get fucked."


On another subject......we could use your help at The Adrienne Shelly Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated in my wife's honor to help carry out her spirit and passion, with the goal of providing film school scholarships and grants to women filmmakers. As many of you know, Adrienne was brutally killed here in NYC on November 1st. Please visit our website to learn more about our mission and to make a donation. Every little contribution helps preserve Adrienne's legacy, and to help create something positive out of this horrible tragedy. Thank you.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Bush's War Machine Revs Up. How Many Soldiers Have to Die Before this Dangerous Fool Realizes That It's Over?


Back in November, an overwhelming majority of voters sent a loud anti-war message to President Bush by punishing Republicans and giving decisive victories--and control of both houses of Congress--to Democrats. Did he get the message? What do you think? In true Bush "it's-my-ball" arrogance and stubbornness, the Decider-in-Chief will go before the American public tomorrow evening and make his request to send 20,000 more soldiers to Iraq in a "troop surge" designed to regain control over Baghdad. That's right. Election, shmection, I'm the Decider. Remember, this is a guy who, with 51% of the vote in '04, proudly claimed he had a "mandate."

It's been 3 1/2 years and 3000 dead soldiers since the worst military blunder in U.S. history began. It's such an obvious failure that even the generals on the ground are saying more troops will not accomplish Bush's goals. Mind you, this is the same president that's on record as saying that the generals will be the ones to decide when and if more troops are needed. And the same president who said that sending more troops will send a message to the enemy that they're winning. But this dangerous fool couldn't care less what anyone thinks because, as long he doesn't pull out, he hasn't lost. As long as he keeps us fighting, in his delusional head, there's still a chance of winning. It's like those internet stocks I still hold from the 90's that are virtually worthless. I haven't lost anything until I sell, right?

Does this maniacal war-monger really think that by sending 20,000 more troops we'll be getting any closer to achieving our long-range goals in that country (whatever the hell those goals are)? That we'll secure Baghdad? That we'll regain control of the Sunni Triangle and send a strong message to Muqtada Al Sadr's al Mahdi army and other Shiite militia that Democracy will prevail? Of course not. Just like every other time the U.S. intensified its military efforts. This is a country that mocks the U.S. A country led by a defiant Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who's made it clear he's running the country, not Bush. A country that punished it's former torturous dictator by hastily hanging him and taunting him. They've clearly come a long way, huh? Un-Curious George should be proud of the thriving Democracy he's created.

With Iraq already mired in large-scale civil war, the last thing we should be doing is sending more young men and women to die in Bush's quagmire. It's pathetic the level of denial our president is in. And if it's not denial, it's something worse: intentionally ignoring the facts on the ground, choosing to send soldiers to die because he can't stomach the thought of losing. Well, some battles are won and some are lost. And this one's over. Someone needs to stop this maniac before he kills again and again and again.

On another subject......we could use your help at The Adrienne Shelly Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated in my wife's honor to help carry out her spirit and passion, with the goal of providing film school scholarships and grants to women filmmakers. As many of you know, Adrienne was brutally killed here in NYC on November 1st. Please visit our website to learn more about our mission and to make a donation. Every little contribution helps preserve Adrienne's legacy, and to help create something positive out of this horrible tragedy. Thank you.

Friday, January 05, 2007

Al Gore's Right About Global Warming


If anyone doubts that global warming is a grave threat to our planet, just take a look at what's been happening here in New York. It's January 5th, and it'll be in the 60's today. Tomorrow, 70, high 40's and 50's the rest of the week. And let's not forget the unseasonably high tempts for virtually the entire months of November, December as well as the start of January. And not one single, solitary snowflake has been spotted to-date. Coincidence, you say? Not the result of trapped greenhouse gases? No fears of melting ice caps for you? Well, I for one think at some future point we're all going to be living in boat houses.

Al Gore's site www.climatecrisis.net summarizes global warming this way: "By burning fossil fuels such as coal, gas and oil and clearing forests we have dramatically increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere - trapping solar energy close to the earth instead of releasing it into space - and as a result, temperatures are rising." On Gore's site you can find loads of facts and evidence that supports his warnings: glaciers are melting, plants and animals are being forced from their habitat, and category 4 and 5 hurricanes have almost doubled in the last 30 years.

The kind of weather we're experiencing is abnormal and suspect, and should not be shrugged off as some freakish anomaly. What we're seeing is the result of years of abuses from man-made pollutants. We can all enjoy the warm weather all we like here in NY and elsewhere, but it's not without consequence. For example, it's wreaking havoc on the retail industry, where manufacturers' unsold inventories of coats and other winter garments is staggering; in the travel industry, where ski resorts are suffering; on vegetation, where flowers are prematurely blooming and might not naturally bloom again in the Spring.

In his film "An Inconvenient Truth" last year Gore laid out a doomsday scenario that's downright chilling. The polar ice caps will melt, he says, with warmer water temperatures causing more intense, longer hurricanes resulting in greater greater property damage. We'll continue to see hotter Summers, warmer and shorter Winters. We'll see unprecedented droughts, famines and flooding. Greenland will melt. The global sea level would then rise 20 feet and much of the world flood.

Sounds like a great campaign speech to me.....

On another subject......we could use your help at The Adrienne Shelly Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated in my wife's honor to help carry out her spirit and passion, with the goal of providing film school scholarships and grants to women filmmakers. As many of you know, Adrienne was brutally killed here in NYC on November 1st. Please visit our website to learn more about our mission and to make a donation. Every little contribution helps preserve Adrienne's legacy, and to help create something positive out of this horrible tragedy. Thank you.

Saturday, December 30, 2006

Why Al Gore WIll Run For President


Is there any sane Democrat out there who believes, at this juncture, that there’s a more electible candidate for president in 2008 than Al Gore? That there’s an individual with a more impressive political dossier than The Goracle? Gore himself recognizes his potential. He knows this is the best opportunity he’s had in his 30-year career to send a moving truck to the White House. An even better chance than after eight years as Bill Clinton’s vice president, when he was a much younger, more arrogant and less passionate nominee. This is not 2000. Al Gore is a changed man. And the country is a much different place. And that’s exactly why he will soon announce that he’s going to run.

With Evan Bayh, Russ Feingold and Mark Warner out of the running, that leaves Tom Vilsack, Wes Clark, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden and the front runners, Barack Obama, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton. Obama is running on hype and charisma, not substance. When all the hoopla ends, and the honeymoon is over, what will surface is a Congressman with just two years experience and not much else. Don’t get me wrong. The guy’s a dynamo; lots of charm, sincerity and promise. But he needs about 6-8 more years before he’ll be taken seriously at election time. John Edwards, who just announced, will never win the nomination. He's simply not presidential. He’s a smart, well-intentioned guy, but so am I. And I can assure you that I won’t be living in the White House either. That leaves Hillary. I won’t get into the whole ‘she’s not electible’ thing. It’s much too complicated. And that’s precisely why Gore makes the most sense.

Al Gore’s a Vietnam vet who served four terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, two terms in the Senate, and eight years as vice president. And he’s brilliant. A guy who truly understands myriad domestic and foreign policy issues. A global warming guru. It’s laughable to even put him in the same category as Edwards and Obama, and even Clinton. And let’s not forget that he won the popular vote in 2000, and as some say, the electoral college as well.

It’s no coincidence that Gore’s been everywhere these past couple of years. He’s a smart, calculating pol, and you better bet your ass he smells opportunity. When he announces, he’ll have tremendous political and financial currency and support from which to build a successful campaign. He’s already been quietly assembling a seasoned team to help him, tapping people like Roy Neel who was a key aide in his 2000 presidential bid.

Gore is the right man at the right time. There’s 3000 dead US soldiers in a war that’s become a Middle East catastrophe, with no end in sight. Americans have finally realized that the economy is a bit more important to them than gay marriage. And if the East Coast’s Summer-like November and December is any proof, global warming is a real threat and not some crunchy liberal’s fantasy problem.

Al Gore. 2008 presidential candidate. It’s a matter of when, not if. Take it to the bank.


On another subject......we could use your help at The Adrienne Shelly Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated in my wife's honor to help carry out her spirit and passion, with the goal of providing film school scholarships and grants to women filmmakers. As many of you know, Adrienne was brutally killed here in NYC on November 1st. Please visit our website to learn more about our mission and to make a donation. Every little contribution helps preserve Adrienne's legacy, and to help create something positive out of this horrible tragedy. Thank you.

Thursday, December 28, 2006

Senseless Death


It's taken me almost two months to write again. What's inspired me is a subject I've written about often in the past: the Iraq War, and how it's been responsible for the senseless death of tens of thousands of Americans and Iraqis. Unfortunately, as many of you know, I know a lot about senseless death. And nothing ignites my passion more these days than seeing so many young men and women dying for an unjust cause. It's time for the carnage to stop. It's time that President Bush puts an end to this violent, out-of-control debacle. The worst military blunder in the history of our great nation.

Almost 3000 U.S. soldiers have been killed since the war began in March 2003, just about the same amount of people who died in the very tragedy--the 9/11 attacks--that was, at least in part, the rationale for going to war in the first place. But as we all now painfully know, with tragic consequences, there was no connection between Saddam and Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, and the mushroom-cloud inducing WMD never existed. In short, this war was and is a fraud, perpetrated by a bunch of selfish, ego-maniacal, fear-mongering liars. But while their sons and daughters rest safely at home in the States, it is other people's children who keep dying a senseless death.

The Iraq war, unless ended as soon as possible with our troops coming home, is well on its way to becoming another Vietnam. But instead of withdrawing our troops, Bush wants to send more. And to keep fueling this military fiasco there's even talk of reinstating the draft in order to meet the many challenges our armed services now face throughout the world.

Winning the House and Senate was monumental for Democrats. But they must now do what's right, and somehow force the president's hand and help bring our troops home before America experiences even more senseless death.

On a related subject, we have created a non-profit organization, The Adrienne Shelly Foundation, dedicated in my wife's honor to help carry out her spirit and passion, with the goal of providing film school scholarships and grants to women filmmakers. Please visit our website to learn more about our mission and to make a donation. Every little contribution helps preserve Adrienne's legacy, and to help create something positive out of this horrible tragedy. Thank you.

Saturday, November 11, 2006

Thank You All For Your Kindness and Support


As many of you now know, my wife, the beautiful, lovely, talented Adrienne Shelly, was brutally murdered in NYC on Nov 1. The events of the past 10 days have been tragic and devastating to me and my family, and it's been the outpouring of love and support from friends and family, and my friends and family in the Blogosphere, that's been a tremendous source of comfort. I want to thank you all from the bottom of my heart for your concern, kindness and, especially, your memories of Adrienne and how she and her work in film affected you and inspired you. I also want to congratulate you all for helping to change our great nation this week. It's the start of a new day, and now my family must begin anew as well. It will be a long, hard, painful process, but we will make it. And I promise you that the blog will back just as soon as I am ready and able to start writing again. My sincerest, heartfelt thanks to you. Keep up the fight.
Andy

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

BuzzFlash.com's Mark Karlin on Tonight's Ostroy/DeLaite Report


The midterm elections, war in Iraq, the Kerry controversy.....there's no shortage of hot topics to discuss with the irreverent, insightful Mark Karlin, editor and publisher of BuzzFlash.com. Karlin is tonight's guest on The Ostroy/DeLaite Report...Where Democrats Play Rough. BuzzFlash.com provides headlines, news, and commentary to over 5-million readers monthly.

The Ostroy/DeLaite Report...Where Democrats Play Rough, is a weekly political call-in talk show that tackles the Right Wing spin machine head on (www.OstroyDeLaiteReport.com). It covers the ever-changing political landscape with guests that include Michigan Congressional candidate Nancy Skinner, New York Congressional candidates Kirsten Gillibrand and John Hall, Nomi Prins, Mark Crispin Miller, WABC Radio's Ron Kuby, Marc Maron, nationally-syndicated radio host Stephanie Miller, Russ Baker, BradBlog.com's Brad Friedman, Mark Green and Fox News Political Analyst Kirsten Powers. The show airs every Wednesday at 6:30PM in NYC on Time Warner channel 67. It can also be viewed live over the internet at MNN.org. Just follow the steps to "Watch MNN/ch 67."

And mark your calendars for next Wednesday Nov. 8th, as we welcome back MSNBC political analyst, Democratic strategist and former Howard Dean campaign manager Joe Trippi for a post-election round-up.

Check Out this Awesome Spoof of Bob Corker's Harold Ford Ad: "Congressman, Call Me"


We all know how dirty politicians have been playing as the clock winds down towards Tuesday's critical midterm elections. One ad in particular, the shamelessly racist attack ad produced by Tennessee Repug Bob Corker in his hotly contested Senate race against Rep. Harold Ford Jr., has been parodied by co-creators Dan Rosen and Kevin Rooney, friends of our friend Emily out in Los Angeles (Emily's in the ad). It's a riot, and dead on. It's called "Congressman, Call Me". Check it out. It's been getting a ton of hits on YouTube, and I'm told it's going to be featured some time Wednesday on CNN.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Chris Matthews Defends Kerry Against Sleazy Repug Attacks. We Say, if Anyone Owes the Soldiers an Apology, it's Bush


Ok, so the October surprise was not exactly what Democrats were expecting: Sen. John Kerry splattered all over the airwaves, just days before the midterms, defending himself after landing in hot water over comments about Bush and Iraq which were twisted by the Repugs in a last minute, desperate and pathetic attempt to deflect attention away from their leadership's miserable military failure. A seemingly straightforward comment, in a speech to students at Pasadena City College on Monday, has become a misguided rallying cry for a political party that's sensing major defeat next Tuesday.

So what did Kerry actually say that got the Repugs' panties in a snit? "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq." Every major Repug, from President Bush to House Speaker Denny Hastert to John McCain, has lambasted Kerry for "trashing the troops." (McCain, that opportunistic little weasel, has already sold his soul ten times over as he plans his 2008 run for the White House. The once highly respected, independent war-hero has become nothing more than a mouthpiece for Bush as he seeks the Christian conservative vote. His spine, and his principles, have said...'check please'). It's obvious to anyone not poisoned by Repuglican rhetoric that Kerry was commenting on Bush, not the troops.

The unmitigated gall of this Repug attack on Kerry is beyond infuriating. How dare these notorious chickenhawks--who used college deferments, family connections and every other tactic known to man in order to escape serving in Vietnam--even suggest that Sen. Kerry, a highly decorated Vietnam combat veteran, had actually intended to malign and disparage our soldiers. Unlike these cowardly, privileged rich kids, Kerry actually served (read: enlisted) our military and bled on the battlefield defending America. What balls the Busheviks have to suddenly claim the mantle of bravery while Swift Boating the stellar record of someone like Kerry and mangling his words.

Speaking to a typical group of Kool-aid-drunken Repugs in Georgia Tuesday, Bush had the audacity to claim that Kerry had insulted the intelligence of Americans troops. "The senator's suggestion that the men and women of our military are somehow uneducated is insulting and it is shameful. The members of the United States military are plenty smart and they are plenty brave, and the senator from Massachusetts owes them an apology." Excuse me while I go puke.

If anyone owes the troops an apology, Mr. President, it is you. You and your administration have used and abused their loyalty and courage to further your maniacal political agenda. And while you're at it, you can apologize to the American people as well. You owe us all an apology for:

1. Lying about WMD in order to justify an invasion of Iraq
2. Failing to provide enough troops to secure the country after toppling Saddam
3. Failing to adequately equip the troops with life-saving body armor
4. Failing to be honest with the troops and the public about the failing war
5. Lying about the circumstances surrounding Pat Tillman's death
6. Lying about the circumstances surrounding Pvt. Jessica Lynch's rescue
7. Having Defense Secretary Rumsfeld lie about knowing where the WMD were
8. Having VP Dick Cheney constantly lie about the "progress" in Iraq
9. Lying that the "mission was accomplished"
10. Lying to America that Democrats want the terrorists to win
11. Lying about never saying "stay the course"
12. For the death of 3000 U.S soldiers
13. For the maiming and wounding of tens of thousands of others

On his Hardball program Tuesday, Chris Matthews chastised several Repuglican spinners, asking incredulously if they truly believed Kerry was trashing the troops instead of Bush. Matthews, in acknowledging the highly orchestrated attack campaign on Kerry, cited the many communications he's received from the GOP.

"You wouldn't believe the number of press releases coming into this studio from the top Republicans, all of them, in a grand bit of choreography," Matthews said. "Not since the June Taylor dancers has there been so much choreography."

Matthews added that, in the context of the entire Kerry speech, it seems clear what the Senator's intention was: "My interpretation became after seeing it a couple times and reading the text of what he's saying...he was out there trashing the president's lack of preparation for going into Iraq. And by the way, I agree with him on that. If this president had more sense of history about the Middle East, we would not be stuck in Iraq." Kudos to Chris.

Even right-wing strategist Matthew Dowd agreed: "I think John Kerry supports the troops...he was a member of the military. I think that John Kerry's intention always has been, in his own way, to support the troops."

"Insulting and shameful," you say Mr. President? Exactly, but it's your behavior, and that of your reckless, irresponsible White House mob of Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and Rove, that has insulted and shamed every single American. When are you going to apologize for what you've done to our soldiers and to this country?

Message to the Busheviks: Kerry's not running for anything, you are. If you think the American people next Tuesday are gonna focus on his bad jokes versus how you've destroyed our country, guess again.

NY Post Endorses Hillary Clinton for 12 More Years. Just What the Heck is Rupert Murdoch Up To?


On any given day, the New York Post can be viewed as a vehicle for the Republican Party to spread its pro-Bush, anti-Democrat rhetoric. So it's kind of a surprise to read in its editorial pages Monday that it endorses Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-NY) bid for re-election. Not for another term, mind you, but for two more terms...until 2018. Has the Post turned a corner here in a desire to be more fair and balanced, just like its sibling at Fox News (that's sarcasm, folks)? Or is this part of some master plan by Murdoch, the likes of which we've yet to figure out?

The editorial, titled "Clinton: 12 More Years," expresses surprise itself that the staunchly conservative paper would be going out on a limb for Hillary, whom it cites as having more of a "centrist" record than not--particularly on national security issues. It said that her Republican challenger, John Spencer, "isn't a credible alternative", and that "Mrs. Clinton, well, she's been a pretty good senator--popular with her colleagues and as productive as a first-term legislator from the minority party probably can be."

But wait...the love doesn't stop there. "We think she's done such a good job these last six years that she'd do well to serve six more. If not 12," said the Post. "Re-elect Hillary. In 2012." Ok, just what the heck is going on here!?

The paper also raises the specter of a Clinton run for the White House in 2008: "Well, New Yorkers simply expect their major officeholders to be presidential aspirants--and the pols always rise to the bait."

As I've said all along, the Repugs would absolutely love to see Clinton run for president. The Swift Boats are fully gassed, stocked with Kool-aid, engines running and ready to launch. Is the Post's endorsement and unabashed lovefest part of Murdoch's grand plan to help make Hillary the nominee? You have to admit, something smells awfully fishy here....

Monday, October 30, 2006

Al Gore's a Huge Hit in Belgium


Al Gore's pro-environment message is resonating like wildfire in Belgium. The Goracle spent a day in Brussels in early October to promote his film "An Inconvenient Truth." He told the enraptured audience, "Our planet has a fever, and the fever has been getting steadily higher. " Since then, the country has been tripping over itself trying to enact legislation inspired by Gore's passion for the environment and concerns over global warming.

"We must take Al Gore's message seriously," said Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt when proposing a new "environmentally friendly" tax on packages that would penalize users of aluminum or plastic, which release harmful CO2 into the atmosphere. The tax would provide incentives to switch to less harmful paper or cardboard. The measure is quickly becoming known as the "Gore tax," and could become part of the 2007 budget. The government has also proposed tax breaks for car pollution filters and deductions for energy-efficient investors.

Countdown to Election Day: Here's How the Senate is Shaping Up For Democrats


With just a week to go before the critical midterm elections, the smart money is on the Democrats handily winning the House of Representatives. But it's not unlikely that the Dems could wrest control of the Senate as well. Here's how the recent polls are stacking up in the key battleground Senate races:

-New Jersey: Sen. Bob Menendez (D) leads Tom Kean Jr. by 6 points
-Pennsylvania: Bob Casey Jr. (D) leads Sen. Rick Santorum (R) by 14 points
-Rhode Island: Sheldon Whitehouse (D) leads Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R) by 9 points
-Maryland: Rep. Ben Cardin (D) leads Lt. Gov. Michael Steele (R) by 11 points
-Ohio: Rep. Sherrod Brown (D) leads Sen. Mike DeWine by 8 points
-Virginia: Jim Webb (D) leads Sen. George "Macacawitz" Allen (R) by 4 points
-Montana: Jon Tester (D) leads Sen. Conrad Burns by 3 points
-Tennessee: Rep. Harold Ford Jr. (D) leads Bob Corker (R) by 5 points
-Missouri: Claire McCaskill (D) and Sen. Jim Talent (R) tied at 49% in one poll and McCaskill ahead by 3 points in another

These candidates need money. Money to fight off the onslaught of vicious Repuglican attack ads during this final week. Once again, here's where you can contribute (McCaskill, Ford, Webb and Menendez are the key races right now):

-New Jersey: Sen. Bob Menendez
http://www.menendez2006.com/

-Tennessee: Rep. Harold Ford, Jr.
http://www.fordfortennessee.com/

-Virginia: Jim Webb
http://webb.bluestatedigital.com/page/s/join

-Missouri: Claire McCaskill
http://www.claireonline.com/

-Rhode Island: Sheldon Whitehouse
http://www.whitehouseforsenate.com/

-Montana: Jon Tester
http://www.testerforsenate.com/

-Pennsylvania: Bob Casey Jr.
http://www.bobcasey.com/?splash=1

-Ohio: Rep. Sherrod Brown
http://www.sherrodbrown.com/

-Maryland: Rep. Ben Cardin
http://www.bencardin.com/

The Democrats need six seats to gain a majority and take control of the Senate. As everyone knows, a week in politics is a lifetime. Almost anything and everything could go down these next seven days. But the odds are, with the Iraq war spiraling out of control and the economy delivering more bad news each day, momentum is likely to tip further to Democrats as Americans head to the polls next Tuesday. But what's most critical is if the Dems win the voter-turnout battle. If so, the Repuglicans' reigh of terror will soon be coming to an end. Keep 'em crossed...

Maryland Repug's Bizarre Stem Cell Proposal


The battle for Maryland's Senate seat is intensifying, and stem-cell research has become one of the primary issues for voters in that state. On Sunday's Meet the Press, the controversial subject was discussed in a debate between Lt. Gov. Michael Steele (R) and Democratic challenger Rep. Ben Cardin (D). On several occasions, host Tim Russert pinned the Repug candidate's back to the wall and left him stammering for a cogent reply.

Russert asked Steele to substantiate the claim in his new ad--which features his sister, who suffers from Multiple Sclerosis--that Cardin's Michael J. Fox ad is "tasteless and deceptive." Steele said he in fact supports stem cell research, which Fox claims he doesn't. Both candidates claim to support stem-cell research, but while Cardin supports both adult and embryonic stem-cell research, Steele advocates research on adult-only cells.

Russert then said to Steele: I went up on the Web site for the National Institute of Health frequently asked questions. And let me share those with you and our viewers. "Question: Why not use adult stem cells instead of using human embryonic stem cells in research? National Institute of Health: Human embryonic stem cells are thought to have much greater developmental potential than adult stem cells." That's the issue. And...

Steele: That's the, that's the issue.

Russert: ...you're opposed to using something that has more promise than adult stem cells.

Russert continued: Why are you opposed to using embryonic stem cells? Taking of a life?

Steele: It's taking, yes, I see that as a life, and I, and I don't think that we should use federal funds to do that. And that's, and that's the difference to me.

Now here's where it gets interesting...and, quite frankly, bizarre.

Russert: Here...here's, here's a question that I have to pose: There are fertility clinics all across the country, several in Maryland--Shady Grove, Baltimore...

Steele: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Russert: ...where they take embryonic stem cells and discard them because they're not used in pregnancies--embryos. What--will you close down those fertility clinics?

Steele: I won't close down the fertility clinics. We have options there. We could, we could set up adoptions for those, for those embryos. There are so many other options that we can pursue that we don't. And, and the key thing to keep in here-- keep in mind here, and for me, and I think for--hopefully for Ben, too, and I-- because he's a good man on this, on this subject: Science moves us in a certain direction, and it pushes the envelope, as it should. But as a society, we also must, must consider the, the, the religious, the moral, and the ethical values of that society, and that needs to be a part of this as well. So we cannot just because it's in a bill, we cannot just because a scientist or a group of scientists say,--Yeah, let's do this,--that we don't step back and, and assess for ourselves is this the moral, ethical and, and, and appropriate thing to do?

Russert: But I'm trying to, I'm trying to understand the logic. If, in fact, these embryos are being discarded by fertility clinics, and you think that's the taking of a life, how can you tolerate or allow it?

Steele: But my point is that we need to look at exactly how, how we store them, we have 400,000, I think, across the country. I, I would pursue options that would allow us to look at adoption of some of those embryos and, and to the extent that they...they'e no longer viable, that they have expired or whatever, then you have to look at what you do there. My only point is, let's step back and evaluate what our options are before we go headlong into a sear--into a science or a research that is not fully developed.

Russert: Would you forbid fertility clinics from destroying embryos?

Steele: Would I forbid them from destroying embryos? Probably would like to look at that a little bit more closely. I don't, I don't know exactly how that mechanism is set up right now with respect to each, each clinic

The reason Russert can't understand the logic is because there is no logic. The lunacy of Steele's positions on stem-cell research knows no bounds. He equates embryonic stem-cell research with the taking of life, but then refuses to emphatically agree that fertility clinics, which discard unused cells which in turn could be used in this research, should be shut down. He'd rather see these valuable cells destroyed than used for scientific/medical research. But the thing that made my head spin was his proposal to possibly put these cells up for adoption. On the eve of Halloween, I must say, nothing could be more twisted and macabre than that.

Friday, October 27, 2006

Hypocrite-in-Chief Bush Defends the Institution of Marriage a Week After Stumping for Philandering PA Congressman


The Bushevik BooGAYman has reared its ugly head once again. Weeks ago following the Mark Foley scandal, I held out hope that Republicans would find a new-found acceptance and tolerance of gays now that they saw just how much homosexuality existed within their own party. We here at The Ostroy Report do play rough, but we also sometimes play naive. So go ahead, say I told ya so. But I'm not giving up on humanity yet. I guess I still have faith that in my lifetime we'll see an end to racist, prejudicial rhetoric. But not this week. Following the New Jersey Supreme Court's ruling on gay marriage, President Bush and the GOP hate-mongers were out in full force gay-bashing as aggressively as ever.

Campaigning Monday in Iowa for House candidate Jeff Lamberti, Bush said, "Yesterday in New Jersey, we had another activist court issue a ruling that raises doubts about the institution of marriage," adding that marriage was "a union between a man and a woman....I believe it's a sacred institution that is critical to the health of our society and the well-being of families, and it must be defended." Oh really George? How come you didn't feel so strongly about the great institution of marriage last week when you took to the stage in Pennsylvania, embraced Rep. Don Sherwood--who recently admitted to having an extramarital affair, in which his mistress accused him of beating her--and declared: "I'm pleased to be here with Don Sherwood: he is the right man to represent the people of the 10th Congressional District from the state of Pennsylvania." The hypocrisy here is enough to make you sick.

The Repuglican Party owes a great big fat debt of gratitude to the Supreme Court of the state of New Jersey. Just ten days to go to the critical midterm elections, the court's ruling has re-energized the party's gay-bashers and reignited a hot-button issue that helped fuel the Repugs' victories in 2004. The ruling, which said that gay couples are entitled to the same legal rights and financial benefits as heterosexual couples, is breathing new life into several hotly-contested races throughout the country, where the Repugs are hoping to use it as a rallying cry and get-out-the-vote engine.

There are gay marriage amendments on the ballot in states like Tennessee and Virginia, where Repugs like Bob Corker and Sen. George Allen respectively are locked in very tight races. Allen's campaign manager said Thursday "It's an issue that's going to play a big role in the next 12 days." I guess Allen's hopeful that Virginians hate gays more than they do racist Senators. And in Pennsylvania, Sen. Rick "Man-on-dog-sex" Santorum, the biggest gay-basher in Washington, is hoping the NJ ruling will tilt support back his way after consistently trailing Bob Casey Jr. in the polls by double-digits.

It's getting real ugly out there folks. The Repugs' attack ads are getting more personal, more deceptive and more vile. And now the BooGAYman has surfaced again. But will Americans be stupid enough to fall for this infuriating crap once again? Will they forget about Iraq, terrorism, North Korea, Iran, Hurricane Katrina, gas prices, oil prices, stagnant wages, rising interest rates, scandal and corruption and instead be suckered into believing Karl Rove's bullshit that gay marriage should be the biggest problem in their lives? Like I said, I'm still optimistic that Americans will do the right thing on Nov 7th. I hope I'm right.

Thursday, October 26, 2006

With Just Eleven Days to Go, Here's How You Can Help Democrats Win the House and Senate


On November 7th voters will have the chance to change the course of modern American history by changing the power structure that Republicans have had a choke-hold on for 12 years. Many key races are very tight and getting ugly in terms of the GOP's deceptive, untrue, shameful attack ads in the campaign's final week. What we as Democrats can do to help our candidates, and our party, win next month is to send money. That's what these brave folks need most right now in order to effectively combat the onslaught of negative ads being produced by the Repugs (see "The Stakes"; Bob Corker's ads attacking Harold Ford Jr in Tennessee; Rick Santorum's Bob Casey ads; the stem-cell battle in Missouri; etc). In the final days of the 2006 campaign, it's all about money, money, money.

In the Senate, Democrats need six seats to regain control. Here are the tightest races, and the candidates who need your money most (these Democrats either are ahead by just a a few percentage points, or are in dead heats):

-New Jersey: Sen. Bob Menendez
http://www.menendez2006.com/

-Tennessee: Rep. Harold Ford, Jr.
http://www.fordfortennessee.com/

-Virginia: Jim Webb
http://webb.bluestatedigital.com/page/s/join

-Missouri: Claire McCaskill
http://www.claireonline.com/

-Rhode Island: Sheldon Whitehouse
http://www.whitehouseforsenate.com/

-Montana: Jon Tester
http://www.testerforsenate.com/

The following Democrats hold strong leads, but still need a massive war chest:

-Pennsylvania: Bob Casey Jr.
http://www.bobcasey.com/?splash=1

-Ohio: Rep. Sherrod Brown
http://www.sherrodbrown.com/

In the House, where Democrats need 15 seats to take control, there are dozens of candidates locked in tight races that desperately need contributions. These include:

-New York: Kirsten Gillibrand
http://www.gillibrand2006.com/About

-New York: John Hall
http://www.johnhallforcongress.com/

-Michigan: Nancy Skinner
http://www.SkinnerforCongress.com

-Pennsylvania: Joe Sestak
http://www.sestakforcongress.com/

-Illinois: John Laesch (challenging House Speaker Denny Hastert)
http://www.john06.com/

-Illinois: Tammy Duckworth (seeking seat of retiring Republican Henry Hyde)
http://www.duckworthforcongress.com/

There are many other worthy House candidates and close races as well. You can find them on the 'net in minutes.

You can also send money to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and organizations such as MoveOn.org. Your money will spent on worthy candidates in the most needed races:

http://www.dscc.org/index_home.html

http://www.dscc.org/index_home.html

http://www.moveon.org/

Please send whatever you can. The Repugs are very good at pulling out all stops in the final days of the election. We must combat this aggressiveness with that of our own. We have a real shot here at winning both the House and Senate. Let's together make it a reality.

Another Stolen Election Headed Our Way? We Talked with Mark Crispin Miller About What Voters Can Do to Prevent It


Mark Crispin Miller is a very serious guy. We met recently over coffee at a quaint little cafe near New York University, where he teaches communications and media. Mark's been sounding the alarm on election fraud for years, convinced that both Al Gore and John Kerry were robbed of the presidency in 2000 and 2004. And he's afraid, very afraid, that the problem these days is worse, not better. Listening to him talk, watching his gestures, hearing his doomsday scenarios, it's easy to get caught up in it. And it makes you angry to think he's right. We vowed to riot in the streets should Democrats lose again in November. What I love about Mark is that you get the feeling he'd actually do it.

While I firmly believe that part of the Repugs' strategy to win elections is to steal them, I don't profess to be an expert on voting fraud. There's plenty of very dedicated folks like Mark, Brad Friedman and Bobby Kennedy Jr. who've thankfully been carrying that torch, making the rest of us painfully aware that the problem exists and that if, unchecked, it can and will happen again. If you don't believe that, all you need to do is monitor the blatantly corrupt actions of people like Kenneth Blackwell--Ohio's Secretary of State, gubernatorial candidate and loyal Bushevik--to get a greater sense of the threat facing Democrats at the polls.

So what I asked Mark was not to simply rehash the infuriating tales of fraud from the Gore/Bush and Bush/Kerry elections, but to clearly define for us what Americans can do to prevent a repeat in 2006 and 2008.

First and foremost, Americans must vote. And vote in record numbers. Sounds simple, right? Well it is. The ability to vote in this country is not just a right but an obligation. The more Democrats that vote, the less likely that fraud would impact the outcome of an election. 96-million, 105-million and 121-million people voted in the '96, '00 and '04 elections respectively. In '04, overall turnout was a record 61%, but the GOP's highly efficient "72-hour" program delivered more voters than the Democrats' get-out-the-vote efforts. But as we now know, we still need even greater turnout.

Miller believes, and has written this month in The American Spectator, that "We need the biggest turnout ever, as a protest on behalf of free and fair elections in America. Such a turnout will make it that much harder for the Bush Republicans to spin their victory."

Next, Miller urges that Americans bombard their congressmen and Senators demanding an end to electronic voting unless a critical paper trail is created. Even better, we should have paper ballots that can be hand counted. That companies like Diebold--headed by shameless Bushevik Wally O'Dell--get to control the machines that receive and tally votes is criminal. As Miller points out, one little programmed tweak can, and did, turn countless Kerry votes into Bush votes. How this situation is allowed to exist in our Democracy is incomprehensible.

Miller also believes the media must commit itself to educating the public to this growing problem. "The key here is mass awareness," he said. "Right now, when nobody has really heard what went down, it's hard to think of what to tell them to do...The real problem here is the media. Their failure to put a spotlight on this is a gross abdication of their Constitutional responsibility." He strongly urges contacting major newspaper editors: "The media should be inundated with letters from people demanding to know why it's not being covered...I mean, why aren't they covering this, it's unbelievable."

Miller is also frustrated that the liberal radio and cable shows aren't doing a better job at creating awareness, and cites just a handful of broadcasters who he says "get it" including MSNBC's Keith Olberman and Air America's Thom Hartmann.

Another suggestion Miller has is to demonstrate at the headquarters of the NY Times, Washington Post and other major news establishments to demand greater focus and coverage be placed on this very serious problem. Where are the young, righteous, idealistic Woodward and Bernsteins of today willing to tackle the greatest threat ever to our Democracy?

As for election day itself, Miller has a couple of suggestions. The first is that the U.S. government should make it a national holiday to make it as easy as possible for people to get to the polls. The less obstacles to voting we put in front of people, the greater the turnout we'll experience.

Additionally, and extremely important, Miller said every voter should go to the polls this November armed with the phone number 1-866-OUR-VOTE from Election Incident Reporting System, which records and analyzes information about voting problems before, during, and after elections. He also mentioned the Election Defense Alliance, "which is setting up a citizen's rapid response mechanism to go to places where there are close races--and where Republicans are cheating--to help people gather evidence." Should you witness fraudulent and/or suspicious activity on election day, get on your cell phone and contact these groups immediately.

Lastly, Miller wants consistency. "I think we need a federal standard of elections, so that there's a certain uniformity of voting methods coast to coast. The patchwork system we have now is a disaster, with different rules and systems from state to state and county to county....The vast crazy-quilt of different voting systems nationwide is very dangerous, as it allows for huge inequities, and has help to over-complicate, and thereby obfuscate, what ought to be a fairly simple process."

But he maintains that overall control should remain on the state level. "It's basically a good thing that the states control their own election systems, as that arrangement helps to keep the federal government at bay. Indeed, Bush is trying to tighten his control of the election system by strengthening the hand, and selecting the members, of the Election Assistance Commission. For BushCo to run the national vote directly would be catastrophic. So the principle of state control is worth preserving. The problem lies not with state control per se, but with the inordinate influence of the parties--and, lately, just one party--over the election process."

So, let's make this simple for voters:

1-Vote, vote, vote...and get everyone you know to vote as well
2-Write your congressmen and senators and demand uniformity and federal standards for the election process. Demand an end to electronic voting machines unless there's a viable paper trail. Demand paper ballots instead. Ask that election day be declared a national holiday
3-Bombard the media with letters and calls that demand coverage of election fraud
4-Organize demonstrations
5-Go armed to the polls next month with 1-866-OUR-VOTE and call it immediately to report any fraudulent and/or suspicious activity

In parting, the most chilling thing Mark told me was his prediction of what the Republicans will do should Democrats win on Nov 7th, which he also expounded in American Spectator: "If the GOP should lose the House or Senate, its troops will mount a noisy propaganda drive accusing their opponents of election fraud. This is no mere speculation, according to a well-placed party operative who lately told talk radio host Thom Hartmann, off the record, that the game will be to shriek indignantly that those dark-hearted Democrats have fixed the race. We will hear endlessly of Democratic "voter fraud" through phantom ballots, rigged machines, intimidation tactics, and all the other tricks whereby the Bush regime has come to power. The regime will, in short, deploy the ultimate Swift Boat maneuver to turn around as many races as they need so as to nullify the will of the electorate."

To quote Alanis Morissette, "Isn't it ironic, don't ya think?".....

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Dick Morris Tells GOP to "Scare 'em Silly"


There's just 12 days to go to the midterm elections and according to the pundits and polls it appears that Republicans will likely lose the House and quite possibly the Senate as well. As a result, in the campaign's homestretch, the utterly terrified Repugs, afraid of losing power, are playing dirtier than ever (see new RNC "The Stakes" ad; Tennessee Repug Bob Corker's racist ad against Harold Ford Jr; Rush LIMPbaugh's horrifyingly inappropriate comments about Michael J. Fox; etc).

In his syndicated column Monday titled "Best GOP Hope: Scare 'em Silly," rapacious right-wing rhetoric slinger Dick Morris wrote that "Republicans won't save themselves with phony optimism--pathetic claims that, somehow, they're mounting a comeback. They need to sound a note of alarm and fill the airwaves with specifics of exactly what will happen if the Democrats triumph." And to Morris, that means lie and distort the truth about the war on terror. And why not? It's sure as hell worked like a charm in the past.

Morris suggests the following ad: "We see and hear a wiretapped conversation, with a terrorist revealing his worst plans to his associate - and, inadvertently, to government eavesdroppers, too. Then, when he's about to spill the beans on when and where the next attack is going to come, the line should go dead, with a dial tone, with a machine voice saying "This wiretap terminated in the name of privacy rights by the Democratic U.S. Congress." The announcer can then say, "If the Democrats win, the National Security Agency will never be able to listen in as the terrorists are plotting to attack us."

This type of distortion is irresponsible and reprehensible, as it once again exploits the 9/11 tragedy for the Repugs' personal political gain. Furthermore, we must remind the portly little pundit that Democrats don't have any problem wiretappings. If the Dems win, the NSA will most certainly "be able to listen in as the terrorists are plotting to attack America." We'll just do it legally, that's all.

Morris continues with: "Republicans are doomed unless they can get their base back...A message like this could have a snowballing effect on the Republican base. The word could percolate through the clutter, reminding voters of their true priorities...If the Republicans frankly address their deserting base and speak plainly of the need to hold steady in the face of the terrorist threat, the base can come back." And of course, that means lies, lies and more lies. Shame on them all.