louisgray.com: live

Keith Olbermann first came to popular culture acting as the tag team partner to Dan Patrick on ESPN's SportsCenter. Now covering "real news", he's made quite a name for himself on MSNBC. As you can see from the below clip on YouTube, he's furious about some of the moves most recently made by this administration. He's sure that we've lost the long-term battle for some short-term feelings that we're "safer today". Regardless of your political leanings, make sure to watch it.

The 2004 elections saw the first time blogs were heavily utilized to promote campaigns, to recruit efforts and dollars. While some used the Web platform to communicate ideas, others hoped the sites would become virtual ATMs, keeping running tickers of the amount raised. Now, as the 2006 mid-term elections approach every candidate, national to local, has a Web site, and most have blogs or e-mail lists. So how can you mobilize beyond the fray?

Left-leaning site and political Web pioneer MyDD is calling for a new volunteer-led campaign to utilize Google's popular AdWords program, "to drive as many voters as possible toward the most damning, non-partisan article written on the Republican candidate in seventy key US Senate and House races." Now, when Google users would search on candidates' names to learn more, they might see ads that show them in an unpopular light.

Given reports that the Republican National Committee is funneling millions to back negative advertising against Democrats in hard-fought contests, this turnabout may seem like fair play, but it's yet another way that political partisans are taking the power of democracy directly to the people, and away from special interests and corporate lobbyists.

Other Political Notes of Interest:

Bush faces political nightmare if Democrats win
Democrat/Republican Ads Spoof Mac/PC Commercials

Listening to '''Pure' Frictions Groove'', by Sasha & John Digweed (Play Count: 4)

Despite the White House's rosy outlook and continued denial over the country's strong opposition to their policies, voters across the United States are tired of the lies and corruption and scandal promoted by the Republican party and its leaders, and are ready to make a change. Early this November, for the first time in way too long, we are going to see a massive shift in Congressional party affiliations - one that threatens to sweep the Republicans out of the majority in both the House and the Senate.

Earlier this summer, the question was focused on whether the Democrats stood for anything, and if they could gain the necessary momentum to put a dent into the GOP's lead. Now, the question isn't if they will put a dent in it, but how big. Some are saying the margin of turnover from Republican to Democratic-held seats ranges anywhere from 20 to 50 seats in the House, and every poll I've seen has the Democrats eking out a slight majority in the Senate as well.

Aside from the omnipresent War On Iraq, now into its 4th year, Republicans have been fighting against self-made scandals involving Mark Foley and Jack Abramoff, and continued strife abroad, in Iran, in North Korea, and in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, the Democrats, powered by Web-initiated campaigning and fundraising, have promoted candidates in nearly every race, and are set to do battle to make a change.

Yet, just like every other important topic under the Bush presidency, the GOP is completely out to lunch. Earlier this week, the Washington Post noted that the White House was "Upbeat About GOP Prospects", despite the fact that other papers, including the New York Times, noted the Republicans had abandoned some once-close races in favor of others, focusing on the "Best Bets" to try and maintain a majority, at any cost.

Change is in the wind, and after seeing the Bush presidency, hand in hand with a stubborn, pigheaded Republican-led Congress, turn back nearly all the gains of the Clinton years, we are weeks away from some first steps to regain the country's glory. All we have to do is vote.

Listening to ''High on Life'', by DJ Encore (Play Count: 9)

It seems we can't watch a single show on cable these days without seeing "Governor" Arnold Schwarzenegger's ads to Join Arnold through defeating Phil Angelides in California's gubernatorial election. Now, the GOP faithful have branched out in their negative ad campaign that hasn't yet said one good reason why Arnold should be re-elected.

This evening, our home answering machine was blinking. Could be an important message, for all I thought. Something from the vet? Family? Reminders about upcoming doctor or dentist appointments? All wrong.

Instead, a gruff man with a gravely voice left a message. "Attention all November 2006 election voters, please stay tuned for an important announcement!" Then a pause, as if they were going to update you on where  your precinct would be... followed by "Phil Angiledes supports abortion on demand for minors. You must vote..." blah blah blah.

Great. Way to play on the fears of parents who are afraid that by electing a Democrat to California's highest seat, that their daughters are going to go out and have sex, get pregnant, and then need an abortion, which they can get without parental consent. Or at least, that's the idea. That's not "an important announcement," that's fear-mongering junk emblematic of what we can expect from a party who has lost its way and can't rally behind their own accomplishments.

Listening to ''Bruce Lee - Dobropet'', by Underworld (Play Count: 15)

The political landscape in the United States has been completely incapable of consensus and compromise for the greater part of the last decade, seen dramatically with the impeachment of President Clinton, and the two highly questioned, litigious, divisive, general elections which resulted in George W. Bush taking the helm. Bush's policies have widened the controversy, as despite record low opinion polls, he and his cronies have pushed forward on an aggressive, radical agenda with mediocre results which may actually have made the economy weaker and the world less safe - and certainly has sullied the American reputation abroad.

As Electoral-Vote.com is showing, this fall's senate and House elections could put Democrats in the majority, if races go the way they are expected. There is a significant anti-incumbent, anti right-wing backlash that has catapulted previous unknowns into powerful swing positions for the party.

But while we see these challenges at the local  level, there continues to be white hot discussion around whether you can even trust the results of any election - as allegations of fraud and simple ineptitude are rampant. Unlikely source Rolling Stone magazine has delivered one of the most in-depth investigative news pieces into the discrepancies of the 2004 general election I've seen. Their conclusion? Widespread fraud and manipulation gave Bush the election over Kerry - especially in critical swing states like Ohio. Meanwhile, others, including The Washington Post, are saying that major problems at the fall polls are expected, as mandates to eliminate "hanging chads" are resulting in even less-trustworthy electronic voting machines, which have been proven extremely hack-worthy.

With all that said, the anger and frustration over the current administration has delivered an almost-nostalgic fondness for the Clinton/Gore years, when the economy was roaring, when our budgets  were balanced, and war was not on everyone's minds. While Bill Clinton can't run again, and Al Gore has repeatedly said he doesn't see it happening, they remain a huge political presence. With the success of "An Inconvenient Truth" and an upcoming book, planned for release in May called "The Assault on Reason", Gore has gained significant chutzpah, unseen in his uninspiring 2000 bid. Meanwhile, the UK's The Observer says that Clinton will become even more active in protecting his legacy from those who love to trash it, to rebuild his role as global statesman, and set up the opportunity to be the first "First Husband" in the White House, should Hillary go all the way.

Unfortunately, we can't go back to the Clinton/Gore years, and Bush's impact on the globe is both far-reaching and long-lasting. But we can at least hope that we have the opportunity to regain the simple trust that our democratic process is working and that our votes are counted - something we took for granted growing up and cannot even fathom now that things have slipped so far.

Listening to ''Ecstasy (Clubb Mix)'', by ATB (Play Count: 7)

It's one thing to allege that the administration has done a poor job helping US citizens prepare for a second potential  terror attack, or to say that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been trumped-up exercises that have seen thousands die unnecessarily and have benefited the most elite of corporations. It's quite another thing to say that the entire 9/11 episode was manufactured by the government, and that, with the help of some edge right-wing groups, the government conspired to bring down the World Trade Center, all in the name of promoting war in the middle east. Yet, somehow, that's the theory reached by a group for academics, who say that all the horror of that day was generated by an "inside job".

As someone who enjoys a good conspiracy theory now and then, and has seen the administration, in concert with right-wing splinter groups, accomplish a great deal of harm in the country, not even I can wrap my head around this one. The fear and fumbling of the administration on the day and days following the attacks was very real, something they aren't capable of manufacturing in an historic coverup.

As the UK's Daily Mail reports:

They believe a group of US neo-conservatives called the Project for a New American Century, set on US world dominance, orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to hit Iraq, Afghanistan and later Iran. The group says scientific evidence over the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon is conclusive proof. Professor Jones said it was impossible for the twin towers to have collapsed in the way they did from the collision of two aeroplanes.
He maintains jet fuel does not burn at temperatures high enough to melt steel beams and claims horizontal puffs of smoke seen during the collapse of the towers are indicative of controlled explosions used to bring down the towers.

The 9/11 commission's report, following detailed investigation, ruled out any of the mega-conspiracy theories, yet that doesn't mean they will simply fade away. Just like Elvis, they're still out there. The National Ledger follows on to this line of thinking with a survey that shows a small segment of the country believes 9/11 was a conspiracy "orchestrated by government officials".

More than a third of the respondents stated their belief that it was either very likely or somewhat likely that “people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.”

There is no doubt that some who see these results will jump to the immediate conclusion that these are leftist anti-Bush liberals who believe in such dreck, which instantly devalues any legitimate concerns we actually do have, and have made clear over the 6 years these guys have been running things. But it's not true. As a group, we are all furious over the administration's response to the attacks, the misguided march to war, and the ineptitude around every facet of our maintaining safety. But we don't believe they had the planning capabilities and tenacity to pull this off. A few dozen extremists "living in a cave" had more foresight.

"I was a Republican until they lost their minds."

Listening to ''Pizza For Eggs'', by Underworld (Play Count: 5)

It seems that commentary on the current administration will nearly write itself - for the truth is even more bizarre than fiction. Even the most new presidential observers recall how President Clinton was charged with mirroring "Wag the Dog" when he ordered airstrikes in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Suggestions were made that as in the movie, a war was manufactured to boost ratings - effectively implementing a Hollywood presidency, and not a DC presidency.

Turning the page forward a few years, we've seen much worse, more tragic, realities. A state of constant war, and wave after wave of misinformation and redirection. Scandals much darker than anything that ever engulfed Clinton have come and gone with regularity - as our civil liberties are increasingly being threatened, and nothing seems outside the grasp of the political elite. But while Bush and Cheney have demanded ever-greater powers for the executive branch, and unprecedented secrecy, George has neglected those things that traditionally define the presidency, choosing to spend months out of each year on vacation in Crawford rather than in Washington, and never even once exercising the power to veto bills from Congress. Representing what historically had been recognized as the fiscally conservative party, George has never even once vetoed any portion of any spending bills - as the country as been racking up hundreds of billions in dollars of deficits, just one administration after the surpluses of Clinton/Gore, which had turned back the clock on decades of deficits from Reagan and Bush Sr.

But now it looks like at least one of those things will change - as Bush is poised to issue his first veto after more than five and a half years in office - not to pronounce any dramatic point of order in business or domestic policy, but instead, to block science, stopping the research into stem cells that could lead to dramatic findings in the research community for decades to come. Instead of really trying to find Osama Bin Laden, or really trying to restore order in Iraq through establishing a stable government and police force, or even offering armor to our troops so that they are protected, Bush is instead once again stopping science - just as the administration continues to deny the reality of issues like global warming and evolution. One has to wonder what their elementary school teachers did that was so horrible to turn them away from the subject forever...

As Americans, we have to recognize that this isn't just an average presidency going through a mediocre spell. This is record-breakingly bad. George W. Bush, who ascended to the presidential throne through trickery and legalese, including a 5-4 majority Supreme Court appointment, is etching his name in stone as the very worst presidency this once-proud country has ever had. It's just head-shakingly ugly.

Listening to ''Prosac'', by DJ Tomcraft (Play Count: 8)

I almost didn't post this after learning the news this weekend that the Bush squad opted to start surveying our domestic phone calls BEFORE September 11th, which of course has been the cause of and solution to all of life's problems, if this administration is to be believed (which they clearly can't be).

Just think of how these stories have evolved. Wars were built out of complete lies and manipulated as each story got picked and pecked away, as people learned more and more.

Now, the right-wing is furious that we are beginning to know the truth, as they have engaged in wholesale campaigns to smear the media who has been doing their jobs and reporting news dear to all of us affected. The New York Times is being made the scapegoat for their frustrations, just like it was when Bob Dole smeared the paper in 1996, and just like it will continue to be in the future, as long as Fox News and others still have a voice.

What kind of administration would so eagerly go after the private bank records, phone records, library records and who knows what else of its own citizens, and how does this not violate the Constitutional rights to search and seizure? That's right - it's completely illegal. That's why the right wing is so hopping mad that they got caught - again.

As a friend wrote me this morning, "I find that most people with a brain aren't thrilled with the current direction of our country, or of our election system." So why do all of these who lack brains continue to have the option to vote? Surely we can change the Constitution to demand a simple aptitude test? Now, wouldn't that be something...

Listening to ''Aura'', by Serenade (Play Count: 4)

June voting isn't nearly as cool as November voting when national elections aren't up for bid. While in 2004, we had the option of selecting Kerry or Edwards, or pretending that Howard Dean still had a shot by the time we non-influential Californian voters were at the polls, in 2006, we have nothing really, except a battle between two gubernatorial candidates who have struggled to distinguish themselves. Remarkably, I changed allegiance once or twice, and could have been considered undecided as recently as last night, before Joe Trippi's note alerted me to how foolish his candidate looked on camera, via YouTube. I tend to make up my mind fairly early in the campaign cycle and push for my favored candidate, but June of 2006 hasn't done that at all.

I did make sure to vote however. Despite a rigorous last few days at the office, I made it to our polling place after work and punched my card, selecting Phil Angiledes for governor, making sure Feinstein isn't challenged, and voting yes on every proposition. Your tax dollars at work, ladies and gentlemen. But what I was really looking forward to was throwing some foolish, self-centered, probably corrupt, Republicans out of office on their tush. It looks like we'll have to wait for that until November, and can only live vicariously through Daily Kos and other sites to see how states around the country are faring.

Links of Interest:
Mercury News: Election Results
Santa Clara County Results

Go Dems, Go!

Listening to ''Lower Your Eyelids to Die With the Sun'', by M83 (Play Count: 7)

At this point, nothing really, truly, surprises me anymore about Bush and his cronies. But I don't think any of us could have foreseen the rampant overturning of civil liberties made possible through the Patriot Act, and the unsanctioned and probably unconstitutional NSA wiretaps, first for foreign calls and now domestically.

Today we learn that the FBI, teamed up with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would like to demand ISPs keep two years of Internet data online, at the very least. Their reasoning? The same as always. It could "aid investigations into terrorism" and pornography to boot - not that pornography itself is illegal, but it can be if you're twisted enough about it.

As with all of Bush's other mandates, no outline is given as to how this will be paid for. I don't expect that Congress is going to "gift" the technology providers with the required software and hardware, and massive amounts of storage necessary to store everything for two years, beyond that they already archive today. They're just supposed to get it done - in the same way businesses have had to react to Sarbanes-Oxley to avoid running against new federal regulations that demand data be archived.

The question is - where does it end? We thought it ended with the government looking into what books you got at the library. Then we thought it ended with them looking into calls to suspicious countries. Now we learn that the US may be one of those countries, as domestic calls are monitored. Now, our Web history and postings are to be stored. Are we going to go completely "1984", and talk to our leaders through the television set and be forced to think happy thoughts? That doesn't sound like the "land of the free and the home of the brave" to me.

Listening to ''Metronomic Underground'', by Stereolab (Play Count: 3)

Growing up, I was enamored by primary politics. I can remember at the age of 11 hiding behind the couch so I could see the NBC Nightly News reports on the "Super Tuesday" results, scribbling down who had won, state by state. I was hiding behind the couch as my parents had of course told me to go to bed. It was a school night after all. But to me, finding out if Al Gore had successfully pulled off his southern strategy and taken a lead against Michael Dukakis and Jesse Jackson was more important than catching a few more hours of sleep.

Flash forward 18 years later, and Al Gore continues to come up as a potential ascendant to the presidential throne - if it can still be called that after the last six years of nonsense from the current administration. Given how Bush's popularity is in the toilet, down at the 30% approval range, pundits and voters alike are eager for a change - anything. Polls are already being taken on who should be the candidate on the Democratic side, and whether they would fare well against a similar guessing game of Republican names. And Gore keeps coming up, even if he says he's not interested.

According to a multitude of recent polls, Hillary Clinton continues to poll the highest among registered Democrats, with John Kerry, Al Gore, John Edwards and a host of also-rans falling behind in line. And don't think it's too early to pick a winner. The New York Times ran a front-page piece on George W. Bush's candidacy for the Republican nomination before a single ballot had been cast in Iowa or New Hampshire in 2000. On the Republican side, it's widely expected that John McCain will make a successful run, with former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani also being named.

What's different this time around, according to just about everybody, is the ascendency of Internet-based politicking, whether the focus is on issues or fund-raising. It's believed that waiting around for huge donations of soft money from large donors isn't the answer any longer, and he or she who operates the most well-honed Web strategy is going to take the prize. This is well chronicled in "Crashing the Gate", and this week, Jonathan Alter of Newsweek comes to the same conclusions in a piece titled, "A New Open-Source Politics". I believe its one thing to harness the energy of the Internet, and quite another to expect that the Netroots are going to act as efficient replacements for the ATM. If one candidate asks for supporters to pony up the dough too many times, whatever advantage they once had will be gone - as they change from presidential candidate to spam candidate - to be filtered as junk.

For me, the biggest disappointment about 2008 projections is a name that is missing. Howard Dean seems to be the strongest on the issues, and aligns with my preferences in a very clear way. While he is doing outstanding work as the chairman for the Democratic National Committee (DNC), I had wished he would give it another run at the chief executive position. In 2004, he had already withdrawn his name as a candidate by the time we in California had the opportunity to vote, and in the back of my head, I wish we had another shot at it. We don't need another repeat of John Kerry, and Hillary, although formidable, simply can't expect to overcome the hatred of the shallow South. It should be an interesting few years.

Listening to ''Inner Depth'', by Jerry Bonham (Play Count: 3)

At times, it's hard to remember that politics is a lot more than rooting for your favorite party, in the way we cheer on our favorite sports teams - hoping that good will triumph over evil. Unlike professional sports, a major tenet of our government is the idea of democracy, that people can both vote and govern, and provide influence to see their policies and leaders enacted. And for me personally, while I've suffered through the last several election cycles, watching the Republican-dominated majority embarrass themselves and our country, I've done little but rant, complain and vote when asked. 

But there remain key issues that are plaguing the Democratic Party that are exposed and analyzed in Crashing the Gate - an insightful piece penned by Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos and Jerome Armstrong of MyDD. The two bloggers change the medium, but not the message, as they pick apart how the Democratic Party, once united, has devolved into isolated factions of splinter groups, who favor their own single issue platforms, even when it may mean the downfall of party candidates.

While the Republicans have certainly made a mess of things, we can't expect for them to fall on their swords, and for the Democrats to swoop in on the carcass to wrest away victory. That simply won't happen - not with the Republican donors continuing to come out in full force, rallied by morality-based issues that extend well beyond traditional politics. Instead, we as a party need to cohesively determine a platform that isn't an amalgam of edge issues - one that can be defended beyond the party base, even when you may see one or two items that don't meet with your ideal agenda. Instead, we must take a long-term view, as the Republicans have, and recognize those who embrace the party's core values and despise the cronyism and hatred espoused by the Republican party. We must do all we can to support party candidates and issues, locally, regionally and nationally, so that we don't endure four more years with characters like Schwarzenneger, Bush, Cheney, DeLay, and Frist.

One of the first steps is to make sure you've read Crashing the Gate. It's been on my to-do list for a long time, and I've finally managed to break into it (from San Jose to Chicago). You won't be sorry you did, and neither will the party.

Listening to ''Zeta Reticula - EP2'', by Dave Clarke (Play Count: 5)

The Center for Disease Control has issued a warning about a new virulent strain of Sexually Transmitted Disease. The disease is contracted through dangerous and high-risk behavior.

The disease is called Gonorrhea Lectim and pronounced "gonna re-elect him." Many victims contracted it in 2004, after having been screwed for the past four years.

Cognitive characteristics of individuals infected include: anti-social personality disorders, delusions of grandeur with messianic overtones, extreme cognitive dissonance, inability to incorporate new information, pronounced xenophobia and paranoia, inability to accept responsibility for own actions, cowardice masked by misplaced bravado, uncontrolled facial smirking, ignorance of geography and history, tendencies towards evangelical theocracy, categorical all-or-nothing behavior.

Naturalists and epidemiologists are amazed at how this destructive disease originated only a few years ago from a bush found in Texas.

Listening to ''Black Day'', by Depeche Mode (Play Count: 6)

As mentioned on Wednesday, Bush and his team flew into Silicon Valley today to meet at Cisco Systems, ostensibly for a panel on technology and education. Unfortunately, for those who work near the area, traffic on the streets nearby the shindig was dramatically effected. Before noon today, we were told that "in and out" access to the streets bordering our corporate headquarters were completely closed down. That meant no customers or partners could visit, and if they were already there, they couldn't leave, and through at least 4 p.m. this afternoon, nobody can come or go.

Every corner has security and every street intersection is lined with bright orange cones, and those working away at the office are literally prisoners in their own country - something we've gotten used to the last six years, but certainly brought home today.

Welcome to California, Mr. President.

Listening to ''Animal'', by Lost It.Com (Play Count: 4)

I've chronicled my strong dislike for Bush and his administration's policies frequently here, and it's no secret I'd be eager to see him replaced well before the proposed departure date of January 20th, 2009. It seems that with every day he and his team remain in office, America dies a little. And it's not just figurative speech. Our troops are dying in an ill-defined, ill-led multi-faceted conflict designed on falsified issues, while assaults on our environment, education, and The Constitution lower the quality of life for those who remain here.

Yet today, I was annoyed to hear the loud thumping of multiple helicopters landing near the office as President Bush's cronies prepared for a speech at nearby Cisco Systems. With two white helicopters bearing the US flag, and two military helicopters patrolling the air search for who knows what, it was clear our tax dollars were being spent to have the liar in chief drum up more support (and by support, he means money) in the Silicon Valley - one that has frowned upon the administration's policies on outsourcing and immigration, to the War on Iraq.

But my disdain was not alone. According to a recent Survey USA poll, Bush has strong unfavorable ratings from states that used to be solid "Red" Republican states. The poll shows that with continued blunders, Bush has lost the support of Montana, South Dakota, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada, to name a few, while those who always opposed him do so with more strength than ever. Aside from the backward South, only Utah, Wyoming and Idaho offer their support, and those states haven't overwhelmed us with any stream of intellectuality.

Meanwhile, famed reporter Carl Bernstein writes in Vanity Fair that the Senate should hold hearings into the Bush Administration's deceit immediately. Additionally, Rolling Stone asks in a cover story, is Bush "The Worst President In History"? It's certainly looking that way. Good luck to us all.

Listening to ''Closer Now'', by Filo & Perl featuring Fischer (Play Count: 5)

It seems unthinkable, but in highly classified discussions about how to approach Iran's continued development of nuclear plants, presumably for weaponry rather than their said need for power, the White House administration is strongly considering preemptive attacks against production plants in Iran - and not just with conventional weapons, but nuclear weapons. This has come to light from a piece in The New Yorker, by Seymour Hersh, the same investigative reporter who uncovered My Lai in the Vietnam War, and first disclosed the treatment of detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

We've already seen widespread acceptance for the concept of preemptive war - Iraq being the best example, but Hersh reports that the Bush administration's focus all along was on Iran, and that Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is seen as a potential Adolph Hitler, having already stated his belief that the Holocaust was a fable, and that Israel should be "wiped off the map". But I am surprised that the United States would discuss the usage of nuclear arms as part of a campaign to thwart a hostile country's acquisition of nuclear weapons themselves.

Given Hersh's background and reputation for accuracy, combined with the administration's history for aggressiveness in the Middle East, this is an eye opening development.

The New Yorker: The Iran Plans
CNN: Report: US Steps Up Iran Options
Google News: "Seymour Hersh & nuclear"

Listening to ''Adrenalin'', by Purple Haze (Play Count: 1)

It seems that the Democrats are mad as hell and aren't going to take it any more - finally. After years of being pushed around by the Republican agenda, voices are rising up against the administration and its lacking ethics, the ongoing war in Iraq that seems to not have an end - or progress for that matter. From Russ Feingold's call for censure to Madeline Albright's words of fury in the LA Times, you can see the fury develop. Today, former presidential candidate and current senator John Kerry sounded off with some of his strongest words yet - saying the president needs to tell the truth, fire the incompetents and find Osama Bin Laden (long time since we heard of him, no?)

His best line? "The Bush administration is wondering when Iraq will have a functioning government. I want to know when we're going to have a functioning government."
Kerry didn't sound so strong in his failed presidential bid in 2004 - known as the candidate who couldn't keep a firm position, best evidenced by his "I voted for it before I voted against it," line. Now, he's struggling to stay relevant at a time when Howard Dean is running the Democratic National Committee and Kerry is seen more as someone with a political past than a political future. In fact, the Republican spokespeople have focused on Kerry in their response rather than the issues, of course, saying he "deserves credit for continuing to take himself so seriously, despite the fact that no one else does." Ouch! Of course, they couldn't have stood behind the president's record on Katrina, Iraq, wiretapping, leaking classified information, shooting friends on hunting trips, or any other of the litany of foolish things the administration has done to damage our reputation at home and abroad.

While Kerry may not be the ideal spokesperson for the Democratic Party, it is time for him and others to continue fighting for what they know to be right. As Kerry said, more than half of the American deaths in Vietnam occurred after Washington politicos had determined we were not going to win the conflict. He doesn't want to see a similar wall for this war - or combination of wars to wherever Bush has plans to send us next.

Related Links: New York Times | Daily Kos

Listening to ''Made Of Sun (KvA Hard Dub - AvB Edit)'', by Kyau Vs Albert (Play Count: 4)

At times during the Bush administration, it has seemed that cronies in the Republican party would have to commit murder in order to see any negative ramifications to their actions. Heck, even the vice president shot his friend in the face on a hunting trip - only to be apologized to later by his victim! Now, tonight, with the nation's eyes turned toward NCAA hoops and baseball's opening night (Damn Yankees are crushing the A's 13-1 right now), Tom Delay has officially announced his retirement from the political limelight, bringing an end to one of the most notorious blights on the political landscape.

Of course, it's not as if he's actually going to jail for his crimes of embezzlement and deceit, but instead, it looked as if he retired because he realized he was in serious danger of losing the election. So, while we have his smiling mug shot around to remind us the man should be in jail, we can at least rest comfortably knowing one fewer crook is running the asylum. How many more of these jokers will go down in flames on their own without giving the electorate the opportunity to throw them out on their ears?

Listening to ''Les Yper-Sound'', by Stereolab (Play Count: 9)

From Survey USA:



So, as long as you stay out of Utah, Alabama and Wyoming, you could go coast to coast in the US and not run into a state where Bush's popularity rating is above fifty percent. It's not about red state vs. blue state any more. The whole country is blue - we're practically suffocating.

More here: Daily Kos: GOP Starts to Sour on Bush

Listening to ''Thomas Trouble'', by Echoes (Play Count: 7)

For the last five-plus years, we've gotten used to Bush's platitudes of "good vs. evil" and how the "evil-doers" hate freedom. For those of us with a higher education beyond the sixth-grade level, which excludes pretty much anybody who voted for Bush in November of 2004, the oversimplification and labeling of whole groups of people as black vs. white, good vs. bad, has been insulting - both to them, and to those of us expected to swallow the tripe.

Today, in a scathing contribution to the LA Times, former secretary of state Madeline Albright takes the conversation up a few pegs by intelligently outlining that "Good vs. Evil Isn't a Strategy" at all. As she writes, "It is sometimes convenient, for purposes of rhetorical effect, for national leaders to talk of a globe neatly divided into good and bad. It is quite another, however, to base the policies of the world's most powerful nation upon that fiction." In all seriousness, this isn't like Star Wars with a Rebel Alliance facing "The Dark Side". International politics, globalization and how it intermixes with religion, cannot be simplified by a black vs. white, us vs. them, good vs. evil mentality.

As we've learned, President Bush and his cronies are not interested in learning the truths that may conflict with their elementary conclusions. It wasn't until 2005 that Bush even realized that Sunnis and Shiites were different sects in Iraq, after all, and that the two groups might occasionally disagree. (Big understatement) In fact, even if some of Bush's goals are well-intended, his oversimplification and saber-rattling has served to turn the global forces against us, making it more and more unlikely that our wishes will be enacted. Albright spells this out, saying, "In today's warped political environment, nothing strengthens a radical government more than Washington's overt antagonism."

It's a shame that it has turned out like this. Bush's predecessors in the Republican party, including his father and Reagan, always commanded some level of respect when it came to foreign policy, and while they too may have had shady dealings, they didn't try to simplify the enemy so much so that talks were impossible. Even the Soviet Union's "Evil Empire" came to the table to reduce the nuclear arms race. With this group of dunderheads making policy, there's no chance we would see Iraq, Iran, or North Korea offer similar compromise.

I'll shy away from stating the obvious, where I make the point that George W's presidency should have ended before it began, but as his bumbling and avoidance of reality has become so commonplace, I almost feel like we should present him with a medal on those rare occasions where he is asked a direct question, and answers correctly, stating the obvious.

Following month after month, year after year, of continued violence in Iraq, and continued denials from the administration that the insurgents (as they are called) are making headway, Bush told reporters today that it's highly possible the Iraq War will be ongoing even after he leaves the White House. On the flip side, he continues to say that Iraq is not in a civil war, and taunts Democrats who have said he broke the law through the domestic spying program, but haven't called for its dismissal.

What Democrats have done all year is call attention to the lies that got us into this mess, the illegalities at home and abroad, the bumbling, lying, cluelessness that seems to be the accepted status quo in the administration and through the Republican party. Yet, when some of the more outspoken congressmen, including John Murtha, have asked us to investigate reducing our presence in Iraq, he and others are called cowards, who are said to "cut and run". Those who have questioned the administration's lies have been thrown under the bus and mocked for their questioning, but now, even our misleader in chief is recognizing we are not being welcomed as liberators - that instead, his legacy of death will have long-term implications far beyond what anyone in Washington D.C. ever imagined.

Those in power and those who report on those that hold the power have never had the best of relationships. From Nixon's Watergate details being unveiled through the Washington Post to the innumerable quasi-scandals that dogged Clinton during his eight years in office, the press has often considered itself the fourth branch of government (the other three being executive, legislative and judicial of course). Armed with some stories of success and the need to drive ratings through sensationalism, skepticism or controversy, a hostile press can be very damaging to an administration.

Under the Bush White House, the administration's focus on PR tactics gained them a considerable amount of leeway - as following the terrorist attacks on Washington and New York, with Bush's approval ratings through the roof (odd how letting that happen helped others opinions of him), the administration marched into Afghanistan and Iraq on a glimpse of reason, while at the same time limiting privacy at home, and engaging in secret activities. While this "honeymoon" lasted the better part of a year or two, the culmination of bad news and bad publicity around the continued War in Iraq, Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath, the continued lack of finding Osama Bin Laden, and a series of unqualified nominations for every public position from the Supreme Court on down, eventually turned the press to be more inquisitive, and this is driving the Bush White House nuts.

In the last year, the press has gotten ahold of and aired imagery on Abu Ghraib, uncovered secret international prisons run by the CIA, and discussed secret wiretapping of US citizens. Had it not been for the tenacity of the press in these cases, we could likely still be in the dark, as the administration has not exactly displayed a historic level of openness. Now, according to a story in the Washington Post today, the Bush administration has launched initiatives targeting journalists and their potential sources. This inquisition has extended beyond the federal realm in Washington DC, reaching to places including the Sacramento Bee, who has seen FBI agents from Los Angeles target the paper following a story on a terrorism case in Lodi.

The first amendment to the US Constitution protects freedom of the press to disseminate information