« Pathetic | Main | Priorities »

September 21, 2005


the exile

Don't give em so much credit. They continue not to ask questions about where the money going to Iraq will come from. Nor do they show any signs of willingness to give up their highway pork. My suspicion is that two things are happening: 1) the paleoconservatives finally realized Bush was out of control when he talked about giving money to "those people," and 2) they have concluded that the Medicare drug benefit, which Rove sold them with the promise that it would cement Republican dominance for eons to come, won't actually win them a single vote. So it must die-- that's a no-brainer. They still have 10 years to eventually go back and make the tax cuts permanent-- no need to hurry now when it's politically inconvenient.


They're eyeballing re-election and thinking about the huge amount of shit their Democratic opponents will be able to throw at them, and a couple of those guys in close districts are starting to sweat having to get a real job again. But in the end, that's all this is--a cover your ass move that lets them run ads saying "Don't blame me for the fiscal mess--I tried to fix it and I'm independent."


As long as they control the voting machines they will say whatever they want and do the exact opposite any time it suits them. Republicans in general have no principles or scruples, if they did they would not be in the party of graft and greed in the first place.

Conservatives are calling for spending cuts to existing programs,

Which is all the misers ever want, except when it comes to cutting the police and military. Got to keep the rabble in line! Any guess as to whether they are ready to cut their faith-based rabble inculcation funding? Or will the school lunches go instead?

1. To impress (something) upon the mind of another by frequent instruction or repetition; instill: inculcating sound principles.
2. To teach (others) by frequent instruction or repetition; indoctrinate: inculcate the young with a sense of duty.

Check out the roots of this precious word:

[Latin inculcre, inculct-, to force upon : in-, on; see in-2 + calcre, to trample (from calx, calc-, heel).]

So the conservatives trample their religious hogwash into us with their heels. Charming.

a few GOP moderates are entertaining the possibility of a tax increase,

Actually, I think these are the true conservatives. You know, the ones that are the dual of the reality-based liberals on the left. Both true liberals and true conservatives want the books to balance. Perhaps 25% of the total US population still shares this value, and of those maybe 5% are actually willing to bite the bullet and actually pay thier dues when they are due. It is only those wierdos on the farflung fringes who burn money and disregard the consequences, you know, like those neocons who fatten up their defense contracting companies, and all those vanishing middle class moderates who run up their debt on meals out, SUV's, divorces, and houses they cannot afford.

and many in the middle want to freeze Bush tax cuts that have yet to take effect.

I think they are confusing Rebulbicans with Democrats here. I do not know of any Rebulbicans that are bright enough to originate this idea on their own. After all, if they piss off their major campaign donors, they might have to, like, implement honest public policy for a change rather than relying on an overdose of televised, radioed, and internetted propaganda (oh yes don't forget the vote rigging) to dupe all those disadvantaged rebulbican wannabes out there, some of who visit this site on occasion to regurgitate talking points.

No, I think the tax cuts are a done deal. They will replace the revenue with more regressive taxes that do not impinge on their power base.
remember Bush's quote from 'Farenheit 9/11'?

"Some call you the elite. I call you my base."

Who did you think he was referring to? Dupes that post right-wing talking points to leftist Internet blogs? HOHOHAHA!

I got it - a gasoline tax! Completely regressive, as long as there is a business exemption. They could package it as an 'energy replacement tax' and sell it to the masses as a conservation measure! With the likely trajectory of gas prices over the next decade, the tax would have automatic increases built into it, that is assuming they are bright enough to levy the tax on the retail cost of the gas rather than the quantity being sold.

After all, the social security tax hike trick will not work this time. The work force is shrinking too quickly now with all those boomers going to seed. The boomers may not be paying social security taxes after retirement but hell they are still going to drive.

The neocons could even get the Democrats to take the blame. It would be so simple to start strongly disagreeing with a nonexistent plan by Democrats to raise gasoline taxes, then when the Democrats start backing down from this position they never adopted, the Rebulbicans could then start making conciliatory noises just long enough for the idea of a gas tax hike to ignite some support within the DLC.

The neocons could make sure that they keep the margin of victory as small as possible, forcing it to become as close as possible to a party-line vote with the Democrats taking all the blame.

I am sure their ultimate game plan includes some such underhanded scheme. Rove is nt our of ideas yet. The flim-flam man has been at this for a long time and he is a master.


Good post.



you said "like those neocons who fatten up their defense contracting companies, and all those vanishing middle class moderates who run up their debt on meals out, SUV's, divorces, and houses they cannot afford."

I guess my husband and I are one of those vanishing middle class types that have 1 SUV and occaisionally use the credit card to by dinner for the family. Really I am the evil neocon in the family, hubby isn't politically oriented any which way but if you had to describe him he is a gun rights advocate, beer drinking, cigarette smoking, 4x4 driving, hard rock listening kind of guy. He voted for Bush only because he was for gun owner rights. (he had no opinion on any other political issue - not even on all the stuff about the Democrats brought up about Bush in the campaign last year) He doesn't like abortions on demand for any reason, but only for mother's health issues, and he isn't very religious. He would rather use his credit card to buy things, and use all the equity in the house to buy more things he doesn't need. Not fiscally sound at all, and has no idea how to balance a budget or save money.

I balance everything and yell when he spends too much on credit. I quit smoking several years ago, cannot drink alcohol for health reasons, and a bit overweight. He's a bit on the chunky side too. I am almost done with my college education; he's never stepped foot in college. I am conservative on buying things, especially clothes and electronics. I want to save money before I buy, I'd rather not use the credit cards, except for emergencies. My Catholic religious faith is very important to me and I don't want abortions, embryonic stell cell research, or euthenasia or capital punishment at all. (Ha even my fundamentalist christian friends want capital punishment, I don't).

I give in to him on some things to keep the peace, so we are in debt that I don't like, but living peacably.

It is a hard to be married to someone who is apolitical and has no idea how the election process works. Nor cares about most topics in the political arena.

I just follow my heart, he follows his, and we try to meet in the middle. We eat at home 3-4 nights a week, and eat out twice a week. And someone else is ususally buying one meal or other on the weekend depending on which side of the family we're with.

My mother's views match mine, his father's views match his for the most part. My mother rarely talks politics, mostly health and religion; his father hates all non-Native Americans and blames President Grant for moving the Native Americans to reservations and taking over the land they had for eons. (many tribes don't have a reservation and some have more than one, how fair was that??)

So we're a diverse group, but not really a decidedly Republican family. I vote conservative, he votes for gun rights, and that's that.

Bob  Vargas

President Brush is prepared to tap the US oil reserve to help with the fuel shortfall from the disaster regions. I think we all can help to increase our fuel supply and keep the price of fuel very low across our Nation. For examples let’s, drive our cars only when it is necessary for about a month or until the problem is resolved. We could run several errands in a day and plan the shortest route. Instead of going out of town on weekends and holidays, we could visit friends and our families close to home, or take in a movie and/or have dinner out. There’s a lot of activities we can enjoy close to home. We could also work on those special home projects that we been putting off and could spend the extra gas saving on them.

To resolve fuel shortages and high fuel prices in the long term: First, we could have a team of highly qualified persons to study the possibility of staggering work day hours in big cities to lessen traffic jams. For example, several big companies within an area that causes a lot of traffic could stagger their work day hours from 0600-0300, 0700-0400, 0800-0500, 0900-0600. Repeat this process for different areas within large congested cities throughout the Nation. This should relieve a huge amount of traffic congestion and save a huge amount of gas due to the stop and go traffic. Also will help prevent drivers’ rages and shorten their commute time considerably.

Secondly, the government should invest in Hybrids and Hydrogen Automobiles by standing behind the Automobile Manufactures and by giving them large tax breaks. These kinds of tax breaks are investments and are extremely good for our country. If the government had done this when this technology was first discover. We would have had hundreds of thousands more Clean Air, Gas Saving Hybrids and advance greatly Hydrogen technology and created large amounts of good high paying skillful jobs. No, President Brush and the Republicans agenda are to build these dirty air polluting ugly oil rigs that could cause cancer, severe respiratory problems, and other diseases. They will not produce a lot of good high paying jobs but will make a lot of Rich Oil Companies Richer. Former President Bill Clinton, former Vice President Al Gore, John Kerry, and the Democratic Party had a passion for Clean Air technologies and greatly wanted to invest in those technologies. But as always, President Brush and the Republican party blocked their efforts. They are very wrong to accuse of the Democratic Party of being big spenders when their investments (big spending) will produce a very high return (stock markets, high paying jobs, decrease health problems, decreases the national debt, etc.).

Please post your thoughts regarding these issues for we all can gain a better understanding. Hopefully, in the future, we all will be able to make a better selection of whom we want serving us when we vote.


Hi Sue,

So your husband votes according to NRA propaganda? Does he drive by sense of smell too?

Your husband is tragically typical of single-issue conservatives who shoot themselves in the foot politically, voting for the same aristocrats that ship jobs overseas, take away benefits, and stiff us with a health care system that is 'the envy of the rest of the world', which must be why the rest of the industrialized world has implemented single-payer or public health care instead of allowing insurance companies to siphon off health care dollars and waste our time with realms of wasteful paperwork.

Then if you are 'voting conservative' then why are you supporting the same people who are polluting the middle east with uranium? Is genocide a conservative value? I cannot understand someone who opposes both abortion and the death penalty but cheers when hundreds of thousands of Iraqis die miserable deaths over decades in order to sustain your SUV fuel requirements.

Have you ever seen photos of the deformed babies from Iraq? Here:

Depleted Uranium (DU)
Silent Genocide

Tribune Media Services 25mar04

Uranium: Deja DU
Verite Sparks 26-07-2003 11:12
Polish troops in Iraq will face risks of DU contamination.
Are they to try to clean up the USUK DU ?


"Unborn children of the region [are] being asked to pay the highest price, the integrity of their DNA."

- Ross B. Mirkarimi, The Arms Control Research Centre, from his report: ‘The Environmental and Human Health Impacts of the Gulf Region with Special Reference to Iraq.’ May 1992

Now. like a good little conservative voter, explain to me again why you are against abortion, but for hideous birth defects?

I am making it easy on you. We can safely neglect the 500,000 Iraqi children who starved to death under the sanctions, which were declared illegal by the UN because they targetted civilians.

Let's just talk about the millions of children who will be born deformed in Iraq, for eternity to come. The half life of DU is 5 million years.

Now, within your own life-affirming, righteous paradigm, how does nuking Iraq in gulf war 1 with tens of thousands of tons of DU, starving civilians, lying to the public about a nonexistent connection between al Quaeda and Saddam Hussein, then bombing Iraq with tens of thousands of tons more DU and invading Iraq to steal the oil, in any way qualify Bush Sr or Jr for the Jesus Christ award?


Sue, here is a test for you.

If you actually followed the links I provided, read the articles, searched your soul, and felt some apprehension about what so-called 'conservatives' are doing with your tax dollars in your name, then you pass.

This means that your sense of morality is absolute.

If on the other hand you ignored the links or numbly glanced at the photos, then dismissed it as left-wing lies, you fail.

This means that your sense of morality is situational and that you adopt self-serving positions at your own personal convenience without regard to the impact on others.

I, too, share your opposition to abortion and the death penalty. I also oppose the war in Iraq. All of these are morally reprehensible and I advocate in opposition to all of them.

I do not, however, want legislation that criminalizes abortion. As a practical legal matter, I have problems with giving an unborn fetus rights that supercede the rights of the mother. It is not the definition of life that is at stake, but it is the relative weight of the two lives that must be balanced. As long as the fetus is attached to and dependent on the mother's body for its survival, it is an extension of her own body and has no legal rights, period. The matter is medically priveledged, confidential, private. Otherwise we will always have the government sticking its nose into the womb to decide whose life is more important and that to me is not freedom, that is despotism.

On the other hand, I can see no moral or legal justification whatsoever for using depleted uranium munitions. It is purely a waste disposal problem for the nuclear powers. Sure, the shells are heavy, but they can just as easily put the money into peaceful solutions, or blow up fewer things with larger explosives if they really need things to go boom.

When comparing a relatively few, private abortions to genocidal war, I know where I want to spend the bulk of my energies fighting the good fight. How about you?


I am not in agreement with you, Cheryl, on the definition of what is life, concerning unborn babies in a mother's womb. I think they are separate people, and the unborn have a right to live, just as much as the mother with no job, no money, no insurance, has a right to good healthcare for her baby and herself.

I am not in total agreement with Bush's administration on a lot of things. The war being one of them. Our late Pope did not want the US fighting in Iraq. For hundreds of reasons, mostly for the death and destruction of innocent lives.

I would have been all for removing Saddam Hussein (who killed hundreds of thousands of Kurds, like Hitler did of the Jews, who Saddam "admired") by other means. You know, Saddam came into power 35 years ago by coming into Iraq, killing over 200 government officials, and naming himself President of the country. He did the very thing I don't like. But like the totalitarian dictator he was, he didn't care about innocent Iraqi babies or mothers. He had thousands of women tortured and raped, genocide of the Kurds, and so much other horrific stuff. I am glad he is gone, but the way to disarm the Ba'ath party and all the Saddam sympathizers, I guess the US military planned this way of ousting Saddam and his illegal government.

What is obvious is the old cliche, all things are fair in love and war, is coming to light. I don't like killing innocent people, and yet I don't like letting depots run amok killing innocent people themselves, either. It is a precarious world situation. And part of the problem is not understanding what drives people like Saddam to do the things they do.

I don't necessarily make Bush an equal to the evil Saddam Hussein, but Bush is not innocent of some bad choices and decisions.

Again, there are SO MANY bad things happening everywhere, not just in Iraq, and not just by the type of weapons you mention either. If we left Iraq right now, that whole region would fall into the hands of worse groups than Saddam's Ba'ath party. And what most AMERICANS don't seem to get is that this bad ass group hates all Americans, they don't care if you are a liberal or conservative. Cheryl to them is just as bad as Sue is. We'd both be blown up or beheaded or whatever. We don't espouse their fanatical Islamic beliefs, so off with our heads, they'd say. They don't even care about our SUVs. They only care about their sick twisted beliefset. Kill all Westerners and all who side with the US, and kill those who defame Allah's name, etc.

It's rather scary to think there are people out there wanting to kill me just because I am an American. Does that not bother you?


Carol you are in agreement with me on the definition of life. What you are not in agreement with me on is the rights of a fetus. If you are unable to make the distinction between life and rights, then we have nothing to talk about.

Saddam did not admire Hitler. His idol was Stalin. This is widely known.

Saddam gassed the Kurds with Sarin gas that Rumsfeld gave him during the Reagan administration, just shortly after Carter lost the election due to the hostage crisis. At that time Hussein was 'our' ally and he had a green light from Reagan to put down the Kurdish rebellion in order to maintain stability. So if you want to know why Hussein gassed the kurds, ask Rumsfeld.

As far as why Hussein invaded Kuwait, that is also widely known. He signalled his intentions to invade Kuwait to Washington before launching his attack, to see if there were any objections. The response he got back from the Bush Sr. administration was, go ahead, we don't care. The reason Hussein was invading Kuwait was because the Kuwaiti dictatorship kept overproducing and undercutting his oil prices and his country was falling into economic ruin. It was a dumb act of desperation and he fell into the trap like a puppet, like the puppet he always was. Like Noriega did.

As far as your contention that all Muslims hate American infidels, well all I can say is that in this respect you are a bigot. I would never make such a sweeping, unqualified statement about any group. Islam dictates respect for religious differences, just as Christianity dictates the murder of pagans.

It was the Saudi royal family's business ties with the US, particularly with the Bush administration, and their adoption of hypocritical anti-Islamic practices, that drove Bin Laden to attack the trade center. His hatred was not directed exclusively towards the US, it was directed towards the forces that prop up a royal ruling Saudi family he believes to be corrupt.

Did any of that make any sense to you?

As far as trying to equate other weapons with depleted uranium, well, I guess the human mind has a difficult time dealing with half-lives of five million years... is that the source of your confusion?

hp laptop battery f4809a

It is common that it is not until the remaining standby time indicated that the laptop is shutdown or restart automatically. Sometimes, the accident condition will get you lose the important data. How to learn the remaining capacity specifically will get you rid of the condition, especially on your business trip. For hp laptop battery f4809a, a long time after purchasing, it is even hard to indicate the standby time. A breed of software will be display here to help you to control the laptop battery life on your way.

The comments to this entry are closed.