The hull is leaking!

Its good to see that Allawi is capable of being honest when Bush operatives aren't writing his statements for him.

I've been coming to the conclusion Richard expressed earlier today. The Bush administration is a sinking ship.

Colin Powell knows it. And like rats flee from boat holds taking on water, even Allawi seems to know it as well. Referring to the slaughter of 49 Iraqi National Guardsmen,

Prime Minister Ayad Allawi told the Iraqi National Council, a government oversight body, that coalition forces' negligent handling of security was responsible for Saturday's deadly ambush along a remote highway near the Iranian border.

We've only 7 days left!

$70 Billion More Reasons to Vote Kerry

What we could do with that $70 bil at home...

BushCo To Request $50 - $75 Billion for Iraq:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration, faced with a growing insurgency and record fuel costs, plans early next year to seek $50 billion to $75 billion in emergency funding for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, administration and congressional officials said on Tuesday.

The White House Office of Management and Budget said it was premature to discuss the size of the upcoming supplemental spending request, which would bring total U.S. funding for military operations and reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan to as much as $280 billion.

Hopefully, it will be rather difficult for the Bush administration to make a such a request from the inside of Allenwood Prison.

Accountability

Michael @ Spontaneous Arising has written a great rant (posted yesterday) on the need for holding the principal players in the Bush administration accountable, post-election.

Certainly, his feelings reflect a general consensus among progressives - we can't allow the 4th Reich to regroup once we dispose of them.

WAYBACK MACHINE: Lacrymosa

This ASZ blog post was originally written on 8/07/04, and was selected by the author for the ASZ Wayback Machine project. All text is exactly as originally posted. Formatting has been updated to fit current Blogger templates, and in many cases, original links may no longer work.

“Thou tellest my wanderings, put thou my tears in Thy bottle; are they not in Thy Book?” Psalm 56:8

Glass, wherein a Greek girl’s tears
 Once were gathered as they fell,
After these two thousand years
 Is there still no tale to tell?
(Frank Dempster Sherman - 1896)

Jimmy Breslin continues his waking of the dead: What we've really lost in this indefensible war.

Excerpt: "And so you sat yesterday with all these Department of Defense death notices for the last weeks covering the desk and you glanced at them, with the ages of the dead reaching up from the paper to grab your throat."

My lamentations are of the crying and raging variety, and I'm seeking a tear bottle for my weeping moments.

Image above left is an ancient Roman lachrymatory. Tear Bottle history

*************
Nothing much has changed since I wrote this in August of this year. American troops are still dying at a rate not seen since Vietnam. In Iraq the civilian wounded still clog the ill-equipped hospitals, and the dead men, women and children are stacked up in the over-flowing morgues. I will have a lot to ask President Kerry come January that he's yet to address in the days leading up to November 2nd.

E.J. Dionne on Intensity

I think E.J. Dionne captured the fundamental dynamic that the polls are generally missing - and why the polls show the presidential race as so close.

In my heart, I know that this election is ultimately not going to be all that close. Standing amongst a non-loyalty oath signing crowd at the Kerry rally in Philadelphia yesterday, it was so plainly obvious that every one of the 100,000+ people in attendance were absolutely energized. From union workers to veterans (where I staked out my ground), office workers and government wonks, the intensity of the crowd was palpable and almost hard to contain.

When you watch a Bush rally on TV, what strikes you is the faux hollering. Anecdotally, in my own interaction with Bush supporters, very few are really, truly stoked - stoked to the point that they'll stand on streetcorners holding up signs, stoked to the point that they'll engage a random stranger on the subway in conversation about the election.

Going into the final seven days, I'm quietly confident. Every time I get a bit down, I go back and remind myself of something I posted several months back. The equation is very simple:

• Almost no one who voted for Al Gore in 2000 will be voting for George Bus this time around. It just ain't happening, regardless of the rosey sweet nothings about Democratic churn that Karl Rove is whispering in the chimpmeister's ear.
  
  
• Legions of folks who voted for Bush in 2000 will be voting for John Kerry this time around. Simply witness the burning Bush editorials from papers that endorsed Bush in 2000.
  
  
• Ralph Nader will not be nearly the factor this year that he was in 2000.
  
  
• Democrats have outperformed the GOP in new voter registration, by some accounts, by a margin of almost 5:1 -- let that roll off your lips - 5:1.

Folks, I really think BushCo knows that the race is pretty much over, barring some absolutely catastrophic (and I do mean catastrophic) event this week. This isn't cockiness or hubris on my part: it's confidence. Grab a slice of it.

EJ Dionne: The Intensity Gap

...this administration is desperately trying to have this campaign be about anything but the central purpose of democratic elections: to hold those in power accountable for what they have done. Bush does not want the election to be about his miscalculations in Iraq, his misleading statements before the war, his false predictions about the fiscal effect of his tax cuts. He wants to scare the country about terrorism and John Kerry. It is not an honorable approach to reelection. That is why moderate and independent voters are finding it so hard to support the president and why so many of Kerry sympathizers are so fervent in their commitment.

Addendum, 11:15AM: One thing I meant to mention earlier when I wrote about "anecdotal evidence" - while I work and play in a decidedly Democratic stronghold (Philadelphia), I live in a verrrrry hardcore Republican leaning location - New Jersey cow country. So I think I'm getting a decent snapshot of gut feelings from both sides. Many of the GOP folks I talk to in the area where I live are as fed up as me with the Bush administration. Of course, there's still the Kool Aid drinkers...

Seven

Not above the law, but below it?

That the Bush administration has little respect for international law except in times of convenience has been pretty well established, but things like this are without excuse.

To claim that people captured by the US military in efforts directly related to what the leaders of the US military have deemed the "war on terror" are not entitled to the same protections as those captured in more "traditional" wars does not make much sense (note that the term "traditional" is being used lightly here). Yes, there are technical distinctions between what Kate likes to call the "war on terra" and war as defined by the Geneva Conventions, but they are simply that: technical distinctions. That the White House is using these technicalities as a basis for skirting the human rights concerns are the basis of the int'l law in question is blatantly hypocritical, especially when the US attacks other nations for humans rights violations often and actually even used Saddam's violations as part of the rationale for invading Iraq.

Its also quite ironic to see the administration breaking the "spirit of the law" when it comes to the Geneva conventions, and excuse it due to technical distinctions, when they criticize Democrats for violating the "spirit of the law" when it comes to 527 groups.

And lastly, as the NY Times article points out quite clearly, this treatment of prisoners is a huge flip-flop for the administration, considering the following:

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld reiterated in public testimony the administration's view that "everyone in Iraq who was a military person" as well as "the civilians or criminal elements" who were detained by the American authorities would be "treated subject to the Geneva Conventions."

The attitude of the Bush administration on this issue undercuts their own premise that Bush is a "compassionate conservative" with the utmost respect for human life. Pro-life stances (not just when related to death, but also the dignity and quality of life) on all related human rights issues and capital punishment would certainly give their rhetoric a little more credence, at least in my eyes.

Groover McTuber

I know I've promised several things - a contest for poll watchers / challengers (it's coming, it's coming), an indepth review of the Kerry / Clinton lovefest at Love Park in Philly today, and shit I haven't even thought about.

But I sat down in front of the tube tonight, watched Countdown (I'm really starting to like Keith Olberman ... this guy's got a great liberal future ... can anyone say "Kerry Press Secretary"?), and then I started watching the John Edwards interview on Larry King.

I know, I know. I've gotta get a life. I will. On November 3rd.

Anyway, the Edwards interview is great - catch it on the rerun later or, for those on the Left Coast, be sure to watch in real time. Right after Edwards, Larry's interviewing Vanessa & Alexandra Kerry. Quite a departure from Jenna and Not Jenna, if I say so myself. Vanessa's a third year medical student; Alexandra's working into the film director's business. Need I say more?

At 10-ish, CSPAN is running the Kerry rally in Philly today, and I'm going to be looking for myself in the crowd. If you see the big American flag hung from the crane, I'm right underneath that someplace. 125,000 people can't be wrong.

What I'm trying to say is that I expect to be back early tomorrow with some insightful stuff. Don't count on it tonight. I'm quite burnt at the moment, and need to veg on the couch with a cold beer.

Indulge me. ;-)

(And Final Jeopardy! - name the three original FF Bros. Yeah, I'm making it hard for you to google it if you don't know what I'm talking about right off the top of your head.)

Return of the Confessing Church?

On May 29, 1934, a group of leaders from the Christian organizations in Germany that made up the underground Confessing Church met in the German town of Barmen to discuss the increasing perversion of Christian church due to the radical teachings of Adolf Hitler. These perversions included the hailing of Hitler as a prophet by pro-Nazi German Christians and attempts at removing non-Aryan racial/ethnic elements from the church.

The Confessing Church had originally formed as a response to these dangers to provide a haven for dissenting German Christians to continue to practice their religion in churches that were not under the control, explicitly or implicitly, of the Nazi government. Early leaders of this anti-Nazi movement included Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who was forbidden to preach by Nazis and assisted a group of Jews to escape to Switzerland, which he was hanged for in 1945.

At the May 1934 meeting in Barmen, the leaders of the Confessing Church put together a statement rejecting what they considered to be a collection of false teachings that had been incorporated into the German Christian church due to the influence of Hitler. This statement was given the formal title of the "Theologicial Declaration of Barmen", but is usually referred to now simply as the Barmen Declaration. The language used in the statement was clear and unmistakable in the doctrine it was intended to attack, as each of the 6 points contained a sentence beginning with "We reject the false doctrine..."

This historical document was brought to my attention last night while I was discussing the recent statement sent out via email by the Christian Sojourners organization, which bills itself as

...a Christian ministry whose mission is to proclaim and practice the biblical call to integrate spiritual renewal and social justice.

One of my friends informed me that the language used in Sojourners statement was nearly identical to that of the Barmen Declaration.

Without a doubt in my mind, the authors of the recent statement, and most of the 200 Christian theologians and ethicists that have signed it, intentionally used language and a format nearly identical to the Barmen Declaration. These are men and women that have Master or Doctorate degrees in Religion. I am friends with a number of Religion majors at my small Christian college, and they all are somewhat familiar with the Barmen Declaration. This is no small coincidence.

I believe that a large portion of conservative Christians will use this connection to the Barmen Declaration and Nazism to discount the validity of both the statement and Sojourners as the result of insane liberal notions. However, an examination of the Sojourners organization can undermine the idea that it is a raging liberal organization, as it teaches only what is firmly based in Christian scripture.

The mainstream Christian church today has, to a large degree, abandoned its calling to advance social justice and peace worldwide, and Sojourners has pointed this out. Such actions have led Bible-thumpers such as Pat Robertson to label the group as "semi-socialist", as if that is inherently a bad thing.

I'm currently attempting to find the list of theologians and ethicists that have signed the recent statement, in order that the concerns that led to its writing can be deemed valid. If I am able to find the list, I'll post it here.

My topics are usually not this religious-centric, but I just came upon both the statement and its connection to the Barmen Declaration, and believe that both such topics could be of great interest to the ASZ community as they relate to Christians opposing the actions of the current administration, which is a cause that brings most of us together.

UPDATE 10/26/2004 9PM EST: On the bottom of this site, you can find of list of the 200+ theologians and ethicists that have signed the recent statement. Much thanks to the wonderful Liz of BlondeSense for directing me to this!

Wild Time in Philly

Just got back from the Kerry / Clinton show - will post more about it when I get home this evening. Should have some pictures to upload, also. Huge, loud crowd. Close to a religous experience. I'm sure the whole thing will be on CSPAN at some point today.

T & K, wish you could have been there with me, guys. I really do, and I'm sorry there was just no way it could work out today.

- Dad

Update, 6:45PM: Local Philly news says 100,000 to 125,000 people. And not one of us needed to sign a blood loyalty oath to get in.

Manic Monday

is beckoning to Hulkette...

It's just another manic Monday
I wish it was Sunday
'Cause that's my funday
My I don't have to runday
It's just another manic Monday
(The Bangles, in case you didnt' know)

Kate and I were driving to work just a bit ago, and the bozos on AM radio (KFI, Los Angeles) were just begging to be slapped.

Rant #1: Newsreaders. Pulease, they pay these people money to use their voices and articulation and fluency to communicate the current "news" to us tiny little, inconsequential Sims. You would think they'd do a better job of it, but ... NO. If I was one of their bosses, I'd be firing their asses left and right. The KFI guy at the top of the hour was giving the "hot off the wire" blurb about the theft of the explosives in Iraq and he said something about "infiltrators". But he pronounced it: in-fil-trators. This sort of thing makes me completely bonkers. Rather like the month-long national mispronunciation of the moon of Jupiter called "io". I used lower case to demonstrate why the dingbat newsreaders didn't get it right EVER,and pronounced it: "Lo" instead. For some reason their teleprompters or copy had a capital "i" that looked like a capital "L". But they were too uneducated to know the names of the larger Jupiter moons. Lo. As Dear Husband says often: everywhere you look there's a clown.

Rant#2: Still on the road, listening to the top o' the hour "news"... getting ready to listen to Oxycontin Boy. Chief Justice William Rehnquist is hospitalized at age 80 with thyroid cancer. Too bad for the Twig. Not possible for Rehnquist to die, and get the "new"'chief' in there before November 2nd. Oxycontin Boy later expressed "sadness" over Rehnquist's illness. My thought as I was motoring down the 57S to work was: "Jebus... he's 80 years old fergawdsakes! Let him die without all fake sentimentality for the legal aristocracy." Grrrrrrrrrrrr.....

Kate has to get to work now, and there's a bag of chocolate-covered coffee beans calling my name. Carry on Gentles. Oh. Caramba! Can somebody fill me in on Rehnquist. Who appointed him, etc., ad nauseum...? ;-)

Your Meme for the Day

350 Tons of RDX = 700,000 pounds.

It took less than one pound of RDX to bring down Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland on December 21, 1988.

Because of their total lack of planning, forethought, or caring, the Bush administration is directly responsible for letting enough explosives slip through their hands to cause nearly 1,000,000 Lockerbie's.

Oh, yeah, I forgot. They were busy after the invasion. Busy securing the oil fields.

But leaving the ammo and munitions dumps unsecure and wide open.

Here's another little factoid for you. Back in April, 2003, in their increasingly desperate quest to find evidence of WMD, the BushCo-backed ISG in Iraq trotted out a bottle labled 'Tabun,' " a nerve agent developed during World War II. The bottle contained a few drops of unidentified liquid. So, while the future insurgency was walking off with 350 tons of high explosives (now being used against our own troops and Iraqi civilians), stripping the copper pipes, and stealing the lightbulbs in Qa Qaa, where was the bottle with a few drops of unknown substance found?

You've got it.

Qa Qaa.

Update, 10:00AM: TeamKerry responds. Great, concise talking points, and I'm sure there's more waiting in the wings. Let's see how much of this the media actually picks up. I'm sure Rush and Hannity and Fox and working feverishly on the GOP talking points right now.

The 'October Surprise'?

Bada bing.

Bada boom.

George Bush just lost the oval room.

(This is unbelieveably huge, if the details are anywhere near correct. The source is Chris Nelson of Nelson Report, an exclusive Washington insider's insider scandal sheet. If a big story is in Nelson Report today, the story's likely to "break" on the New York Times front page tomorrow. People pay major big bucks to buy into his publication, and subscription is limited to a very exclusive Capitol Hill club, because it's usually right. We're not talking about Matt Drudge here. Nelson is better connected in Washington, DC than Dick Cheney. I just wanted anyone reading this to understand why I think this is so huge, and that there's more than just a whiff of drudgeness about it.)

Update - 10:50PM: This story is now "frontpaged" in the New York Times early Monday morning edition. Wow. Go read.

...The International Atomic Energy Agency publicly warned about the danger of these explosives before the war, and after the invasion it specifically told United States officials about the need to keep the explosives secured, European diplomats said in interviews last week. Administration officials say they cannot explain why the explosives were not safeguarded, beyond the fact that the occupation force was overwhelmed by the amount of munitions they found throughout the country...

...After the invasion, when widespread looting began in Iraq, the international weapons experts grew concerned that the Qaqaa stockpile could fall into unfriendly hands. In May, an internal I.A.E.A. memorandum warned that terrorists might be helping "themselves to the greatest explosives bonanza in history...."

..."Should we have gone there? Definitely," said one senior administration official. "But there are a lot of things we should have done, and didn't..."

Still working my way through the article...

Update, 11:15PM: Kos has an extensive discussion going. I need to go to bed. ;-)

My Family, Your Family, the Human Family

Learning Peace and Speaking Truth to Power on the Happy Planet

Families are still on my heart today. Families and war are on my mind. So I let my "googled" fingers do a little bit of walking to find some references that go toward connecting the dots between families and that all-too-human activity that scars and decimates not only all families, but all human endeavor and creativity, "war". The word meister in me insists I get tangential for a second and provide you with the origin of the modern word "decimate":

Decimate originally referred to the killing of every tenth person, a punishment used in the Roman army for mutinous legions.

On my travels I found this at Common Dreams: Families of Iraq War Dead Target Bush in Ads

That said, my own family and my human family is on my mind. The wake of human governmental and corporate addiction to war continues to decimate my human family more than 200 years beyond The Enlightenment. Still. I think, still they're doing it ... ripping bodies, lives and families to pieces, and still idiotically justifying it ... a necessary evil ... human beings are innately violent. My ass.

My own personal WayBack Machine functions like a finely-tuned Bugati, or a Stradivarius violin if you will. It takes little prodding to take me back decades to when I was a child of seven, already schooled in the potential for humankind, via their governments, to self-destruct without warning at any moment. I'm still really angry about having my peace of mind destroyed at age seven. Really pissed about it. (Photos at left are from Christmas of 1959 when I was seven. I'm the tallest, the big sister. Susie is next, and then our baby sister, Shari. The white dog's name was Shaggy.)

So,... cutting finally to the chase... since the notion of ending war and cultivating peace disappeared from the list of top priority items for presidential candidates after John Kerry was nominated, I'm returning to my prime directive... teaching peace, and pointing to others who also think it's a "good idea".

Iraq Veterans Against the War

Veterans for Peace

Traprock Peace Center

Military Families Speak Out

End the War.org

For my parents, my sisters, my children, my husband and the rest of my beleaguered human family.

On Intelligence

It seems obvious to many of us liberals that, generally speaking, we are more intelligent than our conservative counterparts. Up till now, I had not seen much hard proof indicating this. But then I found this site that gives statistics as to what percentage of the populations of all 50 states have college degrees. The results are then color-coded red and blue, and ranked in descending order.

Maybe its just me, but it sure seems like there is a mass of blue at the top, and larger mass of red at the bottom. Now, before any of you start whining about the validity of the source, check out the bottom see from where the information was taken. Yep, the US Census Bureau.

Education may not always be the best measure of intelligence, but its one of the better measurements we have. Hell, even Karl Rove agrees with the premise of the site:

"As people do better, they start voting like Republicans -- unless they have too much education and vote Democratic..."
--Karl Rove

Also, John Stuart Mill, a well-known economist of the 19th century, seemed to agree with this notion:

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."
--John Stuart Mill

Finally, this picture says it all:






If this what the Bush campaign thinks protesters are like, I don't blame them for requiring blood oaths to enter Bush speeches.

Collection of Bush Heresies

Due to the damage the Bush administration has done to this country, most of us here know that this election is one of the most important in American history.

We've seen the erosion of civil liberties, crumbling of strong alliances, increased growth of international anti-American sentiment, massive loss of American jobs, and the destruction of a country in a war based on the lies of our Vice President, our Secretary of Defense and his deputy, a war with no end in sight that is costing us billions of dollars and the lives of the next generation of this country.

However obvious it may appear to us that John Kerry must defeat George Bush, there are nearly as many of those that support Bush as those that support his challenger, not to mention the undecided voters. One of the largest reasons that so many in this country support our President whole-heartedly is due to his claim on Christianity. However, as a mailing from the Sojourners organization clearly demonstrated to me Friday, Bush should not be viewed as a righteous, upstanding Christian due to the fact that he is largely responsible for the growth of a number of heresies in the modern Christian church through his abuse of religious language for political gain. These heresies include

• The teaching that the words "the light shines in the darkness and the darkness has not overcome it" apply to the United States, when they really apply only to Christ.
• The belief that the nature of the war on terrorism demands its success takes precedence over ethical and moral norms such as an abhorrence to torture and the intentional bombing of civilians.
• The idea that American is a "Christian nation" that represents virtue.
• The notion that those that oppose the current policies of the American government are inherently "evil-doers" and stand with the terrorists.

I don't know how many ASZ readers hold Christian beliefs, but surely all of you know Christians who are planning on voting for Bush. Karl Rove has worked very hard at shoring up the Republican evangelical-Christian base, but lets work against him, even just a bit. Read this statement from Sojourners that has been signed by over 200 Christian theologians and ethicists, and send it to some of your conservative Christian friends. Make it clear to them that opposition to Bush is actually better suited to their Christian beliefs.

ASZ Housekeeping

1. I've been seriously remiss in not updating the ASZ blogroll recently (like I haven't been working on other stuff...all right...no excuses...). There are several great blogs that I travel to regularly, and hope you'll find them as helpful and / or entertaining as do I. The newbies have a ** next to them in the blogroll.
   
   
2. A lot of first time voters that I work with have been asking me how to find out where their polling place is located. For those of you in small town America (like me), it's a no brainer. For someone new to the process who lives in a big city (like where I work), it can be a daunting task just figuring out the correct place to vote.
   
   Given the O-hi-O ruling yesterday on not allowing provisional balloting if you show up at the wrong polling place, it becomes all the more important that people know where to vote. Last night, I stumbled onto a great site that will answer all your questions. By all means, if you or someone you know has any concerns about where to vote, check out mypollingsite.com or call your local election board.
   
   
3. Our own SpinDentist is out of action until next Wednesday, so Forrest from American Bodhisattva has graciously agreed to do some guest blogging and take up some of Doc's (ahem) slack in his absence. ;-) You should see some postings from Forrest beginning today.

Have a great Sunday!! It's almost time for the T.O. and Jeffy show!

49 More Reasons To Elect John Kerry

There's enough room in hell for all parties on both sides responsible for this mess. Perhaps Bush and Zarqawi can share a special circle.

49 New Iraqi Army Soldiers Shot to Death

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Forty-nine soldiers in Iraq's new army have been found shot to death, police said Sunday.

Gen. Walid al-Azzawi, commander of the Diyala provincial police, said the bodies were discovered Saturday about 30 miles south of Baqouba.

They were laid out in four rows each, with 12 bodies in each row, he said.

"After inspection, we found out that they were shot after being ordered to lay down on the earth," he said.

Sunday Endorsement Watch

Three major newspapers are among those endorsing John Kerry today:

Washington Post

Des Moines Register

Orlando Sentinel

Editorial board endorsements don't necessarily mean much, in and of themselves, and certainly aren't written to change the mind of anyone who's already locked into a particular candidate. That's not the intent of endorsements. The intent is to articulate a compelling reason for favoring one candidate over another -- and therefore, endorsements are targeted primarily toward the shrinking cadre of "undecideds".

The Washington Post endorsement fails that test, in my opinion. It is a pained rejection of George Bush rather than an unqualified endorsement of Senator Kerry:

...We do not view a vote for Mr. Kerry as a vote without risks. But the risks on the other side are well known, and the strengths Mr. Kerry brings are considerable. He pledges both to fight in Iraq and to reach out to allies; to hunt down terrorists, and to engage without arrogance the Islamic world. These are the right goals, and we think Mr. Kerry is the better bet to achieve them.

In other words, the Washington Post is spinning the roulette wheel, and recommending their readers put their chips on red rather than black and hoping that double zero doesn't come up. This is easily the worst of the Kerry endorsements I've read to date.

Contrast the WaPo endorsement with that of the Des Moines Register:

...It's time to see Kerry as the person he is, not as the caricature created in the president's campaign ads.

Kerry won the presidential debates because the man Americans saw on live television differed from the caricature. Americans saw a thoughtful, experienced, exceptionally well-informed candidate who cares deeply about his country and its people.

...It is the nature of the man to listen and to respect others. He does not tend toward vindictiveness or in-your-face triumphalism. There is a dignity about him. We have watched him from early in the Iowa caucus campaign through a grueling general-election campaign in a battleground state. We have seen Kerry grow and develop in presidential qualities to the point we're confident in recommending him as a person of common sense and decency - a leader who has what it takes to bring Americans back together.

The editorial board of the Register lays out what I described as necessary - a compelling case for the candidate of their choice. Their consideration is clearly not one of picking "the lesser of two evils".

The Orlando Sentinel endorsement of John Kerry is an odd duck. It starts out with an absolutely scathing slapdown of George Bush, and is a thing of beauty:

Four years ago, the Orlando Sentinel endorsed Republican George W. Bush for president based on our trust in him to unite America. We expected him to forge bipartisan solutions to problems while keeping this nation secure and fiscally sound.

This president has utterly failed to fulfill our expectations. We turn now to his Democratic challenger, Sen. John Kerry, with the belief that he is more likely to meet the hopes we once held for Mr. Bush.

Our choice was not dictated by partisanship...Indeed, it has been 40 years since the Sentinel endorsed a Democrat -- Lyndon Johnson -- for president.

...Mr. Bush has abandoned the core values we thought we shared with him -- keeping the nation strong while ensuring that its government is limited, accountable and fiscally responsible.

The Sentinel then ticks off eight bullet point reasons why John Kerry is clearly the most qualified candidate to hold the highest office - their endorsement of him is strong and grounded in fact. It's also, in no uncertain terms, an apology for their previous endorsement of George Bush in 2000. You can be sure that Jeb Bush is spitting up his coffee this morning.

*****
Out of all the endorsements that both Kerry and Bush will receive today, the one given by the Des Moines Register is by far and away the most important. For that matter, it might be the most important endorsement of the entire 2004 election cycle.

The Register carries a disproportionately huge influence in the swing state of Iowa -- maybe more so than any other single media outlet in any other state in the union. No media outlet in Iowa, print or broadcast, can begin to match the sheer clout of the Register in both reach and credibility. For that reason alone, I have no doubt that the editorial board of the Register recognized their potential impact on the upcoming election, and their deliberative endorsement of John Kerry is written as an acknowledgement of that awesome responsibility.

So, it's a good start to what I hope will be a great Sunday of ringing endorsements for John Kerry from small, medium, and large newspapers across the country.

Feel free to post your own endorsement sightings in the comments!

Update, 12:30PM: Jude at Iddybud has a comprehensive list of Kerry endorsements today, complete with linkage. Nice work, Jude!!

WAYBACK MACHINE: Sometimes, It Sucks to be Right

This ASZ blog post was originally written on 6/07/04, and was selected by the author for the ASZ Wayback Machine project. All text is exactly as originally posted. Formatting has been updated to fit current Blogger templates, and in many cases, original links may no longer work.

Hard Drive Maintenance

Every now and then, I'll take a peek at the hard drive on my computer and do some housecleaning - removing old games I no longer play, programs I no longer use, and spyware that sneaks onto the system. When I get motivated enough to actually open Windows Explorer and take a look, sometimes I see interesting file names with old creation dates that pique my interest. I found one of those today, from January 30, 2003. The title of the document was war.txt (I do most of my drafts in notepad).

Here's what I wrote, in response to a pro-war posting on another forum:

Quoting: "...nations that have the ability to right the wrongs being perpetrated on humanity around the world, should have a moral obligation to do so. Human rights are universal, and should be enforced."

My response:

The last I checked, the U.S. had not been elected "cop" of the world. We do NOT have a moral obligation to enforce or project our view of humanity and human rights around the planet by force. If this was truly the case, the U.S. would have been in Iraq, Rwanda, Ivory Coast, and other global human rights hot spots many years ago.

If there is a demonstrable threat to our sovereignty or health / well being as a nation, we have an absolute right to use force. The obligation of our government leaders is to we, the folks who write the checks -- that obligation is to prove the threat exists. That hasn't been done. All we've gotten is a lot of "trust me on this one" coming from Washington. A lot of accusations and harsh words have been forthcoming, but not enough evidence to convict Saddam of enough malfeasance to support even a traffic ticket.

Excuse me if I'm a bit jaded in my old age, but I don't trust the beltway bandits a lick. Ok, Iraq's got chemical weapons? Fine. I want someone to detail what, when, and where, and what type of delivery system Saddam has to get mass destruction level quantities to Atlantic City. If so, I also want to know how long our government has known about it -- because if true, someone in government should hang for not addressing this issue 10 years ago.

Lastly, Iraq has no physical plant capability to do anything nuclear. Nothing. Nada. Zip. North Korea does, but not Iraq. Anyone that thinks you can "hide" weapons grade plutonium processing knows nothing about nuclear fission.

The bottom line is: do you trust your government to tell you the unfettered truth? If you do, you didn't grow up in the era that I did, and that simple fact may be the thing that divides us and our respective opinions.

My words actually mean more to me now than they did in January, 2003. Back then, I was expressing my distaste for the red meat hell-bent-for-leather track that the U.S. was taking with respect to Iraq. Today, those words reinforce for me why I was so adamantly opposed to getting involved in Iraq.

And it's a strange feeling, with Abu Ghraib and Fallujah now quickly receding in the rear view mirror, how close to spot-on I was about the "human rights" excuse, and how wrong the justifiers were.

Sometimes, I hate when I'm right.