HEALTHCARE BATTLEFIELD

Senate votes for debate, holdouts still say "public option" is dead

(11/30/09) At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I believe it is time to begin considering how to react to a crummy, half-way health care reform bill that does nothing for the majority of us but preserves the current employer-based private insurance system.  Profit is the BIGGEST waste center in the health care delivery system and it should be phased out.

It's time, people. It's time to start organizing mass resistance.  There are enough people who are being killed and ruined by the current system to join a mass demonstration that would be the likes of something we've never seen before.  If the uninsured, underinsured, and people on the brink of ruin all dropped a hammer at the same time it would shake the earth.  Instead, we have to march, march, march, against the reactionary teabagging Astroturfing insurance company representatives, march against insurance companies, march against the bastards we sent to Congress to represent THE PEOPLE, not their corporation donors. 

It's time, we need to let them know that calling a failed health reform bill a "robust public option" when only 5% of the very poorest will be allowed to join... we need to tell them we know what's up, and we're not buying it.

House passes HR 3962

(11/9/09) On Saturday, the House narrowly passed its version of the health care reform package, which is now a 1990 page document, nearly a thousand pages over the size of H.R. 3200 a few short weeks back. I guess our Representatives think they're getting paid by the word.

I had some problems getting the .pdf file.  I am not exactly sure if this version datad 10/29/09 includes everything in the final version passed on 11/7/09, but I'm putting it up so you can hopefully avoid getting a virus/spyware while trying to download it from some site with "korea" in the address. Fixing that spyware problem cost me a couple of hours time this morning.

I will comment more on the specifics of the bill as I have time to read it. Meanwhile, please download a copy of it if you wish and begin your own search mission.

Here is an important link with information about the bill. I am not sure if it's just propaganda or not; I haven't had time to look it all over but a lot of the subject lines imply that it's to tell you what's so doggone good about the bill.  http://www.centerforpolicyanalysis.org/id57.html

To be continued....

DYEGR4BCQTMW

Time grows short, the last knife is about to be plunged into our backs

(11/1/09) Here it comes, as they used to say in the service, "without the benefit of a reacharound". 

Nancy Pelosi, who promised at least an opportunity for Dennis Kucinich's up/down vote on his single payer amendment, is going to break that promise.  The Dems, who had the fix in from Day One on health care reform, have manipulated the game so that they now have health care reform advocates pleading for a vote on the choice between a trigger option or an opt-out bill.  Both bills are so outrageously far from what anyone thought "Change You Can Belive In" meant that we who worked for Obama, sent him our money, and gave him our votes are shaking our heads in disbelief.

If you are reading this I know I'm preaching to the choir. A lot of good people supported Obama in good faith. I began to get suspicious towards the end of the Iowa caucus battle as bloggers from both the left and right urged people to listen to what he was actually saying. After Iowa, he went on to New Hampshire and beyond, and I did start listening closely to the inflection and dialect on progressive issues.  Unfortunately I started hearing a lot of backtracking, waffling, and flip-flopping on many key issues, which I began documenting HERE on my site in April or May 2008 when I finally had enough.  I did not find dates for his statement that he would be willing to negotiate with anyone, but you probably remember the statement.  But right before he went to do the obligatory speech ot AIPAC, probably the most powerful lobby in Congress, he withdrew that statement and instead called Hamas "terrorists" even though they are the legally elected representatives of the 10 million people who live in Gaza.

For me, that was the last straw.  What will it take to get YOU, my progressive readers, to finally realize that the Democrats have lost any legitimacy they might have ever had to represent you? They DON'T, you know. Instead they represent BIG EVERYTHING... Pharma, Healthcare, Defense (Offense), Agriculture, Manufacturing, Big EVERYTHING.  Look what's gone down in the last 30 years.  It's not like the Dems didn't have a fair chance to STOP it.  They had control of the Executive Branch for 8 years, and the Congress for a few years, don't know offhand how many and how much.  But RIGHT NOW they have both houses and the Executive and we're approaching the end of their first year.  Do things look better now than they did a year ago?

We are now in the endgame of the Health Care "Reform", what many Democrats are claiming to be the most important legislation of our lifetime and they are crowing about a victory.  But what victory?  It is a provable fact that the only legislation that would have fixed this abominable, disgraceful, embarassing mess of a health care system is HR 676.  The Democrats took that away from us without even MENTIONING it. WTF is up with that?

If this bill sucks as bad as I predict that it will, do you stay Democrats or do you finally free yourselves from the illusion that the two party system can actually work? Without a real choice in the voting booth you get a choice between BAD or WORSE.  It's a Punch and Judy Show, and they're using YOU for the puppets.

I urge everyone who has a progressive thought in their head to plan on two things. First off, plan on attending a march or general strike to prevent this bill from becoming law. There has been some early action from PNHP and I'm sure others will follow. Second, get busy in your state recruiting articulate candidates who will run as independents for Congress.  I believe that the right people stand a chance, especially if we are willing to stare the beast straight in the eye and tell the unvarnished truth without flinching.

So, candidates, I will help any decent human being who asks for it with whatever resources I have. 

 "Baucus bill" a GOP dream come true...

Read the first release here...

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/politics/20091609-HEALTH-BAUCUS.pdf

Obama still sending mixed message on "public option"

(9/13/09) I apologize for not reporting on Obama's speech, but I discovered Twitter this week.

OK, it's had a bit of time to settle in, so I think I can tell you that Obama is throwing some weight behind getting a bill passed.  HOWEVER, I have grave concerns that there has already been a deal done and the so-called "public option", a slippery weasel-worded thingie that nobody has defined, is turning into vapor before our eyes.  Also, a "mandate" to buy insurance is creeping into the President's vocabulary.

Obama gave a convincing speech on Wednesday, with the GOP sacrificing one of its own to provide us with some amusement.  (What were they expecting.... that people are going to start chanting "You Lie" at rallies instead of "Yes We Can"?) Obama always gives a good speech. I can't say that I always agree with the content of his speeches, but they are compelling and fun to watch.

What I would have liked to hear him say is "The public option is going to be an extension of our Medicare system and will be available for those who are unhappy with their current insurance or unable to afford it.  It will be available on a sliding pay scale according to your income, starting at FREE.  This is not "optional" to the bill and I will not sign any bill that does not include this provision.  It will not be subject to any "trigger" or conditions."

Of course, that's NOT what he said.  He said that the "public option" is a small deal and only about 5 per cent of the bill (where did THAT come from?)  The implication is that lefties should be happy to go with the mandate to buy insurance as long as they can't be turned down.  WTF is that?  The point is that we already can't afford our insurance.  Giving people that don't pay taxes due to no income a "tax credit" to buy insurance isn't worth a tinker's damn.

I think somebody better step up to the plate like Rep. Antony Wiener (D, NY) has done and start laying down some definitions, specifics, and talk about what this all really means.  So far the debate has been completely derailed by right wing nonsense about Death Panels, pulling the plug on Granny, socialized medicine, government takeover, and the rest of the non-issue bullshit they always dredge up when adults try to talk about health care reform. 

If there are any of our elected leaders reading this, today's the day.  Do it NOW. 

Obamacare, whatever that was, is on its way to the morgue

(9/5/09)  OK, I was wrong last week when I predicted that the Dems were going to try to make this all about Ted Kennedy.  At least I THINK I was wrong; they haven't done it yet but they still might try that ploy.  It's Labor Day weekend, and the fun starts all over again on Tuesday.

Tuesday is the day Obama chose to address the nation's schoolkids.  OK, it's back to school time, I get that.  But WTF... when is this man going to show some leadership on health care reform?

What some of the press is saying is that Obama has contacted leaders of progressive single payer and other health care reform groups and told them that the "public option" is a dead issue.  I have no way of knowing if this story is true or not, just like none of us knows what the "public option" really means.  I DO, however, remember that candidate Obama told us that every American would have the same opportunity to obtain the same health care plan that HE AND HIS FAMILY have at an affordable price.

OK, he's going to speak to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday.  All I can say is that if he can pull this one off he's got Doug Henning and Houdini beat by a mile.  My fear is that instead of doing what's right, he's going to do what's politically expedient.  That will be to sell out the progressive wing of the party.  He can't help it.  He's a Democrat, that's reflexive, it's what they always do when the going gets tough.  Oh, when they need us, they'll tell us anything, but when it comes time to deal with the minority GOP they'd rather sell out their progressive Grandma than fight for what's right.

Fortunately, progressives are NOT IN A COMPROMISING MOOD on this one.  If Obama fails to provide some political will and leadership on this issue, if he dares to drop the "public option" or whatever it is that's supposed to be a compromise substitute for REAL REFORM, then the House will not pass a bill.  The Dems will split in 2010, and the 3 party system will be born.

That's not such a bad deal, is it?

How the Democrats Will Kill Health Care Reform, version 2

(8/30/09)  Last week was dominated by the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy, who was called the "liberal lion of the Senate" while also being known as the "great compromiser" by the GOP.  Those two notions are mutually exclusive, so an examination of Kennedy's voting record is in order.  However, that's not the topic here... we're talking about health care reform.

As anyone who knows the Kennedy family history would know, Ted Kennedy did not run his own life as a clean and straightforward process.  He was a philanderer, and Vicki Kennedy is his second wife, having divorced first wife Joan in 1982.  In 1969, Kennedy was the driver in a car crash at Chappaquiddick Island in which Mary Jo Kopechne was killed.  I will not feed or repeat speculations here, and I hate to bring this up.  The only thing is, there are a passel of right wing radio and TV news whores and pundits licking their chops and biding their time.

What they are waiting for is the Democrats to launch an emotional appeal to the base to try to revive the floundering  health reform effort.  The right wants the Dems to tie health care reform to Ted Kennedy, at which time they will start digging up everything they can on Kennedy, including the two things I just mentioned, and it will blanket the news.  We will have to relive 1969 Chappaquiddick all over again.

I have tried to post this at Huffington Post and they won't let my posts on this topic get through.  Since they are joined at the hip with the Democratic Party, I'd say the likelihood of this scenario is very high.  If you agree, please contact your Congress critter and let them know that you think hooking health reform to the passing of Ted Kennedy is a bad idea.

My proposed option is to present the best bill to the American people we can and run it through with a simple majority.  The best bill is HR 676.  Any bill that has true reform of the real problem will include measures to phase out health insurance companies.

What did Obama tell the American people about health care in 2008?

From the 2-21-08 debate with Hillary Clinton...

OBAMA: But I said before, I think she did it in the wrong way, because it wasn't just the fact that the insurance companies, the drug companies were battling here, and no doubt they were. It was also that Senator Clinton and the administration went behind closed doors, excluded the participation even of Democratic members of Congress who had slightly different ideas than the ones that Senator Clinton had put forward. And, as a consequence, it was much more difficult to get Congress to cooperate.

OBAMA: And I've said that I'm going to do things differently. I think we have to open up the process. Everybody has to have a seat at the table. And most importantly, the American people have to be involved and educated about how this change is going to be brought about.

So excluding single payer advocates, rejecting single payer as a straw man in public speeches, and making secret deals with Big Pharma seems to be in direct conflict with Candidate Obama's campaign promises.  Democrats, can you do ANYTHING right?

Obama Signals Death of "Public Option"

Obama surrendered to Big Insurance and teabaggers without a fight

(8/21/9) Over last weekend and into this week, the Obama team has sent a weak, waffling, and obscure message on whatever "the public option" is.  As the week drew on, answers to direct questions given from the top down have led to the conclusion that any meaningful reform that reins in health insurance company abuse of their customers is dead. 

The wimpy, wimpy, wimpy stuff started last weekend when Kathleen Sibelius (Director of HHS) hit the news shows stumbling about the "public option".  She said it wasn't essential to the bill.  Obama made a similar statement at a town hall meeting.  The news media jumped all over this, the rightwingnuts gleefully proclaimed victory, and then Obama spent the balance of this week trying to assure us that that "public option" is still alive without coming out and saying "THE PUBLIC OPTION IS ALIVE". 

In reality, the Obama Administration opposed real health reform from the beginning.  Single payer is the system used by the rest of the industrial world, and it was "off the table" from the beginning.  It was literally not at the table; when the Senate Finance Committee held hearings this spring, there was not one single payer advocate given a seat out of 41 available seats.  It's as if the Senate Finance Committee believes that if you don't talk about single payer, it will go away.  Stick your fingers in your ears, shake your head back and forth, and say "Bla la la la la" in a loud voice to avoid hearing the words "single payer".

Obama is determined to reach a bi-partisan supported solution, so he gave away single payer at the start.  He also gave away drug price negotiation to Big Pharma in a secret backroom deal that stopped being secret.  He has failed miserably to corral members of his own party and have real negotions with GOP Congress toads like Chuck Grassley, ranking minority member of the SFC.  Now he is backing down on whatever the "public option" was, abandoning not only the progressives but the base of the party by reneging on his campaign promises about one of the biggest issues of the campaign.

This political cowardice shows exactly why the Democrats are not fit or able to represent the progressive wing of the party.  They have thrown us off and under the bus on so many issues it's hard to keep track.  Let's try.  Campaign finance reform, Executive Branch overreach, accountability for torture, continuation of "rendition", Gitmo, Blackwater still on payroll, accountability for Iraq invasion, accountability for war profitteering, domestic spying, banking and credit card reform, global warming (when bill passes it will be gutted like the banking bill was), Afghanistan escalation.  I'm sure I've left some out.  On these and other issues the Democrats have failed to perform and deliver.  So why are we still voting for them?

It's not like we haven't given them a chance.  In 2006 we sent them to Congress to end the Iraq war and occupation.  This could have been done easily by insisting that any further special funding for Iraq was tied to a withdrawal timetable.  Guess what?  It's 3 years later and we still have 130,000 troops in Iraq and about as many contractors.  (Bush used contractors so he could avoid having to re-instate the draft). 

Think about these failures when you hit the voting booths in 2010.  Think about what the Democrats do to progressives after every election.  It goes like this: we're their best friends during the campaign because we're the ones willing to put shoe leather on the ground and run phone banks for them.  They promise us real change, and then as soon as they calculate that they no longer need us, they pitch us like last week's newspaper. 

Don't let them use you again.

 Former Labor Sec. Robert Reich calls for march on Washington Sept. 13

(8/19/09) From Politico:  Robert Reich is asking Americans to show support for the Public Option (whatever that is) by marching on Washington 9/13.  This also coincides with "Grandparent's Day".  This is a countermarch to the Teabagger/Glenn Beck march on 9/12/09.

Anyone organizing this march who reads this should email to editor@stopdubya.com so I can help publicize the event.  This event fits within the general strategy that will work; national actions such as marches, strikes, slowdowns, and sit-ins.  Non-violent civil disobedience is justified for this cause.

The powers that control how health care is delivered in the United States have got a firm grasp and control over our economic and political systems.

Do you think they are going to voluntarily give up this power and money?  Hell, no, they WILL NOT.  You are going to have to SEIZE IT BACK.

There is an unholy collusion between the politicians who are on the take and the insurance companies who steal you blind.  If you have been following the health care bills and discussions, you know that HR 676 (single payer bill) has been waiting for over a year with 80 Reps signed on.  HR 3200 is a POS bill that is so flawed that it should be scrapped.  Sinc the GOP has no intention of voting for ANY bill, Americans should demand the reform that works, not some cobbled compromise.

Single payer is the only system that will actually save us money and guarantee 100% coverage.   Everybody in, nobody out.  THIS IS A GOAL WORTH FIGHTING FOR.

To achieve this goal, to win this fight, people are going to have to be willing to make some sacrifices and some tough choices.  HOWEVER, IF WE STICK TOGETHER AND DEMAND SINGLE PAYER we WILL WIN.

The way to win this fight is to organize and participate in marches, general strikes and walkouts.  We demand true single payer, which means insurance companies WILL BE PHASED OUT.  Nothing else will suffice.  

SINGLE PAYER ACTION PLAN

I am trying to formulate an action plan to revive our chances of getting Congress to adopt a single payer bill such as H.R. 676.  As you know, many of the Dems, including President Obama, are campaigning against single payer to promote their own cobbled up bill that retains the for-profit system.

The first part of my plan involves raising awareness of what single payer is and how it differs from what the Democrats are proposing in HR 3200.  This would be done through public meetings advertised in local media.  There will be cost involved, the volunteers who take this on will probably have to fund it as well.  I suggest that a carefully designed comparison between plans be standardized and distributed to GP members and anyone else who will take this on.  I am willing to design this material, or suggest a design for it, but a consensus should be reached. 

Other organizations who have been left out of the public discussion and media such as PNHP and others may be very interested in helping this project.  I suggest enlisting allies from whatever sources are available, including any Democrat voters who thought they were electing a single payer advocate.

The second part of my plan is a call for general strikes beginning in late August or early September.  The Congress will be re-convening and getting back to work on the bills.  If there is enough interest in single payer, and people are willing to strike for it, I believe we can still turn this around.  What has to happen is Congress needs to become convinced that voters are aware of the advantages of single payer and we want insurance companies to vanish rather than be placated and controlled at the same time.

I have been trying to raise interest in this project through my website and posting at various progressive sites.  I believe the interest is there, I just don't have a structure handy to build on.

What can you do to help?  Contact HCAN, PHNP, GPUSA, and other interested parties to tell them you would like to organize a national single payer action, which includes awareness and strikes. I will include other organizations as they come forward.

Green Party

Health Care for America Now

Physicians for a National Health Program

Obama Town Hall More Like Campaign Rally

Hand-picked crowd chants "Yes we can"; Nutjob brings handgun and Thomas Jefferson quote about "Watering the tree of liberty with blood"

(8/11/09)  Barack Obama orchestrated his first "town hall" meeting in Portsmouth, NH today to a carefully screened crowd of supporters who even chanted the familiar campaign slogan on cue.  Obama didn't drop any news, although this was probably the first time I've heard him clearly deny that he ever supported single payer health care.  Upon several occasions he has articulated varying degrees of support for single payer, including flat out saying he supports it.  The so-called "public option" has never been properly explained; it seems as if it's supposed to make single payer advocates go away, but I'm not inclined to go away that easily.

It is unclear whether this will help tone down the wakkos who have been sent in by insurance company goons and GOP right wing concerns.  Today, wannabe tough guy William Kostric showed up with a loaded gun at Obama's meeting, holding a sign stating it was time to "water the tree of liberty",  which is a partial quote from Thomas Jefferson that was taken out of context entirely.  Jefferson would have never supported the notion that political ideas had to be decided by threats and gunplay.  That shows you exactly how desperate the right wing is to stop health care reform.

IN RELATED NEWS... Senator Claire McCaskill had her own problems at a town hall meeting in St. Louis.  The crowd was booing and calling her a liar when she was stating plain factual information.  To her credit she did a fairly good job of keeping things moving, much better than Arlen Spector did earlier.  Spector left the Party of No to become the purveyor of "WAIT A MINUTE", which he yelled into his microphone at least 15 times while trying to control a single guy with no microphone.  Pathetic.

Claire McCaskill said (paraphrasing) "If anyone wants to bet you that there is single payer in this bill, take the bet.  There is no single payer, there is no support for single payer, and I will never vote for a bill that includes single payer".  Well, Claire, now we know who the enemy is.  I will look up her insurance company campaign donations and put them in a prominant place.

Unions enter Town Hall Meeting fight

(8/6/09) The leader of AFL-CIO has issued a memo urging union members to target town hall meetings in 50 locations to vigorously engage the paid protestor mobs sent in by the health companies.  John Sweeney urged unions to get membership out to counter the loudmouth tinfoil-hatters and professional agitators that the GOP has been using to intimidate congressmen and women and shut down the debate.

AFL-CIO Treasurer Richard Trumka sent out the following statement:

Every American has the inalienable right to participate in our democratic process. Our politics is passionate, heartfelt and often loud -- as was the founding of our nation. But that is not what the corporate-funded mobs are engaging in when they show up to disrupt town halls held by members of Congress.

Major health care reform is closer than ever to passage and it is no secret that special interests want to weaken or block it. These mobs are not there to participate. As their own strategy memo states, they have been sent by their corporate and lobbyist bankrollers to disrupt, heckle and block meaningful debate. This is a desperation move, meant to slow the momentum for change.

Mob rule is not democracy. People have a democratic right to express themselves and our elected leaders have a right to hear from their constituents -- not organized thugs whose sole purpose is to shut down the conversation and attempt to scare our leaders into inaction

We call on the insurance companies, the lobbyists and the Republican leaders who are cheering them on to halt these 'Brooks Brothers Riot' tactics. Health care is a crucial issue and everyone - on all sides of the issue - deserves to be heard.

 

Update 8/11/09 - Teabagger claims to have been assaulted by SEIU members outside Russ Carnahan's town hall meeting in St. Louis.  If you watch the videotape, the man (Kenneth Gladney, of St. Louis) is running all around trying to attract the attention of police cars that seem to be driving by his histrionics.  In the NEXT PHOTO of Gladney I say, he was in a wheelchair covered with bandages!  LOL, he got lawyered up in a New York minute, too.

Takin' it to the streets - GOP paid thugs try to squelch HC town meetings

(8/5/09) The GOP is no stranger to outright theft and violence. In the 2000 election they sent people from all over the country, many of them staffers to GOP elected officials, to disrupt the vote count in Dade County, Florida.  This was made to look like a spontaneous outpouring of political rage; it was not, it was a show, bought and paid for.  It worked.

More recently, (and ongoing), the GOP has tacitly endorsed the so-called "birther" movement, which is aimed at trying to steal the Executive Branch of the US government by the false claim that Obama is not a US citizen.  The plain truth is that he was born in Hawaii; however, since his mother was a US citizen the question is moot since that automatically confers citizenship no matter where he was born.

Today, the GOP is trying to take advantage of the August recess to kill health care reform by preventing elected officials from informing their constituents about the proposed reforms.  There are "angry" mobs showing up at meetings shouting down speakers and chanting nonsense.  Some of these people are self-identified as remnants of the "teabagger" movement, a chaotic group of malcontents that started out as a Libertarian movement and was hijacked by the GOP.  This is part of the "want Obama to fail" garbage that spews from the increasingly irrelevant Rush Limbaugh group.

The "Party of NO" is encouraging people to disrupt Democratic Party events.  The Health Insurance industry is paying people to disrupt Democratic Party events.  Where does that leave us as a nation?

It leaves us on the brink of losing health care reform.  The proposals are already so watered down by compromises that the best descriptive word I can think of for how Obama has handled this is that he's BOTCHED the job.  He has not provided leadership on this issue, and the Democrats are so compromised with insurance lobby money that they can't put together a real plan.  They are tip-toeing around the real solution; single payer.  That is the ONLY possible solution that will actually work.  Everything else is a halfway measure that will ultimately fail and have to be scrapped.

It is time for Americans to put up or just shut up.  If you truly want health care reform, if you truly believe that health insurance companies are screwing us, then it's time to get your ass out of your chair and into the street.  You need to personally visit your congressional representative, and bring your family and friends with you.  You need to be as informed about when and where these town hall meetings are as the GOP is, and you need to BE THERE to stop the paid thugs from stealing health care reform.

The only feasible solution to our health care crisis is single payer. It's time to demonstrate, strike, and use civil disobedience to get the point across.  The Congress was elected to serve the people, not the well-moneyed interests in Washington who have rigged to the system against you.

House Education and Labor passes Kucinich Amendment

(7/17/09) Rep.Dennis Kucinich has been a strong advocate for single payer for years, being one of 93 co-sponsors of H.R. 676, better known as the Conyers single payer bill.  Kucinich is trying to salvage a bad situation with a new approach.  It appears that the Democrats as a group do not have the spine to do what Americans want them to do, which is to write and pass a health reform bill that reins in the insurance company ripoffs plus gives us the choice of a public plan that eliminates for-profit health care.

H.R. 676 has been sitting around since January 2007 waiting for the Democrats to grow a pair.  Despite having commanding supermajorities in both houses and a promise-rich President in the White House, the Dems prefer to stick with the insurance companies over their constituents.  So they've come up with H.R. 3200.  This is a BAD bill.  However...

Along comes Dennis with an amendment that allows states to opt out of the federal plan and establish their own single payer system.  This is something that California has been working on since March.  The Kucinich Amendment will open the door for states to do their own thing on health care.  This should be a boon for business of all sizes, who will want to relocate to a place where they don't have to offer a high-cost benefits package to their employees.  Other states will want the same advantage, and down they will go, like a line of dominos.

This is a scenario that COULD work.  There are plenty of "ifs", and there will be a huge fight over this amendment, oddly from the GOP who are normally states rights advocates.  More as it develops....

Congressional contact information Capitol switchboard:  800-473-6711 HOUSE:  Link... you can email and then click through to get the phone number SENATE:  Link:  you can get their phone number and web email form here Important:  Your Senator may not be up for re-election this year, so let them know that you will NOT FORGET how they vote for this as it goes south, drains the Treasury, and the Wall Street moguls walk away with golden parachutes made out of your money.  You are going to be REWARDING THEIR FAILURE AND RECKLESSNESS with outrageous "salaries" where they make more in 1 minute than you do in a MONTH.

McCain's campaign tries the possum gambit

McCain gets deadly serious... by playing dead.  His campaign claims it is NOT campaigning (but it still is) because the economic meltdown is so crucial that he cannot pursue election and work on it at the same time.  If he ever gets elected, I hope he never has to do two things at the same time.  Like chew gum and walk.

SOUND THE DEATH KNELL, MCCAIN'S CAMPAIGN IS OFFICIALLY DEAD

I predicted some time ago, not here but in one of my slactivist posts somewhere, that McCain's campaign would take on the same tone of desperation that Bob Dole's did in the '96 election.  I think we've just seen it start.

McCain's assertion that he must stop his campaign and "help" the financial crisis (country first!) is ludicrous on many levels.  First, he personally knows nothing about economics and in fact has a 26 year long voting streak for bills that contributed to this mess through deregulation and gutting of government oversight.  Second, he has the Keating 5 scandal in his resume, which was the mid-80s version of this exact same thing except that back then he was an active participant.  Third, his campaign is taking body blow after vicious uppercut over the Wall Street bailout.  Americans understand that the Democrats are incompetent to understand and stop deregulation, but it's the GOP that has been aggressively pursuing this course and therefore most of the blame is theirs.  And fourth, and probably the most damaging, this appears to be a cowardly ploy to duck the foreign policy debate that's supposed to happen tonight (9/26) and this will be is the undoing of McCain's campaign.

How does this undo McCain's campaign?  All along he has been presenting himself as the experienced, steady, fearless, take-charge kind of guy who will know what to do in any situation.  Now he's made a lot of noise about suspending his campaign, he's had his moment in Washington and couldn't even regroup his President and party to come up with a single coherent answer - instead they walked out of a meeting last night.  So his thesis about suspending his campaign due to a national emergency is debunked.  It's also debunked by precedent.  National emergencies have never stopped McCain from doing what he wanted in the past... for example, having a photo op with Bush and a giant birthday cake while the levees were going down in New Orleans.

The shine has worn off of Sarah Palin.  Every time she opens her lying piehole, she utters another phrase that shows how incompetent and under-informed she is.  She is ignorant to a dangerous level.  She is ignorant to the level of people who don't even spend 5 minutes watching the Faux News crawler.  She doesn't know as much about politics as the two drunks that sit down at the local tavern every day bee-essing about it. She doesn't know even 1/100th as much about politics as the average New York cabbie.  She has quickly turned from an asset to a liability, and the McCain camp is bouncing off the walls and tearing their hair out trying to figure out a way to keep her isolated from the press.  The upcoming VP debate has to have them crapping their drawers. 

If there's one trait the McCain supporters can't tolerate from their candidate, it's cowardice.  This "suspension" is a coward's act, a sign that his campaign is on the ropes and trying to call for a "time out".  Now you can look for desperate 24 hour campaigns on the bus, as he runs around the country doing a Bob Dole sequel.  He may take Palin with him, that is, if he doesn't find a way to replace her first.  I wouldn't rule that out.

You heard it at StopDubya first.

Bush threatens recession, says "most if not all" money will be repaid

George W went on TV last night to tell Americans that his "bailout"plan is necessary to prevent an economic crash like 1929 (my words, not his... he said "recession, panic", and a few other choice words).

Bush claimed that "most if not all" the money will be repaid".  I think it's time to put on the hip boots, folks... we know that's not happening.  Whenever you get that much money into the hands of government workers it's going to melt away like snow in the spring.

Oddly, I thought Bush looked like Will Ferral doing a Bush impersonation when he stepped up to the mic.  The guy looks more like a chipmonk now than a chimpanzee.  Very odd.

Fascism rears its ugly head in America, part 2

Just when you thought it couldn't get any goddam stupider, we go into an economic meltdown and the same people who have been ripping you off for the last 8 years since Phil Gramm knocked the chucks out and the Wall Street Express took off on the luge to hell, the same people who tell you there's too much government, too much welfare, too many handouts... those same people are NOW standing before you with a club behind their back threatening a RECESSION if you don't fork it over.

(9/23/08)  First order of business:  CALL YOUR CONGRESS PEOPLE.  If you have never done this before, it is PAINLESS and you will talk to a nice operator who is just WAITING to hear from you.

SO STOP READING THIS AND CALL THEM.  I'm serious.  If you've got one iota of patriotism in you, you MUST MAKE THIS CALL.

If you don't know what to say, say THIS:  "I don't know what the solution to this problem is, but you need to tell <put in the name of your congress critter> that I'm a voting member of their consitutency and I want them to WAIT.  There is NO HURRY for this.  If this doesn't take at least ONE MONTH to get hammered out, I will definitely work to vote them out of office". 

The phone call shouldn't cost you over a buck or two, hardly anything to think about when EVERY SINGLE MEMBER OF YOUR FAMILY IS ABOUT TO TAKE ON $2300 MORE DEBT IF THEY PASS BUSH/PAULSON BILL.

Don't know where to call? 

Senate

House                    

Fascism rears its ugly head in America

Lost in the shuffle as Americans are distracted with Palin, managing their home budgets, the new school year, two hurricanes, and the beginning of  the pro football season:  The US government has taken over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  These are two of the largest banks in America and their abuse of credit has created the housing crisis that threatens to bring the American economy down.

(9/14/08)  When it comes to economic policy the Bush wing of the GOP (that includes McCain/Palin) sure have some funny ideas.  Joe Biden shares some of these, too, by the way.

When it comes to regulations that prevent usury and other loan practices on homes, credit cards and consumer credit, it's all business all the time.  Every single law passed since Reagan has been designed to faciliate and enable businesses to squeeze every dime they can out of the economy.  Every single law passed has been against the best interests of consumer protection from predatory lending.

Usury - setting Americans up for a lifetime of financial slavery

Credit companies are allowed to make deals and exercise fine print tricks that are nothing short of theft.  How can it possibly be legal for Household Finance Corporation to charge 27% on a $12,000 signature loan?  How can it be possible for credit card companies to lure you into balance transfer at "ZERO INTEREST" and then jack it up to 21% if your payment is ONE DAY LATE?  How can it be possible for home loan companies to keep selling your mortgage off to Wall Street investment firms until you have no idea who owns your mortgage, what their business practices are, and whether they will even be in business for the duration of your loan?  How can it be possible for mortgage companies to make come on loan offers with floating interest rates that quickly rise to the point where even people with good jobs couldn't afford them?

It's possible because the banking system is integrated with the US government.  This is called "fascism" by dictionary definition.  Reagan called it "deregulation" and "privatization".  These are all GOP buzz words that should set off alarm bells in everyone's minds.  The GOP, along with the help and complicity of the Democrats who are also on the banking lobby payroll,  have turned the banking industry into the Wild West.  They are the bandits and you are the townsfolk.  The sheriff and the posse have been bought off and they now work for the bandits.

Bankruptcy -  your safety net has been torn up by the banks

It used to be that if you got into financial trouble you could declare bankruptcy and pick up the pieces of your life and make an attempt to fix it.  A job loss, serious illness with high medical expenses, death of a primary wage earner,  natural disaster, or other life-altering financial catastrophe might be bad enough, but at least you had Chapter 7 to fall back on.

It is now very difficult to file Chapter 7 (liquidation of debt).  The banking industry, the same people who brought you credit card rates you can never repay, variable rate home loans that will put you behind the 8 ball, and signature loans with interest rates of 27% or even more, have tightened the regulations which used to protect you by allowing you to liquidate the debt you have accumulated from their predatory lending.  Law vary from state to state.  It is not impossible to get Chapter 7, but the number of people who can get this has been reduced drmatically and the process has been made into a maze that is designed to discourage you from trying to do it.   With today's inflationary pressures there may appear to be plenty of money in your household that disqualifies you but quickly disappears if you stop at the gas station and grocery store on the way home from work.

Instead of Chapter 7, the laws now "encourage" you to file Chapter 13, using the threat of home disclosure.  Chapter 13 is stacked 100% for the lenders, and is basically a safety net for THEM, not you.  They can screw you into the ground, and then when you can't get up, they can STILL get repaid if you declare Chapter 13.  You just consolidate your debt into a new loan and the state makes sure you make your payments... or else.

The Demcrat/GOP duopoly... the "gift that keeps on taking".

De facto proof the Dems are spineless idiots

The GOP "mavericks" have chosen their VP candidate; a religious fanatic with a public record of lying, pork barrel politics, abuse of power, and what the conservative wing of the GOP used to consider an unpardonable sin, namely a teenage pregnancy.  Yet the Democrat party machine is helpless, unable to to frame the issues of truth and decency.  They are reacting like someone who can't swim who got pushed into the pool at the deep end, flailing and sinking.

(9-12-08)  Heavy sigh.  The conventions are behind us.  Coming off a triumphant Democrat convention, highly criticized for its P. T. Barnum-esque delivery and literally beaten to a pulp by the talking heads who couldn't stop talking and wondering about every little gossipy detail, the Dems sat back and breathlessly waited to see who McCain's partner in the Sacrificial Dance would be. (My Talking Heads, Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann, apparently got reassigned after their goofball performance.  Matthews, isn't there a state senate job waiting for you somewhere?)

In comes Sarah Palin, a person who should be rejected out of hand by anyone with a brain and common sense.  Only in America can you see the Democrats lose the argument that being a US Senator is better qualifying experience to be President than being the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, population 8500 souls and half a dozen moose.  Her primary qualification for VP and eventually President is that she keeps asserting that she is, it over and over, like a crazed Moonie mantra... 'It's all about reform, I'm ready to reform..."

The Democrats cannot frame the issues to snap the electorate's attention back to reality (or even the "reality" that the Dems cooked up, which is more wishes and projection than reality).  The choice of Palin has negated McCain's experience argument; however, Obama's choice of Biden has negated his "change" argument, so I'd call this a net-net loss for America.  Palin should be a lightning rod candidate for women more than anything Hillary could have possibly dreamed of.  She's a kooky religious wingnut, (although I guess she's claiming to have never spoken in tongues).  She's got no record to run on except being on the wrong side of every pork barrel issue in Alaska in the the last 2 years.  She has serious charges of abuse of power and breaking the law in regards to her sister's ugly divorce and how she entangled state officials in it.  She lies about her own record continuously and Obama's statements on a regular basis.  She would repeal Roe V Wade if given the opportunity.  Seriously... the GOP argues that she's experienced in foreign policy because she is from a state that's next to Russia.

So why is this wholly unqualified nobody mayor from Alaska holding the entire Democrat machine, especially Plouffe and Axelrod, in a trance while they wait 6 weeks for the knockout punch?  It's because the Democrats ARE COMPLICIT in every single problem they need to be talking about.  The Dems are FOR pork barrel, they voted FOR funding the war, they are NOT for single payer health care, they have adopted a religious posture just as goofy as Palin's.  They have done nothing about impeachment, nothing about alternative energy, they offer no change in Middle East policy... so the only argument they can make is "Palin is worse than we are".  The self-proclaimed "progressive" organs of the Democrats such as Huffington Post run scandal story after expose trying to shock the faithful sheep back into "Hope" and "Change".  But the message of 'change' got trashed back in April when Obama started his Run for the Right by telling AIPAC not to worry, everything was going to stay the same.  He followed that up by repudiating his own statement about talking to any leader by calling Hamas "terrorists".  The FISA debacle, "faith-based initiative", backtrack on Iraq, promise to escalate Afghanistan, dumping public financing, well, you know the story.  His new slogan should be "The more things change, the more they stay the SAME."  More religion in government, more domestic spying, more wars in the ME, more power to the health insurance companies.  Who do they think they're fooling?  The ONLY vote they have now is the "I can't vote for a Republican" vote.   So long, Independents, it was nice to have you around for a while.

So is the Dems argument "We're not as bad as Palin" worth a damn? Well, that's a MATTER OF OPINION, but now everyone should see the dilemma that the two party system has presented to voters yet AGAIN.  You can choose between crooks and liars or wafflers and machine politicians.

That's the argument I'd like to see the minor party candidates articulating.  More soon...

Where are the Dems on the arrest of jounalists outside the Conventions?

Nowhere to be found.  Same with your "progressive" Corporation Media.  Have another slug of that Svedka vodka, get your health insurance, staple your forehead.  But no truth for you, just Democrat party shilling and corporation payouts. 

"Here, Arianna, here's your advertising revenue, just STFU about impeachment and minor party candidates and environment and open debates, heh heh heh, wink.  And who cares about those journalists, they can rot in jail.  That's what they're good for, anyway, they won't PARTICIPATE like you do."

Your "progressive" media is on the take, too...

It is now painfully apparent that the fix is in for the this race.  At least the phony progressive news media thinks so.  Why can't they talk about how 3rd parties are pulling votes from Barack Obama and John McCain?

(8-25-08) A couple of days ago there was a hubub about why Barack Obama can't "put this away" in the polls.  For 12 weeks he's been leading McCain in the polls by a 2 to 10 point margin, but this closed to zero and everyone wants to know WHY?  Is it disaffected Hillary voters?  Is it because he's "black"?  Is it because he "lacks experience"? (That always makes me guffaw when I think of Dubya). 

Well, no, it's not any of those.  It's because he's run so far right that he's driving people out of the party.  Yep, there are thousands of us who supported Obama during the nomination who don't support what he BECAME after the nomination was his. 

There's an elephant in the room and the progressive media doesn't see it.  The MSM will never see it, but why not the progressives?  Shouldn't they be interested in what's happening to progressive voters who are now supporting Nader and other candidates?  Wouldn't you think that HuffPo, AlterNet, and the rest would be the least bit interested in candidates that are dragging 10 to 15% out of the collective voting pool?

Well OF COURSE they should.  But you'll have to get that information elsewhere, because these people are so busy sucking up to the MSM that they will NEVER breathe a word about 3rd parties.  That's a "taboo" subject.  3rd parties are only "lunatics", "wakkos", "fringe", and so on.  They should only be mentioned in passing, dismissively, with a disparaging comment and a wink or sad shake of the the head.

If Arianna Huffington and Jonathan Alter had any journalistic integrity, why would they be developing business interests with ANYONE, especially MSNBC, which is a subsidiary of General Electric?   What is up with that?  Has anyone asked them how they can claim to be independent when they get paychecks from MSNBC, and they allow advertising on their websites?

Here's a sample this morning....

Capitol Hill Blue - AFLAC, nice popup from Old Navy with a bikini model, HP,  John McCain for President (three times), Sony computers, Windows Vista

Raw Story - Obama/Biden, PBS, AT&T, Swingline staplers(????), McCain, Western Union, GE "Interest Plus", Grainger Industrial Supplies

Alternet - Credo, Air America, Edison Institute, (a fossil fuel advocate). (Credo, BTW, presents themselves as a "progressive" communications company that sends a miniscule per cent of its profit to some cause.  I think it's 1/2%.)

Huffington Post - Svedka vodka, PBS, Kaiser Permanente 

So, ask yourself, WHO are these "journalists" working for, is it YOU or somebody else?

That's why it's a DEMOCRAT/REPUBLICAN race to them... they've sold out, too.  I shouldn't be picking on HuffPo and Alternet, they are just two examples.  But the plain truth is that it's not scripted in the MSM to talk about what Ralph Nader says, because it's not in the MSM's INTEREST to have politicians telling them that they are censoring the debate.  But they ARE. 

Think of this... there are approximately 250 million Americans.  Right now whenever we want to hear new ideas about national policy, if you listen to the MSM, you're going to hear it from 3 guys.  Obama, Biden, and McCain.  (Don't get me started on Biden, he's a real "champ".  Instead, visit Nader's site for a statement on the blunder Obama's campaign made by putting this plagiarizing clown in the VP slot.) So here's the problem... why are the so-called standard-bearers of progressive media covering the race the same way that the MSM is?  You've got some guy who still thinks that getting shot down in Viet Nam makes him presidential material who can't even speak, a "community organizer" from Chicago who ran so far right after he got nominated that he sounds more like Bush than McCain does, and his VP choice who is completely corrupted with banking industry money and has been in Washington 10 years longer than McCain has.  Wow.  Do you think these guys are going to give you the straight poop about ANYTHING? 

Probably not.  But we've still got some hope out there.... I'm rooting for MoJo, DemocracyNow, anti-war.com, CounterPunch, Truthout,  Politico, and others... they are still fighting the good fight. 

Back to the elephant in the room.  In my state, which is one that Obama ought to be able to turn blue, I believe Nader will pull enough votes to stop him cold.  Barr is relatively unknown here, and the GOP voters here are much more loyal to the party than the progressive Dems are to their party.

While the MSM covers the horse race...

The two major parties keep screwing the rest of us at warp 10.

Impeachment proponents... the Democrat party has now nodded in your direction.  Last Friday, July 25, they held non-impeachment hearings in what can only be characterized as the most ludicrous political theater in my lifetime.  But NOW they can say they "did" something about it. 

There was NOT ONE SINGLE WORD about the hearings in any of the corporation press... not in the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, NYT, NewsHour, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, not one DAMN WORD about it.  It's like it NEVER HAPPENED, but next time you bring up "impeach Bush", they will remind you that Congress has already dealt with that matter.  UPDATE:   the "progressives" who covered it had it up for 24 hours or less...

Barack McBama has now acquired the credentials he needs to be President by going overseas to be photographed with world leaders.  He did not make the gaffe that the MSM was breathlessly waiting to jump on, but he still provided the O'Cain camp with some media ammo over the manufactured controversies (aren't they ALL?) over whether or not he should have taken a photo op with wounded troops, and of course, whether or not Barack McBama is qualified to speak at the site he spoke at.  While the media was reporting on that, John O'Cain managed to slip in a line about how he knew how to win a war.  I guess we WON in Viet Nam, eh?  I've been wrong for all these years... it must have been O'Cain's piloting skills that won it for us.

Meanwhile back at the blogs...

The histrionics of Roy Sekoff on MSNBC are a famous body of work in their own right.  The website is famous for running hysterical headlines about who said what, and are frequently 100% incorrect. But there's something else going on at Arianna Huffington's website... HUFFPO IS  CENSORING READER COMMENTS.  Guess what they don't allow on their site?  It's not what you might think.  It's progressive commentary.  Yes, that's correct, HuffPo is censoring progressive political commentary, giving the impression that their "progressive" visitors are all Obama Democrats.  Anyone who speaks out for Nader or McKinney... never mind.  If you are interested in challenging the corporate control of America and our institutions, don't waste your time there.  UPDATE: you can add Raw Story to the list, too.

What a great horse race

You can find out all you want at the "progressive" blogs like Huffington.  Oh that dirty McCain, he said this nasty thing and that nasty thing about Saint Obama.  And the MSM is not covering it?  Or are they covering it too much?  Or just right?  Pfffft. 

What's important to note is that there is a growing 3rd party movement in this nation and we will knock on the doors until we get our candidates on the ballots and into office.  The only way to sieze back control of our public institutions from the corporations is to end the control of the main parties.  They put on a Punch-and-Judy show for us while they are picking your pocket and the puppeteers are taking it to the bank.  MORE SHORTLY....

Retraction of Obama Endorsement

It's Nader '08 if you want real change

I am regretfully withdrawing my endorsement of Barack Obama for President.

See documentation of Obama flip flops....

Recent public statements made by the candidate express views that are contrary to the values held by this website and are a betrayal of the Progressive movement that carried him to win the nomination.

Obama has recently expressed support for a dangerous FISA bill that erodes the 4th Amendment and doesn't even need to be passed.  There is no reason why the original FISA bill couldn't be restored until after the election and then the issue be resolved in an environment free from electioneering.

His stated plan to expand the "faith based initiative" is a slap in the face.  Those programs have been exposed as ineffective and biased by former directors Dilulio and Kuo.  The administration of the money and employment practices are tainted by religious bias and prosthelytizing.  This is just a BAD idea. The government is expressly prohibited from getting into the affairs of churches by the First Amendment.  How is that not obvious to Obama?  He's claimed to be a Constitutional scholar.

His recent public statements echoing Scalia's sentiments on gun ownership and the death penalty ought to be setting off alarm bells in the Progressive movement.  The Supreme Court has upheld the right of the Federal Government to overturn a local law banning handguns.  This ruling will spawn a new onslaught of gun "rights" cases to bring guns into every aspect of our daily lives.  You won't be able to go out in public without taking the risk of being shot by someone who will tell the court that you were behaving suspiciously or they thought you were threatening them.  Regarding the death penalty, many if not most Progressives believe that the death penalty ought to be abolished as it is a violation of the 8th Amendment and has been known for decades to not work as a deterrent.  Again, Obama comes down on the wrong side of two Constitutional issues.

So who should get your vote?

In the 2004 election the Green Party exploded itself over the issue of "safe states".  There were some people, the "anybody-but-Bush" Greens, who wanted to only run a candidate in states that were not competitive.  That is, they wanted to make sure that the Green Party would not throw the election to the Republicans by "stealing" votes from the Democrats.  The "scorched earth" Greens felt that the Party should run a candidate hard in all 50 states and let the chips fall where they may.  The theory is that the Democrats are never going to voluntarily become Progressive.  The only way this is going to happen is if they are forced to do so.

Well, the events of the last 2 years and especially the last 6 months ought to be a lesson to Progressives.  Despite the fact that our nation has been beaten to a pulp by Bush policies for 8 years, the Democrats STILL DON'T GET IT.  We gave them control of Congress in 2006 and they have done NOTHING to stop Bush.  Outside of a few principled people, they have largely rolled over and are the party of the status quo.  Progressives like Kucinich and Wexler are marginalized and ignored.  Candidates like McKinney and Nader are ridiculed. 

Obama started his campaign with a direct appeal to Progressives and now that he has locked up the nomination he has dumped us.  He's now showing us his true colors, and it's not a pretty picture.  All his fine talk about changing politics is proving to be BS.  He's not changing anything.  He's grubbing for money every chance he gets and he's clawing his way to the center and abandoning any idea that could possibly be construed to be progressive.

So, I think it's time to put Nader on the ballot in all 50 states.  I think it's time for the Democrats to lose YET ANOTHER "sure thing" election and this time maybe they will pay attention to how it happened.  Don't worry about "how bad it could be with a McCain presidency".  We're already there. 

Nader '08... change you can REALLY believe in.

-Wexler

from www.Antiwar.com

Bomb Iran? What's to Stop Us?

by Ray McGovern

Unlike the attack on Iraq five years ago, to deal with Iran there need be no massing of troops. And, with the propaganda buildup already well under way, there need be little, if any, forewarning before shock and awe and pox – in the form of air and missile attacks – begin.

This time it will be largely the Air Force's show, punctuated by missile and air strikes by the Navy. Israeli-American agreement has now been reached at the highest level; the armed forces planners, plotters and pilots are working out the details.

Emerging from a 90-minute White House meeting with President George W. Bush on June 4, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said the two leaders were of one mind:

"We reached agreement on the need to take care of the Iranian threat. I left with a lot less question marks [than] I had entered with regarding the means, the timetable restrictions, and American resoluteness to deal with the problem. George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it, and intends to act on that matter before the end of his term in the White House."

Does that sound like a man concerned that Bush is just bluff and bluster?

A member of Olmert's delegation noted that same day that the two countries had agreed to cooperate in case of an attack by Iran, and that "the meetings focused on 'operational matters' pertaining to the Iranian threat." So bring 'em on!

A show of hands please. How many believe Iran is about to attack the U.S. or Israel?

You say you missed Olmert's account of what Bush has undertaken to do? So did I. We are indebted to intrepid journalist Chris Hedges for including the quote in his article of June 8, "The Iran Trap."

We can perhaps be excused for missing Olmert's confident words about "Israel's best friend" that week. Your attention – like mine – may have been riveted on the June 5 release of the findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee regarding administration misrepresentations of pre-Iraq-war intelligence – the so-called "Phase II" investigation (also known, irreverently, as the "Waiting-for-Godot Study").

Better late than never, I suppose.

Oversight?

Yet I found myself thinking: It took them five years, and that is what passes for oversight? Yes, the president and vice president and their courtiers lied us into war. And now a bipartisan report could assert that fact formally; and committee chair Jay Rockefeller could sum it up succinctly:

"In making the case for war, the administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed."

But as I listened to Senator Rockefeller, I had this sinking feeling that in five or six years time, those of us still around will be listening to a very similar post mortem looking back on an even more disastrous attack on Iran.

My colleagues and I in Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) issued repeated warnings, before the invasion of Iraq, about the warping of intelligence. And our memoranda met considerable resonance in foreign media.

We could get no ink or airtime, however, in the Fawning Corporate Media (FCM) in the U.S. Nor can we now.

In a same-day critique of Colin Powell's unfortunate speech to the U.N. on Feb. 5, 2003, we warned the president to widen his circle of advisers "beyond those clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic."

It was a no-brainer for anyone who knew anything about intelligence, the Middle East, and the brown noses leading intelligence analysis at the CIA.

Former U.N. senior weapons inspector and former Marine major, Scott Ritter, and many others were saying the same thing. But none of us could get past the president's praetorian guard to drop a memo into his in-box, so to speak. Nor can we now.

The 'Iranian Threat'

However much the same warnings are called for now with respect to Iran, there is even less prospect that any contrarians could puncture and break through what former White House spokesman Scott McClellan calls the president's "bubble."

By all indications, Vice President Dick Cheney and his huge staff continue to control the flow of information to the president.

But, you say, the president cannot be unaware of the far-reaching disaster an attack on Iran would bring?

Well, this is a president who admits he does not read newspapers, but rather depends on his staff to keep him informed. And the memos Cheney does brief to Bush pooh-pooh the dangers.

This time no one is saying we will be welcomed as liberators, since the planning does not include – officially, at least – any U.S. boots on the ground. Besides, even on important issues like the price of gasoline, the performance of the president's staff has been spotty.

Think back on the White House press conference of Feb. 28, when Bush was asked what advice he would give to Americans facing the prospect of $4-a-gallon gasoline.

"Wait, what did you just say?" the president interrupted. "You're predicting $4-a-gallon gasoline?...That's interesting. I hadn't heard that."

A poll in January showed that nearly three-quarters of Americans were expecting $4-a-gallon gas. That forecast was widely reported in late February, and discussed by the White House press secretary at the media briefing the day before the president's press conference.

Here's the alarming thing: Unlike Iraq, which was prostrate after the Gulf War and a dozen years of sanctions, Iran can retaliate in a number of dangerous ways, launching a war for which our forces are ill-prepared.

The lethality, intensity and breadth of ensuing hostilities will make the violence in Iraq look, in comparison, like a volleyball game between St. Helena's High School and Mount St. Ursula.

Cheney's Brainchild

Attacking Iran is Vice President Dick Cheney's brainchild, if that is the correct word.

Cheney proposed launching air strikes last summer on Iranian Revolutionary Guards bases, but was thwarted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff who insisted that would be unwise, according to J. Scott Carpenter, a senior State Department official at the time.

Chastened by the unending debacle in Iraq, this time around Pentagon officials reportedly are insisting on a "policy decision" regarding "what would happen after the Iranians would go after our folks," according to Carpenter.

Serious concerns include the vulnerability of the critical U.S. supply line from Kuwait to Baghdad, our inability to reinforce and the eventual possibility that the U.S. might be forced into a choice between ignominious retreat and using, or threatening to use, "mini-nukes."

Pentagon opposition was confirmed in a July 2007 commentary by former Bush adviser Michael Gerson, who noted the "fear of the military leadership" that Iran would have "escalation dominance" in any conflict with the U.S.

Writing in the Washington Post last July, Gerson indicated that "escalation dominance" means, "in a broadened conflict, the Iranians could complicate our lives in Iraq and the region more than we complicate theirs."

The Joint Chiefs also have opposed the option of attacking Iran's nuclear sites, according to former Iran specialist at the National Security Council, Hillary Mann, who has close ties with senior Pentagon officials.

Mann confirmed that Adm. William Fallon joined the Joint Chiefs in strongly opposing such an attack, adding that he made his opposition known to the White House, as well.

The outspoken Fallon was forced to resign in March, and will be replaced as CENTCOM commander by Gen. David Petraeus – apparently in September. Petraeus has already demonstrated his penchant to circumvent the chain of command in order to do Cheney's bidding (by making false claims about Iranian weaponry in Iraq, for example).

In sum, a perfect storm seems to be gathering in late summer or early fall.

Controlled Media

The experience of those of us whose job it was to analyze the controlled media of the Soviet Union and China for insights into Russian and Chinese intentions have been able to put that experience to good use in monitoring our own controlled media as they parrot the party line.

Suffice it to say that the FCM is already well embarked, a la Iraq, on its accustomed mission to provide stenographic services for the White House to indoctrinate Americans on the "threat" from Iran and prepare them for the planned air and missile attacks.

At least this time we are spared the "mushroom cloud" bugaboo. Neither Bush nor Cheney wish to call attention, even indirectly, to the fact that all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies concluded last November that Iran had stopped nuclear weapons-related work in 2003 and had not resumed it as of last year.

In a pre-FCM age, it would have been looked on as inopportune, at the least, to manufacture intelligence to justify another war hard on the heels of a congressional report that on Iraq the administration made significant claims not supported by the intelligence.

But (surprise, surprise!) the very damning Senate Intelligence Committee report got meager exposure in the media.

So far it has been a handful of senior military officers that have kept us from war with Iran. It hardly suffices to give them vocal encouragement, or to warn them that the post WW-II Nuremberg Tribunal ruled explicitly that "just-following-orders" is no defense when war crimes are involved.

And still less when the "supreme international crime" – a war of aggression is involved.

Senior officers trying to slow the juggernaut lumbering along toward an attack on Iran have been scandalized watching what can only be described as unconscionable dereliction of duty in the House of Representatives, which the Constitution charges with the duty of impeaching a president, vice president or other senior official charged with high crimes and misdemeanors.

Where Are You, Conyers?

In 2005, before John Conyers became chair of the House Committee on the Judiciary, he introduced a bill to explore impeaching the president and was asked by Lewis Lapham of Harpers why he was for impeachment then. He replied:

"To take away the excuse that we didn't know. So that two, or four, or ten years from now, if somebody should ask, 'Where were you, Conyers, and where was the U.S. Congress?' when the Bush administration declared the Constitution inoperative...none of the company here present can plead ignorance or temporary insanity [or] say that 'somehow it escaped our notice.'"

In the three years since then, the train of abuses and usurpations has gotten longer and Conyers has become chair of the committee. Yet he has dawdled and dawdled, and has shown no appetite for impeachment.

On July 23, 2007, Conyers told Cindy Sheehan, Rev. Lennox Yearwood, and me that he would need 218 votes in the House and they were not there.

A week ago, 251 members of the House voted to refer to Conyers' committee the 35 Articles of Impeachment proposed by Congressman Dennis Kucinich.

Former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, who sat on Judiciary with Conyers when it voted out three articles of impeachment on President Richard Nixon, spoke out immediately: "The House should commence an impeachment inquiry forthwith."

Much of the work has been done. As Holtzman noted, Kucinich's Articles of Impeachment, together with the Senate report that on Iraq we were led to war based on false pretenses – arguably the most serious charge – go a long way toward jump-starting any additional investigative work Congress needs to do.

And seldom mentioned is the voluminous book published by Conyers himself, "Constitution in Crisis," containing a wealth of relevant detail on the crimes of the current executive.

Conyers' complaint that there is not enough time is a dog that won't hunt, as Lyndon Johnson would say.

How can Conyers say this one day, and on the next say that if Bush attacks Iran, well then, the House may move toward impeachment.

Afraid of the media?

During the meeting last July with Cindy Sheehan, Rev. Yearwood and me, and during an interview in December on "Democracy Now," Conyers was surprisingly candid in expressing his fear of Fox News and how it could paint Democrats as divisive if they pursued impeachment.

Ironically, this time it is Fox and the rest of the FCM that is afraid – witness their virtual silence on Kucinich's very damning 35 Articles of Impeachment.

The only way to encourage constructive media attention would be for Conyers to act. The FCM could be expected to fulminate against that, but they could not afford to ignore impeachment, as they are able to ignore other unpleasant things – like preparations for another "war of choice."

I would argue that perhaps the most effective way to prevent air and missile attacks on Iran and a wider Middle East war is to proceed as Elizabeth Holtzman urges – with impeachment "forthwith."

Does Conyers not owe at least that much encouragement to those courageous officers who have stood up to Cheney in trying to prevent wider war and catastrophe in the Middle East?

Scott McClellan has been quite clear in reminding us that once the president decided to invade Iraq, he was not going to let anything stop him. There is ample evidence that Bush has taken a similar decision with respect to Iran – with Olmert as his chief counsel, no less.

It is getting late, but this is due largely to Conyers' own dithering. Now, to his credit, Dennis Kucinich has forced the issue with 35 well-drafted Articles of Impeachment.

What the country needs is the young John Conyers back. Not the one now surrounded by fancy lawyers and henpecked by the lady of the House.

In October 1974, after he and the even younger Elizabeth Holtzman faced up to their duty on House Judiciary and voted out three Articles of Impeachment on President Richard Nixon, Conyers wrote this:

"This inquiry was forced on us by an accumulation of disclosures which, finally and after unnecessary delays, could no longer be ignored...Impeachment is difficult and it is painful, but the courage to do what must be done is the price of remaining free."

Someone needs to ask John Conyers if he still believes that; and, if he does, he must summon the courage to "do what must be done."

Find this article at: http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern

reprinted without permission for the public good by

William W. Wexler

editor@stopdubya.com