Monday, March 12, 2012

Desperate Housewives

Felecity Huffman is an awful actress.  And knowing what a b. she is and was on the set of the show, how she sucked up to Marc Cherry and played teacher's pet, I hate Lynette even more.

And readers, I didn't think that was possible.

Lynette is an ugly piece of work.  I'm told by people who watched the show and used to that Lynette was a great character once.  They explain that they don't know what happened.

What happened was Huffman.  She didn't want to play Lynette.  Lynette wasn't good enough for her.  She'll need to remember that three years from now when even the Lifetime films dry up.

If you don't know, I'm covering the TV show "Desperate Housewives" which airs Sunday nights on ABC and is thankfully in its final season.

Thankfully?

Did you see last night's show?

Along with Lynette almost letting a woman choke to death, we also had Gabby. I'm sure Eva thinks she's cute.  She's not.  And I'm sure she thought it was cute the way they're all friends with Bree again but it wasn't.  It just emphasized what shallow little back stabbers they were.

Vanessa Williams has been completely underutilized on this show.  They added her to the cast to get mileage out of her name and to beat back charges of their racism.  Then they did nothing with her.

In this episode, she had a scene with Lynette that was like every scene with Lynette.  Renee gets a funny line or two but it's all about Lynette's problems.  It's really amazing how seldom Lynette ever even bothers to ask Renee about her life.

Renee also had a scene with Susan.  Susan went over to complain about Mike.  Renee offered her wine and told her that she didn't trust men, didn't believe in them anymore until Mike.  She said Mike was a good man.  Susan realized she was very lucky to have him.  She had been furious with him (and who could blame her) because of his taking on the loan shark.

Mike explained to Susan that not being able to do anything as a kid while his mother was beaten made him unable to stay silent now.  Shortly after the loan shark drove by the house and shot.  Mike shoved Susan into the house and took the bullet.  He's dead.

Karen wants to be dead.  Her cancer is beyond treatment.  She asks Bree to help her.  Bree says she will but doesn't.  Bree's hoping she'll change her mind.

Gabby.  Useless and selfish and a shrew.  I cna't believe how awful and retro and sexist this show has been. I'm glad I watched for Vanessa.  And Teri Hatcher is a talented actress as well.



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, March 12, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, the targeting of Iraqi youth (gay and/or Emo) finally gets Big Media's attention, US officials and UN officials fail Iraqi youth with their silence, and more.
As Al Mada, Dar Addustour, Alsumaria TV and Kitabat reported last week (Al Mada all last week) and as the US and UK LGBT press picked up on the story of Iraqi youth being targeted -- those thought to be Emo, those thought to be gay and those thought to be both. (As was the case in Egypt last year, Emo youth were demonized in Iraq this year as Satanists and vampires.) But while all this went on, silence from Big Media. Saturday,the silence was broken. First, Ahmed Rahseed and Mohammed Ameer (Reuters) reported on the targeting noting, "At least 14 youths have been stoned to death in Baghdad in the past three weeks in what appears to be a campaign by Shi'ite militants against youths wearing Western-style "emo" clothes and haircuts, security and hospital sources say. Militants in Shi'ite neighborhoods where the stonings have taken place circulated lists on Saturday naming more youths targeted to be killed if they do not change the way they dress." Later the same day, Alice Fordham (Washington Post) reported on the targeting including, "Lists threatening named people with death unless they change their attitude circulated anonymously late last week in Baghdad. Prominent clerics, as well as at least one police official, have condemned the emo -- short for emotional -- craze for its gloomy music and macabre look, which includes tight clothes and styled hair. The trend began in the 1980s in the West but has only recently become popular in the Arab world." And suddenly, Big Media was interested in the story. And applause for law professor Jonathan Turley who noted the targeting at his blog today. With all that, we might have been tempted to feel things were finally moving.
How can we be
Just along for the ride
We'd rather believe
That we decide
That we can stand here
And say loud and clear
Here comes the turn of the tide
-- "Turn Of The Tide," written by Jacob Brackman and Carly Simon, first appears in Robert Richter and Stan Warnow's 1984 film In Our Hands (of the June 12, 1982 peace demonstration in NYC -- which includes speeches and performances) and performed live on Marlo Thomas' 1988 TV special Free To Be . . . A Family where Carly sang it live and -- via with satellite link -- with children in the then-Soviet Union, appeared on the soundtrack album to the special, on the cassette single of "Let The River Run" and first on a Carly collection with the boxed set Clouds In My Coffee.
But if the tide had truly turned on this topic, wouldn't today's the issue have been raised in today's State Dept briefing? It wasn't. At least they were semi-adult. The issue also wasn't raised in the White House press briefing but there were giggles and guffaws as a reporter joked about a Blackberry app and more garbage. Does the press not get that their peers may laugh, White House spokesperson Jay Carney may laugh but the public's not laughing. The public's wondering why these people paid to cover the White House use this time to giggle and snort instead of addressing serious issues? And while trivializing serious issues, the press trivializes itself in the eyes of people. And it's probably worth again noting that in 2009, when a wave of attacks targeted Iraq's LGBT community, it took the BBC to ask about it at a State Dept press briefing. The New York Times, AP, Reuters, ABC News, CNN, and a host of other outlets at one press breifing after another in 2009 and no one bothered to ask. That's okay. The BBC took that embarrassing non-answer from the US State Dept and made it sort of the centerpiece of their 2009 radio documentary on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community -- thereby allow the entire world to listen and laugh at the US press corps and the US State Dept. The one hour documentary was anchored by Aasmah Mir, entitled Gay Life After Saddam and first aired on BBC Radio 5 July 12, 2009 (it was meant to debut the week prior but the Wimbledon Men's Final delayed it). And let's note one thing from the documentary, Iraq's LGBTs had a better and safer life before the start of the 2003 US war on Iraq. Excerpt.
Aasmah Mir: Haider is an Iraqi seeking asylum in England. He's been living in Huntersfield. He left Iraq shortly after the US invasion six years ago.
Haider: If you respect yourself and live and you don't cause any problems nobody is going to kill you. We didn't hear of anybody being killed because of his sexuality in Saddam's regime. Now after that, everything got worse, everything got fluctuated. I fled from Iraq in 2003 because of one of the worst experiences I've had in my life. I was kidnapped for 9 days, they took me in a small car and they send me about to a place about half an hour. I was. I was eye-folded, they call it. [. . .] on the border of Baghdad. One of the officers there, he raped me. And then he said "if you're going to tell anyone from the rest of the gang, I will kill you directly." I was scared. Just a one meal a day which is not enough. They were always telling us that they were going to kill you.
Today England's Sky TV filed a video report on the latest attacks on Iraqi youth:
Simon Newton: Even for a country used to terrible violence, these killings have been shocking. The rise of Emo culture among some young Iraqis hasn't been welcome in all quarters. Despite the infiltration of Western influence, many in the country remain deeply conservative. Sarah is an Emo but too frightened to show her face on camera. She interacts with other followers around the world using Facebook.

Sarah: There are special events where we support the Emo group. We meet regularly to decide which ones to attend.

["Famous Last Words" by My Chemical Romance plays.]

Simon Newton: Like most youth cultures, Emo has its own music, fashion and lifestyle -- much of it revolving around themes of emotional pain and andorgeny -- a blurring of the sexes. Sarah says she only meets fellow Emos with her parents approval and admits her family are divided by her lifestyle.

Sarah: Sometimes we have heated discussions at home. I usually stay silent and usually don't go to gatherings.

Simon Newton: Nine Emo youngsters were bludgeoned to death and seven shot recently in Sadr City. The Interior Ministry says it's monitoring the movement claiming rumors of homosexuality and mass suicide means it's a danger to wider society

[Official babbling, I'm not interested.]

Simon Newton: Being gay remains taboo in Iraq. Human rights groups say 750 men and women have been murdered for their sexual orientation. But with clerics linking the Emo lifestyle to homosexuality, the fear is that figure will only rise. Simon Newton, Sky News.
And one of England's premier music papers picked up the story, the New Musical Express which debuted in 1952. Today NME notes, "Reports also indicate that militias in the Iraqi capital Baghdad's conservative Shia neighbourhood of Sadr City have distributed leaflets with the names of 20 young people that they say should be punished for being 'emo'." Yesterday, BBC News explained, "Dozens of Iraqi teenagers have been killed in recent months by militias who consider them to be devil worshippers, human rights activists claim. The young people are described as 'emos', a term used in the West to refer to youths who listen to rock music and wear alternative clothing. [. . .] Iraq's interior ministry recently described emos as devil worshippers. In Iraq, the term emo is also conflated with homosexuality, which although legal is socially and religiously taboo." And Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) spoke with a gay Iraqi youth who explains, "Ten days ago, I received a letter from militiamen threatening me that if they found me then they will not kill me like other 'perverts' but they will cut my body into pieces." The letter reads, "We strongly warn every male and female debauchee, if you do not stop this dirty act within four days, then the punishment of God will fall on you at the hands of Mujahideen." Jasim Alsabawi (Rudaw) spoke to a variety of Iraqis including Dr. Shamil Ashu who is a psychologist and explains that emo has been in Iraq for some time, "It emerged in the 1990s when some bands were singing emotional songs to attract people's attention. Many teenagers and children who had family problems were influenced by it. These bands have unique costumes, and the suppressed emotions and frustrations among teenagers nowadays is the reason they are mimicking these imported habits." Peter Graff (Reuters) adds, "Since the start of this year, death squads have been targeting two separate groups - gay men, and those who dress in a distinctive, Western-influenced style called "emo", which some Iraqis mistakenly associate with homosexuality. [. . .] Iraq's government, dominated by the Shi'ite majority that was oppressed under Saddam, may not be helping. The Interior Ministry added to the atmosphere of menace last month by releasing a statement that labeled the emo culture 'Satanism'. It said a special police force would stamp it out."
As Graff points out, the statement came from the Ministry of the Interior last month. And yet Nouri al-Maliki has done nothing. Excuse me, he's given his approval on this targeting, this terrorism and these murders.
In November 2010, Jalal Talabani named Nouri al-Maliki prime minster-designate. It was his task to name a (full) Cabinet by the end of December 2010. Nouri refused to name heads to the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of National Security. For 15 months, the posts have remained empty.
Which means Nouri is in charge of all three -- something he insisted would be temproary at the end of 2010. He's in charge of the Ministry of the Interior. Which means he was or should have been aware of the statement on the Emo youth that the Ministry released last month. He should have been aware of it and, as someone who takes an oath to the Constitution, he should have stopped it. He didn't.
The deaths fall at his feet. Via intent or ignorance, he has allowed this to take place and he is responsible for the deaths. And this despite his proclamations to care for Iraq and to care for Iraqis. Only some Iraqis, apparently, are worthy of Nouri's protection -- an interesting way to interpret both the Constitution and the role of prime minister.

In today's New York Times, Jack Healy reports on the targeting of Iraqi youth and notes the image problems as the Arab Summit looms, "Many details of what Iraqi newspapers have called the 'emo killings' are murky, but the uproar comes at an awkward moment for Iraq. The country has been preparing to showcase itself to the world as host of a high-profile meeting of Arab leaders in late March, the first major diplomatic event here since American forces withdrew in December. But the news that young men in tight T-shirts and skinny jeans are being beaten to death with cement blocks and dumped in the streets has threatened to overshadow the new palm trees and fresh paint." The Arab Summit was supposed to have been the crowning glory of 2011. Baghdad would host the Summit. But it was postponed once and then twice. Now they insist it will take place this month (March 29th), the officials from other Arab countries will come to Iraq for the summit to represent their countries. AFP reports that Bagdhad is contemplating shutting down its airspace of all commercial traffic in an attempt to guarantee safety during the summit. I'm not sure if they're assuming that al Qaeda in Iraq has had flight training (no one's offered that theory thus far) or that they believe a shipment of fighter planes is coming in. But the only 'air' attacks in Iraq have been from mortars and small rockets. They're also considering imposing a curfew. Those moves don't really speak to a 'safer' Iraq, do they?
The summit, if it takes place, was supposed to be Iraqi President Jalal Talabani's moment to shine. Due to the nature of the summit, Nouri would be representing Iraq in the same manner as visiting officials represented their countries. Presiding over the summit itself would be Talabanai. Over the weekend, Kitabat reported that Talabani's latest trip to the Mayo Clinic in the US makes many believe he won't be back in Iraq in time for the summit and won't be able to preside over it. (Past trips to the Mayo Clinic usually require Jalal to spend a week to a week and a half in the US. If this trip is like previous ones, he should be able to make it back to Iraq in time for the summit.) It's been a period of bad news for Talabani which kicked off with the March 1st killing of American teacher Jeremiah Small in the KRG. The killer then took his own life. The killer was Beyar Talabani, Jalal's great-nephew.
Last week, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari announced that United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had promised he would attend the Arab Summit. Today Ban Ki-moon delivered prepared remarks on Middle East Countries at the UN Security Council meeting on Changes in the Middle East -- a 1330 word statement. And not once did he ever mention the targeting of Iraqi youth or, in fact, Iraq.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton outdid Moon in bluster and word count. Yet her opening remarks running 1876 words didn't mean she found the time to note Iraqi youth or Iraq. Excuse me, who leads the US mission in Iraq now?
That supposed to be the State Dept which Hillary Clinton is supposed to be in charge of. So, golly, maybe at a Security Council meeting entitled "Changes in the Middle East," Hillary should damn well talk about Iraq?
I understand why she doesn't want to talk about it. Would you want to talk the US failure in Iraq? Would you want to be the one to admit that, yes, Iraq is "the breakdown" of a state, that "the army, the ministries, and so on that are still plagued by chaos and confusion and violence"?
Oh, I'm sorry, that has been admitted to by the State Dept. The press just forgot to inform you. Friday, State Dept spokesperson Victoria Nuland agreed with that description quoted above as she conducted the press briefing and she herself stated that what was described "is precisely why we are focused [in Syria] on trying to push everybody towards a political solution through dialogue."
Seems to me, when your own spokesperson is describing Iraq that way and when your department is tasked with Iraq, when you brag about how the US is running Iraq to the US House Foreign Affairs Committee earlier this month -- when you do all of that and the country's falling apart, you stop screaming for war on Syria or Iran or any other damn country, you shut your mouth, roll up your sleeves and do the damn job you've been tasked with.
No, Hillary Clinton, you are not doing that.
And, yes, Hillary Clinton, shame on you, for refusing to address Iraq today. Either before the Security Council or after at the UN in your never-ending blab-a-thon press conference. Shame on the reporters for not raising the subject, but shame on you for not addressing it.
You cheapen and betray every word you've spoken about what you've done for gays and lesbians at the State Dept when you can't even make the time to call out the attacks on Iraqi youths. You won't shut up about the burned Korans (again today -- over and over), and you blather on about every topic under the sun, but you won't say one damn word about the targeting of Iraqi youths.
You're not doing your job.
And you're not helping Iraq.
You have put out an order at the State Dept to "starve the beast" on the topic of Iraq, to not speak of the country, to avoid it, so the press has nothing to run with, nothing to print, nothing to air. That may be skillful manipulation of the press and damage control (especially during an election year), but don't for one moment kid yourself that it's leadership or that you are doing your job or that you are helping the people of Iraq.
I know Hillary and I like Hillary but Hillary has her defenders, the Iraqi youth don't. And for any who might whine that I'm being cruel to Hillary -- I'm holding to the same standard I'd hold anyone else and if I wanted to be cruel, I'd riff for three to four paragraph on the topic of her outfit today and how "The Mad Hatter called. He wants his wardrobe back." Followed by three more about how clothes should be sewn and only rugs should be produced by latch hook and cross stitch.
While Hillary was silent again today on the topic, Saturday found Iraq's clerics weighing in on the killings. Alsumaria TV reported that cleric Moqtada al-Sadr declared that Emo youths were the scourge of society, insane, a dark evil within the Muslmin community and called for their deaths ("finish them off under the threat of law"). By contrast, Dina al-Shibeeb (Al Araibya) reported on the cleric reaction to Emo youths in Iraq (including Moqtada) and notes that "on the other end of the spectrum, one of the most revered Shiite sheikhs in Iraq, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, said on Thursday that targeting 'Emo' youth is an act of 'terrorism' and a 'bad phenomenon for the peaceful co-existence project'." Cleric Mohammed al-Yaokoubi insists that the Emo targeting and killing is "exaggerated and fabricated." It's a plot, he insists, to serve a non-religious, government agenda. The report notes Al Akhbar reporting Friday sources in the Ministry of the Interior who acknowledged "the approval to eliminate it [Emo youths] as soon as possible since it's detrimentally affecting the society and becoming a danger." AGI added, "The ayatollah's [Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani's] Baghdad delegate Abdul-Raheem al-Rikabi described the stoning as 'terrorist attacks,' adding that while the emo movement may be questionable 'it has to be addressed by way of dialogue and by other peaceful means, not via physical elimination'." Iraqi youth need to be defended. The US government supposedly gives a damn about the Middle East. HIllary told the UN today that the region has "a common desire for rights, freedom, economic hope and human dignity" and insisted that these "are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the UN Charter and they are fundamental to my country's identity" (on and on) but they're just words, just meaningless words, when you don't have the guts, the courage, the spine to condemn what is taking place with the targeting of Iraq's youth. This is beyond ridiculous. You're over sixty-years-old, you're a government official and you can't defend the children of Iraq. It's disgusting and what's going to happen if Hillary doesn't find a spine real damn quick is that the Madeline Albright will no longer be the punchline when people mock a US Secretary of State, it will be Hillary. That will be her legacy unless she starts making the time to start calling out abuses.
They're such idiots in the Barack Obama administration. When they refuse to call out the targeting in Iraq, they look the War Whores they are and people paying attention just roll their eyes as they make claims about caring about the people of Syria or anywhere else.
When you refuse to defend the people in danger because the actions the US government has taken, the world sees that and they know your claims of humanitarian intervention are bulls**t.
Over sixty, the person supposedly in charge of the Iraq mission and she refuses to publicly call out the killing of Iraqi youth, to simply say, "This is wrong." Just as Madeline Albright's Marie Antonette pose on sanctions will forever follow her around, just as Ronald Reagan's silence on the emerging AIDS crisis during his presidency is something his legacy will never escape, Hillary's ensuring that she'll be seen as the homophobe who was too busy crying out for more war to object when a genocide took place. No one's asking her to send more US troops into Iraq (I believe there are 900 -- plus contractors -- still in Iraq). We just expect her to condemn actions that are appalling and go against human rights.
But for an administration that uses "human rights" as a prop, that's apparently too much to expect.
And repeating, I know Hillary, I like Hillary, but her feelings aren't really my concern. She's a public servant who's supposed to be representing the United States and she is silent as Iraqi youths are killed by thugs. She is silent in the face of that. I don't have any sympathy for her. I'll cry for the Iraqi youths. They don't live in a mansion, they don't have six-figure book deals, they don't travel with an entourage and they didn't ask for their country to be invaded by the US to begin with.
Iraqi Christians have suffered wave of attacks since the start of the Iraq War, the most brazen being the October 31, 2010 attack on Baghdad's Our Lady of Salvation Church. These waves of attacks led many to become refugees which is why they make up a surprisingly large percent of Iraq's external refugees. Within Iraq, they have relocated to northern Iraq for safety. Jack Healy (New York Times) reported yesterday that lack of jobs and safety concerns are resulting in they're leaving northern Iraq and heading towards "Turkey, Jordan, Europe and the United States." Those who remain will face additional problems. Ahmed Mohammed (Al Mada) reports on the literacy law being discussed by Parliament and by educators which would foster education through a series of measures -- one of which would be withholding family rations cards if a family does not send their children to school. When waves of attack start on, for example, Iraqi Christians, the first thing many parents do is keep their children home. They are the ones who would most likely be punished by the measure.

Iraq was once the cradle of civilization. It was an advanced country. Then the US wars and the sanctions wore it down. After the 2003 invasion, a new trend emerged -- Iraq's educated class began fleeing the country. This was dubbed "the brain drain." It didn't have to happen. But the US government didn't rate an educated class as important, they were too busy getting in bed with thugs and exiles and exiled thugs. Thugs scare, thugs intimidate and that was the role the US government wanted them to play, to throw off and scare the Iraqi people so that there would be little resistance to the plans the US decided to impose.

An educated class could organize, could put forward leaders, could put forward opposition. So the US was more than happy to set the thugs loose throughout Iraq to ensure that didn't happen. And thugs fear knowledge so they especially loved targeting the doctors and the professors and the engineers, etc.
Let's stay on the targeting of Iraqi women for a moment. What is the State Dept doing for them? I know the lie -- the lie that even friends in the State Dept laugh about because it's such a ridiculous lie. Here it, if you haven't already heard it, "The State Dept is overseeing police training because it will help Iraqi women if the police are trained to recognize the rights of all." That's not police training and it's not a description of the training the US is even offering. All it is is a cheap lie from the State Dept.
Maybe some day, Iraqi women will reclaim the rights they had prior to the US invasion. Fortunately, they're strong women and are used to fighting for themselves. They'll continue to advocate for themselves and for all the children of Iraq. (Iraqi women have been the most publicly outspoken in decrying the attacks on Iraqi's LGBTs and/or Emos.) Al Mada reports that Saturday MP Safiya al-Suhail announced the formation of a coalition in Parliament to support women, noting that it includes men and women and that they come from various political blocs with the goal being to address the economic, social, political and cultural status of women. Also over the weekend, Suha Sheikhly (Al Mada) reported over the weekend that a workshop put together by the magazine Narcissus explored Iraqi women's rights and noted that while quotas allow a number of women into the Parliament, once women are in the institution they face many road blocks to exercising their powers; that in all civilizations, civil rights movements are necessary to strengthen the rights of the people; and more. One participant felt that the workshop raised questions but did not provide solutions. Another felt that the government money for individual widows was not sufficient to support even one person and that the payments were too often late whent hey did come. Another woman voiced the opinion that Gender Traitor Ibtihal al-Zaidi who is Minister of Women cannot represent women because she has publicly stated she does not believe in equality and the Constitution recognizes equality. Iraqi women are the subject of Iraqi-American Heather Raffo's play 9 Parts of Desire which is playing in Malta's St. James Theatre in the Round March 16, 17 and 18th and is directed by Toni Attard and with a cast of Shirley Blake, Estelle Grech and Marta Vella. Fiona Galea Debono (Times of Malta) explains, "The central element is thep lay, which highlights the plight of women in conflict. It is about nine Iraqi women -- mothers, lovers, communist exiles, educated and not -- who were locked up during the Gulf War. They are being portrayed by three actresses, whose talent is being challenged by the character changes they have to master. But their differences have one common prop: a square garment wore by Arab woman as a veil or cloak."
Turning to the topic of violence, CNN reports armed assailants invaded the Mayor of al-Dhuloiya's office today and killed 5 of his guards while, in Baghdad, assailants "robbed a pair of jewelry stores" and had "a shootout with police." AFP adds that the Ministry of the Interior says both owners of the jewelry store were killed, 2 police officers and 2 bystanders were killed and ten people were left injured -- that adds up to six dead; however, the hospital states that 7 died and fourteen were attacked (go with the hospital figures), the Tarmiyah municipal headquarters were attacked early this morning leaving 3 police officers dead and a police patrol came across the assailants nearby resulting in 2 police officers shot dead. Zee News notes Tarmiyah mayor Jassim Mohammed Saleh's home was attacked yesterday resulting in the death of 1 bodyguard and four of the mayor's female relatives. Xinhua identifies the four women as the mayor's "wife, sister and two daughters."
Radio notes, real quick. On this week's Law and Disorder Radio -- a weekly hour long program that airs Monday mornings at 9:00 a.m. EST on WBAI and around the country throughout the week, hosted by attorneys Heidi Boghosian, Michael S. Smith and Michael Ratner (Center for Constitutional Rights), topics explored included a squatters museum, AIPAC, Michael Smith's book tour for Who Killed Che? (written by Michael Smith and Michael Ratner), attorney Wolfgang Kaleck on the Columbian Trade Unionist murder and Cyrus McGoldrick on police surveillance of American Muslims. And Michael Steven Smith is Matthew Rothschild's guest on this week's Progressive Radio with the two discussing Che and the new book.
Lastly, US Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee and her office notes this Wednesday hearing on the issue of homeless veterans (it should be an important hearing, the witnesses are impressive and well versed in this issue):
FOR PLANNING PURPOSES:
Contact: Murray Press Office
(202) 224-2834
Monday, March 12, 2012


WEDNESDAY: VETERANS: Murray to Hold Hearing on Veteran Homelessness

Hearing will discuss VA's progress on 5-year plan to end homelessness among veterans


(Washington, D.C.) -- Wednesday, March 14th, U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, will hold a hearing to discuss the progress the VA has made in its 5-year plan to end homelessness among veterans. During the hearing, the Committee will hear from 2 homeless female veterans, service providers, and officials from the VA.



WHO: U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Chairman Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee

Homeless Veterans

Marsha Four, Executive Director of Philadelphia Veterans Multi-Service & Education Center

Reverend Scott Rogers, Executive Director, Asheville Buncombe Community Christian Ministry

Linda Halliday, Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Audits and Evaluations, Office of Inspector General, Department of Veterans Affairs

Pete Dougherty, Acting Executive Director, Homeless Veterans Initiatives Office

WHAT: Hearing to discuss VA's progress on its 5-year plan to end homelessness among veterans, including the unique needs of homeless women veterans


WHEN: Wednesday, March 14th, 2012

10:00 AM ET



WHERE: Russell Senate Office Building
Room 418

Washington, D.C.

###
afp
zee news
xinhua
al mada
kitabat
al rafidayn
the new york times
jack healy

Friday, March 09, 2012

Whitney

Time to blog about the NBC Wednesday night show Whitney -- best show on TV.

The episode was about letting go.  Whitney and Neal kicked it off down in the basement as they found a box of one of Alex's old girlfriend's things.

Neal:  Is this stuff yours?

Whitney:  No, I don't wear scrunchies or short-shorts or tube-tops.  You know what this means? Somewhere Heather Graham is naked.

Mark was hilarious.  Lily was tense and walking on egg shells because she and Roxanne are roommates and she's living in fear of doing something wrong that makes Roxanne stop being her friend.

So when Lily accidentally breaks several things, she calls Mark and asks him, "You really think you can fix all of this?'"  Mark replies, "Lily, I'm a guy.  I will never admit that I can't fix something."

So finally he gets Lily to break one of Roxanne's plates.  Then another.  Then another.  Then Roxanne breaks a plate and Mark gets very turned on.

"I'm not going to lie you guys, this is really working for me.  Who wants to take their shirt off?  He raises his hand as he asks that last question.

But Neal walks in so it doesn't get "amazing between the three of us" as Mark had hoped. But Neal's returning Lily's lotion (not really, it's a trick Whitney gave him so he could go talk to her) and Mark grabs the lotion and says, "I would like to point out that a new bottle of lotion has been thrown into the mix."

Mark really is sexy.  If there was a vote for sexiest guy on TV this year, I'd vote for him.


Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"


Friday, March 9, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Iraqi Emo youths and LGBTs remain targeted, a document said to be from the Interior Ministry explaining how to kill the LGBTs surfaces, the political crisis continues, the US Senate discussed Iraq and more.
"In Iraq," US Senator John McCain declared Tuesday, "Prime Minister Maliki continues to centralize power at the expense of the other political blocs while the threat posed by al Qaeda appears to be growing along with the kinds of horrific, spectacular attacks, like the one we saw yesterday." He was referring to Monday's attack on Haditha security forces which left at least 27 dead with three more injured. Senator Carl Levin is the Chair of the Committee, McCain is the Ranking Member. General James Mattis (Commander of US Centcom) and Admiral William McRaven (Commander of the US Special Operations Command) were the witnesses appearing before the Committee. We had to hold this to cover the Veterans Affairs Committee hearings this week (and there's a House VA hearing we still didn't get to).
The drawdown in Iraq is a drawdown. The military's been clear in their use of "drawdown" and "reposturing" and just as clear in the non use of the term "withdrawal." There are at least 200 US service members guarding the American Embassy in Baghdad and the various consulates. In addition, there are US service members present as "trainers." Nouri al-Maliki has publicly spoken this year -- and repeatedly -- on this issue. The number he supplies publicly is 700. You don't read that in the US newspapers. His number may be too high, it may be too low. Maybe if US newspapers weren't so busy attempting to spin and reported facts, we'd know what the number was. At this point, the only number given is Nouri's number of 700. And there are more, as US Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey admitted to Ted Koppel last December on NBC's Rock Center with Brian Williams.
MR. KOPPEL: I realize you can't go into it in any detail, but I would assume that there is a healthy CIA mission here. I would assume that JSOC may still be active in this country, the joint special operations. You've got FBI here. You've got DEA here. Can, can you give me sort of a, a menu of, of who all falls under your control?
AMB. JAMES JEFFREY: You're actually doing pretty well, were I authorized to talk about half of this stuff.
In addition, the US State Dept has its largest mission in Iraq and Iraq is the mission they have militarized. There are 16,000 foreigners working for the US State Dept in Iraq -- that includes a large number of contractors.
Iraq is reported badly if at all by most outlets today. You get the Josh Rogins who want to pretend they're journalists but don't want to be held to the guidelines of journalims if it interferes with them completing another page in their slam book. The US occupation of Iraq continues. It hasn't ceased. Moqtada al-Sadr grasps that. So many in the US press pretend otherwise.
In addition to those US service members still in Iraq, there are the thousands stationed in the region around Iraq. General James Matthis noted to the Senate Armed Services Committee Tuesday that most US troops had left Iraq.
General James Mattis: The question then becomes: How do we maintain our presence with a light footprint? To accomplish this, the USCENTCOM AOR will assume an increasingly maritime character with special operations forces (SOF) and strong air enablers. Naval forces -- with embarked troops -- provide presence and a cost efficient means of rapidly projecting power in a crisis to execute contingency operations. Sustained naval presence and response forces provide a lighter footprint on the ground and are vital for reassuring our partners, deterring those with malign intent and tempering destructive actors from fermenting trouble in the region. The maritime environment also permits freedom of action unfettered by international boundaries and agreements. However, the stacked Iranian threats in our AOR of ballistic missiles, long range rockets, mines, small boats, cruise missiles and submarines demand stronger naval presence and capability to protect vital sea lines of communication.
The US news industry is a story of budget cuts. So Americans get less and less news from the news industry. Less and less coverage. It's much cheaper for Diane Sawyer, Scott Pelley and Brian Willaims to, for example, waste three or more minutes of airtime 'reporting' on some YouTube sensation where a pet does a trick. Pets can be house broken. News anchors, I'm not so sure. As the news industry goes for the cheap and the banal, Americans are less and less informed about what is going on due to this news failure.
General James Mattis: Our successful military drawdown from Iraq puts the need to develop a new strategic relationship with the Iraqi government at the forefront of our regional policy. The Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq (OSC-I) has been established and testifies to our respect for Iraqi sovereignty. Our relationship going forward will be based on mutual respect between two sovereign nations. USCENTCOM will work to expand security cooperation activities and deepen our military-to-military ties with Iraq while helping to expand its military engagement with key regional partners. Simultaneously, we remain clear-eyed, recognizing Iran's access to and efforts to subordinate Iraq and work to counter that malign influence. OSC-I -- working under Chief of Mission authority and with the full support of USCENCOM -- is the lead proponent for executing the military component of our intent. Thank you for your fast action in support of our special authority for OSC-I and for your continued patience as we work through a successful transition. The danger from al Qaeda in Iraq is still serious and it remains capable of spectacular attacks against the people and the government there even as it takes advantage next door in Syria to mount attacks there.
The Congress, the Pentagon and the State Dept continue to have to address Iraq -- that's staffing, that's budgeting. But the news media tells Americans that the mission (occupation) has ended.
We'll note this exchange from the hearing.
Ranking Member John McCain: General, are their strong indications that al Qaeda is making a comeback in Iraq?
General James Mattis: Yes, sir. Particularly in the western Iraq area but the threat is extending into Baghdad.
I think al Qaeda in Mesopatamia is both a catch-all to blame anything on and, especially for the US government and the US press, a device that allows denial. If al Qaeda in Mesopatamia is responsible, then there's no need for the US government of US press to factor in just how much US actions have resulted in a government that so many Iraqis oppose. You might also think that since the US went into a trillion dollar debt over the Iraq War -- a debt that will weigh on the country for decades to come -- the news media might continue to cover Iraq as a result of the money invested but you would be wrong. Then again, maybe the news media avoids Iraq for that reason -- don't you dare let the taxpayers know just how poorly their money was spent.
Maybe that's why Senator Claire McCaskill's comments at the hearing weren't noted? Specifically when she observed, "I can give you anecdotally disasters in Iraq. In fact, I am trying to compile all the infrastructure we build in Iraq and what the status is of it today. But I think everyone knows, it's not a pretty picture. How much got blown up? How much was never utilized? How much sits crumbling? And -- and that's all an incredible amount of resources of our country that we have invested."
The press is supposed to be a watchdog and provide oversight. Does it really look like that's happening today?
We'll note this exchange from the hearing.
Senator Ben Nelson: I've got a number of concerns about our presence in Iraq at the current time. I don't think that I have a clear understanding of what our mission is there. And it's further complicated by the fact that we've got questions about the new embassy which is a significant -- in terms of size -- building with a significant number of security contractors located there -- perhaps not even functioning in a security role outside of the embassy. And the embassy continues to be expanded. And I understand, perhaps, the State Dept is now in charge of establishing what our mission in Iraq is. Can you -- either of you -- help enlighten me about what our mission truly is in Iraq today? And how that might relate as well to the providing of security by contractors and the continuing expansion of a building that seems to be gargantuan in size already. General Mattis?
General James Mattis: Sir, as far as our mission in Iraq, it's going from a military-led effort in Iraq over the last eight years to a State Dept-led mission under the Ambassador. There I do have a Lt. General with a small footprint on the ground, part of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq and they are engaged in everything from the sales of certain military equipment, providing contractor-led training, to organizing the Iraqis who want to go to military schools in the United States. We've maintained those relationships, that's what they're doing. As far as the security contractors, sir, who actually protect the embassy, those come under the US embassy, under the State Dept. But having been there recently, they're simply doing the guard duty you would expect in a high threat area. And as far as the size of the building, sir, I'm really not competent to respond on that part of the question.
Senator Ben Nelson: But it is big, isn't it?
General James Mattis: It's big.
Senator Ben Nelson: Thank you. In trying to understand the role of the contractors there in providing security, in other embassies in other countries, are we required -- do we require ourselves to provide security or do we look to the host nation to provide security?
General James Mattis: Sir, the host nation provides the external security outside the grounds. Inside the grounds, it's sovereign territory and we do that. We do that generally with contract guards, many of them are long serving guards there, and inside the building itself, you have Marine security guards.
Senator Ben Nelson: Is that the way it works in Iraq? In Baghdad?
General James Mattis: Yes, sir. It is.
Senator Ben Nelson: The Iraqis provide the external security?
General James Mattis: They do, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson: And if our personnel are moving from one place to another, who provides the security?
General James Mattis: That security is provided by our own -- our own contract guards.
Senator Ben Nelson: What level of security would the Iraqis provide externally to the -- to the Embassy?
General James Mattis: In that zone, when you go there, sir, you see that there are checkpoints set up some blocks away. They have patrols that go by. It's not just for our embassy, it's for other embassies in town as well as they provide the kind of diplomatic security that's expected around the world. Here in Washington, DC, some police men [and police women] can provide it because the threat is very low. In a place like Baghdad, prudent measures require the Iraqi army, the Iraqi police to do the security in a much more visual, obvious way.
If the State Dept is now in charge of the US mission in Iraq, why are they doing reports? When they weren't in charge, through 2011, they did the "Iraq Status Report." (Click here if you never read them.) Not anymore. And why isn't the State Dept regularly briefing on Iraq. They're supposedly in charge. They are answerable to the American people. They should be required to provide regular updates. They are operating in darkness, they are cloaking their actions and it's not surprising that a senator wants questions answered as to what the mission is. (Yes, I am aware that Victoria Nuland made comments Thursday -- only when asked -- on Iraqi women. I've never seen such ill-informed remarks. And that's despite the fact that we're referring to only a few sentences. I'll address them when I can do so a bit more calmly.) (And I've noted many times that I know Robert Kagan -- and often disagree with him. Victoria and Robert are married. I know Victoria as well. Check the archives, she's gotten no special treatment as a result of that.) They're not just spending taxpayer money, they are asking for record levels of taxpayer money and they can't be open about what they're doing? That should be unacceptable to everyone.
We'll note this exchange from the Tuesday hearing.
Senator Scott Brown: Regarding Iraq, I am as concerned as others are about the vacuum that has been created. And, as you know, al Qaeda in Iraq has carried out more attacks this year than it did in the entire second half of last year. Do you think there's a security vacuum there since we've left or what?
General James Mattis: It's not a security vacuum, Senator Brown, but it is a less capable Iraqi security force without our capabilities there. They're scrambling to try and fill in those gaps. We are working with our small footprint there to help them fill in those gaps but it is a concern, I know, for the Iraqi government and it is a concern for [US] Ambassador [James] Jeffreys.
Senator Scott Brown: Alright. You think al Qaeda -- You think al Qaeda's making a comeback in Iraq?
General James Mattis: Yes, sir, they are. It's not significant. It won't threaten the government. It will kill a lot of innocent people.
Senator Scott Brown: And what about the favoritism in the Iraqi government for the majority Shia political party? Do you think that's fueling another insurgency potentially and does this play right into al Qaeda's hands potentially to create that instability?
General James Mattis: It's not playing into al Qaeda's hands yet and I think that there has been some progress back into a political dialogue here in the last couple of weeks that I think is back on the right track. So it's -- I give you a cautious, optimistic view of this -- but it's very, very cautious at this point.
Wow. Mattis offers less spin than the US press. Which is supposed to be independent? That's right the US press. But they've rushed to tell you -- especially the New York Times -- that the political crisis is over. No such thing has happened. Mattis offered his "optimistic view" and it was more fact-based than anything the New York Times has offered on the political crisis. That's great for General Mattis, good for him. But that's damn lousy for the US press.
Brown and Mattis explored the political crisis. If you're the New York Times, you pretend that the political crisis kicks off on or around December 21, 2011. That's not accurate. The political crisis is ongoing and years-old. The easiest way to trace the current problems is to return to March 2010 when parliamentary elections were held and Nouri al-Maliki was unhappy with the results, stomped his feet for a recount and even after that was completed his State of Law still did not come in first. Instead, the Ayad Allawi-led Iraqiya slate came in first. Per the Constitution, President Jalal Talabani should have named Allawi the prime minister-designate and, at that point, Allawi would have had 30 days to put together a Cabinet -- failure to do so, per the Constitution, would mean Allawi's turn was over and a new prime minister-designate would be named. But Nouri used everything to hang on to his post, from the non-independent Supreme Court to the US White House.
For over eight months, Nouri refused to budge. This is Political Stalemate I. It is ended in November 2010 only when the US-brokered Erbil Agreement is signed off on by all parties. The agreement puts a number of things into writing including that Nouri can remain prime minister for a second term. All the political blocs get a little something in the Erbil Agreement -- such as a referendum on Kirkuk will finally take place or Ayad Allawi will head an independent security council. But Nouri gets named prime minister-designate and Nouri immediately calls off the census of Kirkuk that had been announced and due to start in December. Nouri insists that the security council headed by Allawi will need to wait. He gets made prime minister -- moved from prime minister-designate -- on the basis of the Erbil Agreement, not on the basis on the Constitution because the Constitution required him to name a Cabinet -- not a partial one, a Cabinet. Nouri didn't do that in the 30 days, he was in violation of the Constitution and a new prime minister-designate should have been named.
The White House and non-independent lackeys in the US press insisted that Nouri would soon name the empty posts. The most critical empty posts were the Minister of the Interior, the Minister of Defense and the Minister of National Security. Nouri's critics charged that he was intentionally refusing to name them because it was a power-grab on Nouri's part.
Naming them -- nominating them and allowing Parliament to vote on them -- means they have power and independence. Including, but not limited to, the fact that if Nouri wants to get rid of them, he has to go through Parliament. Once they're approved by Parliament, Nouri can't fire them on his own. (As he's found out with Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq who he's been calling for to be stripped of his post since December with no luck thus far.)
So who was right?
The White House and the US press or Nouri's critics?
It's 15 months since Nouri named his 'Cabinet' and still those three security ministries remain with no heads. It was a power grab. The National Allaince spoke candidly in February to the press stating they didn't want Nouri to name anyone to the post (State of Law is one of the components of the National Alliance, others include the Sadr bloc, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and other Shi'ite bodies). When this caused distress among some Iraqis, the National Alliance backed off from and disowned those statements.
But it was a power grab. Nouri controls three ministries that he wouldn't otherwise. These are the security ministries. As Iraq's security worse and worse over the last 15 months, it's time to grasp that this falls on Nouri.
The US press and the White House insisted for months after December 2010 (when Nouri provided a partial cabinet) that Iraq needed time and then all would be well. For awhile even detractors were willing to give it another week, another month . . . Until finally, over the summer of 2011, the Kurdish bloc begins demanding that Nouri return to the Erbil Agreement. That the Erbil Agreement be implemented. This is not confusing, this is not in doubt. KRG President Massoud Barzani -- among others -- has been very vocal publicly on this issue. But the New York Times and ignore that fact. Iraqiya joined the Kurdish call. Others followed.
In October 2011, Nouri's dislike for Sunnis became more pronounced. It was obvious by his treatment of the Sahwa (largely Sunni; forces who were put on the US payroll to stop attacking the US military). He refused to bring them into the process. Not just to bring them into the security forces but to bring them into the government in non-security jobs. October 2011, he began having Sunnis arrested throughout the country and Tikrit was among the areas. He lied and claimed he had intel from Libya. There was going to be an attempted coup, he inisted.
Insisted? Try confessed. If Freud got anything right, it was the criminal's compulsion to confess. Nouri was carrying on a coup against Sunnis. A large portion of the arrested were college professors. Sunni ones. They're now out of jobs. Even the many who've been released (supposedly all are in the process of being released). They haven't just been replaced with Shi'ites, they've been replaced with fundamentalists who now carry out attacks on Iraqi students. (The efforts to control Iraqi youths are typical moves by a despot in any authoritarian regime.)
While Nouri's slate (as well as his political party Dawa) are Shi'ite, Iraqiya was a mixing. It is Sunni, it is Shi'ite (Allawi himself is Shi'ite), it is Turkmen and much, much more. And that's what Iraqis voted into first place in the March 2010 elections. As with the provincial elections the year before, the 2010 elections saw Iraqis rejecting sectarianism and reaching for a national identity instead. The White House, Barack Obama, refused to honor the wishes and will of the Iraqi people and the political crisis is the fault of the White House.
Nouri and Barack posed and preened for the cameras in December 2011, claiming success in the 'new' Iraq. Reality would be visible by the end of the week when Nouri returned to Baghdad, ordered troops to patrol the homes of Iraqiya members -- tanks circled the homes -- he began attacking Iraqiya members publicly.
December 21st, while Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi was in the KRG (Kurdistan Regional Government -- three provinces which are semi-autonomous and free from Baghdad's control), Nouri al-Maliki issued an arrest warrant against al-Hashemi claiming the vice president was a terrorist. al-Hashemi has remained in the KRG where he has been a guest of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and KRG President Massoud Barzani. The KRG has refused to hand him over to Baghdad. Tareq al-Hashemi has asked that the trial be moved to Kirkuk noting he did not believe he could get a fair trial in Baghdad. Last month, when 9 members of the Baghdad judiciary held a press confrence to announce he was guilty, they demonstrated al-Hashemi's was correct when he asserted he wouldn't receive a fair trial. (Guilt is determined at the conclusion of a trial, it is not determined by judges before the trial even starts.)
As AP and AFP noted Sunday, Nouri was again demanding al-Hashemi be handed over to him. Tuesday, the Oman Tribune noted that al-Hashemi told Al Hurra he had no plans to leave the KRG and quoted him stating, "I will stay in Kurdistan unless Kurdistan says that the status of Hashemi is causing us embarrassment."
Though the New York Times pretends it's nothing, this political crisis is not a minor thing. As Daniel J. Graeber (Oil Price) obsereves, it's even effecting the oil industry, "Baghdad announced triumphantly this week that oil production increased to more than 3 million barrels per day for the first time in more than 30 years. Exports, the government said, should increase substantially once a new floating oil terminal starts operations later this week. The IEA in December said crude oil production in Iraq could reach an average of 4.36 million bpd by 2016, about half of what Riyadh produces. The agency warned, however, that Iraq's fractured political system might be as much of an obstacle as anything."
How do you resolve the crisis? Starting December 21st, Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujfafi and President Jalal Talabani began calling for a national conference. Instead of supporting the call, Nouri dragged his feet. Now he's insisted that the Arab Summit (scheduled to kick off in Baghdad on March 29th) had to be the focus and everything else must be put on hold. It's another delaying tactic on the part of Nouri. Meanwhile Al Mada reports that the Sadr bloc is insisting Iraqiya should not raise the issue of the political crisis at the summit. Apparently the Sadr bloc is under the mistaken impression that the Arab neighbors are ignorant of what's been going on in Iraq for months? Al Mada also reports that Iraqiya's current position is that it will raise the political crisis at the summit.
Today Dan Littauer (Gay Star News) reports this morning, that's one of the ways Iraq's LGBTs, Emos and suspected LGBTs and Emos are being killed -- approximately 100 of them since the start of February is by beaten with concrete blocks. Littauer notes that another popular way of targeting them for death is "pushing [them] off the tops of high buildings." Littauer reports:


The report from the local LGBTQ activist indicates that Jaish Al-Mahdi (Mahdi Army) and Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq (League of the Righteous) are at least partially responsible for the murders.
An anonymous official in Sadr city's municipal council affirmed that some people are recruited by extremist armed militias who carry lists stored in their phones with the names of emo youths and LGBTQ people to be murdered.
It has also emerged that some officials are actually behind the killings.
Colonel Mushtaq Taleb Muhammadawi, director of the community police of the Iraqi Interior Ministry, stated on 6 February that they had observed the so-called Satanists and emos. He added that the police have an official approval to eliminate emo people because of their 'notorious effects' on the community.
The colonel declared to Iraq News Network that: 'Research and reports on the emo phenomenon has been conducted and shared with the Ministry of Interior which officially approves the measures to eliminate them.
'The Ministries of Education and Interior are taking this issue seriously and we have an action plan to "eradicate them". I will be leading the project myself and we have the necessary permits to access all schools in the capital,' added the colonel, thus possibly indicating at the very least Iraqi state complicity with the
massacres.

It should be noted that Nouri al-Maliki is the one bringing the League of Righteous into the current political process. Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) adds, "The Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq warns of a surge in anti-gay attacks across Iraq, particularly in Basra and Baghdad. The attacks, which began in early February, have left at least 42 dead, according to the women's rights group. Militia groups have publicly posted threatening messages and even lists of suspected homosexuals to target. Many of the victims were tortured before their deaths. It is unclear if their deaths went unreported in regular news reports."
While many are silent, As Sheikh (Dar Addustour) takes on the issue of the attacks on the Emo youth. He notes a lot of the fear is based upon people not knowing what Emo is and that the media can assist in times like these by not falling back on silence but by clarifying what is taking place. He notes the variety of things Emo youth have been confused with -- including Satanists and vampires -- and how that alarms further. He points out that the hair and clothes are styles and the may be momentary fads or something longer lasting. He points out that you don't kill someone ("some young innocent") because you don't like the way they dress and that there is no blessing granted for murdering someone for those sort of reasons.

Meanwhile Kitabat notes that the Interior Ministry is declaring there have been no deaths and this is all a media creation. That would be the same Ministry of Interior that, please note, was declaring earlier this week that Emo was the number one threat to Iraq. Guess someone got the message about how badly this was making Iraq look to the rest of the world? Now the still headless ministry (Nouri never appointed a minister to head it) wants to insist that it is only a small number of Iraqi youth who are even into Emo. The ministry insists that the only truth on the subject of Emo is that which the government tells. But the Parliament's Security and Defense Commission also spoke to the media on Thursday and they spoke of the discovery of 15 corpses of young Iraqis -- Emos or thought to be -- discovered in one Baghdad neighborhood. Activist Hanaa Edwar also speaks of the large number of Iraqi Emo youths being targeted. Al Mada notes the Parliament committee stated that the security forces have failed to protect the Emo youth. Dar Addustour reports that activists Mohammed al-Kazimi has pointed out that the constitution of Iraq guarantees Iraqis the right to freedom of expression and that Emo youth are not unconstitutional.
Instinct magazine publishes what may be a document from the Ministry of the Interior giving the orders to kill Iraq's LGBTs and they interview Iraqi Ali Hili who now lives in England and remembers a time when he was able to live in Iraq without fear:
When the US and UK invaded Iraq. That ended the secular state of Iraq, and turned it into a very "dark ages", fanatical, religious period for Iraq. They brought us a Shi'ite government whose ideology is imported from Iran, they adopted their lifestyle strategy and cultural habits, and they tried to impose this on Iraq's society.
Turning back to the US, yesterday the Secretary of the Army, John McHugh, appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee. That was an interesting hearing but we're just going to quickly grab some figures McHugh provided. Specifically, he noted that "less than one-half of 1 percent of Americans [currently] serve in the Army [. . .]. Over one million soldiers and Department of the Army Civilians served courageously in Iraq. [. . .] Their heroic actions earned 8,238 awards for valor, including 408 Silver Stars and 16 Distinguished Services Crosses. Two Medals of Honor were awarded posthumously to Sergeant First Class Paul R. Smith and Private First Class Ross A. McGinnis."
Scott Weakley tells Denver's 9News (link is text and video), "It isn't like you're in a Humvee where you can name the date, time and route you were on. With these post-deployment lung disorders veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan are getting, we don't know [where they are coming from]." The former army Major spent 22 years in the military, he did marathons when not deployed, after his last deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, he returned to home to discover marathons were out and even trying for a half mile was impossible. Tests on his lungs reveal that they "are damaged, constricted and scarred" and that both together now function as if they are "just half of one." Weakley is among many who suffer from exposure to burn pits and he's trying to raise awareness on this issue. National Jewish Health is currently studying the issue and Dr. Cecile Rose is leading the study into exposure to "burn pits, desert dust and extreme humidity."

Rosie Torres: It wasn't the military it was the contractors that were running those burn pits. Everything was burned. I mean, amputated body parts, unused pharmaceuticals, batteries, tanks, you name it. Everything was burned there. Because I asked him, I said, "Well didn't you notice?" He's like, "No, no, I have pictures. I've seen the smoke, it's there, but when we ask questions, it's like, no everything's fine, everything's safe." Because they were told that too. So it never dawned on them. He was like, "We were just there to fulfill our mission. We weren't there to ask about smoke, you know?" It would go through the mess hall like when they were eating. The plume would just sort of hang all over. Like the air conditioner unit, would come in through there. There was like no escaping it, it was everywhere. What people fail to realize is that invisible wounds aren't just PTSD, I mean it's now toxic exposure too.


Rosie Torres is the wife of Iraq War veteran Leroy Torres and, like Scott Weakley, Leroy Torres was deployed fit and healthy and came back to the US with multiple health issue. Kelly Gustafson and Kristen Kellar (Medill Reports, link is text and audio -- Rosie Torres' comments above are from the audio) report:

When Torres lost both of his jobs -- he was a captain in the Army Reserve and a Texas state trooper -- because of his ailments, his wife made the march to Washington. There, she fought to create a national registry that could link long-term health problems with burn pits in the future.
"We need to make every legislator aware of our cause. These soldiers are from every state," Torres said. "I think what people fail to realize is invisible wounds aren't just PTSD, it's toxic exposure, too."
Torres rallied congressional support from Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) and Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.). While the bill sits in front of the Committee of Veterans Affairs, Torres has started an online registry that is tracking more than 500 soldiers.

And you can find out more information at Burn Pits 360.

Thursday, March 08, 2012

Desperate Housewives

The Hollywood Reporter says James Denton is going to die on "Desperate Housewives."  He plays Mike.  Supposedly he dies this Sunday.  Good.

I've been following the Nicolette Sheridan case.  I don't know anything about her character.  I never watched his crappy show until Vanessa Williams was added to the cast (fall of 2010) to attract viewers but given not much to do because Marc Cherry's just another racist.

So anyway, a number of things came up in the case and I was confused and mentioned it to Ty who hooked me up with a producer who knows all the players.  The producer then said I should talk to ___ who is a good friend of C.I.'s.  So I did.

Here's the story I'm getting (and I believe it).  There's Teri Hatcher and then there's a bunch of bitches.  Vanessa's not included in that mix, this is before she was on the show.

That's hilarious to me because Teri's the only one with a career.  I see that as God watching out for Terri because she, it turns out, is a very nice person.  I love Susan and I'm always talking about how talented I think Teri is. I'm so glad about that now because she apparently is a very sweet person and the only decent one. 

The woman who plays Lynette?  A total piece of work who you'll probably see in Betty Ford at some point. But you won't see her in anything other than a Lifetime movie or two when this shows goes off the air because she's got no career. Ha-ha-ha.

I'm sad to learn that Marcia Cross is a bitch and was a real bitch to Nicolette Sheridan.  But, again, God works in natural ways.  And Marcia won't have another hit either.

Then there's Gabby, the failed movie actress.  Who is too identified with her role to ever be anything else. Ha ha.

Only Terri Hatcher had a career before this show and she's the only who'll walk away with one.  She's genuinely nice which makes people want to work with her, audiences love her which helps her get work and she's so talented that she makes it look so easy.

Nicolette Sheridan, I'm told, was not an angel on the set.  Nor was she a total bitch.  But her problem was that Felicity Huffman hated her and hated the attention Nicolette got.  Felicity was the leader on the push Nicolette off the show.

And basically the entire cast went along with it except for Teri Hatcher and Doug Savant.  (I am so sorry for all the mean things I've said about Doug Savant.)

You would not believe the petty jealousy of Felicity Huffman.  Or her ridiculous idea -- supported at one point by Marc Cherry -- that Lynette could become a femme fatal for the show.

Has Huffman never looked in the mirror?  On a good day, she can pass for "well groomed."  But even on that day, no one would mistake her for pretty.  Add in that she walks like a man and you have to wonder how she ever thought she was going to be the new Edie?

But she thought that.  Stupid idiot.

She has to be filmed very carefully and ideally from the left side.  The right side of her face doesn't film well and she's also got a "Popeye mouth" on the right side. 

Popeye mouth?

I was confused too. 

Remember how he pours spinach in his mouth open on one side?  That's the right side of her face. 

Last night I wrote about the awful Eric Holder declaring Barack to basically be a king.

Glen Ford has a column where he calls it out as well:







It turns out that due process of law is not what we thought it was, these last two centuries. Attorney General Holder defended the president’s authority to summarily execute, without sanction of the courts, or formal charges, or even evidence of crime, persons designated by him as enemies of the United States. You can’t get more king-like than that. Holder acted as if he’d found a previously undetected loophole in the Constitution. “‘Due process’ and ‘judicial process,’” he said, “are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security.” According to Holder, “The Constitution guarantees due process,” but it does not guarantee judicial process. In other words, the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee people access to the courts, even if they are targeted for execution. If that were true, it would be a worthless Constitution, but the U.S. Supreme Court has convincingly ruled, in a 2004 case, that citizens who are detained as enemy combatants have a right to confront the government on the facts of the matter “before a neutral decision maker” – that is, before a court of some kind. Certainly, such rights would apply to someone the president wants killed.



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Thursday, March 8, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Josh Rogin is an embarrassment whore and Foreign Policy is not about journalism, Iraqi women reject the government spin, the US Congress hears about burial issues, was Dennis Kucinich's Tuesday loss a great blow to the left, and more.
In 2009 and 2010, US House Rep John Hall was the Chair of the House Veterans Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and memorial Affairs. With others on the Subcommittee, including former US House Rep Steve Buyer, they raised many important issues. We'll drop back to September 24, 2009 to note one example:
During the first panel, US House Rep Steve Buyer opened with a visual display showing various cemeteries. Normandy American Cemetery, Arlington National Cemetery, Fort Rosecrans National Cemetery. These were "beautiful" and up to standard. He then went to a national cemetery run by the Department of the Interior, Andersonville National Cemetery. Pointing to the dingy, dirty headstones, "This should not matter that this is the marker of someone who died in the Civil War. It shouldn't matter. It shouldn't matter if it was someone who died in the Revolution or someone who died that's interned in Mexico City." He then "So when you said in your testimony that you gently, finely clean the markers, well that's going to take you a lot of time. This is not a standard for which we should have in America. I think Mr. Cleland, if you saw that in one of yours, you would just freak out." Buyer explained that he complained about the weeds and the result was they pulled out everything, including the grass.
If you can't take the heat and embarrassment from the shoddy work noted above, what do you do? Maybe you do like the National Park Service did too and skip a Congressional hearing. The Subcommittee Chair noted that they were invited but they decided they wouldn't attend today. The first panel was made up of government officials who were willing to attend, the Veteran Affairs Dept's Steven Muro (Under Secretary for the National Cemetery Administration), the Pentagon's Kathryn Condon (Executive Director of Army and National Cemeteries Program) and the American Battle Monuments Commissions' Deputy Secretary Raymond Wollman.
In the 2010 mid-terms, control of the House flipped to the Republicans and some House members chose not to seek re-election and others did not win their re-election races (that applies to Buyer and Hall). US House Rep Jon Runyan is now the Chair of the Subcommittee and Jerry McNerney is the Ranking Member.
Chair Jon Runyan: We are here today to examine the current state of our final resting place for our nation's heroes. These cemeteries and monuments span across our country and the entire world: from my own District in New Jersey with Beverly National Cemetery; to across the Atlantic in Normandy, France; or across the Pacific with Clarke Veterans Cemetery in the Philipines. Some of these cemeteries instantly bring to mind the triumph of courage in conflicts fought around the globe for liberty and freedom. Others hold memories of bravery now known only to God and those who died on the field of battle. Others hold memories of bravery now known only to God and those who died on the field of battle. Yet each one of these national shrines has this in common: They are all honored tributes to our service men and women now resting in peace.
He would go on to explain that audits reveal more than "240 mismarked or unmarked graves and 8 veterans or their loved ones buried in the wrong place. Again, this was not a failing of just one national cemetery, but at 13 NCA cemeteries nationwide. Ladies and gentlemen, there is a pattern here and I find it totally unacceptable."
The following exchange was typical of the responses offered in the hearing.
Chair Jon Runyan: I want to start with Under Secretary Muro. Currently NCA is performing 39 raise and realignment projects. Could you discuss what is being done to make sure the problems related to the prior raise and realignment projects are not repeated?
Steven Muro: Thank you for the question, sir. The first thing we've done is ensure that the headstones are not taken from the grave sight. So they're maintained on the grave sight. The second thing is we're requiring the COR -- which is the Contracting Officer's Representative at the site -- to do a daily check at the end of the day at the site before they leave to ensure that the headstones are on the correct grave sight.
Chair Jon Runyan: Were you able to identify all of the contractors who were involved in all of the previous raise and realignment projects where the errors occurred that actually uncovered and started this national audit.
Steven Muro: Yes, we were able to uncover the contractors that had done the work. Some of them had done multiple cemeteries and we didn't have an issue at other cemeteries but we were able to identify them.
Chair Jon Runyan: That -- And what are you doing to ensure that none of these -- none of these contractors involved during the initial errors are involved in the future raise and realignments? And are you going to reach out to the same ones or do we have to make sure that obviously we have the system of checks and balances and that in there? Because, I mean, rewarding bad behavior sometimes becomes, unfortunately, a bad pattern around here.
Steven Muro: Two things we've done. Some of them didn't rebid other contracts. But the ones that have? We have been watching them at the other cemeteries where they didn't have problems. Plus, if they have a site now, we're making sure that they're doing it --
Chair Jon Runyan: So you're still -- you're still offering them?
Steven Muro: Unfortunately, if they did an error and we didn't catch it, it became our responsibility once they left and we signed off on it. So that's where we're holding our employees accountable for that issue.
Chair Jon Runyan: But you're still offering the same contractors --
Steven Muro: Actually, most of the contractors that did the first rounds aren't in the business anymore. A lot of them couldn't keep up with the standard that we set and have not rebid their contracts.
Chair Jon Runyan: What is the process of accountabily once personnel are identified who directly led to some of the failings uncovered by the national audit?
Steven Muro: Whenever -- Whenever an aerror is found at the national cemeteries, it's reported up through the chain and then we -- we double check to make sure everything they think they found, we do ask differet questions to verify. Then when we are sure that it is an error, we make sure we advise Congress of the error and this committee. And we also work with the families, we contact the families -- where there are families available -- and we talk to the families. If it's just the headstone, once we move it -- We advise them before we move it and after we've moved it that it's been corrected. And then if it's cremated remains or a body that needs to be relocated -- the eight that we did, we contact the family and we have a funeral director there. If the family wishes us to use the original funeral director there -- if they're still in business we do. Otherwise we hire a local one from the area.
Chair Jon Runyan: But to the personal accountability, there's nothing being done there?
Steven Muro: Yes, there is. We're holding those employees there are still employed there accountable for the error and for not catching the error.
Chair Jon Runyan: You have any examples of that?
Steven Muro: We're in the process of doing the investigation to take the appropriate adminstrative action on those employees.
If you're not feeling like accountability is taking place, you're not alone. Runyan's expressions throughout were often of disbelief. And what of Ranking Member Jerry McNerney? He noted that this was a follow up to the September 24, 2009 hearing and he would also note that "the value of the current $300 burial allowance and $300 plot allowance for qualifying veterans has diminished as funeral and burial costs have increased -- negatively affecting the survivors left behind."
He is correct. However, if you go back to our snapshot of that Septemeber 24, 2009 hearing, one of the first things you'll find is this: "Subcommittee Chair Hall also noted that the VA's $300 for a funeral plot and $300 for burial does not begin to cover the costs."
This was known in 2009. It's three years later. Why has this not been addressed?
One new detail that did come up was when the Department of Defense's Kathyrn Condon informed the Subcommittee that the average wait time is 98 days for the burial of a veteran not killed in action. 98 days seems like a very long time.
Back in 2009, then public editor of the New York Times Clark Hoyt weighed in on the issue of anonymous sources. He noted that the paper's "policy says anonymous sources should be used only as 'a last resort when the story is of compelling public interest and the information is not available any other way'." Does Foreign Policy not have a policy on anonymous sourcing?
"This is tough enough without paid advocates making it worse" is what Josh Rogin presents "one official" in the government telling him. Are there any standards at Foreign Policy. Is Josh Rogin just allowed write any damn thing? He's now, yet again, attacking Camp Ashraf and this time he's gong after their public supporters. And the poor little White House and State Dept are just so so so worn down by these awful, awful advocates.
Not only was the quote unneeded, not only did it violate the basic policies (in journalism) on anonymous sourcing, it also part of yet another catty attack on Camp Ashraf from someone who's been allowed to launch many already.
Here's another reality for Josh Rogin: If the United Nations is monitoring Camp Liberty -- where some residents of Camp Ashraf are being relocated -- then you talk to the UN to confirm that.
Unless you're a an idiot, you do not run with this, "While there are some legitimate problems at the camp, the ["Obama administration"] official admitted, the U.N. has been monitoring Camp Liberty's water sewage, and food systems on a daily basis and the condtions are better than the MEK is portraying." How the hell is that sourcing?
Did Josh ever get his work fact checked? Or did the little punk cry and piss his briefs to get his way with every editor he ever had? The White House is not monitoring by that statement; therefore, the White House cannot tell you what is or isn't going on. If you want to talk -- on the record or off -- about what the UN has found, you go to a UN source. This is basic. And what Josh has offered is bulls**t.
If you doubt it, this section of his 'report' is a character attack and you don't allow anonymous officials to launch character attacks:
"The Americans who ought to know better and claim to be on the side of good solutions are really damaging it. Either they are too lazy or too arrogant to actually do their homework. They don't spend the time to learn facts, they just pop off. They accept the MEK line without question and then they posture," the official said. "We have a plan that has a chance to work and the Iraqis want it to work. The MEK ... it's not clear. And in this situation they are being badly advised by the people whose names appear in these ads."
I know Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, Patrick Kennedy, Ed Rendell, John Lewis and Evan Bayh. (I know Lee Hamilton but I loath him.) They're among the public advocates for Camp Ashraf residents to be treated fairly.
It's strange because I spoke to two about this little 'report' from Joshy Posh and, thing is, he didn't try to get a comment from them. He just, like a good little whore, wrote down what the government wanted him to write down -- no questions asked. Whores don't ask questions, they just take your money.
The White House has refused to honor international law. Last week, we called out Hillary for making an idiot of herself and the US terrorist list by stating that whether or not Camp Ashraf residents were taken off that list would depend upon how they 'behaved' as the Iraqi government relocated them -- the same government that's already twice attacked them and -- as the United Nations publicly acknowledges -- the same government that's killed at least 49 Camp Ashraf residents.
No, that's not how you determine terorrism. If Josh Rogin weren't such a little whore, he'd be writing about that, he'd be pursuing that. Instead, he launches another attack on a group of people who are defenseless. And, at some point, the argument's going to be made -- and I could do it right now and do it in terms of the law -- that Camp Ashraf residents aren't on the terrorist list. The MEK is. The MEK is on it for activites that don't involve Camp Ashraf. When that argument gets made, the White House has even less to hide behind.
Somehow the State Dept refusing to comply with a court order from 2010 to conduct and complete a review of the status of the MEK isn't a concern to a whore like Josh Rogin. It's not even worth mentioning to him.
Camp Ashraf residents are protected under international law, that's reality. Josh Rogin doesn't have to like them, doesn't have to support whatever it is they support. All he has to do is recognize the law. Once he does that he can respect or reject the law. But there is nothing in his mental midget ditherings to ever imply, infer or openly suggest that the idiot knows the first thing he's writing about. But he's so very good at working in every point the White House wants made.
Here's what so damn embarrassing about Josh Posh's latest crap-fest, the White House is complaining that citizens -- that's what Howard Dean and company are -- are being active in politics. They're using their First Amendment rights. And that's what has the White House bitching, whining and moaning. They need to grow the hell up. In a democracy, what they're facing right now should happen on every issue and if they hadn't dragged their feet on this issue, maybe they wouldn't be fighting such a strong push now.
It's hard to tell when Josh is lying because he's so damn stupid. But at one point, when he's listing the 'paid advocates' and their activities, he goes off about sitting in on Congressional hearings. Those aren't paid advocates and that didn't start this year, it didn't start last year. It's been going on forever and maybe if Josh Rogin didn't take swallow everything the White House sticks in his mouth, he'd know that. Then again, maybe not. As I said, it's always had to tell when he's lying or when he's just showing how very stupid he is.
I've noted this before, I'll note it again before someone wonders, I have not received any money from Camp Ashraf or MEK or anything to do with them. I don't take money for things like that. I don't take money period. I don't take money for speaking -- I pay my own travel, I pay my own lodging. Nor do I speak on behalf of Camp Ashraf. The law is the law and who knew Foreign Policy would decide that international law wasn't to be respected?
Today was International Women's Day. Salam Faraj (AFP) reports that Iraqi women refused to be silent puppets in their government's attempt to distort the record and use them as props. While the Baghdad-government attempted to spin, Iraqi women gathered together for their own conference. Hanaa Edwar was among the brave women gathered to tell the truth and she tells AFP, "Iraqi women suffer marginalisation and all kinds of violence, including forced marriages, divorces and harassment, as well as restrictions on their liberty, their education, their choice of clothing, and their social life." It's an important article and, if you use any link in this snapshot, please use that link.
We covered International Women's Day this morning. The only thing to add to that is that Iraqi women are very strong and it's shame they have to be so strong yet again. Their countries been attacked so many times, they've had to live through crippling sanctions, the US-picked ruler does nothing to improve the lives of Iraqis (via jobs or basic services) and the US assisted the "brain drain" -- where large portions of Iraq's educated class left the country -- by installing and building up theocratic thugs. Not only that, the US government actively sought to undercut Iraqi women when the country's Constitution was being written. On top of all that, they have to deal with bombings, with shootings, with threats, with the never-ending attacks just for being a woman.
That they get up each day and start the struggle all over is a testatment to their spirit and strength and they are surely (once again) making the country a better place for their children. Hopefully, when their children are adults, the US will not again attack Iraq in an illegal war thereby destroying all the hard earned progress these women are and will be making possible. They are Iraq's heart and soul, its leaders and its dreamers.
Turning to the US, Tuesday in Ohio, US House Reps Dennis Kucinich and Marcy Katpur faced off against one another in a primary. Both incumbent Democrats ended up in the same district due to redistricting. Only one could run for a spot representing the newly designed district in November. Marcy won the primary and will go on to compete for the vote this fall. Dennis cannot represent Ohio now althogh there are rumors he might attempt to run in Washington state. Marcy and Dennis both represented their constitutents. In what follows, we're not discussing Dennis Kucinich as "your Congress member" but as the national politician -- a spot he actively sought.
Theo Anderson (In These Times) wonders who the next Dennis will be and thinks/hopes it will be US House Rep Tammy Badlwin. I would hope not. I was not impressed with National Dennis. National Dennis did vote against the 2002 Iraq Authorization and applause for that. But so what? Did he filibuster to end the war? No. In 2008, former US Senator Mike Gravel would repeatedly explain how you can filibuster to stop the authorization vote for the war spending. Dennis didn't do that. Did he do anything? He spoke. Often and well. Little else.
In 2004, he ran for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. This is, as Rebecca's explained many times, is why I truly do not care for National Dennis. After he failed to make much of a dent in terms of votes, he assured his supporters he would make an impact on the platform and on the convention and blah blah blah. Rebecca and I were at the 2004 DNC convention and dealt with the saddest non-physically injured person at a convention we've ever seen -- a Kucinnich supporter who couldn't believe Dennis would sell them out. Dennis did what was best for Dennis. That's all he ever did. Paul D'Amato (International Socialsit Review) analyzed Kucinich's sell-out of beliefs and principals and, yes, supporters at the 2004 DNC convention and concluded:
This is indeed the role of all left-leaning Democratic candidates. George McGovern in 1968 and Jesse Jackson in 1988, to mention a couple, did the same thing: corraling millions of votes by making a Left or populist appeal, and then handing those votes to the centrist party choice at convention time. The process is predictable. First the Left-Democrat presents his candidacy as one that can push the party to the Left and pressure it to take on issues it otherwise would not. Then, on the fateful convention day, it is revealed that the dynamic is actually the opposite: the party co-opts the Left, drags it to the right, and neuters it. In the end, it has absolutely no influence on the party's platform or trajectory. All the talk about campaigning for the Democrat as being "part of the movement" for labor rights, against war, for women's rights, and so on, is revealed to be a lie. The truth is that backing the Democrat is aimed at defusing the fight for a genuine alternative. Those who realize this become demoralized and depressed, and when the next presidential election roles around, a new crop of enthusiasts are found who can be convinced that this is the "most important election of your lifetime," and the whole process begins again. It is a seamless trap.
This is a textbook case of how to kill any attempt to build a third-party alternative that really represents working-class interests. The Mariah Williamses are right to believe that we have virtually one pro-corporate party. And it is the job of the Dennis Kuciniches to make sure that the Mariah Williamses fail to break from that party by wagging a left tail behind the mainstream dog.
That was 2004. Then came his attempt to run for the 2008 Democratic Party presidential nomination. And we treated him fairly here (check the archives) despite the fact that I can't stand National Dennis. He was the peace candidate, he swore. But right from the start, he proved it wasn't a real campaign. Before the caucus vote in Iowa, well before it, he was telling his supporters to vote for Barack Obama. They would support Dennis in the first round and then go over to Barack. Mike Gravel was a peace candidate. You could make the case that Bill Richardson or John Edwards were. But Barack Obama had voted for every Iraq War measure that came before him. And Dennis knew it. So it was offensive that way. It was also offensive in the "I release you minions" manner. But what it really did was demonstrate that Dennis wasn't a real candidate. You don't do that if you're a real candidate. And Dennis had sworn he was going to fight for every vote. Then he wanted to whine that the networks were excluding him. You competed in Iowa by giving your supporters away to another campaign. You're not a real candidate. The networks were under no obligation to cover him. I love Rosenne Barr. But with her announcing that she wants Jill Stein to win the Green Party nomination, that says to me, "You're not a real candidate." And that's fine. But time is limited as are resources and there's no reason to cover candidates who aren't trying to win the nomination. It short changes those who actually are trying to run.
There have been many key issues since Barack Obama was sworn in as US President in January 2009. One of them was ObamaCare. The US needs to address health care. From the left, many of us believe the only way to control costs is to supply universal, single-payer health care and the easiest way to get that is to lower the age for Medicare. (You can raise the age on CHIPS and other state programs that cover children.) If you do not have the guts or the votes to go to single-payer system immediately, you go incremental with Medicare lowering the age ten years. You up the age for the children's health programs and pretty soon you're dealing with a 15 or 20 year gap and, of course, it is only fair to everyone that those people be covered so you do one more incremental and you've basically got everyone covered. That's simple and you're not selling the American people on a new plan, you're just expanding one that already has a strong record of serving seniors.
That's nothing like what Barack proposed. Though he used the buzzword "universal health care" at the DNC in Denver in 2008, he wasn't going to provide that and he hasn't. What did he do? Prior to ObamaCare, you could purchase insurance or not. Now you have to puchase it. He pushed a law the Congress passed (which hopefully the Supreme Court will toss out) forces all Americans to buy insurance. It turns you into consumers of the insurance companies, it leads you like lambs to slaughter. It is of no help to anyone. Strangely enough, when Mitt Romeny pulled this crap as governor, my own local Pacifica, KPFA, couldn't shut up about how wrong that was. Despite the fact that we're in the Bay Area of California and what Massachusetts does really shouldn't be our biggest concern. But damned if Philip Maldari and the rest couldn't let go of this story and what a fraud and rip-off it was. Strangely enough when Barack pimps it, KPFA will not allow critics of the plan on the air to voice the exact same arguments they did when RomneyCare passed.
What does this have to do with Dennis? National Dennis wanted -- and got -- national news stories when he vowed he would not vote for ObamaCare. And in November 2009, he voted "no" and issued a press release which included the following:
We have been led to believe that we must make our health care choices only within the current structure of a predatory, for-profit insurance system which makes money not providing health care. We cannot fault the insurance companies for being what they are. But we can fault legislation in which the government incentivizes the perpetuation, indeed the strengthening, of the for-profit health insurance industry, the very source of the problem. When health insurance companies deny care or raise premiums, co-pays and deductibles they are simply trying to make a profit. That is our system.

"Clearly, the insurance companies are the problem, not the solution. They are driving up the cost of health care. Because their massive bureaucracy avoids paying bills so effectively, they force hospitals and doctors to hire their own bureaucracy to fight the insurance companies to avoid getting stuck with an unfair share of the bills. The result is that since 1970, the number of physicians has increased by less than 200% while the number of administrators has increased by 3000%. It is no wonder that 31 cents of every health care dollar goes to administrative costs, not toward providing care. Even those with insurance are at risk. The single biggest cause of bankruptcies in the U.S. is health insurance policies that do not cover you when you get sick.

"But instead of working toward the elimination of for-profit insurance, H.R. 3962 would put the government in the role of accelerating the privatization of health care. In H.R. 3962, the government is requiring at least 21 million Americans to buy private health insurance from the very industry that causes costs to be so high, which will result in at least $70 billion in new annual revenue, much of which is coming from taxpayers. This inevitably will lead to even more costs, more subsidies, and higher profits for insurance companies -- a bailout under a blue cross.
And despite that when it was time to vote in March 2010, despite vowing he would stay a firm no, Dennis took a plane ride with Barack and suddenly changed his vote. Jeff Zeleny and Robert Pear (New York Times) noted his Mach 17, 2010 announcement that he would vote "yes" for it and that, "In an interview five days ago, Mr. Kucinich said he could not support the legislation and dismissed suggestions that his vote would derail the Democratic health care agenda."
That is Dennis Kucinich. Dennis talks a big game but in the end he always does what's best for himself. How is it a loss not to have Dennis in the House of Representatives? (Again, he served his constitutents very well. I'm speaking of National Dennis.) Isn't this 'talk big but have no spine' exactly why many of us on the left were upset with a large number of Democrats? Didn't we hate seeing them cave in over and over?
What did Dennis accomplish either them getting national press for himself -- press that often portrayed him as a joke?
When he raised serious issues -- no, not his lawsuit against the Congressional cafe, think the remarks about Barack's Libyan War being in violation of the War Powers Act -- he was kooky Dennis. How much did he undermine the right positions just by supporting them? That's a serious question and someone should seriously explore it.
He voted against the Iraq War. He was a critics of the Iraq War. That's all you can say. He didn't use his office to end the war. Time and again, he caved and, time and again, he provided cover for the most craven acts of the Democratic Party.
I'm sorry that Dennis and Marcy had to go up against each other. But this idea that the US Congress just lost Russ Feingold isn't accurate. Russ did stand up and Russ made serious arguments and conducted himself in a serious manner so that when he took a stand -- like opposing the PATRIOT Act -- it registered as something other than, "Oh, look why the kooky flibbertigibbet did today!" The Department of Peace was ridiculed by many this week. It's something Dennis supported.
However, contrary to what some of those snarking though, that idea did not originate with Dennis Kucinich and has been around forever and a day -- it was popularized in 1793 by a free African-American. It's an important part of Black history and I wonder if knowing that history would have prevented some of the snark? At Third Estate Sunday Review last October, it was addressed by Jim, Cedric and Ann:
Jim: I think it was the fact that The Nation could be leading the way towards something other than making excuses for Barack. And they're not leading. We're all on a treadmill, jogging in place, never getting forward. And that was driven home, to me, with the information -- I didn't know this before -- that a Secretary of Peace had been proposed as far back as 1793. That's 17 years after the start of the American Revolution.

Cedric: Benjamin Banneker. That's the person who proposed it in 1793. And that it was proposed in 1793 was as much a revelation to me as the fact that Banneker was a Black man. I had teachers who made a big deal out of Black History Month and really felt like I had a strong grounding in Black History. Obviously, that's not the case and I need to start supplementing what I was taught in school.

Ann: Well most of Cedric's Black history reading is on people from the Civil Rights Era. Such as Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth whose passing Ava and C.I. recently noted in "
TV: That Bunny Won't Hop." There's a lot of history.

Cedric: There is but I think Banneker's contribution is sort of swept to the side the same way MLK's calls for peace, an end to war and economic justice get swept to the side.
It's a serious idea and it has been for centuries. It's also an idea popularized by a great American, consider him a founding father, certainly so in terms of information -- he published an almanac. And it's not idea that should be ridiculued -- especially considering all the wars that US has been in lately. But the fact that 'kooky' Kucinich is championing it, leaves it open to ridicule.
I realize that those who speak out will always be targeted with ridicule. But you can bring it on yourself. He didn't conduct himself in a serious fashion and he was always eager to grab the spotlight by laughing at himself. Cynthia McKinney speaks out. She is ridiculed for it. She never plays to the press by pulling "Look how stupid I am" the way Dennis did and does. Doing that does not make you look like a "good sport," it makes you look like an idiot because people are calling you one and you're attempting to get their approval by agreeing with them. I don't see his departure from Congress as a great loss for the peace movement. Cynthia McKinney's departure from Congress? That was a huge loss.