Rihanna's trash, Pink knows better

I figure we've had enough of the elections and by the time I end this post, it might already be decided so I'm going to focus on something else instead.

Two women who are betraying women.


First up, the idiot Rihanna, "Rihanna unveiled the tracklist for Unapologetic that features Chris Brown on a new song called “Nobodies Business” along with Eminem on another new track."

The fact that Dave Zirin was coo-coo for Rihanna should have been our first clue that she was trash who betrayed women.  But she's recording with Brown (and dating him again) after he beat the crap out of her.  That's not a message to send to young girls.  And let's not forget the hideous Eminem song she plays the woman in -- the battered woman who's happy to be battered. "Well that's alright because I like the way it hurts" she sings in "Love The Way You Lie" as Eminem raps about beating up the woman and about how if she tries to leave him, he'll burn her in bed ("If she ever tries to f**kin' leave again, I'ma tie her to the bed/ And set this house on fire" then Rihanna with her, "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn/ Well that's alright because I like the way it hurts").

This is f**ked up and is played on popular radio that kids listen to.

Rihanna is nothing but trash.

If her ass gets beat to death, I'm not going to feel sorry for her.  You can, if you're that pathetic.  But she has justified beating up women by going back with Chris Brown and with this awful song with Eminem.  It's not funny.  Do you not know that most women who are beaten are killed when they try to leave.

It's not funny.

It's trash and it doesn't belong on radio targeting kids.

She's trash and shame on anyone who doesn't call her out.

Alicia Keys doesn't have the need to act the fool.  Mary J. Blige is a strong woman.

Rihanna's nothing but a bitch looking to get slapped down.

And doing that publicly says it's "okay" to a lot of little boys growing up who will believe it's okay to hit women and a lot of little girls who will believe that hitting a woman is a way of saying you love her.

Rihanna should rot in hell.

This is Pink's video "Try" (her single that just came out).







You'll note I'm not posting Rihanna's crap.

I will post Pink.  Make up your own mind on it.

The lyrics?  Strong song.


But the video?

Pink is a strong woman who usually promotes strength for all.

And she may think she's doing an 'equality' video.

But the reality is that the victims of violence are predominately women so her having a romantic couple where the man tries to choke the woman and is aggressive towards her? 

I'm sorry, Pink, you should be ashamed for yourself. 

Rihanna's trash.  She can't help it.  Someday, she'll be beat to death while she's drugged out. 

Pink, however, has a brain and some respect.  I'll give her the benefit of the doubt that she saw the video as some bold artistic statement.

But that's not how it's going to play.

Pink has a young girl following.  And this video is not a message to send to young girls.

I've never had a problem with Pink's video.  (My favorite Pink song is "Just Like A Pill.")

Maybe it wouldn't be such a big deal if I didn't have a girly-girl for a daughter.

I was a tom boy and if some guy tried to hit me, I would beat the s**t out of him.  There was only one time when I was surprised by a guy in my life and that was because he seemed so nice and he tried to date rape me.  If my father hadn't shown up, I would have come out of it enough to beat the crap out of him.  My sisters and I were taught where to aim and how.

But my daughter is a girly-girl wanting to dress up as a princess wanting all that sort of thing.  So I do worry about her.  And she's just the type that would see Pink's video and say, "Pink's so pretty and she sings so great.  I want to be just like her . . . in this video!"

Pink has a daughter, by the way.  So I would think she'd show a little better judgment when making her videos.



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Tuesday, November 6, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, Taji is slammed with a bombing, Nouri (at present) can't get the support he needs to form a majority-government, Moqtada al-Sadr continues to present as a leader, Nouri and his Cabinet attempt to gut the food ration card system, the European press appears to miss that the cards have more than one use, Ayad Allawi says Nouri will appear before Parliament, Massoud Barzani finishes up a tour of the region, and more.

In the United States today, a presidential election is being held.  Alastair Reith (CounterPunch) explores Iraq and Afghanistan in terms of the lies being told:

However, both candidates are neglecting to mention a few things about America's 'total withdrawal'.

Privatisation of occupation

A small number of troops will remain in the country, with the Office of Security Cooperation directing the activities of more than 100 military personnel tasked with training Iraq's army and helping to oversee continuing multi-billion dollar arms sales to the Iraqi military.

The US embassy in Baghdad is the largest and most expensive in the world, with 17,000 staff all operating under legal immunity.

There are also consulates in Basra, Mosul and Kirkuk, each with upwards of 1000 employees.

These figures include more than just the bureaucrats and diplomats that immediately spring to mind – the embassy also houses CIA officers, intelligence analysts, defence attaches and upwards of 5,000 security contractors.

In place of uniformed soldiers, America's activities in Iraq are increasingly carried out by thousands of defence contractors – essentially mercenaries operating under the aegis of the US government.

They do everything from peeling potatoes to providing diplomats and businessmen with armed security details.

Exact figures and details of precise activities are hard to come by, but the latest report from US Central Command details 7,336 contractors working for the Pentagon in Iraq.

It's not just the Pentagon outsourcing its boots on the ground – when other government agencies (such as the US State Department) are factored in the numbers become closer to 13,500.

While Obama and Romney cross verbal swords over the withdrawal of troops and how it took place, the privatisation of America's significant and ongoing presence in Iraq does not rate a mention.

Also noting the US election is Wael Grace (Al Mada) who points out that Barack's 'withdrawal' has left behind US military as "trainers" and Marines guarding the US diplomatic staff as well as contractors.

Taji has been slammed by a bombing which has left many dead and many injured. Reuters quotes police officer Ahmed Khalef stating, "There were army trainees leaving the base and small buses were waiting for them when the explosion took place.  We immediately started to rescue the wounded.  You could smell charred bodies."   Earlier today, Adam Schreck (AP) reported 27 dead (and possibly a suicide bomber) and over forty injured.  Hours later, Schreck updated to 33 dead and fifty-six injured.  The Frontier Post notes the suicide car bombing was "at the entrance to an Iraqi army base" where recruits were lining up.  AFP adds, "The explosion appears to have occurred as they left the base at lunchtime. But sources told the AFP news agency there had also been a recruitment event on Tuesday to welcome potential new soldiers. Such events have been targeted by militants in the past."  Yesterday Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported a Taji car bombing as well -- one that claimed 1 life and left seven injured.

Yasir Ghazi (New York Times) quotes Mohamed Talal who was hoping to enlist, "I was heading to the place near the parking lot to check my name when all of sudden a strong explosion happened where people were gathering.  I turned and started to run, and I began to feel shrapnel in my back and I fell to the ground."

Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera) states, "Our police source said that the attack was a parked car bomb, and not a suicide blast."  Reuters notes that the death toll has risen,  "A suicide bomber rammed his explosive-filled car into soldiers outside an army base near Baghdad on Tuesday, killing 31 people and injuring tens more in one of the worst attacks this year on the country's military."

In addition, All Iraq News notes that 2 school guards were injured in the Dora district of Baghdad and 1 soldier was shot dead in Qayyarah.  Alsumaria reports that 1 police officer was killed in an attack on his Mosul home (attackers used automatic weapons), also in Nineveh Province, 2 soldiers were killed by an IED, 1 person was shot dead in Mousl (gun had a silencer) and, dropping back to last night, a Falluja car bombing claimed the lives of 1 police officer and left four injured.  Alsumaria adds that 1 Yezidi was kidnapped in Kirkuk.

Also on violence, All Iraq News notes that today Iraqiya MP Hamid al-Mutlaq called for Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and President Jalal Talabani to hold responsible whomever killed Diyala Province's Mohammed Jassim al-Mikdadi and strung the man's body up on an electric pole afterwards.

In other disturbing news, All Iraq News reports Nouri al-Maliki's spokesperson declared today the intent to do away with the ration cards.  Earlier this year, Stan Cox (Al Jazeera) explained the food ration card system:

For more than two decades, Iraq has been running what the World Food Program (WFP) has called "the largest public food program operating in the world today". The system dates back to August 1990, when President Saddam Hussein's army invaded Kuwait. In response, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 661, imposing sanctions and blocking virtually all trade with the country. The government of Iraq quickly established a PDS to provide food and other basic necessities to all Iraqis. Little did they know the system would remain in place for more than 20 years.
Because sanctions hampered Iraq's ability to sell oil or buy food, hardship intensified in the years following the 1991 Gulf War that ousted Iraqi troops from Kuwait. In 1995, Security Council Resolution 986 created the UN Oil-for-Food Program, and the PDS was expanded. But, through the sanctions period and during the almost nine years of occupation that followed the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, a significant portion of the population remained vulnerable to hunger.

Nouri's spokesperson is asserting that they will replace it with the equivalent of US $12 in cash per month and that this will cut down on corruption.  No, it wouldn't.  Corruption isn't even an issue.  Though some -- even some at the UN -- have called for reform, this program has been effective, especially before Nouri came into power (spring 2006) and began gutting it.  All Iraq News reports that Zia al-Asadi, the secretary-general of the Sadr bloc, has declared that they reject the decision and do not see the proposed alternative being an adequate substitute.  Independent MP Jawad Albzona dismisses the move and says the amount being offered is "trivial" and will not help anyone.  Iraqiya also calls out the decision stating that the answer was to improve the ration card system, not do away with it.  They feel this will lead to an increase in food prices.  Iraqiya MP Adnan al-Janabi tells All Iraq News that ending the ration card system would be a disaster.    AFP may be the only one filing an English language report.  I'm not sure why they bothered.

Are we not supposed to think? I'm sorry, I thought humans were the thinking animal.  I thought we processed.  I thought we did more than just offered he-said, she-said.  Seems to me if Nouri's killing off the ration card system, you ask a few questions, you make a few observations.

And I'm real sorry but it's not just about the food or has the press been sleeping for the last years? 

Pretend I am an Iraqi.  I want to vote in the provincial elections scheduled for early next year.  And I want to vote in the parliamentary elections which are supposed to take place in 2014.  How do I do that?

Currently -- pay attention AFP -- I would do as I have done since the US invasion.  I would display a food ration card.  This is the identification system that's used.

And a move away from the card system?  With an election coming up and one supposed to follow within 12 months after the provincial elections?  I think it's safe to argue it's a pretty damn stupid time to drop the food ration cards.  Nouri can't even pull off a census.  We're supposed to believe he can handle voter registration?

Immediately someone wearing a dunce cap insists, "Well they can end the program and just use the cards."  Yes, they can.  If no new voters are coming into the process.  Good thing Iraq's got a population that rends old, right?  Good thing -- Oh, wait.  Iraq's median age is 20-years.  Iraq has an incredibly young population and the percentage that will be coming of age for the parliamentary election is a significant proportion of Iraq's estimated 30 million people. 

So what are you telling us?  The ration card system is ending but you're still going to issue cards for the next two years to take care of the voting issue?

We've talked about what is.  Let's note what this may be based on past history: Yet another attempt by Nouri to skew the elections in his own favor. 

For those who've forgotten, Iraq is in the midst of a political crisis -- one caused by Nouri al-Maliki.  Unhappy that his State of Law did not come in first in the 2010 parliamentary elections, Nouri dugs his heels in for 8 months while the US government backed him and figured out a way to disregard the Iraq Constitution, the will of the people and the vote.  The White House decided a contract could sidestep all the issues.  So the 8 month political stalemate ended in November 2010 with Nouri and the leaders of the other political blocs signing the Erbil Agreement.  The contract had concessions from Nouri (such as the formation of an independent national security commission, Article 140 of the Constitution finally be implemented, and more) and, in return, the blocs agreed to let Nouri have a second term as prime minister.  Nouri used it to get that second term and then trashed the contract, refused to honor it.  By the summer of 2011, it was obvious that Nouri didn't -- as the US State Department repeatedly lied -- just need more time.  No, Nouri wasn't going to follow the contract.  That's when Moqtada al-Sadr, the Kurds and Iraqiya began demanding that the Erbil Agreement be honored.  Nouri's failure to honor the contract started political stalemate II.  His desire to target Sunnis and Iraqiya led to the political crisis. 

Mohammed Sabah (Al Mada) reports today that Nouri's wish to further disregard the votes, the voters and the other parties (including Iraqiya which won the parliamentary election) has been stymied for while he still wants to form a "majority-government" (he would block out political rivals), he's worried that both Iraqiya and the Kurds would prevent him from forming that if he dissolved the current government.  It's a sign of just howed cowed and cowardly the White House is that Nouri's trying to form a majority-State of Law-government and they're not saying a word.  The runner up in the 2010 election is trying to seize total control of the government and the White House is too chicken to speak up publicly.  Al Rafidayn reports that not only is the National Alliance (Shi'ite party led by Ibrahim al-Jaafari) split on Nouri's plan for a majority government but the Sadr bloc has also made clear that they oppose it.  Let's again note, as we have since 2010, Moqtada al-Sadr wants to be the next prime minister of Iraq.  In the last years, he's gone out of his way to make moves and take positions that are seen as inclusive of all Iraqis.  And reportedly (this is what the US government was told), one of the reasons Moqtada finally agreed to back Nouri on the second term in 2010 was because the Iranian government told Moqtada, come 2014, they would back him.  A little while ago, when oil rich Iraq, according to Nouri, had no oil surplus funds to share with the people, Moqtada cried foul.  He's refused to leave that issue alone and Nouri's been forced to admit that there are funds.  Moqtada's still not leaving it alone.  All Iraq News reports that a delegation from the Sadr bloc met today with Minister of Finance Rafie al-Issawi to discuss this issue and find out what the progess was on it.  The bloc issued a statement noting they will continue to stay focused on this and ensure that the country and its children benefit from the oil.

Moqtada is positioning himself to be Iraq's future prime minister.  There's no reason he shouldn't but he is, to the White House, "Iraq's radical cleric."  If they wanted to stop Moqtada (and they do), the easiest way would have been to back Iraqiya in 2010 when it won the parliamentary elections.  Then Ayad Allawi would be prime minister (most likely it would have been him, he is the head of Iraqiya) and if Iraqis were even just a little bit better off, he'd be sailing into another term in 2014.  Instead, the White-House-dreaded Moqtada may be the one.  Al Mada reports that Allawi declared yesterday that the political crisis has led to serious differences and that Nouri must appear before Parliament as has been requested.  If the work is too much for Nouri, Allawi says, then Nouri can leave the work to others because many would be happy to take on Nouri's job.

Another person unafraid to tell Nouri "enough" is KRG President Massoud Barzani.  (When Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi was in the KRG and Nouri was demanding that the KRG hand al-Hashemi over to Baghdad, President Jalal Talabani buckled and al-Hashemi had to get the support of Barzani who, unlike Talabani, doesn't stick a finger in the air to determine what way the wind is blowing before making a decision.)  Barzani has just wrapped up a regional tour.   Yesterday, Barzani met with  Abdullah Bin Hamad al-Attiyah, the Deputy Prime Minister in Qatar, and, while in Qatar for several days, he met with other government officials to discuss relations between the two countries and common sides.  Today, he met with the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani to discuss economic opportunties and investments between Qatar and the KRG.  And Barzani returned to the KRG late this evening.

Al Mada reports that Baghdad made third dirtiest capital on the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's ranking as a result of environmental pollution. Meanwhile  All Iraq News reports Iraq's Ministry of the Environment is noting the waste in the Khasa River water in Kirkuk -- oil and construction materials.

Turning to England, as noted at War Criminal Tony Blair's online office, he decided to kick off the work week with another speech, this one to the Iraq Britain Business Council's 4th London Conference.  To them, he declared  "So these are all compelling reasons for Britain and British investment to be part of Iraq's future. But, naturally, in addition, to the economic and industrial reasons, British forces helped liberate Iraq from Saddam and for years with much heroism and sacrifice helped Basrah survive the sectarian aftermath. They should be proud of what they achieved. "

Many hearing his remarks probably thought of the news in June about efforts in the UK to ensure that those who tortured Iraqis not be legally punished.  From Russia Today:


In 2003, dozens of men were allegedly hooded, stripped and beaten in secret camps across Iraq. One innocent civilian has reportedly died aboard a Royal Air Force helicopter, and a group of 63 others are still considered missing after being taken to another secret prison located in an oil pump station.
The shocking revelation is worsened by the fact that these events – which, if proven true, are clear violations of international law – were apparently sanctioned by top lawyers in the British Ministry of Defense, and kept secret from the Army's lawyer on the ground in Iraq.
Lieutenant Colonel Nicholas Mercer, the chief British Army lawyer in Iraq during the 2003 invasion, told the Mail on Sunday that what went on in this secret prison network amounted to "war crimes."

As news was breaking of the War Criminal and former British Prime Minister's speech was breaking,  Kitbat already had filed a story about that attempted cover up in June.  Meanwhile Iraq's a real mess.  If you haven't figured that out, a British official rushes to make it clear today that the fault lies with the United States, not with England.  Charles Maggs (Politics UK) reports:

Peter Mandelson has admitted Tony Blair made a mistake invading Iraq, as he did not foresee the prolonged violence that was to engulf the country.
In an interview with Esquire magazine, the former king of spin said Blair had been expecting a "short, sharp success" rather than eight years of sectarian killing.
"He expected it, obviously, not to be a walk in the park but to be a short, sweet success with the downfall of Saddam," he said.
"But it didn't turn out like that, which was more the Americans' fault than his, but I think he should have gone into it with his eyes wider open."

Sorry, Mandelson, Tony didn't go to war with Iraq inspite of the US, in went to war in partnership with the US.  That means if the US is 'at fault,' so is War Criminal Tony.  We are judged by who we hop in bed with.  As Stop The War Coalition notes, that wasn't War Criminal Tony's only public event this month:

Protest Tuesday 13 November 11am
War criminals & arms dealers out of our universities
Main Entrance, University College London WC1E 6BT

Facebook event...

Tony Blair, John Reid and Michael Gove are among the speakers at the inaugural conference of the UCL Institute for Security & Resilience Studies.

Join Stop the War to protest against war criminals like Tony Blair and his friends speaking at a conference to promote the interests of arms dealers in our universities.

What's Tony doing?  What a good whore does, put out when paid.  Stop The War Coalition explains:

ON TUESDAY 13 NOVEMBER, Tony Blair will be the headline speaker for the inaugural conference of University College London's Institute for Security & Resilience Studies (ISRS).

If you would like to attend Building an ethos of Resilience – A new Manifesto for Business, it costs just £714 a ticket -- or £354 at the "not for profit"rate.

This is a departure from Mr Blair's recent public engagements, which have focused more on the religious community. It is, however, perhaps more in tune with his employment by the government of Kazakhstan, who currently pay him £8 million a year to whitewash their human rights record.

The ISRS was founded in 2008 by former MP John Reid. Reid was a key Blair ally in the run-up to the Iraq war and an 'enforcer' within the Labour Party. He was appointed Home Secretary following Robin Cook's resignation to ensure few others would follow suit.

Reid was known in Whitehall as 'Minister for Newsnight' for his skill in pushing the Bush/Blair line in media appearances. The invasion of Iraq may well be remembered as 'Blair's war', and not without some justification. But there are many people who bear a great deal of responsibility for that criminal act. John Reid is one of them.

Maybe the November 13th appearance will see someone attempt to Arrest Blair.  The website notes it's already paid out money to several who made attempts to Arrest Blair:

Amount in the pot at 28.08.12: £7,262.67

First payment to Grace McCann: £2,619.67
Second payment to David Cronin: £2,801.98
Third payment to Kate O'Sullivan: £3,129.02
Forth payment to Tom Grundy: £2,420.89

Back to the US where already some states are being called (yes, voting continues on the West Coast -- never stops the 'news' industry from predicting an outcome), if tonight's results leave you unhappy, let's join Elaine in noting Brian Montopoli's "Will The Election Really Change Anything?"  (CBS News):

Yet no matter who wins on Tuesday, much of what goes on in Washington won't be all that different.
That's because there are significant limits on what a president can do without a compliant Congress. And forecasters expect the House to remain in Republican hands and the Senate to remain in Democratic hands. That sets the stage for the same Congressional gridlock we've seen over the past four years, when Congress' approval rating has hovered around 10 percent.
And let's say that Mr. Obama wins the election and the House also, improbably, ends up in Democratic hands. Even if Democrats hold the Senate, they still almost certainly won't have the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster, which will make it easy for Republicans to block many of their policy goals.
On the flip side, let's say Romney wins and Republicans take control of the Senate and hang onto the House. Republicans also wouldn't have 60 Senate votes, and while either party could use a maneuver called "reconciliation" to circumvent the filibuster on certain budget matters - this is what Republicans want to use to block the health care law from going into effect - the minority would still have significant power to stymie the majority.

iraq

the associated press

adam schreck

al mada

all iraq news

al jazeera

jane arraf

cbs news

brian montopoli

ayad al-tamimi wael grace alsumaria

cnn

mohammed tawfeeq

afp

666 Park

"Rescue America Or Goodbye America" (Hillary Is 44):
It’s not as if any side is going to surrender on Wednesday. The political fights will continue. But the results from Tuesday will matter for the future, the present, and the past.
The American future will be greatly determined on Tuesday. The vote on Tuesday will also be a shout from today’s electorate as to what kind of country we want. Tuesday will also inform us all as to what happened in the past – if Obama loses we’ll finally get to hear the truth about his history and campaigns as well as rejoice in the judgment call of history on his tactics througout his electoral history.
A Mitt Romney win on Tuesday will mean that race-baiting as a political movement will end – character, not skin color will determine our choice in leaders. A Mitt Romney win on Tuesday will mean the American voter believes in accountability as to elected officials and not smear and fear slime tactics as practiced so dexterously in Chicago. A Mitt Romney win on Tuesday means the American future is not the Greece present.
If Barack Obama wins on Tuesday all restraints on race-baiting, fear/smear politics, and unaccountable elected officials will get worse.
With both these scenarios we’ll bet on the American people but we all have to understand the toxic influence of Big Media on our daily lives and on our electoral process.
Vote as if your lives depended on it because in many ways they do.
As the Professor says, today will be a day of mostly meaningless predictions as to Tuesday’s outcome. There is already a fun Hot Air Survey: Your Election Predictions.
The Professor also graphically reminds us that on election day 1980 the polls, according to Associated Press, held the election “too close to call”. Reagan won solidly. This is important because as we have written before Mitt Romney has premised his campaign on the 1980 campaign.


I already voted, I did absentee because I would be out of the state for a family wedding anniversary.  I'm still in Georgia because if we fly out here, we're taking a week and not just hopping the plane and flying right back out.

"666 Park" airs on ABC Sunday nights.  This episode provided a lot of backstory.

Slowly, as Henry doubted Jane -- to the point that even I was pissed off -- Jane began to grasp her own backstory.  The woman who was murdered -- in the newspaper story from last week -- she realized it was her grandmother.  Which made the young girl under the bed that her grandmother tells (as she's dying from stab wounds) to stay there and be quiet (so that the little girl isn't killed also) Jane's mother.

Jane tells Henry that she "sees things."  He thinks she's nuts.

Well if your grandfather killed your grandmother and showed up last week on the Halloween episode to try to kill you too, I think you'd be a little nuts.

Gavin and Olivia.  Gavin lied to Olivia about last week.  He had her checked out by the doctor (the new one in the building) and found out she was okay.  Then he lied and told her she just drank too much.  (She was gassed to knock her out when their apartment was broken into.)

A man shows up at her lunch and tells her Gavin is lying.  She doesn't believe him.  He says she should see a doctor her husband doesn't pay.

She does.

She finds out she had gas in her bloodstream.

Confronting Gaving, she learns that their safe was broken into.  For stocks and bonds, this happened?  No, he tells her, the other safe.

Immediately, she asks about the box.

So this box is really a big deal.

I've guessed that it somehow keeps Olivia alive.

I could be wrong.

But this episode made me wonder that even more.

Gavin's desperate to get it back.

He tells the man not to open it.

The man brings up an admirer that Olivia had years ago.  Then he disappeared allowing Gavin to step-in.  What if that man suddenly turned up?

So Gavin may be able to trap people in the box.  If so, I'm guessing there are a lot of souls in that box.

Olivia knows enough to know that the box must not be opened. 

At the end, the man who's stolen the box is in a limo with it and the box is thumping.  (Like the suitcase Jane took out of the basement did.  Remember, that suitcase ended up having her killer grandfather in it.)  So it was a pretty complex episode as it dealt with a lot of backstory.

I think the show gets better with each episode.  It's really moving fast these days.



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Monday, November 5, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, the US gears up for Tuesday's elections, the issue of the Kurds gets some serious attention, the political crisis continues, and more.       As last month drew to a close, the US Dept of Veterans Affairs announced that the home loan program which was created as part of the GI Bill of Rights back in 1944 had awarded its 20 millionth home loan.  The VA's Undersecretary For Benefits Allison Hickey declared, "The 20 millionth VA home loan is a major milestone and is a testament to VA's commitment to support and enhance the lives of Veterans, Servicemembers, their families and survivors.  As a result of their service and sacrifice, as a group, they prove to be disciplined, reliable, and honorable -- traits that are ideal for this kind of national investment."  The VA has a history page on the GI Bill of Rights of 1944 which opens:   It has been heralded as one of the most significant pieces of legislation ever produced by the federal government -- one that impacted the United States socially, economically and politically. But it almost never came to pass. The Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944 -- commonly known as the GI Bill of Rights -- nearly stalled in Congress as members of the House and Senate debated provisions of the controversial bill. Some shunned the idea of paying unemployed veterans $20 a week because they thought it diminished their incentive to look for work. Others questioned the concept of sending battle-hardened veterans to colleges and universities, a privilege then reserved for the rich. Despite their differences, all agreed something must be done to help veterans assimilate into civilian life. Much of the urgency stemmed from a desire to avoid the missteps following World War I, when discharged veterans got little more than a $60 allowance and a train ticket home.   Veterans of today's wars also have The Post 9/11 GI Bill. ("The Post-9/11 GI Bill provides financial support for education and housing to individuals with at least 90 days of aggregate service after September 10, 2001, or individuals discharged with a service-connected disability after 30 days. You must have received an honorable discharge to be eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill.")  Many of the leaders on the Post 9-11 GI BIll are no longer in the House -- the 2010 midterms saw a number of them lose their seats.  It's another election year.  Voting in the US is done on Tuesday.  IAVA's Paul Rieckhoff (Daily Beast) looks at what the Barack Obama and Mitt Romney campaigns have addressed or haven't addressed in their campaigns:   Eleven years ago in October, American military forces launched a war in Afghanistan that's still raging today. One would think that the war and the postwar care for the veterans that fought in Afghanistan and Iraq would be a crucial part of the 2012 presidential campaign, but that hasn't been the case. In stump speeches and campaign pit stops across the country, President Obama and Governor Romney have made cursory references to veterans' care and benefits, but offered little in the way of specifics. And in the debates, the candidates spent more time talking about Big Bird than they did vets' policy. ObamaCare versus "Obama Cares" and "Romnesia" are funny, but also a sad commentary on the state of our political discourse. The Main Streets in countless American towns and cities are pushed aside for carefully crafted PR zingers. But whoever wins on Tuesday, America's 2.5 million post-9/11 veterans -- more than 60,000 in Ohio alone -- will be looking to the president to address the education, housing, employment, and health-care challenges they face every day -- and to do so substantively, the same way they have tackled the fallout from Hurricane Sandy. Just because the war in Afghanistan will end someday doesn't mean it already has, nor does it mean that the effects of it are going away anytime soon. Quite the contrary, in fact.   I have friends in IAVA but I'm not a fan of Paul's.  That's long established here.  So hopefully when I now say that he has written a very important column, it means something if even one of his detractors, like myself,  praise it.    I can't praise Barack's lie that he ended the Iraq War, a lie he makes while also negotiating with Nouri al-Maliki to send more US troops back into Iraq.  As Tim Arango (New York Times) reported at the end of September, "Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions.  At the request of the Iraqi government, according to General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence."    Kevin Gosztola (FireDogLake) notes:   Each paper praised Obama for ending the Iraq War. The Chicago Tribune suggested, "He set and stuck to a withdrawal schedule for U.S. troops in Iraq." Actually, in 2008, George W. Bush negotiated the withdrawal schedule. It also must be noted the Pentagon wanted to keep 10,000 to 20,000 troops in Iraq as "trainers" and "anti-terrorism forces. They lowered the figure to around 3,000. The Pentagon, along with the Obama administration pressed for immunity for any US troops that would remain in the country. That was met with opposition and, when immunity could not be ensured, the withdrawal officially began. The US presence did not completely end though. According to the State Department, 16,000 to 17,000 US personnel would remain in the country along with about 5,500 military contractors. The US occupation would also leave behind the world's largest embassy in Baghdad. How did Obama mark the end of the war? Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick in their book, The Untold History of the United States, gave it proper treatment: …Obama welcomed the troops home at Fort Bragg. But instead of honestly treating the Iraq War as the unmitigated disaster it had been for the United States, drawing some poignant lessons, and thanking those gathered for their sacrifice, Obama felt compelled to cloak the war's end in the kind of patriotic drivel that conjured up the powerfully haunting words of Rudyard Kipling, the erstwhile proponent of empire, who had convinced his son to enlist in the First World War, only to have him die his first day of combat. In his "Epitaphs of the War," Kipling wrote, "If any question why we died / Tell them, because our fathers lied." Obama's lies would sear just as deeply and painfully. "We're leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people," he told the troops, praising their "extraordinary achievement." The "most important lesson," he declared, was "about our national character…that there's nothing we Americans can't do when we stick together…And that why the United States military is the most respected institution in our land." He commended their willingness to sacrifice "so much for a people that you had never met," which, he insisted, was "part of what makes us special as Americans. Unlike the old empires, we don't make these sacrifices for territory or for resources. We do it because it's right. There can be no fuller expression of America's support for self-determination than our leaving Iraq to its people. That says something about who we are."…   Voices for Creative Nonviolence's Cathy Breen (OpEdNews) is on the ground in Iraq.  Does it sound like the war ended:     If anyone thinks that the war is over in Iraq, I have only to open my "At a Glance" calendar where I have tried to note the number of Iraqi casualties each day over the last nine plus years: deaths due to explosions, bombs, assassinations. Just a few randomly selected numbers from 2012 (these are the number of dead, the number of wounded is of course much greater). 63, 54, 78, 97, 28, 36, 105, 24, 41, 115 ... the list goes on and on. One of my hopes on this trip is to visit Iraqi families who have had to return from Syria. Having fled the violence in Iraq, they came to Syria where I met them as refugees. Now they are threatened once again, and there are no countries willing to take them. Many have returned to Iraq, and we are anxious to know how they are doing.     While some deserve praise, some don't.  Such as a spinner spinning online in an attempt to bully/trick people into voting for Barack.  First, you would have been ripped apart in an undergrad poli sci class for your gross ignorance -- forget an advanced class.  No, we don't have to vote.  Voting is a right in the United Staes.  So is owning a gun.  I don't own a gun.  Second,  Ralph Nader did work in 2000 regarding party building and ballot access.  After that?   He continued to do strong work on ballot access in terms of raising awareness.  As for helping to build the Green Party?  The reality that the Green Party was 'conflcited' (co-opted) is why he didn't run with them in 2004 or 2008.  Distortions of Nader only reveal your sublime ignorance.  In the future, stick to horse race 'coverage' because your tired little mind might be able to handle that.  As for the accusation that the Greens only show up at election time?  First,  isn't that the only time the Democrats and Republicans remember that there are voters out there?  Second, your ignorance of what takes places in the fifty states is exceeded only by your ego assuming you could absorb that information even if the media bothered to cover it.  The Michigan Green Party, to name but one state, never stops working.    From your computer screen, you may think you see the world.  But being aware of what's happening on the ground would require you traveling to many states -- something I've done repeatedly since the month before the Iraq War started.   Next topic on the elections: Barack Obama supporters better get outraged.  Republicans vote.  I'm sorry if that's upsetting news to anyone.  I've done every task in the world on campaigns during my lifetime and that includes getting out the vote on election day.  I've driven seniors to polls, you name it.  I live in a state that has gone Democratic in the last five elections.  We also are still voting -- due to the time difference -- when most states have stopped.  Regardless of what the prediction or, yes, 'call' is, Republcians still show up to vote in those last hours.  Many Democrats don't.  Point being, this nonsense of "Barack's going to win!"  It's hurting Barack and anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't live in the PST time zone which regularly sees how this sort of 'the winner's known' talk effects turnout.  It may hurt him just a little, it may hurt him a lot.  But you should be demanding that media stop saying he or anyone has won.   Democrats are more likely to be working class and they're more likely to have obstacles to voting.  You start saying that Barack's won, your hurting his turnout and you're hurting the Democratic Party turnout.  Not just in the PST states, but in all the states.  Encouraging people not to vote -- calling the election the day before the vote is encouraging people not to vote -- can also hurt Senate races, House races and state and municipal races.  People are busy enough as it is, don't give those who want to vote but are buy a reason not to.  (And I'd make this point if Mitt Romney were the one the press was saying would win Tuesday.  Although I'd be less concerned about turnout being depressed as a result because, again, Republicans vote regardless.  CBS could call it for Barack at 7:30 PM EST tomorrow and Republicans on the West Coast would still show up at the polls.)     Howard Kurtz (Daily Beast) observes a Barack defeat "will also be a crushing blow for the punditocracy that headed into Election Day filled with confidence that Obama had it in the bag." Liz Marlantes (Christian Science Monitor) tries to provide caution and that's appreciated but she also reveals a knowledge gap:   In addition, the growing prevalence of early voting has provided analysts with a more concrete metric – allowing prognosticators to base their assumptions not only on what polls suggest will happen on Election Day, but also on what early voting patterns suggest has already happened.     English lit is not poli sci.  Maybe people who didn't study poli sci shouldn't be presenting as 'experts.'  Liz's comment above? You have nothing to base a conclusion on.  The votes have not been counted.  Not even the early votes.  Not the mail-in votes.  Not the votes that will be cast on Tuesday.  You have nothing.  You don't have early prognostics.   You have polling which can be an indication.  Provided the pollsters are doing their job correctly and provided that people aren't pissed off at the pollsters.  Meaning when someone says, "I'm doing a poll . . .," respondents aren't thinking, "I hate that polling firm/outlet, I'm going to f**k with this man/woman and lie about my vote."   Predictions don't win elections, votes do.  Nate Silver and the rest have already destroyed whatever was left of campaign reporting because the coverage is even less about issues.  (In the film, Network, these worthless types were represented by the character Sybil the Soothsayer.  Remember when so many on the left couldn't stop citing Network and insisting we heed its cautionary tales?)   Now they're taking over the last hours of the election as well.  Supporters of the nonsense Nate does like to claim, "Well sports . . ."  Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may be, I don't follow sports) but predicting a winner in sports is based upon using their past performance in that season.  There has been no 'win' in a general election this year that you can base another one on.  Tomorrow is the contest.   I don't care who you vote for.  If you choose not to vote in a race or not to vote in all races because you make that decision, that's your choice and be happy with it.  (I will not be voting in the presidential race, no candidate earned my vote.  I will be voting in other races)  But I do care that whomever is elected is elected by the people and not by the media.  The media overwhelmingly wants Barack to win.  That's been obvious for some time.  But preening and strutting before an election may not bring about their desired result.      Trusting the media worked out real well in 2000, didn't it?  And it worked out real well with the Iraq War, too, right?  (Wrong in both cases.)  Do you really want to be a Quil Lawrence?  March 7, 2010, Iraq held parliamentary elections.  March 8th, Quil did what?  Before votes were counted, Quil was on NPR's Morning Edition telling Steve Inskeep that Nouri did "very well."  Maybe Barack will do "very well," too?  "Very well," when the ballots were actually counted and Quil Lawrence had left the region and moved on to another story, translated as: Nouri's State of Law came in second to Iraqiya.  Second place isn't winning in an election.       The political crisis continues in Iraq, not a surprise when the White House spat on the Iraqi Constitution and the will of the people to back second place Nouri over first place winner Iraqiya.  All Iraq News reports MP Mohammed Jaafar al-Sadr is calling  for Iraqi President Jalal Talabani to accelerate the resolution attempts.  But what can be done?  Saturday Ayad al-Tamimi (Al Mada) reported that negotiations had stalled as a result of disagreements with the National Alliance -- specifcially within the 'Reform Commission.'  To avoid a National Conference, Nouri stalled and road blocked and then finally, in late spring, insisted what was needed was a Reform Commission. That turned out to be a paper.  And all this time, Nouri and company have led people to believe that there was a paper.  Turns out the paper has yet to be written but there are 'intentions' to write it, al-Tamimi notes.  Yesterday, Wael Grace (Al Mada) reported a Kurdistan Alliance MP was stating State of Law (Nouri al-Maliki's political slate) was attempting to prevent a National Conference to resolve the political crisis.  That seems plausible since Nouri's been attempting to do that since Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi and Jalal Talabani first began calling for one nearly a year ago (December 21st). The Tigris Operation continues with no US coverage.  This is seen as yet another power grab by Nouri.  Nouri is sending in military under his command to disputed Kirkuk.  This has long been protected by the Peshmerga (Kurdish forces).  Nouri has refused to implement Article 140 of the Constitution (hold a census and referendum) on Kirkuk to resolve the dispute and his decision to send in security forces is seen as laying the ground work for his ignoring the Constitution and just declaring Kirkuk to be part of the Baghdad-based government and not part of the Kurdistan Regional Government.  (Kirkuk is oil rich.)    Alsumaria reports that the Salahuddin Province's Student Council has called for Nouri to cancel the operation.  Al Mada reports that Kurdistan Alliance MP Chuan Mohammed Taha has called out the operation and states that Nouri has gone beyond any powers listed in the Constitution.  The RAND Corporation's Larry Hanauer examines the Kirkuk issue here. The power grabs never stop with Nouri.  Last month, he fired the Governor of the Central Bank (despite not having the authority to do that) and declared him a criminal (thereby running him out of the country).   Sinan al-Shabibi had been the Governor of the Central Bank since 2003.  In fact, he's still listed as such on the Central Bank's website whic notes:   Awards Arabian Business Power 500 - Listed among The World's Most Influential Arabs, June 2012. Arabian Business Power 500 - Listed among The World's Most Influential Arabs, March 2011. The New Breed/Listed among the Time-CNN 25 Business Influentials, December 2004. Career Governor of the Central Bank of Iraq since 2003. Consultant on Trade, Debt and Finance to UNCTAD. Was until retirement a Senior economist at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Undertaken research on Financial flows, Economics of disarmament, Balance of Payments, External debt, Globalisation, and the Iraqi Economy. Managed projects for the implementation of policy, analytical and institutional aspects of debt management including the implementation of UNCTAD's Debt Management and Financial Analysis System (DMFAS) in several Arab countries. Familiar with the macroeconomic and operational aspects of the "Debt Sustainability Model (DSM)" of the World Bank, and with the HIPC initiative. Coordinated UNCTAD's work on OPEC financial flows to other developing countries resulting in the production of numerous reports on the subject. High-level contacts with Government Officials especially in the Arab region. Delivered numerous lectures and talks on the "Economic Prospects of the Iraqi Economy" in many international forums. Extensive travel experience in connection with work on debt management, OPEC Financial Flows and the work on the Iraqi economy.     How did such an applauded figure end up up charged with crimes?  Dropping back to October 21st, " In other scandals, Nouri fired Sinan al-Shabibi as Governor of the Central Bank (despite Article 103 of the Constitution making clear that he doesn't have that right -- Parliament does).  Since then a warrant's been put out for al-Shabibi who is said to be in Europe.  An unnamed MP tells Al Mada that Nouri fired al-Shabibi because the man refused to loan Nouri $63 billion that Nouri said was for the government's budget.  Al Mada notes that Moqtada al-Sadr is calling out Nouri's attempts to politicize the Central Bank and he also asks where is the reform that Nouri promised in early 2011?"  Shortly afterward,  Prashant Rao (AFP) reported, "The targeting of Iraq's well-respected central bank chief appears to be a move by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to consolidate power and sends a bad message to international investors, experts and diplomats say."  Long time Iraq observer Joost Hiltermann of the International Crisis Group told Rao, "The Maliki government will claim it (the move against Shabibi) is part of long-standing efforts to root out corruption.  It looks more like a long-standing effort to gain control over independent institutions."     But that's really more what happened.  The how he ended up charged goes back further.  Back to the days when Nouri was having the then-head of Iraq's Electoral Commission arrested because he wanted to take over that independent body.  At the same time, he was attempting to take over Iraq's Central Bank, insisting it must come under his authority -- he targeted all the independent institutions in his attempted power grab.   Fear of the Arab Spring spreading into Iraq prevented Nouri from following up on that desire.  Now he's gone in the back door.  Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) reports Nouri is accused of attempting to stack the Central bank with Dawa personnel in order to control it.  (Dawa is Nouri's political party, State of Law is his political slate.)     Violence continues in Iraq and is encouraged by Nouri's repeated targeting of political rivals and non-stop mass arrests.   All Iraq News reports a Baghdad car bombing near a mosque has resulted in 1 death and six people being left injured.  In an update, they note the death toll has risen to 3 with eight injured. Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports a Taji car bombing claimed 1 life and left seven people injured.     In addition, Alsumaria reports that Turkish war planes bombed erbil Sunday night  for approximately one hour, setting at least one section of a forest on fire.  Hurriyet Daily News adds that the latest attacks, beginning Saturday night, are taking place under the name "Panther Operation" and that Saturday's assault lasted two hours.  They are targeting the PKK.  Aaron Hess (International Socialist Review) described the PKK in 2008, "The PKK emerged in 1984 as a major force in response to Turkey's oppression of its Kurdish population. Since the late 1970s, Turkey has waged a relentless war of attrition that has killed tens of thousands of Kurds and driven millions from their homes. The Kurds are the world's largest stateless population -- whose main population concentration straddles Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria -- and have been the victims of imperialist wars and manipulation since the colonial period. While Turkey has granted limited rights to the Kurds in recent years in order to accommodate the European Union, which it seeks to join, even these are now at risk."   The root of the conflict? Dr. Aland Mizell explores it at Kurdish Aspect:     I am not arguing or asking Turkey to give the Kurds rights, but I am asking who gave Turkey or Islamists the right to deny Kurdish basic rights, such as birth rights to a right to life, a right to speak, a right to worship, and a right to a fair trial before a judge? If God has created the human race, skin color, languages, as well as tribes, and rights are natural, inalienable, God-given, and self-evident, then why do TUrkey and most Islamist countries deny the Kurds those rights? Today more than 40 million Kurds are denied basic rights not by Christians or Jews but by Muslim countries; yet, most Muslim countries consider Islam to be the only religion that administers true justice, tolerance, and peace on earth, and consider Christians, Jews, and devotees of other religions as unjust, intolerant, and cruel. But what about the more than 40 million Kurds who live in Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria being denied their basic rights? Why are mroe than 683 Kurdish people participating in a hunger strike in Turkey and agreeing to die? They have been on a hunger strike for more than 53 days, and the days move them closer to death. Because they are like any other human being, demanding to live in dignity and because death for them is the last resort to voice their plight even though they cherish human life and liberty, but will the world listen as the Kurds show solidarity in their suffering? Will those who learn of their hunger strike pressure Turkey not to play the hypocrite when it comes to the Kurdish issue but to value human beings? Will they pressure Turkey to let the kurds decide how to live and who to worship, and let the Kurds, not Turks, Arabs, or Persians, decide their destiny?     At Huffington Post, Stanley Weiss makes the argument that now is the time for an independent Kurdistan:       It will not be easy, but the uncertainty and plasticity in the region today offers an opportunity to secure a Kurdish homeland and remedy the capricious map-making of the early 20th century. Iraq is threatening to split into the pre-Iraq Sunni, Shia and Kurdish divisions of the Ottoman Empire, with the Kurds semi-independent and the Iran-allied Shiites ruling the Sunnis. Iran's economy is in free-fall. Syria will soon have no central control and no choice. And while no country is eager to surrender a fifth of its population, Turkey would do well to get ahead of this issue -- ending the vicious, ongoing war with the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), saving countless lives and positioning themselves to reap the benefits of a long-term strategic alliance to counterbalance Iranian influence. Not to mention, membership in the European Union will forever be out of reach for a Turkey at war with itself. For proof of what's possible, look no further than Iraqi Kurdistan, a pro-American, pro-Israel and semi-autonomous parliamentary democracy most Americans have never heard of. Nurtured by an American no-fly zone in the aftermath of the first Gulf War, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) was established under the Iraqi Constitution in 2005, a stunning testament to the success of Muslim representative government. Of more than 4,800 American soldiers killed in the brutal battles for Iraq, not a single one has lost their life -- and no foreigner has been kidnapped -- within the borders of Iraqi Kurdistan. Boasting two international airports, a booming oil industry and a dawning respect for the rights of women, this 15,000 square-mile territory of nearly four million Kurds is the one part of President George W. Bush's "Mission Accomplished" that was actually accomplished. Building on this unanticipated success, the U.S. should rethink its previous opposition to an independent greater Kurdistan and recognize that the advantages of a friendly, democratic and strategically-positioned ally far outweigh the outdated assumption that the Kurds' national liberation would result in regional conflagration.       Lastly, Bill Corcoran writes at CORKSPHERE about Iraq and Afghanistan.  He's now planning/toying with walking away.  At the New York Times' At War, he writes:   The blog passed one million hits over a year ago. But something was happening: both the news media and the American public were suffering from "war fatigue." Interest in the blog was waning. Blog viewership dropped to under 200 hits a day, and even though I was posting fresh material on Facebook and Twitter, it became more and more obvious to me that the American public was no longer very interested in a conflict that, in the case of the Afghan war, had entered its 12th year. I'm a realist and I'm fully aware that after so many years it is hard for people to continue to care deeply about a conflict that doesn't seem to have any end goal or sense of mission. So a few weeks ago, I decided I would stop the blog after the election. (I'm leaving the door open just a bit to a last-minute change of heart.) If I do stop posting, however, I intend to keep it on the Internet as a historical reference for anyone interested in the Iraq and Afghan wars.      You can check out his site (I never knew about the site until a few minutes ago).  At some point, most will say "enough" (I would love to and am still weighing whether or not we'll do six more months).  I do agree that there is war fatigue.  I also think there are other issues at play.  (Including the lack of interest on the part of the US media which tends to make a number of people believe that the end credits rolled, the lights came up and it's all over.)  I'm sorry that he doesn't feel there's an audience (our audience has only increased in 2012 -- the increase has largely come from outside the US).  I'm sadder that he feels you do something based on numbers.  But mainly, I'm saddened by the fact that he's obviously put a great deal of time in trying to keep Iraq and Afghanistan in the national discourse and he feels his work didn't matter or doesn't now.   What he has done matters and, even if you were unaware of the site until this evening (like me), it being out there did and does make a difference.  Whether he continues with it or shuts it down, thank you, Bill Corcoran for focusing on something that actually mattered in a landscape that's otherwise so much fluff from sea to shining sea.     iraq npr morning edition quil lawrence steve inskeep all iraq news al mada ayad al-tamimi wael grace alsumaria hurriyet daily news aaron hess kurdish aspect

cnn

mohammed tawfeeq

afp

Bad parenting (yeah, we're talking YouTube)

"Four More Days Not Four More Years" (Hillary Is 44):
Just say NObama.
The New York Times documents Mittmentum as Obama is still trying to get out his base vote while Romney heads to Pennsylvania and the crucial swing voters:
“First there was quiet. Then came the “super PACs.” Now the candidate is on his way.
In a striking last-minute shift, the Romney campaign has decided to invest its most precious resource — the candidate’s time — in a serious play to win Pennsylvania.
Mr. Romney’s appearance here on Sunday could be a crafty political move to seriously undercut President Obama, or it could be a sign of desperation. Either way, his visit represents the biggest jolt yet in a state that was until recently largely ignored in the race for the White House.
Over the last several days, with polls showing Mr. Obama’s edge in the state narrowing, Republicans have sprung into action and forced the Democrats to spend resources here that could have gone toward more competitive battleground states. [snip]
The super PACs helped create an opening that paved the way for the Romney campaign to start making its move. The campaign has already invested $1 million in television advertising across the state, and on Thursday it bolstered that effort even further with a new round of commercials that will ensure a heavy and continuous presence through Election Day.

Tuesday's the day.  I've already voted and mailed it off and am, in fact, now in Georgia for a family function.  If you're voting, I hope you're pleased with whomever you decided to go with.  We can't control the results because we're only responsible for our own vote.  But since we do have responsibility for our own vote, we need to be sure we're pleased with our decision. 

You don't owe anyone your vote.  That includes someone like me.  You don't owe me your vote.  You vote the way you want to vote because it's what you feel good about. 

What I don't feel good about?

Bad parenting.

I don't mean me, though certainly I wouldn't win Mother of the Year.

When the stupid story about Abigael Evans began making the news cycle, I didn't say anything hoping it would go away quickly.

Instead it's still around.  Here for Peter Grier showing there is no thought at the Christian Science Monitor.

If you do not know, I have no problems with Abby.  She's a 4-year-old girl.

She's famous because she has an awful mother.

Yeah, I said it.

Abby was in the car with her mother and they were listening to NPR and, as they got out of the car, the mother noticed Abby was crying.

Instead of hugging her daughter, Mommy Dumb Ass decides to use her cell phone to get it on video.  Why you so sad?  Because she's tired of hearing about Bronco Bama and Mitt Romney.

NPR doesn't play fair and has slanted the story.

But not only does Mommy Dumb Ass need to be called out for taping her crying daughter instead of hugging her, Mommy Dumb Ass needs to get honest about what's going on.

This wasn't about the media, kids.

You stupid idiots.  Mommy Dumb Ass can't shut up.  Did you miss that?  She's going around saying her daughter thinks Mitt is evil and her daughter loves Bronco.

Did you miss that?

Did you miss that they listen to NPR in the car and the home and that they don't watch TV?

So this 4-year-old's hatred of Mitt Romney was formed where?

Right, from Dumb Ass Mommy.

You don't teach a four-year-old to hate.

Why was the little girl crying?

Because her trashy parents have destroyed her childhood.  Because they have talked about the leader of the country in such a way to stress out a four-year-old.  Because they've convinced their daughter that if Barack loses this evil man named Mitt will take over.

Peter Grier's a dumb ass but is there not one functioning parent in the press who can explain what the video is really about?

Apparently not.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Friday, November 2, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri tries to stage a trade fair in Baghdad, the government of Turkey feels threatened by Kurds in the region, mass arrests continue, and more.     All Iraq News reports that US Ambassador to Iraq "Stephen Beecroft" (that's how he's billed -- maybe he's finally dropped the three names) is praising the Baghdad International Fair which just started.  Al Mada notes the fair started Thursday and that the first Baghdad International Fair was in 1957 though it wasn't called that until 1964.  Alsumaria notes this is the 39th Baghdad International Fair and that twenty countries are participating.  Yang Lina (Xinhua) quotes Nouri al-Maliki declaring,  "Iraq is now the investment opportunity in the region that everything here needs for reconstruction, particularly its infrastructure."    Everything you need here -- if what you need is no booze, if what you need is security forces who do not obey the law they're supposed to enforce.  In fact, here's a YouTube video of Nouri's forces executing someone on the spot.  Iraq, where there's so much corruption, you may not even notice the bombings. Baghdad, infamous for kidnapping and killing foreigners.  Or maybe you'll be like Peter Moore and just suffer for years in captivity without being killed.     Nouri attended the opening ceremony and then split.  If you were Nouri, you would too.  That's a pathetic showing.  And if you doubt it, consider the 8th Erbil International Fair was last month and had 23 countries participating.  Poor, inept Nouri, always living in the shadow of the KRG. Hurriyet notes that, despite sharing a border with Iraq, "not many Turkish firms attended the event."  It appears to be shaping up to be another Arab League Summit type event -- where people grade on the pity scale and say, "It's a success!  Regardless of the fact that it accomplished litte or even nothing, it's a success!"  Poor Nouri, between his threats against corporations and his authoritarian streak, there's little to attract international investors to Baghdad.        And it's going to be evident for a prolonged period because Dar Addustour notes it's a ten day event.  The KRG where there's, by comparison, safety.  Where religious zealots will not prevent your consumption of alcohol.  Where you aren't confined to a pen named the "Green Zone."  And the KRG already has a business image -- a strong one.  Businesses don't fear they're going to be ripped off.  Of course Nouri has given Baghdad a strong image as well -- as a contract-breaking center.  And the only thing worth less than a written contract with the Baghdad government is Nouri's word.       Moving over to violence, Alsumaria reports a roadside bombing just south of Mosul claimed the life of 1 contractor who was killed "on the spot" according to source with the police. Alsumaria also reports that in Salahuddin Province a student was shot.  All Iraq News notes that Turkish warplanes began bombing northern Iraq in the early morning hours today.  Today's Zaman adds that there are reports "that four Turkish F-16 jets struck the PKK targets in the region."  This is part of the ongoing struggle between the Turkish government and the PKK.    Aaron Hess (International Socialist Review) described the PKK in 2008, "The PKK emerged in 1984 as a major force in response to Turkey's oppression of its Kurdish population. Since the late 1970s, Turkey has waged a relentless war of attrition that has killed tens of thousands of Kurds and driven millions from their homes. The Kurds are the world's largest stateless population -- whose main population concentration straddles Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria -- and have been the victims of imperialist wars and manipulation since the colonial period. While Turkey has granted limited rights to the Kurds in recent years in order to accommodate the European Union, which it seeks to join, even these are now at risk."  Ofra Bengio (Minority-Opinion) offers this take today:   The signs are not hard to read.  Most dramatically, the traditionally marginalized Kurds of Syria have found new energy in the cauldron of the Syrian uprising and are now demanding a federal system in which they would gain significant autonomy in a post-Assad Syria.  The extremely restive Kurds of Turkey are pressing for what they call democratic autonomy.  The Kurds of Iran, typically unremarked upon in the media, are stirring beneath their blanket of obscurity.  But most important of all these are the Kurds of Iraq.  Iraq was the epicenter of the Kurds' great leap forward in the early 1990s: the establishment of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), which is a euphemism for a de facto Kurdish state.  It is to the KRG experience that Iranian, Syrian and Turkish Kurds increasingly look for lessons and guidance, and rightly so.     This is an ongoing struggle throughout the region.  In Turkey, that gets resolved only by recognition and equality of the Kurds. The Kurds there have been denied inclusion and that's what's fueled the struggle.  It's what's led to a hunger strike.  Ivan Watson and Gul Tuysuz (CNN) report,  "Turkey's government announced Friday that at least 682 inmates were participating in a hunger strike in at least 67 prisons across the country, but it insisted that no protesters were in critical condition." Daren Butler (Reuters) explains, "Jailed Kurdish militans on hunger strike in Turkey may start to die within the next 10 days, Turkey's main medical association warend on Thursday, saying the prime minister's dismissal of the protest as a 'show' risked hardening their resolve."   Gareth Jenkins (Great Britain's Socialist Worker) reports:     Up to 200 people from Kurdish and Turkish organisations protested outside the Turkish embassy today, Friday. The protest marked the 52nd day since 63 Kurds in Turkish prisons started a hunger strike. They have been joined by 600 others. Some may be near death. Thousands of Kurds around Europe have gone on solidarity hunger strikes. Kurds make up roughly 30 per cent of the population in Turkey and have faced decades of repression. Thousands of Kurds, including MPs and mayors, are political prisoners. Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the Kurdish nationalist party, the PKK, has been held in prison since 1999. Turkey's president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan recently dismissed the hunger strikes—but protests have broken the wall of silence. Mehmet Aksoy from the Kurdish Federation told Socialist Worker, "We want freedom for Öcalan, for there to be meaningful negotiations. And we want an end to the ban on using Kurdish in the law courts and in schools. "We want the cries of the hunger strikers to be heard. We are here today to call on the international community to pressure Turkey into meeting our demands as the only way to bring a just and honourable peace." © Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original.   The KRG (three provinces in Iraq) are the closest to a Kurdish homeland.  As such, the government of Turkey has long been threatened by it, afraid that the KRG would result in (louder) cries among Turkey's Kurdish population for a section of Turkey to set up a homeland.  UPI  notes, "Turkey will not condone a separate autonomous Kurdish government in Syria, similar to the one in Iraq, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said."  Hurriyet quotes Erdogan stating, "We cannot let playing of such a scenario [Kurdish autonomy] here [in Syria].  We told this to [KRG President Massoud] Barzani too.  We wanted him to know this."  Whether he heard it or not, Emirates News Agency reports, "His Highness General Sheikh Mohammad Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Abu Dhabi Crown Prince and Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces has received Masoud Barzani, the President of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq who is on current visit to the UAE."   The statements by Turkish government officials will not be surprising to the KRG nor will they be all that important to the KRG either.  There are a number of issues, however, that are important to the KRG.  For example, the Kurdistan Regional Government notes Glen Campbell's BBC World Service News report:     Iraqi Kurds in Britain have begun a campaign for the mass murder of their people in Iraq in the late-1980s to be formally recognised as genocide. At least 180,000 Kurds were killed by Saddam Hussein's forces.  The justice4genocide campaign says many more died in atrocities carried out by regimes from the 1960s onwards.  It is petitioning the UK government to declare the mass killing of Kurds as a genocide and press the European Union and United Nations to do the same.     Though not everyone may agree on genocide, there's this believe that everyone will agree on voting.    Al Mada reports that the United Nations is urging Iraqis to vote in the upcoming provincial elections scheduled for April 20th currently.  If UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's Special Envoy to Iraq Martin Kobler really wants Iraqis to turn out for the provincial elections, he might try working on a slogan -- something like, "Vote in the provincial elections -- the only ones so far that the US government doesn't overrule." The US government did let the 2009 provincial elections -- both sets (the KRG did not hold them at the same time the other provinces -- minus Kirkuk -- did).  It was the Parliamentary elections of 2010 that they overruled because they wanted their pet Nouri al-Maliki to get a second term as prime minister after Nouri's State of Law came in second to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya.  So they backed him on his eight month political stalemate and then they negotiated the Erbil Agreement guaranteeing him a second term as prime minister. That legal contract found the political blocs granting that concession to Nouri in exchange for Nouri making concessions to them.  Nouri got what he wanted (the second term) and then discarded the contract.  That created the current stalemate.  Now the second place Nouri that the US re-installed in 2010, wants to shut out Iraqiya by forming a majority-government.  Al Mada reports that a split if evident in Parliament over the move.  And Al Mada quotes State of Law MP Abdul Salam al-Maliki stating that the answer is a majority government and that anyone who disagrees with that is not a supporter of democracy.  It's as if State of Law got all the MPs who fell on their heads. And the UN continues to grade on the pity scale.  "Poor inept Nouri, but he managed . . ."  Reality, no one has to handhold the KRG to get them to plan their provincial elections.  Reality, the disputed Kirkuk Province?  That was supposed to have been decided by the end of 2007 -- per the Iraqi Constitution -- that's Article 140.  Nouri ignored that in his first term and he ignores it in his second and, guess what, Kirkuk won't be voting in the provincial elections.    But let's all pretend that 14 of the 18 provinces voting is amazing and flatter Nouri.   Why hasn't the United Nations publicly called otu the continued mass arrests which largerly target Sunnis in Iraq?   From yesterday's snapshot:   On violence, yesterday was the end of the month.  Iraq Body Count's counts 253 reported violent deaths in Iraq for the month of October.  Last month, their total was 356 which means a reduction of about 100 deaths.  AFP, forgetting fairy tales are for bedtime, notes the government total for October is 136.  AFP also forgets to note that there were over 550 reported mass arrests in Iraq in the month of October.  Nouri's round up largely focused on Sunnis. Today, Alsumaria reports that in Mosul alone, last month saw the arrest of 90 for 'terrorism.'  It really is amazing how US and European press ignore these ongoing mass arrests.  Already today Alsumaria is reporting a mass arrest of 9 people for 'terrorism.'         In the US,  April Baer (OPB -- link is text and audio) reports, "A federal jury in Portland has awarded $85 million  in damages to twelve former soldiers who were exposed to hazardous material while on duty with the Oregon Guard. The jury deliberated for two days on evidence presented in a three-and-a-half week trial."  Teresa Carson (Reuters) adds, "Each Guard soldier was awarded $850,000 in non-economic damages and another $6.25 million in punitive damages for 'reckless and outrageous indifference' to their health in the trial in U.S. District Court in Portland."  Mike Francis (Oregonian) quotes Jason Arnold stating, "It's a little bit of justice" and Aaron St. Clair stating, "We're not disposable.  People are not going to make money from our blood."      Veterans Day is approaching.  US House Rep Jeff Miller is also the Chair of the House Veterans Affairs Committee.   He has a column in the Pensacola News Journal which opens:     America has many great qualities, each of which makes us the greatest nation in the world. Few of these qualities are as vital, however, to America's success as the strength and determination of our war fighters. For more than 225 years, Americans have signed up, at great peril to themselves, to defend the ideals upon which this nation was founded. Once a year, on Veterans Day, all Americans turn their eyes to this group of heroes and honor their service to our nation. Nov. 11 is a special day. It is a reminder for us to always respect and pay tribute to our men and women in uniform who served. But in my opinion, and I know others agree, one day is not enough. Many veterans will tell you they signed up to serve expecting nothing in return. It is that type of selflessness that makes our veterans unique. We should mirror that selflessness and celebrate our veterans throughout the year.     Vietnam veteran and author (most recently, The Nostradamus Secret) Joseph Badal writes at his blog about Iraq War veterans Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods:   By now you have all heard about the actions of two brave men, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, on September 11, 2012, in Benghazi, Libya. Their actions while under fire to rescue other Americans were astounding. They could have delayed taking action, but didn't. They could have made excuses to not take action, but didn't. Even when they were ordered to "stand down," they didn't. They stepped up and did the right and courageous thing to save the lives of other Americans. But Glen and Tyrone were everyday people from everyday backgrounds, and all of that has been lost in the noise around who told whom to do what and when.     For how they died, we'll refer to the Chair of the House Oversight Committee:   Committee Chair Darrell Issa:  On September 11, 2012, four brave Americans serving their country were murdered by terrorists in Benghazi, Libya.  Tyrone Woods spent two decades as a Navy Seal serving multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Since 2010, he protected the American diplomatic personnel.  Tyrone leaves behind a widow and three children.   Glen Doherty, also a former Seal and an experienced paramedic, had served his country in both Iraq and Afghanistan.  His family and colleagues grieve today for his death.  Sean Smith, a communications specialist, joined the State Dept after six years in the United States Air Force.  Sean leaves behind a widow and two young children.  Ambassador Chris Stevens, a man I had known personally during his tours, US Ambassador to Libya, ventured into a volatile and dangerous situation as Libyans revolted against the long time Gaddafi regime.  He did so because he believed the people of Libya wanted and deserved the same things we have: freedom from tyranny.      That's US House Rep Darrell Issa speaking at the House Oversight Committee (he is the Chair of the Committee) on October 10th.  We covered the hearing in the October 10th and October 11th snapshots.  That Doherty and Woods were working for the CIA was not news if you were at the hearing.  That and the large number of injured CIA personnel were obvious at the hearing -- and why US House Rep Jason Chaffetz kept objecting and stating that certain things were classified.  Today, the media wants to treat it as news.   And not because they give a damn about Doherty and Woods but because they think it clears the administration.  One charge being tossed around (as 'fact' by some) is that the CIA was the target of the attack.  That's interesting.  You're saying Libyan terrorists knew that was a CIA outpost?  That's very interesting.  Equally interesting is the lie that Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty working for the CIA means the four deaths are a CIA problem or have nothing to do with the administration.  A US Ambassador is supposed to travel with a security detail.  This was the point Chaffetz was constrained to make in an open hearing but kept coming close to it.    If Chris Stevens were traveling to Benghazi to hear a briefing from the CIA and a Turkish asset, he was traveling.  The fact that the CIA was on end-point for the trip did not relieve the administration of the responsibility to provide Stevens with security while en route and one he arrived.    There are a lot of lies being told and once again it's not to help anyone except Barack Obama.  Americans have a right to know what happened.  At this point, they still don't.  And nothing 'emerging' today changes the larger story.     Douglas Sloan (Oxonian Globalist) observes, "On the same day that President Barack Obama announced his support for same-sex marriage, an openly homosexual American solider experienced his 714th  day of incarceration. He had not been convicted of any crime. Bradley Manning, the alleged Wikileaks informer, has been in custody since May 2010, and was in solitary confinement for nine months."  Bradley Manning, like Barack's kill-list, is a topic the faux left doesn't want to address in an election year.  Alexander Reed Kelly (TruthDig) notes of  Gary Dorrien's The Obama Question: A Progressive Perspective which is meant to churn out the vote for Barack: The chapter titled "Moral Empire and Liberal War," which serves to justify Obama's expansion of the American military establishment, is the most telling in terms of its omissions. According to a Google Books search, the name "Bradley Manning" appears nowhere in the section's 30 pages. Neither do the words "whistle-blower" or "rendition." "Surveillance" comes up once, and the unmanned drone war, which has claimed dozens of civilian lives in Pakistan since Obama took office, gets a passing mention in a single paragraph. But though whores might wish Bradley would just disappear, he remains and possibly the hatred being spewing by the faux left has to do with the fact that Bradley is the ghost that haunts them, the truth that mocks them. Monday April 5, 2010, WikiLeaks released US military video of a July 12, 2007 assault in Iraq. 12 people were killed in the assault including two Reuters journalists Namie Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh. Monday June 7, 2010, the US military announced that they had arrested Bradley Manning and he stood accused of being the leaker of the video. Leila Fadel (Washington Post) reported in August 2010 that Manning had been charged -- "two charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The first encompasses four counts of violating Army regulations by transferring classified information to his personal computer between November and May and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system. The second comprises eight counts of violating federal laws governing the handling of classified information." In March, 2011, David S. Cloud (Los Angeles Times) reported that the military has added 22 additional counts to the charges including one that could be seen as "aiding the enemy" which could result in the death penalty if convicted. The Article 32 hearing took place in December.  At the start of this year, there was an Article 32 hearing and, February 3rd, it was announced that the government would be moving forward with a court-martial.  Bradley has yet to enter a plea and has neither affirmed that he is the leaker nor denied it.  The court-martial was supposed to begin this month has been postponed until after the election .  Douglas Sloan explains: Not only have Manning's reputation and credibility been attacked using his homosexuality, but his defence centres on the assertion that he struggled with gender identity issues. As a result of having to suppress his homosexuality due to the prevailing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy, Manning's defence deems that he was not mentally fit to be given access to classified information, and as such the blame for the leak lies with his superiors. That homosexuality can be considered a defence in such a case seems to undermine both the work done by LGBT rights groups and the progress that the repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' represents. To view it as a plea of homosexuality, however, is to misunderstand the issue at hand. Manning's defence is more one of aggravated mental disturbance than of sexuality, for all this aggravation was a consequence of his sexuality and the military's reaction to it. Questions must be asked of an institution that drove a man to such extremes that he would go for a weapons rack during a counselling session, send pictures of himself in women's dress to his commanding officer and potentially leak thousands of sensitive documents. Whether he was responsible for the leak or not, his situation hardly reflects well on the American military. Today is Bradley's 894th day imprisoned.  He has still not had a trial.  There are 365 days in a year.  Barack has imprisoned an American citizen for close to three years.  Barack has denied Bradly his Constitutional right to a fair and speedy trial. David E. Coombs and will be speaking December 3rd in DC.  This Day In WikiLeaks notes that and two other events: Bradley Manning's attorney David Coombs will be giving his first ever public presentation on December 3 at the All Souls Church Unitarian in Washington D.C. The presentation will give an overview of pending defence motions in U.S. v. PFC Manning, as well as other facts about the case. A rally will be held at Fort Meade on November 27, the first day of Bradley Manning's hearings related to his unlawful pretrial punishment. An Election Day demonstration will be held at the U.S. Embassy in London on November 6. Anthony Timmons of WISE Up Action will speak about Bradley Manning.         iraq al mada the socialist worker cnn ivan watson bbc news todays zaman dar addustour xinhua yang lina the oregonian mike francis

the oxonian globalist

douglas sloan

truthdig

alexander reed kelly