Presidential Debate #1: McCain Curses

Sen. McCain Swears During National Debate, Upset At Obama

Sen. John McCain was triggered back to his hot-headed out-of-control days tonight, cursing twice in front of tens of millions of America citizens whom he was trying to persuade to vote for him.

"HORSESHIT," McCain swore. Seconds later, "Horseshit."

McCain has a reputation for mood swings, for suddenly reverting from 72 years, all the way back fifty years ago to his 20s, when as a Navy pilot, he was wild and out of control.

McCain takes pride in being wild and out of control. Think Tom Cruise as Lt. Pete 'Maverick' Mitchell in Top Gun up against Val Kilmer as Lt. Tom 'Iceman' Kazansky.

(Pay attention now... here is the whole deal.)

• Losing control IS BEING MAVERICK.
• I AM A POW.
• By definition, a Prisoner of War is NOT IN CONTROL of his own life.
• If McCain ever gives up LOSING CONTROL, he gives up BEING A POW.
• If McCain gives up his story of being a POW, he surrenders who he IS -- or at least who he considers himself to be.
• Attack "Maverick", especially in a massively public setting, e.g.: "You're no 'Maverick' and you never truly have been' and you attack McCain at the very core of who he IS. You are likely to not only break him, but for him to lose it big-time -- anger, lashing out -- as he tries to defend who he considers himself to be. He is unlikely to be able to stop himself.
• McCain will reflexively LIE in order to defend Maverick. He will do ANYTHING to defend Maverick. Maverick is essential to the survival of McCain (or so McCain 'knows', deep down in the part of him of which he is unaware and blind.)
  
• Do not worry about breaking him or damaging McCain. Just attack him enough to provoke a heated response. The point is to demonstrate his unfitness for duty: temper, lies, and Noun, Verb, POW.
  

Human beings consist of historical stories we tell which define us -- in a particular body (your own body and its biology), as part of a particular cultural/historical background (the historical background you are part of), and with a particular (specific) set of vocabulary (your own linguistic possibilities, the vocabulary which you have) -- and which give our lives meaning as we live together with other people in communities, societies, and cultures (Asian, African, European, North/South-American cultures, among others.)

BEING A POW is THE defining story of McCain's life.

Take away being a POW, and McCain would be case (and cast) adrift. McCain was always a poor student with no real ability to learn. Accordingly, he lacks any compensating ability to reorient himself around a different story.

Shorter me: McCain can not learn a new version of himself. He is stuck with the unworkable version which sucked hard, even before Vietnam.

Bluntly, had McCain not gone to Vietnam and returned as a POW, he'd be nothing right now. Maybe a car dealership owner in Arizona. His inability to learn and short temper would have stuck him at the short end of failed business lawsuits and ventures. But being a POW had let him off the hook for a multitude of sins. Lucky for McCain he was shot down; it made his career. That, and dumping his first, poor, crippled wife (who loved and had waited for him; and then holding her entire medical future as a gun to her head financially to make goddamn certain she never told tales out of school) for a rich blond beer heiress.

POW is McCain's story, his entire identity, public and private, personally and politically.

McCain will reflexively defend the POW story at any cost.

• LOSING CONTROL is core to BEING A POW.
• One could say, LOSING CONTROL DEFINES being a POW, as clearly to be a POW is to NOT BE IN CONTROL.
• How he survived then is how he and his body know to survive today...
• Abase yourself to people in power
• Demand surrender from others
• Be unpredictable, dangerous, and torment the hell out of people
  

• Therefore, now, 50 years later, McCain sees himself and demands others see him also, as a

1. Maverick,
2. Dangerous
3. Out of control

• McCain is Angry (it is how he survived as a POW; he was angry. Other people had other emotions. McCain was angry.)

• Life is Black and White for McCain. There truly is no difference between one brand of Islam and other. A gook is a raghead is a wetback is a redskin is a girl.
  

• If you're not a white man, who gives a fuck?
  

In short, McCain lives out life now, as it was 50 years ago, over and over again.

Why?

Because it was the defining moment of his life and he survived.

McCain is replaying his survival in every aspect of his life.

Being a POW was central to the story McCain is living out, his survival story. To challenge that story in any significant way -- and by challenge, I mean to make changes to whom McCain is, which is what would happen were McCain to question any of his fundamental assumptions, or to seek out therapy for the obvious damage done to who he is, and for which our Nation clearly owes him for his service -- would be to destroy his own story about himself.

McCain's story about himself, who he considers himself to be (and this is tautological but none-the-less true) would not survive a serious examination of who he considers himself to be, because part of who he considers himself to be IS an unexamined out-of-control maverick who is too dangerous for anyone to ever truly examine closely or suss out.

This is not TRUE.

It is simply the story McCain told himself in the POW camp to survive as a prisoner, to survive torture, and still tells himself today to survive being alive. Including to survive the Bush administration. Being a Senator from Arizona. And having to suck up to everyone to raise the money to stay in power. This story -- because the story clearly has little to do with the facts, just as the story had little to do with the facts when John was a POW -- allows John to survive now and allowed John to survive THEN.

The POW story disconnects WHO HE IS from reality.

Returning full circle...

• McCain will always lose control.
• Losing control (he would say, being unpredictable and dangerous -- "That's right Iceman. I am... dangerous") is CORE to his Maverick identity.
  
• Being a "Maverick" is the identity which anchors his sanity.
• Attacking McCain's Maverick-ness attacks the core of whom he considers himself to be.
• WANT TO WATCH MCCAIN COME APART? Attack "Maverick."
  

McCain's PTSD adaption -- he certainly is not cured or in any way resolved with his PTSD -- has him telling this story of being a Maverick to everyone. To the extent people buy it, or fight it, people are then inside of McCain's prefered frame: Maverick, out of control, dangerous.

Since returning from Vietnam, McCain has used his POW status to keep the framing on Maverick. This lets him off the hook for confronting MEGA-FAIL questions which he can NOT answer such as

• Why have you lost 5 aircraft?
• Why do you so frequently lost your temper?
• Are you too volitile, short-sighted, and quick to rush to attack, to be trusted with National Command Authority strategic assests of any kind?
• Would letting you anywhere near our SIOP be a serious risk to the people of the United States? Should your PTSD permanently disqualify you from ANY position of national authority, till you have received long-term therapy for your obvious anger-management issues?

Gen. Clark put some of these questions to McCain. McCain and his media friends RACED to hide behind POW POW POW. The questions are legitimate.

To this day, the Senator, according to many serving and recently retired Generals and Admirals who have served with him, does not have a stable mood, and is famous for his unpredictability when he sits in for Principles in National Security drills.

The unpredictability of India and Pakastan in C3, that we simply do not know what they will do with their weapons, is an enormous weakness in their system. It does not make them stronger. Unpredictability makes them weaker, as a stronger foe -- us, for example -- while apparently showing more "respect" because of one's unpredicability, in actual fact will be giving MUCH more time to figuring out how to fucking DESTROY you.

One can live with a predictable enemy. An unpredictable enemy must be destroyed completely.

Unpredictability in C3 systems is considered a HUGE failing -- one large enough in the United States to prevent non-elected staffers from receiving high-level security clearance. When it comes to dealing with any aspect of our strategic weapons systems, the United States National Command Authority strives, indeed, demands predictability at all times.

Oops!
Dial-a-Bomb
Boom Chicka Boom
Rejecting Theological Thinking: CJCS Mullen Gets Real With Cheney
Boom Chicka Boom: Cat's in the Cradle
The U.S. Iranian War

This is what you WANT in C3:
He Saved The World (No Cheerleader)

General Clark ate McCain for LUNCH about precisely this issue.
As I wrote June 17, 2008:

Clark on McCain: “Largely Untested and Untried.”

The full article is worth reading.

Huffington Post

"I know he's trying to get traction by seeking to play to what he thinks is his strong suit of national security," Clark said of McCain while speaking from his office in Little Rock, Arkansas. "The truth is that, in national security terms, he's largely untested and untried. He's never been responsible for policy formulation. He's never had leadership in a crisis, or in anything larger than his own element on an aircraft carrier or [in managing] his own congressional staff. It's not clear that this is going to be the strong suit that he thinks it is."

Resume aside, though, Clark also took issue with the Arizona Republican's instincts on national security. "McCain's weakness is that he's always been for the use of force, force and more force. In my experience, the only time to use force is as a last resort. ... When he talks about throwing Russia out of the G8 and makes ditties about bombing Iran, he betrays a disrespect for the office of the presidency."

There's more...

This wasn't a victory on points. It was a clean knock-out. Clark won.

One of the major strategic questions of the Democratic campaign has been how to destroy McCain's image, who people think McCain is, who he claims to be.

General Clark just demonstrated a big piece of the answer. HUGE win.

WIN WIN WIN.

The media took sides.

They already always clearly have a strong opinion about who John McCain is and what he stands for. Their preconceived notions were on display from the start and all the way through the interview. They were an enormous barrier to effective communication.

Like most protracted teenagers, when someone challenges their preconception with a well-thought out, carefully reasoned, well-grounded assessment, THE MEDIA HATE IT. They remind me of high schoolers being told off in painful, public detail by the school's best teacher, the one everyone admires and wants the approval of. That teacher never chews you out in public unless you really screw up, but they don't hesitate to tear apart your work in a way which makes clear you've been skating by. That's what happened here.

Check this carefully....

The media simply couldn't argue the POINT, which Clark made clear without saying word one directly about them to anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear, that they have been lazy goof offs who are brutally biased for McCain, against Obama, and are not doing their damn jobs. Or they would already have reported this obviously well-grounded assessment/interpretation about McCain's national security ability -- “Largely Untested and Untried” -- over which Clark was taking them to school. They couldn't argue the actual point. It was that clear, that obvious, that elegant a takedown. In effect, Clark's hit on McCain took out two targets with one shot. That, my loves, is a fucking pro.

The media -- like high school students being dressed down -- were left:

• instead of dealing with the consequences of what does it mean if “what everyone knows about McCain is a lie?”, which is what I think a reputable journalist would have done. It's sure as hell what I hope I would have done, taken the interview in the direction it was going and see what I learned instead of trying to wrench it around to some pre-determined point of view to support what I thought I knew. Nope...
  

• The media left untouched -- were left stunned by -- General Clark's assessment that McCain on national security is “Largely Untested and Untried.”

• What is there to say about that but, “Well, yeah. Obviously. McCain was a fighter pilot who got shot down.
  

• Then, after he was a POW, after he left the military, he divorced his critically crippled badly disfigured middle-aged wife who had waited for him all those lonely years, left her dependent on him for money for her medical care (to this day so to this day she still dare not speak out against him), left her and married a young blonde rich girl whose Daddy gave McCain a job and then paid for war hero John McCain to become a Congressman and a Senator. This is the beautiful trophy wife McCain then called a **** in front of a bunch of national reporters back in '92 according to The Real McCain by Cliff Schecter. (Link NOT safe for work; headline uses the word.) (And no, we do not use that word on GNB or any variation of the word. It's a FAIL. Don't do it.)
  

• Because McCain's is the kind of temper you want holding the Gold Codes, having access to the Playbook and the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP) and being able to ask for the Nuclear Football. Oh yeah baby, let's play football!

• Oh yeah, and on the interview? Finally, when none of that other stuff worked, the last thing the media folks did was they tried sucking up to teacher about how if only they had four stars, showing big smiles of TEETH, and reaching over and brushing Clark's shoulders. What... they think a full four-star general has never had people suck up? *snickers*

None of it worked.

Clark was a full grown adult in a room of children.

Clark is genuinely DANGEROUS. He's not pretending to be; he is.

Again, full circle...

McCain said HORSESHIT during the debates -- twice.

No one serious cares about the word.

What matters is McCain lacks enough control to keep from cursing on national television. We all remember the hissy-fit Republican's threw over Ms. Jackson's breast being exposed by accident during the Super Bowl half-time show some years ago.

Yet now, the Republican's candidate for President curses, twice, when children and women are watching? Shameful.

Kennedy/Nixon debates: Nixon was famously assessed on television by the independents as not trustworthy. In this first Obama/McCain debate, McCain will be judged as too angry, and a liar, while Obama will be ruled Presidential.

McCain can not help himself. This IS who he is; he can be no other.

He is unpredictable. Unfortunately for McCain, it totally predictable, that he's an angry old man with poorly resolved PTSD and an incomplete understanding of reality (he was a D student) who will say and do anything to try and win the White House.

That, as McCain says, is HORSESHIT.

Hat Tip DailyKos.

There's more...

Hacking Pacemakers

Medtronic Marquis DR ICD, Photo: Medtronic, Inc.

According to Cory Doctorow at boingboing and Dean Takahashi at VentureBeat, a paper (pdf) was presented at Black Hat and Defcon in Las Vegas Thursday on the vulnerability of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), specifically a Medtronic Maximo DR VVE-DDDR model #7278. According to Takahashi:

Fu and Halperin said they used a cheap $1,000 system to mimic the control mechanism. It included a software radio, GNU radio software, and other electronics. They could use that to eavesdrop on private data such as the identity of the patient, the doctor, the diagnosis, and the pacemaker instructions. They figured out how to control the pacemaker with their device.

“You can induce the test mode, drain the device battery, and turn off therapies,” Halperin said.

Translation: you can kill the patient. Fu said that he didn’t try the attack on other brands of pacemakers because he just needed to prove the academic point. Halperin said, “This is something that academics can do now. We have to do something before the ability to mount attacks becomes easier.”

This isn't new news. The basic idea was around the Intartubes in March. The same paper was presented at a conference in May, according to Takahashi.

It's fascinating to me that the people who build ICDs haven't started to add some kind of security to them. They are basically embedded microcontrollers and could have anything from a 4-digit PIN to full RSA encryption. Instead, device companies seem to have relied upon "security through obscurity" (not publishing the communication protocols) and the belief that the wireless range of an ICD is limited to inches or feet, not yards or kilometers.

Well, Bluetooth networking is allegedly limited to 10m, and people build "bluetooth sniper rifles" capable of detecting devices at 3/4 miles.

How long before someone creates an "ICD sniper rifle"?

"Mr. Vice President, I'm afraid you're going to have to enter the Faraday Cage. Permanently"

There's more...

Boom Chicka Boom: Don't Go Near The Water

Atomic Bomb Code Name Baker, Bikini Atoll, Height Minus 90 Feet Underwater,
Burst 21 kilotons Yield. July 23, 1946 0835 local time. photo US Military.

Breaking: CentCom CO Admiral William Fallon Resigns

The Iranians will take this as a sign the U.S.A. is going to war.

With nukes.

Against Iranian nuclear facilities, waving the Flag of Christ.

Think Progress

CentCom Commander Fallon: Attack On Iran ‘Will Not Happen On My Watch’

Earlier this year, the Bush administration deployed a second Navy group carrier into the Persian Gulf. Vice President Cheney referred to the move as an attempt to send a “strong signal” about the administration’s commitment to confronting Iran.

In February, Newsweek reported that the Bush administration was planning to ratchet up the pressure even further by deploying a third carrier group into the Gulf. Hillary Mann, the administration’s former National Security Council director for Iran and Persian Gulf Affairs, warned that some Bush advisers secretly wanted an excuse to attack Iran. “They intend to be as provocative as possible and make the Iranians do something [America] would be forced to retaliate for,” she told Newsweek.

IPS reported yesterday that the administration’s attempt to send the third carrier group was vetoed by the new head of the U.S. Central Command Admiral William Fallon:

Admiral William Fallon, then President George W. Bush’s nominee to head the Central Command (CENTCOM), expressed strong opposition in February to an administration plan to increase the number of carrier strike groups in the Persian Gulf from two to three and vowed privately there would be no war against Iran as long as he was chief of CENTCOM.

Fallon’s resistance to the proposed deployment of a third aircraft carrier was followed by a shift in the Bush administration’s Iran policy in February and March away from increased military threats and toward diplomatic engagement with Iran. That shift, for which no credible explanation has been offered by administration officials, suggests that Fallon’s resistance to a crucial deployment was a major factor in the intra-administration struggle over policy toward Iran.

One source said Fallon sent a memo that “insisted there was no military requirement for” for an additional carrier. Fallon private conveyed around the time of his confirmation hearing that an attack on Iran “will not happen on my watch.” IPS notes, “Fallon’s refusal to support a further naval buildup in the Gulf reflected his firm opposition to an attack on Iran and an apparent readiness to put his career on the line to prevent it.”

Fallon was recently the subject of an article in Esquire, which suggested he would be relieved of command before his tour was up, over his policy differences with The White House. (READ THE ESQUIRE ARTICLE.)

In announcing Fallon's resignation, Secretary of Defense Gates said:

Think Progress

Fallon resigned because the fall-out from the article. Gates said Fallon told him: “The current embarrassing situation, public perception of differences between my views and administration policy, and the distraction this causes from the mission make this the right thing to do.” Gates said he approved Fallon’s request to retire with “reluctance and regret.”

[Video available at Think Progress.]

Last week, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino downplayed Fallon’s possible retirement, decrying “rumor mills that don’t turn out to be true.”

Fallon opposed the “surge” in Iraq and has consistently battled the Bush administration to avoid a confrontation with Iran, calling officials’ warmongering rhetoric “not helpful.” He rejected the praise in the Esquire piece, calling it “poison pen stuff.”

A reporter noted to Gates there was a “line in that Esquire story that said basically if Fallon gets fired, it means we’re going to war with Iran. Can you just address that?” Gates responded, “Well that’s just ridiculous.”

UPDATE: Sources at the Pentagon said that Fallon was worried the White House would “perceive the magazine piece as a challenge to the president’s authority, and insisted that couldn’t be further from the truth.”

UPDATE II: Last year, Fallon vowed that an attack on Iran “will not happen on my watch.”

UPDATE III: TPM has Fallon’s statement here. The Agonist also has more.

UPDATE IV: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has issued this statement:

I am concerned that the resignation of Admiral William J. Fallon, commander of all U.S. forces in the Middle East and a military leader with more than three decades of command experience, is yet another example that independence and the frank, open airing of experts’ views are not welcomed in this Administration.

The Bush Administration said recently:

A reporter noted to Gates there was a “line in that Esquire story that said basically if Fallon gets fired, it means we’re going to war with Iran. Can you just address that?” Gates responded, “Well that’s just ridiculous.”

In other words, yes, we're going to war.

The Bush/Cheney administration lies. Always. About everything.

They won the off-Presidential (2002) election with the Afghanistan War. They won the Presidential (2004) election (okay, they cheated in Ohio, but got close enough the cheating worked) on the blood of the Iraq war and OBL conveniently doing 60 second TV commercials for Bush.

Then the Bush/Cheney administration got their ass kicked in 2006... over the WAR. They didn't have a new product. No fresh blood. People had time to think.

They will not make that mistake again.

"I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace." —George W. Bush, June 18, 2002 (Bushisms - 2002)

"I became totally inebriated with hitting the big one." --George W. Bush, on his oil drilling days, Texas Monthly, May 1994 (Bushisms - 2000.)

We are nuking Iran this summer (peak driving time; lots of opportunity for gas prices to blow SKY HIGH for their oil tycoon friends) or just after Labor Day, when everyone is paying attention, can freak out, and go rushing to the polls for McCain.

LISTEN UP: AIN'T NO ONE GIVING CONTROL OF THE NUCLEAR FOOTBALL TO A BLACK DUDE OR A WOMAN DURING A NUC-LEAR WAR.

The Football is going to the Fighter Jock ex-POW, high-temper and all. Frightened white people will NEVER vote control of launch codes to a nig**r or a gi*l.

“If Bush/Cheney nukes Iran (or starts a war), initially, can a black or woman win?”

No.
Another edition of Short Answers to Foolish Questions:

McCain would win by 10-15%.

Assuming there even is an election, and we're not under martial law due to either radiation, riots, or retribution. (If Bush is stupid enough to cause a State of War to exist between Iran and the United States, for the first time since World War II, the war will end up being fought for DECADES on American soil. Our children's children will be legitimate targets of war, in the viewpoint of the Iranians.)

This entire idea is insanity.

Yet to make certain Dubya lives on through McCain...

If 6.66 million camel-jockeys (and their wives and children) must burn alive in explosions bringing nuclear winter to the world (fuck you, Al Gore and Global Warming) in order to scare shit pouring down the legs of every soccer-mom in America, cause testosterone poisoning in every man 8-80 in the U.S. of A., and put a goddamn yellow ribbon back on the rear window of every SUV on every highway just as Jesus intended (plus $10 gasoline), well by Gawd then we'll nuke the little fuckers into glass like Bush 41 lacked the balls to do.

(“Look Daddy, I'm more of a man than you!”)

Ain't nobody stopping this here permanent Republican revolution, no Sir. More importantly, ain't nobody nailing Dick Cheney or George W. Bush for war crimes. Nobody named President John McCain, that is. That's the deal. [Video at the link.] McCain already said clearly and publicly he won't be going after them: “I do not agree with your sentiment that there has been widespread corruption. I just don't accept that.” So no justice for what's happened, and how would he have time? Not when he's busy fighting a Global War on Terror with weekly attacks in huge LIBERAL cities all across the United States by actual terrorists major league pissed 'cause we fucking turned Iran into a glass parking lot.

Nothing like a weekly 9/11 attack to cause Americans to Rally Round the Flag, Boys, Rally Round the Flag like nothing else on earth. The flag of Jesus Christ, the United States of America, Purity Balls for Daddy's Little Girls to keep her sacred [you know] safe from everyone but Daddy, and the triumph of Republican Party for 1,000 years, Amen and Amen.

And if you think Bush/Cheney won't nuke anyone, remember...

No one including their parents and the Draft Board has ever told these folks "NO" and made it stick.

They are going to set the Middle East on fire.

• Get your passports ready.
• Prepare to get your families out of the United States. Fast.
• We are about to become targets.
  

1. AF nukes got "lost" & were "discovered" headed for the Middle East.
2. Russia upgraded its ballistic weapons systems in support of Iran.
3. Admiral Fallon had vowed an attack on Iran "will not happen on my watch".

With Fallon gone, nothing stands between Iran and Cheney but water.

(Except Chairman of the JCS Mike Mullen.)

Boom Chicka Boom.

There's more...

FAX-a-thon

From FireDogLake, we have a great idea for your lazy Sunday afternoon. Fax you magnificent bastards! Fax!

Let's hit the phones and FAXes. Numbers for Senators are here. Also, ProjectVoteSmart has a great compilation of information that you can search by zipcode. Credo has a fantastic tool for contacting your representatives. EFF has a great tool as well.

You can send FAXes for free through a number of internet spots, including FreeFax, eFAX, faxzero, and any number of other places if you don't have a FAX of your own. (Do read the fine print on all of these before using them.)
Toll-free numbers for Congress from Katymine:

1 (800) 828 - 0498
1 (800) 459 - 1887
1 (800) 614 - 2803
1 (866) 340 - 9281
1 (866) 338 - 1015
1 (877) 851 - 6437

Several Senators could use extra contact on this -- uncommitted Democrats, members of the Gang of 14, and a number of wavering Republicans. Tell them to vote "no" on cloture. It is well past time that respect for the rule of law and the role of Congress in the balance of powers was restored:

Name      Phone            FAX
Bayh      (202) 224-5623  (202) 228-1377  
Carper    (202) 224-2441  (202) 228-2190  
Obama     (202) 224-2854  (202) 228-4260  
Inouye    (202) 224-3934  (202) 224-6747  
Johnson   (202) 224-5842  (202) 228 5765  
Landrieu  (202) 224-5824  (202) 224-9735  
McCaskill (202) 224-6154  (202) 228-6326  
Mikulski  (202) 224-4654  (202) 224-8858  
Nelson(FL)(202) 224-5274  (202) 228-2183  
Clinton   (202) 224-4451  (202) 228-0282  
Nelson(NE)(202) 224-6551  (202) 228-0012  
Pryor     (202) 224-2353  (202) 228-0908  
Salazar   (202) 224-5852  (202) 228-5036  
Specter   (202) 224-4254  (202) 228-1229  
McCain    (202) 224-2235  (202) 228-2862  
Graham    (202) 224-5972  (202) 224-3808  
Warner    (202) 224-2023  (202) 224-6295  
Snowe     (202) 224-5344  (202) 224-1946  
Collins   (202) 224-2523  (202) 224-2693  
Sununu    (202) 224-2841  (202) 228-4131  
Lieberman (202) 224-4041  (202) 224-9750  
Byrd      (202) 224-3954  (202) 228-0002  
Lincoln   (202) 224-4843  (202) 228-1371  
Chambliss (202) 224-3521  (202) 224-0103  
Coleman   (202) 224-5641  (202) 224-1152  
Dole      (202) 224-6342  (202) 224-1100  
Smith     (202) 224-3753  (202) 228-3997 
Stabenow  (202) 224-4822  (202) 228-0325  
Kohl      (202) 224-5653  (202) 224-9787

And, for extra bonus points, here is contact information for all three Democratic presidential candidates, courtesy of ProjectVoteSmart:
Sen. Hillary Clinton:
NY Office: Phone: 212-213-3717 Fax: 212-213-3041
VA office: Phone: 703-469-2008 Fax: 703-962-8600
Former Sen. John Edwards:
Phone: 919-636-3131 Fax: 919-967-3644
Sen. Barack Obama:
Phone: 312-819-2008 Toll Free: (866) 675-2008 FAX: 312-819-2088

There's more...

Oil

$100

A Barrel

Oil (crude oil futures for February deliver) hit $100 a barrel just after noon today, before closing at $99.62, up $3.64 today.

Three years ago when I was still totally not myself, I went through about a four-week phase when I first heard about peak-oil, of really freaking out about, well, basically that The End Of The World is coming. I remember specifically predicting -- and again, this wasn't really me; I wasn't home in any real sense of the word -- that we'd be at $100 oil by the end of 2006.

Eh... One year and two days off. Not bad, not bad.

And the world didn't end. So we've got that going for us.

The New York Times

Oil prices, which had fallen to a low of $50 a barrel at the beginning of 2007, have quadrupled since 2003.

Gasoline has lagged the rise in the price of oil. It stands at a nationwide average of $3.05 a gallon for regular grade, according to AAA, the automobile club. That is below the all-time peak in May of $3.23 a gallon, but it is 73 cents higher than at this time a year ago. Some analysts worry that gasoline could hit $4 a gallon by next spring if oil prices remain at high levels.

Oil is now within reach of its historic inflation-adjusted high reached in April 1980 in the aftermath of the Iranian revolution when oil prices jumped to the equivalent of $102.81 a barrel in today’s money.

Unlike the oil shocks of the 1970s and 1980s, which were caused by sudden interruptions in oil supplies from the Middle East, the latest surge is fundamentally different. Prices have risen steadily over several years because of a rise in demand for oil and gasoline in both developed and developing countries.

Two-thirds of the world's proven oil reserves live in the middle east.

The war(s) goes on.

No real commitment to alternative fuels exists on a national scale, regardless of what may be happening at individual and regional power companies (some of whom are fiercely committed.) As a nation and a world, our need for oil continues to rise, while the pool of oil continues to shrink. People continue to die and starve and wars are fought over oil (e.g.: Iraq, Africa (throw a dart damn near anywhere)).

And if you're asking yourself why, just remember this...

The Vice President of the United States is still Richard Cheney.

There's more...

Army Body Armor Tests Postponed... Again

Vice President Dick Cheney & General David Petraeus, Baghdad Airport. Wed, May 9, 2007.
The Vice President in Dragon Skin body armor. White House photo David Bohrer.

Who You Gonna Believe? Me Or Your Lying Eyes?

Friend of GNB, Lurch of Main and Central has an interesting take on Army logistics.

Seems yet again -- what is this, the third time? -- the Army has postponed side by side comparisons of the Dragon Skin body armor against Interceptor armor which the Army swears is safe.

Main and Central

A cynical fly on the wall would not have been surprised to have heard “some” armor manufacturer say, “Are you insane? We can’t stand up to a side-by-side test! We need tome to build a better vest for the testing.”

The Army insists the Interceptor is the best armor available, and has in fact warned GIs that if they wear Dragon Skin and are injured or killed, they families will not be allowed to collect their SGLI benefits.

If any reader believes Whining Joe Lieberman and Dick “dick” Cheney aren’t wearing the very best armor money can buy, please contact me. I have a controlling interest in a bridge I’m prepared to sell you for a bargain price. After gaining approval from the Mayor of New York, and the Borough Presidents of Manhattan and Brooklyn you will be able to erect toll booths. It’s an income for life!

Pinnacle's [DragonSkin] [Murry] Neal says he plans to submit Dragon Skin samples for the upcoming test and is glad the Army is finally taking his technology seriously.

"The extensions, as we have been told by several Army personnel, are primarily for the current manufacturers to fix the plates that have been run through preliminary testing and that are not passing with enough percentage to guarantee passing the [final] testing," Neal said in a email to Military.com, adding he's only too eager to pit his flexible -- otherwise known as "scalar" -- system up against any comers.

If their vests weren’t ready in the Summer of 2007, and they needed more time to jigger improvements, then the Interceptor certainly wasn’t the best vest available.

I just want to point out that NBC filmed their side-by-side tests of the Interceptor and Dragon Skin vests. The Army either didn’t, or won’t release the films. Suspicions that the Mk II pencil was involved in the testing just might be valid.

There's more...

This story won't quit.

It won't necessarily be Dragon Skin that comes out on top, either.

DefenseTech has a series of posts going back a long way, if you want the full gory details, as does Lurch in his story above.

What does seem clear is, the Army hasn't given Dragon Skin a fair chance, weight (of the armor) is going to matter a lot, and I seriously doubt the Secret Service is risking Cheney's life in Iraq when they packed him into Dragon Skin instead of a standard issue vest.

If it's good enough for the Secret Service, it's probably good enough for the Army.

Update 10:00 AM:

I received an email from the person who manages the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI) program on behalf of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

He says:

I can assure you, there is ZERO truth to the statement about SGLI not being payable if the service member is injured or killed while wearing or not wearing that Dragon body armor or any other item.

99% of active duty service members have elected to be insured under SGLI. Except for extraordinarily serious situations, such as treason, desertion, etc. SGLI death proceeds are always payable for those individuals. SGLI is 24/7 coverage, everywhere in the world, and is payable whether the death is combat-related or not.

GNB doesn't consider this a correction per se, in that, I don't consider Main and Central's original story -- which I quoted, which in turn goes out and links to another story -- wrong.

In the original story -- and if you hit the links, there's more like the first -- soldiers said their commanders said if they wore Dragon Skin and were killed, they were told by their commanders, they wouldn't get their military insurance (that's SGLI.)

GNB believes that happened as reported (there were several cases), so I'm not retracting the story. It fits completely with my personal experience as a soldier. I've had CO's make up shit in order to try and push me around. It happens.

At the same time, while we stand by our story, we're also happy to tell everyone that their CO's were fucking with them and SGLI will pay if you buy the farm. I've got that word from the VA its own self, straight from the man who manages the program.

Got it?

Wear Dragon Skin, don't wear it, it's between you and your command. SGLI life insurance is there for you 24/7, in and out of combat, regardless. As it was for me, and has been for troops for as far back as I can remember.

Good deal, and we thank the VA for dropping us a line.

There's more...

Toshiba's Neighborhood Nuke

Westinghouse AP1000 Nuclear Plant (Jan 25, 2006) drawing The News and Observer.
Click to Enlarge.

Micro-Nuke in Blogs; Not in Paper of Record.

All you have to do is google Toshiba micro nuclear and up come a bunch of links. Slashdot went freaking nuts on this, although the paper of record remains silent. (On this. Much to say on other issues. For example, it likes Sweeney Todd and Charlie Wilson's War. I may go see one of these myself this weekend. But I digress.)

Hmmmm.

Examining further, it certainly isn't the AP1000 I have the diagram of up top. That's massively too big. (Toshiba purchased Westinghouse last year.)

Engadget

It does seem like the company is well on its way to commercializing the design.

Toshiba's Micro Nuclear reactors are designed to power a single apartment building or city block, and measure a mere 20-feet by 6-feet. The 200 kilowatt reactor is fully automatic and fail-safe, and is completely self-sustaining. It uses special liquid lithium-6 reservoirs instead of traditional control rods, and can last up to 40 years, making energy for about 5 cents per kilowatt hour.

One of these with their ability to power just -- as Engadget points out -- an apartment building or a city block, would be perfect for a small data center, a call center, or a few of them for communities off the grid.

The key is regulatory approval.

Let me give you that again...

The key is regulatory approval AND dealing with NIMBY -- Not In My Back Yard.

I know this isn't the great progressive position to take, but I'm not reactionary about these things. I'd want to see the science, before rejecting it out of hand. Energy is the issue these days, and I'm interested in any solution which doesn't include a one-third to two-thirds die-off of the human race back to our normal pre-petroleum planet-wide carrying capacity. If nuclear is part of that solution, even for a hundred years, well, so be it.

Or shall we line up your family and have you watch one or two out of three die of starvation or worse as you sit there while we run out of oil? In the next fifteen to thirty years? Okay then. Moving on... (And yes, of course I'm open to rebuttals in comments. Please be polite, provide evidence to support your positions, and use a name, even if it's pseudonymous.)

I did a bunch of digging around and I think -- key word think -- that what they're talking about is a kind of Liquid Metal cooled Fast Reactor called the Rapid-L. This is not the 4S design (also talked about below.)

Encyclopedia of Earth

Liquid Metal cooled Fast Reactors

Fast neutron reactors have no moderator, a higher neutron flux and are normally cooled by liquid metal such as sodium, lead, or lead-bismuth, with high conductivity and boiling point. They operate at or near atmospheric pressure and have passive safety features (most have convection circulating the primary coolant). Automatic load following is achieved due to the reactivity feedback—constrained coolant flow leads to higher core temperature which slows the reaction. Primary coolant flow is by convection. They typically use boron carbide control rods.

A small-scale design developed by Toshiba Corporation in cooperation with Japan's Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI) and funded by the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI) is the 5 MWt, 200 kWe Rapid-L, using lithium-6 (a liquid neutron poison) as a control medium. It would have 2700 fuel pins of 40-50% enriched uranium nitride with 2600°C melting point integrated into a disposable cartridge. The reactivity control system is passive, using lithium expansion modules (LEM) which give burnup compensation, partial load operation as well as negative reactivity feedback. As the reactor temperature rises, the lithium expands into the core, displacing an inert gas. Other kinds of lithium modules, also integrated into the fuel cartridge, shut down and start up the nuclear reactor. Cooling is by molten sodium, and with the LEM control system, reactor power is proportional to primary coolant flow rate. Refuelling would be every 10 years in an inert gas environment. Operation would require no skill, due to the inherent safety design features. The whole plant would be about 6.5 meters high and 2 meters in diameter.

The Super-Safe, Small & Simple (4S) 'nuclear battery' system is being developed by Toshiba and CRIEPI in Japan in collaboration with STAR work in USA. It uses sodium as coolant (with electromagnetic pumps) and has passive safety features, notably negative temperature and void reactivity. The whole unit would be factory-built, transported to site, installed below ground level, and would drive a steam cycle. It is capable of three decades of continuous operation without refuelling. Metallic fuel (169 pins 10mm in diameter) is uranium-zirconium or uranium-plutonium-zirconium alloy enriched to less than 20%. Steady power output over the core lifetime is achieved by progressively moving upwards an annular reflector around the slender core (0.68m diameter, 2m high). After 14 years, a neutron absorber at the center of the core is removed and the reflector repeats its slow movement up the core for 16 more years. In the event of power loss, the reflector falls to the bottom of the reactor vessel, slowing the reaction, and external air circulation gives decay heat removal.

Both 10 MWe and 50 MWe versions of 4S are designed to automatically maintain an outlet coolant temperature of 510°C—suitable for power generation with high temperature electrolytic hydrogen production. Plant cost is projected at US$2500/kW and power cost 5-7 cents/kWh for the small unit—very competitive with diesel in many locations. The design has gained considerable support in Alaska and toward the end of 2004 the town of Galena granted initial approval for Toshiba to build a 4S reactor in the remote location. A pre-application review by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is being sought with a view to a demonstration unit operating by 2012. Its design is sufficiently similar to PRISM—GE's modular 150 MWe liquid metal-cooled inherently-safe reactor that went part-way through US NRC approval process, giving it favorable prospects for licensing.

There's more...

Well the thing looks real.

I wonder why all the sudden drama? Who is pushing to get this hyped?

We just got a significantly more friendly nuclear regulatory environment *waves to Vice President Cheney* so I wonder...

What the hell is going on?

There's more...

Kucinich Moves for Cheney Impeachment

Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

I have listened and read many speeches in my life.

From John F. Kennedy to Malcolm X, to Ronald Reagan in his prime (who for all his incompetence could give one hell of a speech.) Bobby Kennedy on a roll, the writings of Jefferson, and Lincoln at Gettysburg*. Finally, my two personal favorites, the stunning vision of FDR's Second Inaugural and the unsurpassed beauty of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King with The American Dream, delivered at the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta on the 4th of July, 1965.

Hold on to your hats. There's a new speech in town.

Set aside at least ten minutes, maybe even twenty-seven minutes, would you please?

I promise you the ninth to the the tenth minute mark of the above speech, as Congressman Kucinich finishes reading Article I of the Articles of Impeachment, will be some of the most amazing oratory you've ever heard. (I'll tell you why, later.)

After Congressman Kucinich finished reading The Articles of Impeachment onto the floor of the House, they were then sent by the Democrats to the Judiciary Committee, where they will languish till this Congress expires.

Total time on the House Floor after the Congressman finished reading them -- about one hour.

The following Democrats voted to send the articles to Judiciary, rather than to debate impeachment.

Is your Congressman or Congresswoman a sell-out?

Downing Street

135 traitors now confirmed!

NY-5 Ackerman, Gary [D]
PA-4 Altmire, Jason [D]
NJ-1 Andrews, Robert [D]
NY-24 Arcuri, Michael [D]
WA-3 Baird, Brian [D]
GA-12 Barrow, John [D]
IL-8 Bean, Melissa [D]
CA-31 Becerra, Xavier [D]
NV-1 Berkley, Shelley [D]
CA-28 Berman, Howard [D]
AR-1 Berry, Robert [D]
GA-2 Bishop, Sanford [D]
NY-1 Bishop, Timothy [D]
OR-3 Blumenauer, Earl [D]
OK-2 Boren, Dan [D]
IA-3 Boswell, Leonard [D]
VA-9 Boucher, Frederick [D]
FL-2 Boyd, F. [D]
KS-2 Boyda, Nancy [D]
FL-3 Brown, Corrine [D]
CA-18 Cardoza, Dennis [D]
MO-3 Carnahan, Russ [D]
PA-10 Carney, Christopher [D]
FL-11 Castor, Kathy [D]
SC-6 Clyburn, James [D]
TN-5 Cooper, Jim [D]
CA-20 Costa, Jim [D]
IL-12 Costello, Jerry [D]
CT-2 Courtney, Joe [D]
AL-5 Cramer, Robert [D]
TX-28 Cuellar, Henry [D]
AL-7 Davis, Artur [D]
TN-4 Davis, Lincoln [D]
CA-53 Davis, Susan [D]
CO-1 DeGette, Diana [D]
MA-10 Delahunt, William [D]
CT-3 DeLauro, Rosa [D]
MI-15 Dingell, John [D]
IN-2 Donnelly, Joe [D]
TX-17 Edwards, Thomas [D]
IN-8 Ellsworth, Brad [D]
IL-5 Emanuel, Rahm [D]
NY-17 Engel, Eliot [D]
CA-14 Eshoo, Anna [D]
NC-2 Etheridge, Bob [D]
PA-2 Fattah, Chaka [D]
MA-4 Frank, Barney [D]
AZ-8 Giffords, Gabrielle [D]
TX-20 Gonzalez, Charles [D]
TN-6 Gordon, Barton [D]
NY-19 Hall, John [D]
CA-36 Harman, Jane [D]
FL-23 Hastings, Alcee [D]
SD-0 Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie [D]
NY-27 Higgins, Brian [D]
IN-9 Hill, Baron [D]
TX-15 Hinojosa, Rubén [D]
PA-17 Holden, Tim [D]
MD-5 Hoyer, Steny [D]
NY-2 Israel, Steve [D]
LA-2 Jefferson, William [D]
TX-30 Johnson, Eddie [D]
WI-8 Kagen, Steve [D]
RI-1 Kennedy, Patrick [D]
MI-5 Kildee, Dale [D]
WI-3 Kind, Ronald [D]
FL-22 Klein, Ron [D]
TX-22 Lampson, Nicholas [D]
RI-2 Langevin, James [D]
CA-12 Lantos, Tom [D]
WA-2 Larsen, Rick [D]
CT-1 Larson, John [D]
MI-12 Levin, Sander [D]
IL-3 Lipinski, Daniel [D]
CA-16 Lofgren, Zoe [D]
NY-18 Lowey, Nita [D]
MA-9 Lynch, Stephen [D]
FL-16 Mahoney, Tim [D]
MA-7 Markey, Edward [D]
GA-8 Marshall, James [D]
UT-2 Matheson, Jim [D]
CA-5 Matsui, Doris [D]
NY-4 McCarthy, Carolyn [D]
NC-7 McIntyre, Mike [D]
CA-11 McNerney, Jerry [D]
FL-17 Meek, Kendrick [D]
LA-3 Melancon, Charles [D]
CA-7 Miller, George [D]
AZ-5 Mitchell, Harry [D]
WV-1 Mollohan, Alan [D]
KS-3 Moore, Dennis [D]
CT-5 Murphy, Christopher [D]
PA-8 Murphy, Patrick [D]
PA-12 Murtha, John [D]
NY-8 Nadler, Jerrold [D]
MA-2 Neal, Richard [D]
WI-7 Obey, David [D]
MA-1 Olver, John [D]
MN-7 Peterson, Collin [D]
ND-0 Pomeroy, Earl [D]
WV-3 Rahall, Nick [D]
TX-16 Reyes, Silvestre [D]
TX-23 Rodriguez, Ciro [D]
AR-4 Ross, Mike [D]
NJ-9 Rothman, Steven [D]
MD-2 Ruppersberger, C.A. [D]
OH-17 Ryan, Timothy [D]
CO-3 Salazar, John [D]
CA-39 Sanchez, Linda [D]
CA-47 Sanchez, Loretta [D]
MD-3 Sarbanes, John [D]
CA-29 Schiff, Adam [D]
PA-13 Schwartz, Allyson [D]
GA-13 Scott, David [D]
PA-7 Sestak, Joe [D]
NC-11 Shuler, Heath [D]
NJ-13 Sires, Albio [D]
MO-4 Skelton, Ike [D]
WA-9 Smith, Adam [D]
AR-2 Snyder, Victor [D]
OH-18 Space, Zackary [D]
SC-5 Spratt, John [D]
TN-8 Tanner, John [D]
CA-10 Tauscher, Ellen [D]
MS-4 Taylor, Gene [D]
MS-2 Thompson, Bennie [D]
MA-5 Tsongas, Niki [D]
CO-2 Udall, Mark [D]
NM-3 Udall, Tom [D]
MD-8 Van Hollen, Christopher [D]
IN-1 Visclosky, Peter [D]
MN-1 Walz, Timothy [D]
FL-20 Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [D]
CA-30 Waxman, Henry [D]
OH-6 Wilson, Charles [D]

I agree completely with Downing Street. These people are traitors to those of us who elected them to the Democratic Party.

Instead of investigating the Vice President for what everyone knows are genuinely impeachable crimes, the Democratic Party runs like cockroaches when the lights are turned on, afraid of what the Beltway Media and the White House will say.

Cowards. Cowards more afraid of holding on to their seat than doing what their Oath of Office calls for.

When will they learn Americans hate cowards and respect people who kick bullies in the balls.

*sighs* As for y'all, dear readers...

Listen to the first ten minutes -- through Article I at least.

Like any roller coaster ride, it goes up and down, but minute 9-10 is the most amazing minute of oratory I've heard from anyone since Dr. King.

Why? Because it's for real. It's not a media commentator making observations from the side. (Sorry Keith O.; I love you anyway.)

This is an elected official with full authority to act -- and wow is he acting. He's requesting of the rest of the House of Representatives to Impeach the Vice President, and declaring why --- in principle no different than the Declaration of Independence. -- Declaring what is wrong, saying this shall not stand, and asking everyone else with authority to bind the States they represent, to stand together and take action.

The difference? Back 231 years ago our representatives had fucking balls. Today our representatives -- *waves to Congressman Adam Smith* -- are cowards.

Here is what Congressman Kucinich declared today in Congress assembled:

Rep. Dennis Kucinich Privileged Resolution

Washington, Nov 6-Below is a copy of the speech Congressman Dennis Kucinich gave on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives today.

Mr. Speaker:

Pursuant to 2.A.1. of Rule 9, I rise to give notice of my intent to raise a Question of the Privilege of the House, The form of the resolution is as follows:

Resolved, That Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Article I
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction:

(A) `We know they have biological and chemical weapons.' March 17, 2002, Press Conference by Vice President Dick Cheney and His Highness Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Crown Prince of Bahrain at Shaikh Hamad Palace.

(B) `. . . and we know they are pursuing nuclear weapons.' March 19, 2002, Press Briefing by Vice President Dick Cheney and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Jerusalem.

(C) `And he is actively pursuing nuclear weapons at this time . . .' March 24, 2002, CNN Late Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.

(D) `We know he's got chemicals and biological and we know he's working on nuclear.' May 19, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(E) `But we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons . . . Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.' August 26, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at VFW 103rd National Convention.

(F) `Based on intelligence that's becoming available, some of it has been made public, more of it hopefully will be, that he has indeed stepped up his capacity to produce and deliver biological weapons, that he has reconstituted his nuclear program to develop a nuclear weapon, that there are efforts under way inside Iraq to significantly expand his capability.' September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(G) `He is, in fact, actively and aggressively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.' September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(H) `And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.' March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.

(A) Vice President Cheney and his Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby, made multiple trips to the CIA in 2002 to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives accounts.

(B) Vice President Cheney sought out unverified and ultimately inaccurate raw intelligence to prove his preconceived beliefs. This strategy of cherry picking was employed to influence the interpretation of the intelligence.

(3) The Vice President's actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002, and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002, vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice President's actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.

(A) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate stated `Lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute it's nuclear weapons program INR is unwilling to speculate that such an effort began soon after the departure of UN inspectors or to project a timeline for the completion of activities it does not now see happening. As a result INR is unable to predict that Iraq could acquire a nuclear device or weapon.'.

(B) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate also stated that `Finally, the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are, in INR's assessment, highly dubious.'.

(C) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate references a Department of Energy opinion by stating that `INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the US Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose.'.

The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3800 United States service members; the loss of more than 1 million innocent Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article II
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda:

(A) `His regime has had high-level contacts with Al Qaeda going back a decade and has provided training to Al Qaeda terrorists.' December 2, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at the Air National Guard Senior Leadership Conference.

(B) `His regime aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists for use against us.' January 30, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to 30th Political Action Conference in Arlington, Virginia.

(C) `We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the Al Qaeda organization.' March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(D) `We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the '90s, that it involved training, for example, on biological weapons and chemical weapons . . .' September 14, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

(E) `Al Qaeda had a base of operation there up in Northeastern Iraq where they ran a large poisons factory for attacks against Europeans and U.S. forces.' October 3, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney at Bush-Cheney '04 Fundraiser in Iowa.

(F) `He also had an established relationship with Al Qaeda providing training to Al Qaeda members in areas of poisons, gases, and conventional bombs.' October 10, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to the Heritage Foundation.

(G) `Al Qaeda and the Iraqi intelligence services have worked together on a number of occasions.' January 9, 2004, Rocky Mountain News interview with Vice President Cheney.

(H) `I think there's overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government.' January 22, 2004, NPR: Morning Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.

(I) `First of all, on the question of--of whether or not there was any kind of relationship, there clearly was a relationship. It's been testified to; the evidence is overwhelming.' June 17, 2004, CNBC: Capital Report interview with Vice President Cheney.

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, a fact articulated in several official documents, including:

(A) A classified Presidential Daily Briefing ten days after the September 11, 2001, attacks indicating that the United States intelligence community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks and that there was `scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda'.

(B) Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency, which challenged the credibility of information gleaned from captured al Qaeda leader al-Libi. The DIA report also cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy: `Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.'.

(C) A January 2003 British intelligence classified report on Iraq that concluded that `there are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network'.

The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,800 United States service members; the loss of more than 1 million innocent Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article III
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:

(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:

(A) `For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime. And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.' March 7, 2006, Speech of Vice President Cheney to American Israel Public Affairs Committee 2006 Policy Conference.

(B) `But we've also made it clear that all options are on the table.' January 24, 2007, CNN Situation Room interview with Vice President Cheney.

(C) `When we--as the President did, for example, recently--deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.' January 29, 2007, Newsweek interview with Vice President Cheney.

(D) `But I've also made the point and the President has made the point that all options are still on the table.' February 24, 2007, Vice President Cheney at Press Briefing with Australian Prime Minister in Sydney, Australia.

(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:

(A) `I know that what we see in Iran right now is not the industrial capacity you can [use to develop a] bomb.' Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

(B) Iran indicated its `full readiness and willingness to negotiate on the modality for the resolution of the outstanding issues with the IAEA, subject to the assurances for dealing with the issues in the framework of the Agency, without the interference of the United Nations Security Council'. IAEA Board Report, February 22, 2007.

(C) `. . . so whatever they have, what we have seen today, is not the kind of capacity that would enable them to make bombs.' Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:

(A) The United States has refused to engage in meaningful diplomatic relations with Iran since 2002, rebuffing both bilateral and multilateral offers to dialogue.

(B) The United States is currently engaged in a military buildup in the Middle East that includes the increased presence of the United States Navy in the waters near Iran, significant United States Armed Forces in two nations neighboring to Iran, and the installation of anti-missile technology in the region.

(C) News accounts have indicated that military planners have considered the B61-11, a tactical nuclear weapon, as one of the options to strike underground bunkers in Iran.

(D) The United States has been linked to anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a terrorist organization.

(E) News accounts indicate that United States troops have been ordered into Iran to collect data and establish contact with anti-government groups.

(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S. Constitution's adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force.

(A) Article VI of the United States Constitution states, `This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.' Any provision of an international treaty ratified by the United States becomes the law of the United States.

(B) The United States is a signatory to the United Nations Charter, a treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, Section 4 of the United Nations Charter states, `All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.' The threat of force is illegal.

(C) Article 51 lays out the only exception, `Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.' Iran has not attacked the United States; therefore any threat against Iran by the United States is illegal.

The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.

In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

Mr. Speaker: This resolution is similar to a resolution which I introduced earlier this year and has the support of 22 of my colleagues here in the House of Representatives.

The Congressman's Declaration is obviously valid.

The Congress are obvious cowards.

*Abraham Lincoln, Draft of the Gettysburg Address: Nicolay Copy, November 1863; Series 3, General Correspondence, 1837-1897; The Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress, Manuscript Division (Washington, D. C.: American Memory Project, [2000-02]). http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/alhtml/alhome.html.

There's more...

FLASH!: VP Dick Cheney Hunts At Gun Club Where Dixie Flag Is Proudly Displayed

“Yawn!” So Dick Cheney likes to cool his gout-filled heels at a hunting club where his good ol' boy buddies (in New York State, that is!) think it's cool to fly the flag of the Shitforbrains-eracy Confederacy?

Vice President Dick Cheney is embroiled in yet another hunting-related controversy.

The vice president made a daylong hunting trip on Monday to the Clove Valley Rod and Gun Club, an exclusive mountainside establishment on 4,000 acres in Union Vale, N.Y., about 15 miles east of Poughkeepsie, in Dutchess County. Only members and their guests may hunt on the property; an annual membership is said to cost tens of thousands of dollars.

Reporters who covered Mr. Cheney’s visit on Monday — including Fernanda Santos of The Times — were not permitted to enter the grounds of the hunting estate. But at least one eagle-eyed photographer captured images of a Confederate battle flag — about 3 feet by 5 feet in dimension — hanging in plain view in a garage attached to the club’s headquarters. The Daily News captured images of the flag.

--------------------------------

In a brief interview this morning, a spokeswoman for Mr. Cheney told us that neither the vice president nor anyone in his entourage had seen the flag.

“Until this issue was raised by the press last night, no one in our office was aware there was such a flag,” said the spokeswoman, Megan M. Mitchell. “The vice president did not see a flag, nor did anyone on his staff traveling with him in New York.”

Asked whether Mr. Cheney had an opinion about the flag’s being displayed, Ms. Mitchell replied, “Bottom line, he didn’t see the flag.”

What in the fuck is everyone so upset about here? That Cheney gets his shriveled rocks off on playing tough-guy by hanging with a bunch of Deliverance wanna-bes with a barely-concealed “We hatez n*ggers” fetish? Folks...that's his peeps.

The last folks who give an amoeba's turd about him.

That's the BASE!

Frankly, I was surprised by how quickly they managed to purge the garage of the massive vintage noose and charred-cross collection normally stored in there.

Must've sent the ol' shreddin' truck up there the day before. The drunken, face-blastin' little scamp!

(And if you don't get the “Dreadlocked Ice-T” reference, my friends...get thee to your late-nite, bad movie cable channel, or Netflix trash queue for this ghastly gem.)—LowerManhattanite

There's more...

Rejecting Theological Thinking: CJCS Mullen Gets Real With Cheney

CNO Adm Mike Mulllen aboard the USS Pasadena (SSN 752) Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, May 7, 2007
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Ben Gonzales

“The ground forces are not broken, but they are breakable.”

The New York Times Magazine (By Ron Suskind, Published: October 17, 2004)

Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush

I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''

By the time you become the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, you don't buy into airy-fairy west-coast bullshit about creating your own realities.

I leave aside here, the very valid Many-Worlds conversation from quantum physics, and the equally valid Autopoetic neuro-biology theories advanced by Humberto Maturana (From Being to Doing) currently doing to biology what Einstein did to physics; making it recursive by demonstrating when an Observer is present, the wave-form function collapses, leaving a world literally caused by the collapsing of the wave-form.

This is not what I'm talking about, and I assure you, it was not what the quote senior adviser to Bush unquote was talking about back in 2004 in The Times Magazine article. I doubt the senior adviser had ever even completed calculus, let alone understood how wave form functions worked. But I'll bet dollars to donuts -- not resorting to cliché, that's an actual bet I'm offering -- the smarmy unnamed bastard believed in the New Age bullshit about literally creating new realities. Either through religious fundamentalism -- quite possibly, or through a weekend "I am responsible for my own experience" LGAT course.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mike Mullen (nominated June 28, 2007) doesn't buy into "create your own reality" bullshit. He wants something done, he does it himself, gives an order, or makes a request.

He doesn't: "I take responsibility for my space and create a world which works for everyone in which I go deep and produce a result which causes that which I promise to occur reliably, moving the future I've declared into the present moment, thus causing my declared intention to be realized, inside my commitment for being responsible to my oath to the Constitution of the United States of America, which declaration I am continuously bringing forth from the future into the present now, thereby creating new historical realities consistent with my fundamental declaration, responsibilities, and accountabilities."

*grins*

Really, he's not doing that. No one in the Navy does that. Or the Army or Marines.

What CJCS Adm. Mike Mullen is doing, is standing up to Dick Cheney, who does seem to think he can create realities.

First, from the VPOTUS (Very Pompous & Officially The Ugly Sociopath-in-charge)

New York Times

Vice President Dick Cheney issued a pointed warning to Iran on Sunday, calling the government in Tehran “a growing obstacle to peace in the Middle East” and promising “serious consequences” if the government there does not abandon its nuclear program.

The remarks, just days after President Bush suggested that a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to “World War III,” amounted to Part II of a one-two punch from the administration at a moment when it is trying to persuade its allies in Europe to impose stiffer sanctions on Tehran. Those efforts grew more complicated on Saturday when Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator resigned on the eve of crucial talks with Europe.

“The Iranian regime needs to know that if it stays on its present course, the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences,” Mr. Cheney said, without specifying what those might be. “The United States joins other nations in sending a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

Mr. Bush has repeatedly said the administration would not “tolerate” a nuclear-armed Iran. But during a news conference on Wednesday, the president went further, saying of Iran: “If you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.”

That distinction — having the knowledge to make a nuclear weapon, as opposed to actually having a weapon — is one the administration has not made in the past. David Makovsky, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute who moderated a panel discussion before and after Mr. Cheney’s speech, said the vice president also seemed to draw a new red line when, instead of saying it is “not acceptable” for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, he said the world “will not allow” it.

“The first is a condition,” Mr. Makovsky said. “The second is a commitment.”

Tough talk from a chickenhawk, an an old man with a bad heart and the balls of a coward.

When he could have gone himself -- yes, yes, it is well know, BUT IT DESERVES TO BE SAID OVER AND OVER AGAIN -- Dick "the Coward-Hearted" Cheney cut and run, having "other priorities."

Now he wants to set the middle-East aflame in nuclear fire over a sea of oil, and ka-CHING, watch the oil stocks and his Haliburton shares go straight to the moon, Alice! ...over the burning corpses of the dead.

Fuck that.

The New York Times

The new chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen, expressed deep concerns that the long counterinsurgency missions in Iraq and Afghanistan have so consumed the military that the Army and Marine Corps may be unprepared for a high-intensity war against a major adversary.

He rejected the counsel of those who might urge immediate attacks inside Iran to destroy nuclear installations or to stop the flow of explosives that end up as powerful roadside bombs in Iraq or Afghanistan, killing American troops.

With America at war in two Muslim countries, he said, attacking a third Islamic nation in the region “has extraordinary challenges and risks associated with it.” The military option, he said, should be a last resort.

“We’re in a conflict in two countries out there right now,” he added. “We have to be incredibly thoughtful about the potential of in fact getting into a conflict with a third country in that part of the world.”

This man and the remainder of the Joint Chiefs, clearly are standing between Dick Cheney, George Bush, and war with Iran.

READ THE INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT.

Hold the line Admiral. Hold the bleeding line.

h/t Josh Marshall, Talking Points Memo: New JCS Chair: Cheney's Whacked

There's more...