Jim Matheson, Still Not Doing Enough

Here's the email I just got from Congressman Matheson:

Dear Misty,

The lack of independent, accurate assessments about our progress in Iraq has stymied our efforts to secure the country and assist in its reconstruction. We have the world's most powerful military. If military might alone could succeed in Iraq, our mission would be complete by now.

We need more than a military strategy for Iraq--we need a plan for political, diplomatic and economic success. The President received such a strategy a year ago in the form of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group (ISG) report. Unfortunately, he did not adopt it.

Going forward, in trying to establish a new Iraq strategy, I am guided by a set of principles that 14 Democrats and 14 Republicans support, including:

* We need a clearly defined and measurable mission for military involvement
* The government of Iraq must now be responsible for Iraq's future and must make progress on political, security and economic benchmarks
* Our soldiers, including Guard and Reserves, must have adequate rest and recuperation time between deployments
* A safe and responsible redeployment of our Armed Forces is necessary to transfer the combat mission to the Iraqi forces
* Any ongoing mission must involve counterterrorism operations, force protection, equipping Iraqis, helping refugees and preventing genocide

It is immoral to play politics with the needs of the men and women who protect the ideals we hold so dear. Our troops have performed heroically. We owe them a new approach and a thoughtful approach to the situation in Iraq. We owe them a comprehensive strategy for success.

Our intelligence community tells us Al Qaeda--the number one threat to Americans--is strengthening. We must not weaken our capability to combat that threat. I will continue to look for responsible ways to change course in Iraq without engaging in political games that would compromise the safety of our soldiers.

Sincerely,

U.S. Representative
2nd District of Utah

It's sad that Matheson is so far behind the Democratic platform when it comes to so many important issues.

Seriously, he's "pushing for" this "principle" to guide us?

We need a clearly defined and measurable mission for military involvement

We needed this years ago, and now we just need out.

Oh, and is Matheson still part of the group who thinks al Qaeda is a threat to us in Iraq? They're kicking our asses over in Afghanistan, but there's not enough oil there for us to really care.

Get with it, Matheson!

Army of Dude

I found a blog called Army of Dude through the Weblog Awards. It looked interesting, so I added it to my RSS feed. This post was probably the first blog that has ever made me cry.

I'm not entirely sure why it made me so sad (as opposed to any of the other stuff I read about the war), or why I feel compelled to share it. But, I do.

The war is real, it's not a made up story in a movie on our t.v., it's real people dying and real people killing and real people living. It's real, people.

Why It Was A Good Idea To Attack Iraq

From the one and only Scott Adams, of Dilbert fame, comes "Why It Was a Good Idea to Attack Iraq". He begins:

Sometimes, just to test my point of view, I like to take the opposite side and defend it. For example, I think attacking Iraq was a huge mistake. So today I will make my best argument for the other side.

I must admit that I think he took most of this from Hillary. But, we'll let him have her argument, just this once.

First, you have to separate the outcome, which is unknown, from the original decision to attack. Hypothetically, it could be a good decision to attack, based on what you knew at the time, but things could go wrong for unforeseen reasons. Likewise, it could have been a bad decision to attack, based on the evidence at the time, and somehow by luck, things might turn out well. So you have to look at the decision and the outcome separately.

He seriously goes on to defend Bush's invasion of Iraq.

The cost of the war in Iraq is immense. But it has several potential benefits:

1. Al-Qaida showed itself to be everyone’s enemy.
2. Iraq has potential to be a U.S. ally, even if true democracy doesn’t take hold.
3. The U.S. sharpened its war-making tools and showed it is willing to use them.
4. Iraqi oil production will eventually increase, even if it takes 20 years.
5. The U.S. has a permanent military base in the Middle East.

He even says:

All things considered, the DECISION to attack Iraq was correct, given the perceived risk of Saddam developing WMD.

Oh, and here's the Republican argument:

When a venture capitalist invests in a particular company, and it goes out of business, he doesn’t conclude that he made a bad decision to invest. He concludes that his strategy is good because he only needs one in ten companies to succeed.

And to finish:

In fact, if we attacked three or four countries looking for WMD, and found none, it still doesn’t invalidate the strategy. You only need to find one country that actually has them, and might use them, to make the entire strategy sensible. At the very least, all that attacking gives some teeth to the U.N. inspectors.

That’s my best argument for why attacking Iraq was both sensible at the time and might work out well in the long run.

I just wish I believed it.

The last line is perfect. Read the whole thing, he says it better than I can copy/paste pieces of it. And if you've ever read Dilbert, you know how great Scott Adams is at trying to make sense of the nonsensical.

The blood of millions of Iraquis is on your Hands"

Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.



Condoleeza Rice has blood on her hands, and it looks like she wants the blood of Desiree Farooz, as well. Now if we could only get this sort of photo with Cheney and Bush...

(h/t Crooks and Liars)

Rep. Stark nails it on the head

Representative Pete Stark just said the following on the House floor, and it's exactly what Republicans who want the war and are against SCHIP make me want to say to them (or, well...yell, really):

First of all, I'm just amazed they can't figure out, the Republicans are worried we can't pay for insuring an additional 10 million children. They sure don't care about finding $200 billion to fight the illegal war in Iraq. Where ya gonna get that money? You going to tell us lies like you're telling us today? Is that how you're going to fund the war? You don't have money to fund the war or children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement. This bill would provide healthcare for 10 million children and unlike the President's own kids, these children can't see a doctor or receive necessary care. [...]

But President Bush's statements about children's health shouldn't be taken any more seriously than his lies about the war in Iraq. The truth is that Bush just likes to blow things up. In Iraq, in the United States and in Congress.

(h/t BarbinMD)

Fools?

Watch the video, click the link and let your representatives know that you don't want to be fooled again.



Tell 'em!

Where in Baghdad did they stay, again?

Where did John McCain and the rest of the "important" government official stay while in Iraq? You know, the ones who came back and said with a straight face that the situation is improved in Iraq.

They stayed here:

I’m sitting on a gilded chair, writing on a gilded table. The floors beneath me are marble, and the chandeliers above are sparkly and crystal. The only reminder that I’m in a war zone is the pair of man-high concrete barriers I can see out my window. “It’s Sunday, man, you’re working too hard,” a national guardsmen just told me. Welcome to Baghdad.

You know, the place where:

Not all that far away, Marine grunts are going weeks without showers or toilets, chomping on rations – and generally maintaining a positive outlook on life. I got my laundry done by a Philippino maid. Yesterday, I listened to a salsa band play in the chow hall, while I supped on alu gobi and navratan vegetable curry.

As Noah Shachtman says in the article:

This isn’t a war. It’s a war convention. Too bad I didn't bring my bathing suit; maybe I would have taken a dip in the big, outdoor pool a few hundred yards away.

Next time one of our officials visits, and wants to come back and tell us how nicely everything is going, I think he or she should try staying in the barracks with the guys who are there for the war, and not the war convention.

Verbal Flogging?

Here's an idea that just might work:

For three hours during a townhall meeting last night, Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) “was verbally flogged by hundreds of his constituents for no longer supporting the quick withdrawal of troops from Iraq.” “There is only one way to end an illegal and immoral war, and that’s to end it,” said Zamme Joi. “You have screwed up, my friend. You have screwed up and you have to change course,” another constituent said. “We don’t care what your convictions are,” said Jan Lustig of Vancouver, “you are here to represent us.”

So, how do we pin Matheson down, and let him know that Utah Democrats want out of Iraq, and a lot of the Republicans do, too. I'd love to participate in giving him a verbal tongue lashing for making the wrong decision on that, and other issues such as Habeas Corpus.

Vietnamese Say Bush Was Wrong

We're all probably aware that Bush rejected the comparison of Iraq to Vietnam, more than once.

We're also probably aware that Bush recently compared Iraq to Vietnam.

"One unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like 'boat people,' 'reeducation camps' and 'killing fields,' " Bush told a receptive audience at the Veterans of Foreign Wars national convention.

Beyond pointing out that "I was against it before I was before it", I was floored when I heard that statement. Just floored.

So, while Bush may no longer reject the comparison of Iraq and Vietnam, Vietnam definitely rejects it.

HANOI, Vietnam - President Bush touched a nerve among Vietnamese when he invoked the Vietnam War in a speech warning that death and chaos will envelop Iraq if U.S. troops leave too quickly.

People in Vietnam, where opposition to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq is strong, said Thursday that Bush drew the wrong conclusions from the long, bloody Southeast Asian conflict.

"Doesn't he realize that if the U.S. had stayed in Vietnam longer, they would have killed more people?" said Vu Huy Trieu of Hanoi, a veteran of the communist forces that fought American troops in Vietnam. "Nobody regrets that the Vietnam War wasn't prolonged except Bush."

'nuff said.

War Protest Next Tuesday

I'm hoping to make it, to this, and providing I don't have another meeting that I have tentatively scheduled, I will be. The protest is called "Stand up for Peace", and is going to be at Liberty Park, instead of downtown like most of them are.

Here is part of what the MoveOn email I got about it said (emphasis mine):

We learned yesterday that the White House and pro-war donors have put together a massive $15 MILLION media fund to keep the war going.1 It's an enormous ad buy—and it's aimed at stopping Republicans from breaking with the president now that it's clear that the surge has failed.

Now is the time to fight back. We don't have super-rich corporate donors to match a $15 million ad campaign—but we do have each other. There are millions of us around the country and we're getting together next Tuesday to tell Congress that the time to stand up to President Bush and redeploy our troops out of this unwinnable civil war in Iraq is NOW.

We're gathering at vigils all over the country to honor those who have given their lives in this war and tell Congress and the media that we can't afford another years worth of casualties. If enough of us show up we can counter the White House spin with real people and real voices.

and

The White House front group, "Freedom Watch" is running ads in more than 20 states and they're targeting mostly Republicans, but some Democrats too. They're trying to convince voters and members of Congress that the "surge" is working and that Congress should give Bush more time.

But the truth is time has run out on the White House policy in Iraq. The "surge" is a total failure. Consider these key facts:

* 2007 is already the bloodiest summer for American troops since the war began.2
* There has been little to no progress on the political benchmarks that the president said the "surge" would help accomplish.3
* 64 percent of conservative foreign policy experts say the escalation is having either a negative impact or no impact at all.4
* 7 out of 10 foreign policy experts support redeployment of US troops out of Iraq.5

This big ad blitz is happening now because this September is going to bring the biggest showdown on Iraq since the war began. The White House will try to convince Congress to let them continue their reckless policy in Iraq and if they succeed we could be in Iraq for another 10 years.6

We have to show up in force on Tuesday, before Congress returns to D.C. for the big September fight, and show them that voters want our troops out of the religious civil war in Iraq now—not in six months, not in a year, now.

Sources:

1. "Democrats Refocus Message on Iraq After Military Gains," Washington Post, August 22, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2905&id=11075-6917764-6W5lge&t=6

2. Iraq Index, Brookings Institution, August 20, 2007
http://www3.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf

3. Ibid

4. The Terrorism Index, Center for American Progress, August 20, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2906&id=11075-6917764-6W5lge&t=7

5. Ibid

6. "Petraeus: Iraq 'Challenges' to Last for Years," Washington Post, June 18, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2888&id=11075-6917764-6W5lge&t=8

Orange Day (Impeach Cheney) July 23 [Updated]

I'll be wearing orange, as well as flying an orange ribbon from my Jeep antenna, on July 23, to show solidarity with those committing acts of civil disobedience across the nation by sitting in their Representative's office reciting either the Constitution or names of soldiers who have given their lives in the Iraq War.

From Democrats.com:

In Washington, Cindy Sheehan, Ray McGovern, Rev. Lennox Yearwood, Ann Wright, Debra Sweet, Dave Lindorff, David Swanson, Jodie Evans, Medea Benjamin, Kevin Zeese, Tina Richards, and others will march from Arlington National Cemetery to the office of Congressman John Conyers. They will sit in Conyers' office reciting the U.S. Constitution until they are either arrested or he agrees to start impeachment. See http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/sit for time and location.

From a Democrats.com email:

The Orange Revolution Begins July 23

On July 23, 2002, the head of British intelligence reported that Bush and Cheney were intent on invading Iraq and planned to "fix the intelligence and facts around the policy". Five years later a million people have died in Iraq as a direct result of these lies with no end in sight. Torture has been institutionalized, habeas corpus eviscerated, and illegal spying made routine. New Orleans lies devastated along with the Constitution and the rule of law. And Bush and Cheney are making a mockery of the Democrats' feeble gestures towards accountability.

Enough is enough, and this July 23rd we will launch a new phase in the movement for peace and justice. We call it the Orange Revolution because starting that day wearing orange will signify that you want Congress to START IMPEACHMENT and STOP THE WAR. The majority of Americans, who want to see Bush and Cheney impeached and want an immediate end to this war, are made effectively invisible by a complicit media. Wearing orange will be our signal to each other, and to the world, about where we stand. Anything orange will do: a t-shirt, a wristband, your shoelaces. Get creative and send us your ideas. Here are a some great items you can wear designed specifically for the Orange Revolution:
http://www.democrats.com/orangerevolution

The Orange Revolution will be launched with acts of civil disobedience in Washington, D.C., and elsewhere to show Congress that we are serious.

[UPDATE]
I just got to the articles for this next part. Yeah, I'm that far behind on my RSS feeds.

WaPo tells us:

Bush administration officials unveiled a bold new assertion of executive authority yesterday in the dispute over the firing of nine U.S. attorneys, saying that the Justice Department will never be allowed to pursue contempt charges initiated by Congress against White House officials once the president has invoked executive privilege.

However:

On a 7-3 ruling, House Democrats moved rapidly Thursday afternoon to rule that the White House had asserted executive privilege in a manner that was 'not legally valid.'

It's going to be one hell of a fight, but the Democrats better damn well get this done. The time has come.

In Terms a Child Could Understand

Maybe if we could get all of the Republicans to watch this cartoon, they'd finally understand what's going on.



(h/t Cliff Lyon over at One Utah)

Pajama Party at the Senate

Crooks and Liars has a whole lot of information about What You Can Do Today To Make Your Voice Heard On The Filibuster, including a timeline of events planned in DC this evening. Rumor has it that Madame Speaker herself will be leading the Candle Lite Call to Action.

MoveOn.org tells me that there are at least 2 counter-filibuster events planned near Salt Lake, including this one:

Tuesday, 17 Jul 2007, 5:00 PM
Senator's office bldg, 125 S. State
125 S. State
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Directions: The local offices of Senators Hatch & Bennett are at 125 S. State, Salt Lake City
Description We need to take letters, petitions, go to, the offices of Senator Hatch & Bennett, asking them not to filibuster the bill to wind down the war.
END THE WAR IN IRAQ!

If my kids were in better moods, I'd bring them down with me to that event, but I don't think they'd be pleasant about it, so I'm going to skip this one. I'll be with everyone else across the nation in my thoughts, though. And maybe I'll even get to catch parts of it on tv.

What a Sad Day in History

Yesterday will always be one of the saddest days in history, in my opinion. George W. Bush commuted the sentence I. "Scooter" Lewis Libby, saying that he thought the sentence was too harsh.

Too harsh? Really, 2 years in prison for (covering up for those) having outed an undercover CIA officer, putting her and her family's lives at risk, and other CIA officers lives at risk, and harming the security of our country was too harsh. Everyone who had a part in this crime is a traitor to the United States. And 2 years is too harsh? Is that perhaps because Bush himself was a party to the crime?

What about the truly excessive sentence that Weldon Angelos recieved? If Bush will display public "compassion" for anyone, why not for the thousands upon thousands of Iraqis who have lost their lives because of the occupation of their country? Or the thousands more who probably will?

How can the people of our country sit by and watch Bush give a "Get out of jail free" card to those in his administration, and ignore the fact that his Vice President seems to have invented a "4th branch of government", which puts him above the law? Why are we not "in the streets banging pots and pans"? Why are we not rioting and taking our country back from George W Bush? I really, truly do not get it.

I feel like the only thing I can personally do right now is support Barack Obama's candidacy for president. I only worry that it will be too late before he or another person takes office. Even if it's not too late in general for the revival of the great country we should be, it will be too late for our fallen soldiers, for the heartbreak of their families, for America to prove that we are a country run by the people, and for yesterday to not be a day that goes down in history as a giant mistake. And we have 18 more months for Bush to continue to try to beat his own records at making mistakes. Perhaps, instead of praying for rain, we should direct our prayers to the future of our country.

I can only hope that our country is turned around enough that, in 20 years, I can tell my children about the mistakes that Bush made, and how they impacted us all. So that when they cast their votes for president, maybe they'll have more foresight than most of the country did in 2004.

Update: BBC News is reporting:

On Tuesday Mr Bush declined to rule out a complete pardon for Libby at a later time.

"As to the future I rule nothing in and nothing out," he told journalists in Washington.