One Senator Blogs State of the Union Response

As the most-popular Web logs gain readership approximating those of bigger, more-established media, it is no surprise that those who have a message to sell are heading directly to their audience - whether that be companies aiming to sell a product, or politicians and advocates aiming to sell a point of view.

Following today's presidential state of the union address, Democratic Illinois senator Dick Durbin, the majority whip for the Senate, headed not to the TV cameras and radio waves to make his case, but instead to Daily Kos, where he took questions and offered answers to the site's visitors.

Though it's not the first time a politician has recognized the immense traffic and power that Daily Kos holds for the progressive movement in the Democratic Party, it's exactly this type of behavior that gets me excited about the potential of blogs. Through this medium, visitors around the world were able to post questions and have a dialog with an elected politician immediately after a news event, something unprecedented only 10 or so years ago. And I respect Senator Durbin's willingness to take a risk, entering unknown territory without a script to offer frank insight on everything from increasing troop levels in Iraq, how to best offer solutions for health care and spiraling higher education costs, and on how he feels the current administration has responded to suffering still being felt by citizens of New Orleans.

This is the real deal. I give Senator Durbin a lot more credit for this than some of the more polished politicians who think slapping a quasi-commercial on YouTube is the new way to be hip to a younger, more connected generation.

Don't Blame Me, I'm Rooting for Hillary

Yesterday's announcement that Hillary Clinton is "In it to win", throwing her hat into the 2008 presidential race, wasn't much of a surprise. Hillary has been visibly preparing herself for such a challenge even before her husband Bill left office in January 2001. And while she may not end up being the woman I cast my vote for by the time we get the opportunity, we are happy she's stepped up, and hope she gives it her all.

After six years of George W. Bush and company delivering plenty of shock and none of the awe to Americans everywhere, the country voted emphatically for change in the 2006 mid-term elections, pushing Democrats into congressional power. With Iraq spiraling further into chaos, and the Republican minority scuttling away in scandal and illegalities, that push for  change will hopefully continue. And for once, the Democrats are flush with good candidates with serious name recognition, from John Edwards and Barack Obama to, now, Hillary Clinton. If all those running can remember that their real foe is already sitting in the White House, and not one of the other candidates, the party will have the best chance at success, no matter who emerges the victor.

As mentioned previously here, the more I learn about Hillary's background, the more impressed I am. While she may be the most reviled individual in the history of the conservative right, she has stood her ground and been unafraid to take controversial stances for the good of the country. The prospect of having both her and her husband back in the White House, surrounded by intelligence actors for change, is thrilling - especially when contrasted with what we've sickeningly grown accustomed to.

I'm also pleased that the issue of Hillary being a female candidate might not be the headline issue of a campaign. Hillary's announcement is more than a token to the feminist movement, but one that stands on its own merits. With Obama setting a similar mark on race, rather than gender, both should be interesting proof points to see if America can move beyond its white male Protestant dominated world - one that recently said Republican candidate Mitt Romney was doomed for being Mormon, as approximately half said that alone disqualified his candidacy. It's time for the voters to focus on issues and vote for those they think can move the country forward and out of the pit we've been dug into for six very long years.

Good luck Hillary. We will be eagerly watching and waiting to see if you can convince us that you are the right choice. (More: Daily Kos, The Atlantic)

Al Gore Again Denies 2008 Presidential Bid

It is mind-boggling to think how different this nation and world would be had a few hundred votes for Pat Buchanan or Ralph Nader down in Florida have gone Al Gore's way in 2000. While it's a little like crying over spilled milk, his political star continues to rise, even as Bush and his administration are finding new ways to embarrass the United States and the Republican Party. Now, following the Democrats' pummeling of the GOP in the mid-term elections last November, all eyes have moved forward to the next big election, for president, and candidates are already lining up on both sides.

Unfortunately, it looks as if Al Gore really, truly, won't put his hat in the ring again. Content to fight his own campaign against global warming on a worldwide basis, he told reporters again today that he is out, officially. This leaves the already crowded Democrat party field with one less star, and potentially, a little less infighting before the general election.

Given how the last 6-plus years have lowered our expectations for what the US presidency represents, every candidate seems better than what we have now. While I think Barack Obama lacks experience, this may be to his benefit, as he's not beholden to a raft of questionable past votes. John Edwards and Hillary Clinton are very interesting candidates with strong principles and momentum. But this race could have been Al Gore's to take. While they fight it out in the snows of Iowa and New Hampshire, he will remain above the fray. (More: Daily Kos)

Listening to ''a lie for breakfast'', by Ulrich Schnauss (Play Count: 2)

At Midnight, It Appears The Democrats Have the Senate

Cognizant of the early calls of Florida for Gore in 2000, the news networks have learned not to prematurely call states and elections without 100% of the data - and litigation is now the norm, rather than the exception. Given this environment, no major news medium is calling what is now clear will happen - the Democratic party has taken both the House of Representatives and the Senate majority tonight, as well as a significant majority of governorships.

Though late into the night, two outstanding races - in Virginia, and in Montana, have yet to be called, and the Democrats need both states to declare victory, the margin of victory is expanding to the point that a Republican victory in either race would be increasingly miniscule. When the votes are all counted, whether that be by tomorrow morning, or following legislated recounts in a month, the Democratic party will have won a slim majority in both houses, taking back the Legislative branch of the US government, held hostage by the Republicans for more than a decade.

With every victory and seat party change, the Democrats said it was a call for change, a call for a new direction, new ideas, and a 180 from the bullheadedness we've seen this entire administration. While those words are strong, every single party that is not in power says the same thing - we're here to change. Now, despite not owning the Executive branch and Judicial branch of government, the Democrats have a fighting chance to slow down the deterioration of our economy - to stop our foreign policy which has run amok, and to institute the recommendations of educated experts.

While not all the numbers are in, and while some are holding off on making the final tallies official, the Democrats did what some only dared to dream - taking what looks to be 30+ seats in the House and the necessary 6 seats in the Senate. Down by three with three to go, the Democrats went deep and sunk a three pointer... and the crowd cheered. Victory.

Thank You Very Much, Green Party

A good friend of mine since high school told me yesterday that he's moved his allegiance to the Green Party instead of the Democrats, in the hope that the party would theoretically move left, and address some of the few issues that separate Green loyalists from mainstream Democrats. I said that his view concerned me, as instead of getting a Green candidate elected, his vote and others like it would only make it more easy for Republicans to gain the advantage - as we so memorably saw when Ralph Nader siphoned away Al Gore's margin in Florida, teeing up the mess we have now. I was told instead that his one vote didn't matter - especially in California.

Tonight, as the Senate majority hangs in the balance, a small handful of seats are still up for grabs. Most notably, with 97% of votes counted in Virginia, the Republican candidate, George Allen, has a 3,000+ vote advantage over his Democratic opponent, and he just might win (although CNN is saying Webb has eked ahead with 99% in). The major issue here? A candidate, G G Parker, of the Green Party, has nearly 25,000 votes. One could safely say that Green voters would be happier casting their votes for Democrats than Republicans, and yet, here they are handing the race away.

Real-time Virginia Precinct Results: http://sbe.vipnet.org/

It's mind boggling. Want to throw your vote away? Do it in a race that doesn't matter.  Want to completely nullify your vote and accomplish the opposite of your goals? Then go ahead and vote for a third party in a close race. You might as well not vote at all.

Election Night 2006: Christmas Comes Early

At the age of 11, I hid behind the couch as my parents watched the late night news, taking in the 1988 Super Tuesday results, and marking down the winners, state by state. I had the political bug, and have always craved the results flowing in on Election Night, be it the presidential elections every four years, or the biannual tussle over House and Senate seats. With the Web's emergence in the political sphere, I'm now glued, not only to the set, watching CNN's flim-flammery, but reloading each of the various political sites to see who's going to break the next news on individual seats, which when added up, could present a vastly different state of government come morning.

My biases are clear. I've been pulling for the Democrats to take a majority role in Congress, and hopefully, they can somehow find a way back into the White House in a couple years - should everyone come to terms with a single candidate. Tonight, the projections have seen the Democrats riding the groundswell of frustration against President Bush and a rubber stamp Congress, and are seen as taking the House of Representatives. But it looks less likely they'll gain the lead in the Senate - with a 50-50 tie being very possible.

Some of the sites we're following in this fun evening?

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/called/
Daily Kos: http://www.dailykos.com/
Drudge: http://www.drudgereport.com/
Eschaton: http://atrios.blogspot.com/
MyDD: http://www.mydd.com/
Talking Points Memo: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

PS - Yes, of course I voted this morning.

Nov. 7th Election Projections Show Democrats Pulling Away

It's hard to be overly optimistic about this year's midterm elections, given how poorly the 2000 and 2004 general elections went for the Democratic Party. Further, given so many different stories about the insecurity of "black box" electronic voting machines, there's always a concern in the back of my mind that not every vote is being counted, that there just might be some uneven tallying aimed to keep the GOP in power. But aside from those feelings, just about every news service under the sun is saying that come Tuesday, the Democrats will take over the House of Representatives, and some are saying it is increasingly likely that the Senate will fall their way as well.

First, you have Stuart Rothenberg, a top non-partisan, claiming on CNN that the Democrats will take both the House and the Senate, picking up 34-40 seats in the House, and 5-7 seats in the Senate.

Chris Bowers of MyDD, in his forecast, conservatively estimates the Democrats will gain 26 seats in the House of Representatives, adding detail in every race to back up his claims.

Electoral-Vote.com shows the Democrats ahead in key Senate races, but says some of the races are within the margin of error of 1-3 percent. As of today, he says it's a 49-49 tie, with 2 races too close to call. This number has varied anywhere from 48 to 50 Democratic seats over the last few months.

News wire services also see Democrats picking up governorships, leaving the only place where they haven't made a dent to be the White House. It looks like we'll still have to wait at least two years for that.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are going out of their way to implode in a race to the bottom. It turns out our "oh so intelligent" administration posted instructions on how to make an atomic bomb on their Web site, with detailed documents, now pulled down, but not before pundits said they would be very helpful to aggressive countries, including Iran. This, compounded with news that a key evangelical leader likes to gain pleasure through trysts with a gay hooker, just makes you wonder if the Democrats could win it all just by watching the entire Republican leadership team fall in a series of resignations and indictments.

As Daily Kos often writes, we're just "four days until daylight". 

Olbermann Takes On Bush's Assault to Habeus Corpus

Keith Olbermann first came to popular culture acting as the tag team partner to Dan Patrick on ESPN's SportsCenter. Now covering "real news", he's made quite a name for himself on MSNBC. As you can see from the below clip on YouTube, he's furious about some of the moves most recently made by this administration. He's sure that we've lost the long-term battle for some short-term feelings that we're "safer today". Regardless of your political leanings, make sure to watch it.

Political Activism + Google = New Rules

The 2004 elections saw the first time blogs were heavily utilized to promote campaigns, to recruit efforts and dollars. While some used the Web platform to communicate ideas, others hoped the sites would become virtual ATMs, keeping running tickers of the amount raised. Now, as the 2006 mid-term elections approach every candidate, national to local, has a Web site, and most have blogs or e-mail lists. So how can you mobilize beyond the fray?

Left-leaning site and political Web pioneer MyDD is calling for a new volunteer-led campaign to utilize Google's popular AdWords program, "to drive as many voters as possible toward the most damning, non-partisan article written on the Republican candidate in seventy key US Senate and House races." Now, when Google users would search on candidates' names to learn more, they might see ads that show them in an unpopular light.

Given reports that the Republican National Committee is funneling millions to back negative advertising against Democrats in hard-fought contests, this turnabout may seem like fair play, but it's yet another way that political partisans are taking the power of democracy directly to the people, and away from special interests and corporate lobbyists.

Other Political Notes of Interest:

Bush faces political nightmare if Democrats win
Democrat/Republican Ads Spoof Mac/PC Commercials

Listening to '''Pure' Frictions Groove'', by Sasha & John Digweed (Play Count: 4)

Less Than One Month Left for GOP Oligarchy

Despite the White House's rosy outlook and continued denial over the country's strong opposition to their policies, voters across the United States are tired of the lies and corruption and scandal promoted by the Republican party and its leaders, and are ready to make a change. Early this November, for the first time in way too long, we are going to see a massive shift in Congressional party affiliations - one that threatens to sweep the Republicans out of the majority in both the House and the Senate.

Earlier this summer, the question was focused on whether the Democrats stood for anything, and if they could gain the necessary momentum to put a dent into the GOP's lead. Now, the question isn't if they will put a dent in it, but how big. Some are saying the margin of turnover from Republican to Democratic-held seats ranges anywhere from 20 to 50 seats in the House, and every poll I've seen has the Democrats eking out a slight majority in the Senate as well.

Aside from the omnipresent War On Iraq, now into its 4th year, Republicans have been fighting against self-made scandals involving Mark Foley and Jack Abramoff, and continued strife abroad, in Iran, in North Korea, and in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, the Democrats, powered by Web-initiated campaigning and fundraising, have promoted candidates in nearly every race, and are set to do battle to make a change.

Yet, just like every other important topic under the Bush presidency, the GOP is completely out to lunch. Earlier this week, the Washington Post noted that the White House was "Upbeat About GOP Prospects", despite the fact that other papers, including the New York Times, noted the Republicans had abandoned some once-close races in favor of others, focusing on the "Best Bets" to try and maintain a majority, at any cost.

Change is in the wind, and after seeing the Bush presidency, hand in hand with a stubborn, pigheaded Republican-led Congress, turn back nearly all the gains of the Clinton years, we are weeks away from some first steps to regain the country's glory. All we have to do is vote.

Listening to ''High on Life'', by DJ Encore (Play Count: 9)

Arnold's Army Playing Dirty Early

It seems we can't watch a single show on cable these days without seeing "Governor" Arnold Schwarzenegger's ads to Join Arnold through defeating Phil Angelides in California's gubernatorial election. Now, the GOP faithful have branched out in their negative ad campaign that hasn't yet said one good reason why Arnold should be re-elected.

This evening, our home answering machine was blinking. Could be an important message, for all I thought. Something from the vet? Family? Reminders about upcoming doctor or dentist appointments? All wrong.

Instead, a gruff man with a gravely voice left a message. "Attention all November 2006 election voters, please stay tuned for an important announcement!" Then a pause, as if they were going to update you on where  your precinct would be... followed by "Phil Angiledes supports abortion on demand for minors. You must vote..." blah blah blah.

Great. Way to play on the fears of parents who are afraid that by electing a Democrat to California's highest seat, that their daughters are going to go out and have sex, get pregnant, and then need an abortion, which they can get without parental consent. Or at least, that's the idea. That's not "an important announcement," that's fear-mongering junk emblematic of what we can expect from a party who has lost its way and can't rally behind their own accomplishments.

Listening to ''Bruce Lee - Dobropet'', by Underworld (Play Count: 15)

Political Rhetoric Heating Up in Time for Fall 2006

The political landscape in the United States has been completely incapable of consensus and compromise for the greater part of the last decade, seen dramatically with the impeachment of President Clinton, and the two highly questioned, litigious, divisive, general elections which resulted in George W. Bush taking the helm. Bush's policies have widened the controversy, as despite record low opinion polls, he and his cronies have pushed forward on an aggressive, radical agenda with mediocre results which may actually have made the economy weaker and the world less safe - and certainly has sullied the American reputation abroad.

As Electoral-Vote.com is showing, this fall's senate and House elections could put Democrats in the majority, if races go the way they are expected. There is a significant anti-incumbent, anti right-wing backlash that has catapulted previous unknowns into powerful swing positions for the party.

But while we see these challenges at the local  level, there continues to be white hot discussion around whether you can even trust the results of any election - as allegations of fraud and simple ineptitude are rampant. Unlikely source Rolling Stone magazine has delivered one of the most in-depth investigative news pieces into the discrepancies of the 2004 general election I've seen. Their conclusion? Widespread fraud and manipulation gave Bush the election over Kerry - especially in critical swing states like Ohio. Meanwhile, others, including The Washington Post, are saying that major problems at the fall polls are expected, as mandates to eliminate "hanging chads" are resulting in even less-trustworthy electronic voting machines, which have been proven extremely hack-worthy.

With all that said, the anger and frustration over the current administration has delivered an almost-nostalgic fondness for the Clinton/Gore years, when the economy was roaring, when our budgets  were balanced, and war was not on everyone's minds. While Bill Clinton can't run again, and Al Gore has repeatedly said he doesn't see it happening, they remain a huge political presence. With the success of "An Inconvenient Truth" and an upcoming book, planned for release in May called "The Assault on Reason", Gore has gained significant chutzpah, unseen in his uninspiring 2000 bid. Meanwhile, the UK's The Observer says that Clinton will become even more active in protecting his legacy from those who love to trash it, to rebuild his role as global statesman, and set up the opportunity to be the first "First Husband" in the White House, should Hillary go all the way.

Unfortunately, we can't go back to the Clinton/Gore years, and Bush's impact on the globe is both far-reaching and long-lasting. But we can at least hope that we have the opportunity to regain the simple trust that our democratic process is working and that our votes are counted - something we took for granted growing up and cannot even fathom now that things have slipped so far.

Listening to ''Ecstasy (Clubb Mix)'', by ATB (Play Count: 7)

9/11 Conspiracy Theory Embarrassing

It's one thing to allege that the administration has done a poor job helping US citizens prepare for a second potential  terror attack, or to say that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been trumped-up exercises that have seen thousands die unnecessarily and have benefited the most elite of corporations. It's quite another thing to say that the entire 9/11 episode was manufactured by the government, and that, with the help of some edge right-wing groups, the government conspired to bring down the World Trade Center, all in the name of promoting war in the middle east. Yet, somehow, that's the theory reached by a group for academics, who say that all the horror of that day was generated by an "inside job".

As someone who enjoys a good conspiracy theory now and then, and has seen the administration, in concert with right-wing splinter groups, accomplish a great deal of harm in the country, not even I can wrap my head around this one. The fear and fumbling of the administration on the day and days following the attacks was very real, something they aren't capable of manufacturing in an historic coverup.

As the UK's Daily Mail reports:

They believe a group of US neo-conservatives called the Project for a New American Century, set on US world dominance, orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to hit Iraq, Afghanistan and later Iran. The group says scientific evidence over the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon is conclusive proof. Professor Jones said it was impossible for the twin towers to have collapsed in the way they did from the collision of two aeroplanes.
He maintains jet fuel does not burn at temperatures high enough to melt steel beams and claims horizontal puffs of smoke seen during the collapse of the towers are indicative of controlled explosions used to bring down the towers.

The 9/11 commission's report, following detailed investigation, ruled out any of the mega-conspiracy theories, yet that doesn't mean they will simply fade away. Just like Elvis, they're still out there. The National Ledger follows on to this line of thinking with a survey that shows a small segment of the country believes 9/11 was a conspiracy "orchestrated by government officials".

More than a third of the respondents stated their belief that it was either very likely or somewhat likely that “people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.”

There is no doubt that some who see these results will jump to the immediate conclusion that these are leftist anti-Bush liberals who believe in such dreck, which instantly devalues any legitimate concerns we actually do have, and have made clear over the 6 years these guys have been running things. But it's not true. As a group, we are all furious over the administration's response to the attacks, the misguided march to war, and the ineptitude around every facet of our maintaining safety. But we don't believe they had the planning capabilities and tenacity to pull this off. A few dozen extremists "living in a cave" had more foresight.

Charles Barkley: Role Model

"I was a Republican until they lost their minds."

Listening to ''Pizza For Eggs'', by Underworld (Play Count: 5)

Utilizing Presidential Powers - Or Not

It seems that commentary on the current administration will nearly write itself - for the truth is even more bizarre than fiction. Even the most new presidential observers recall how President Clinton was charged with mirroring "Wag the Dog" when he ordered airstrikes in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Suggestions were made that as in the movie, a war was manufactured to boost ratings - effectively implementing a Hollywood presidency, and not a DC presidency.

Turning the page forward a few years, we've seen much worse, more tragic, realities. A state of constant war, and wave after wave of misinformation and redirection. Scandals much darker than anything that ever engulfed Clinton have come and gone with regularity - as our civil liberties are increasingly being threatened, and nothing seems outside the grasp of the political elite. But while Bush and Cheney have demanded ever-greater powers for the executive branch, and unprecedented secrecy, George has neglected those things that traditionally define the presidency, choosing to spend months out of each year on vacation in Crawford rather than in Washington, and never even once exercising the power to veto bills from Congress. Representing what historically had been recognized as the fiscally conservative party, George has never even once vetoed any portion of any spending bills - as the country as been racking up hundreds of billions in dollars of deficits, just one administration after the surpluses of Clinton/Gore, which had turned back the clock on decades of deficits from Reagan and Bush Sr.

But now it looks like at least one of those things will change - as Bush is poised to issue his first veto after more than five and a half years in office - not to pronounce any dramatic point of order in business or domestic policy, but instead, to block science, stopping the research into stem cells that could lead to dramatic findings in the research community for decades to come. Instead of really trying to find Osama Bin Laden, or really trying to restore order in Iraq through establishing a stable government and police force, or even offering armor to our troops so that they are protected, Bush is instead once again stopping science - just as the administration continues to deny the reality of issues like global warming and evolution. One has to wonder what their elementary school teachers did that was so horrible to turn them away from the subject forever...

As Americans, we have to recognize that this isn't just an average presidency going through a mediocre spell. This is record-breakingly bad. George W. Bush, who ascended to the presidential throne through trickery and legalese, including a 5-4 majority Supreme Court appointment, is etching his name in stone as the very worst presidency this once-proud country has ever had. It's just head-shakingly ugly.

Listening to ''Prosac'', by DJ Tomcraft (Play Count: 8)

Nothing Surprises Us Any More

I almost didn't post this after learning the news this weekend that the Bush squad opted to start surveying our domestic phone calls BEFORE September 11th, which of course has been the cause of and solution to all of life's problems, if this administration is to be believed (which they clearly can't be).

Just think of how these stories have evolved. Wars were built out of complete lies and manipulated as each story got picked and pecked away, as people learned more and more.

Now, the right-wing is furious that we are beginning to know the truth, as they have engaged in wholesale campaigns to smear the media who has been doing their jobs and reporting news dear to all of us affected. The New York Times is being made the scapegoat for their frustrations, just like it was when Bob Dole smeared the paper in 1996, and just like it will continue to be in the future, as long as Fox News and others still have a voice.

What kind of administration would so eagerly go after the private bank records, phone records, library records and who knows what else of its own citizens, and how does this not violate the Constitutional rights to search and seizure? That's right - it's completely illegal. That's why the right wing is so hopping mad that they got caught - again.

As a friend wrote me this morning, "I find that most people with a brain aren't thrilled with the current direction of our country, or of our election system." So why do all of these who lack brains continue to have the option to vote? Surely we can change the Constitution to demand a simple aptitude test? Now, wouldn't that be something...

Listening to ''Aura'', by Serenade (Play Count: 4)

Primary Politics 2006

June voting isn't nearly as cool as November voting when national elections aren't up for bid. While in 2004, we had the option of selecting Kerry or Edwards, or pretending that Howard Dean still had a shot by the time we non-influential Californian voters were at the polls, in 2006, we have nothing really, except a battle between two gubernatorial candidates who have struggled to distinguish themselves. Remarkably, I changed allegiance once or twice, and could have been considered undecided as recently as last night, before Joe Trippi's note alerted me to how foolish his candidate looked on camera, via YouTube. I tend to make up my mind fairly early in the campaign cycle and push for my favored candidate, but June of 2006 hasn't done that at all.

I did make sure to vote however. Despite a rigorous last few days at the office, I made it to our polling place after work and punched my card, selecting Phil Angiledes for governor, making sure Feinstein isn't challenged, and voting yes on every proposition. Your tax dollars at work, ladies and gentlemen. But what I was really looking forward to was throwing some foolish, self-centered, probably corrupt, Republicans out of office on their tush. It looks like we'll have to wait for that until November, and can only live vicariously through Daily Kos and other sites to see how states around the country are faring.

Links of Interest:
Mercury News: Election Results
Santa Clara County Results

Go Dems, Go!

Listening to ''Lower Your Eyelids to Die With the Sun'', by M83 (Play Count: 7)

Big Brother Expanding His Reach

At this point, nothing really, truly, surprises me anymore about Bush and his cronies. But I don't think any of us could have foreseen the rampant overturning of civil liberties made possible through the Patriot Act, and the unsanctioned and probably unconstitutional NSA wiretaps, first for foreign calls and now domestically.

Today we learn that the FBI, teamed up with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would like to demand ISPs keep two years of Internet data online, at the very least. Their reasoning? The same as always. It could "aid investigations into terrorism" and pornography to boot - not that pornography itself is illegal, but it can be if you're twisted enough about it.

As with all of Bush's other mandates, no outline is given as to how this will be paid for. I don't expect that Congress is going to "gift" the technology providers with the required software and hardware, and massive amounts of storage necessary to store everything for two years, beyond that they already archive today. They're just supposed to get it done - in the same way businesses have had to react to Sarbanes-Oxley to avoid running against new federal regulations that demand data be archived.

The question is - where does it end? We thought it ended with the government looking into what books you got at the library. Then we thought it ended with them looking into calls to suspicious countries. Now we learn that the US may be one of those countries, as domestic calls are monitored. Now, our Web history and postings are to be stored. Are we going to go completely "1984", and talk to our leaders through the television set and be forced to think happy thoughts? That doesn't sound like the "land of the free and the home of the brave" to me.

Listening to ''Metronomic Underground'', by Stereolab (Play Count: 3)

Looking to 2008... Already

Growing up, I was enamored by primary politics. I can remember at the age of 11 hiding behind the couch so I could see the NBC Nightly News reports on the "Super Tuesday" results, scribbling down who had won, state by state. I was hiding behind the couch as my parents had of course told me to go to bed. It was a school night after all. But to me, finding out if Al Gore had successfully pulled off his southern strategy and taken a lead against Michael Dukakis and Jesse Jackson was more important than catching a few more hours of sleep.

Flash forward 18 years later, and Al Gore continues to come up as a potential ascendant to the presidential throne - if it can still be called that after the last six years of nonsense from the current administration. Given how Bush's popularity is in the toilet, down at the 30% approval range, pundits and voters alike are eager for a change - anything. Polls are already being taken on who should be the candidate on the Democratic side, and whether they would fare well against a similar guessing game of Republican names. And Gore keeps coming up, even if he says he's not interested.

According to a multitude of recent polls, Hillary Clinton continues to poll the highest among registered Democrats, with John Kerry, Al Gore, John Edwards and a host of also-rans falling behind in line. And don't think it's too early to pick a winner. The New York Times ran a front-page piece on George W. Bush's candidacy for the Republican nomination before a single ballot had been cast in Iowa or New Hampshire in 2000. On the Republican side, it's widely expected that John McCain will make a successful run, with former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani also being named.

What's different this time around, according to just about everybody, is the ascendency of Internet-based politicking, whether the focus is on issues or fund-raising. It's believed that waiting around for huge donations of soft money from large donors isn't the answer any longer, and he or she who operates the most well-honed Web strategy is going to take the prize. This is well chronicled in "Crashing the Gate", and this week, Jonathan Alter of Newsweek comes to the same conclusions in a piece titled, "A New Open-Source Politics". I believe its one thing to harness the energy of the Internet, and quite another to expect that the Netroots are going to act as efficient replacements for the ATM. If one candidate asks for supporters to pony up the dough too many times, whatever advantage they once had will be gone - as they change from presidential candidate to spam candidate - to be filtered as junk.

For me, the biggest disappointment about 2008 projections is a name that is missing. Howard Dean seems to be the strongest on the issues, and aligns with my preferences in a very clear way. While he is doing outstanding work as the chairman for the Democratic National Committee (DNC), I had wished he would give it another run at the chief executive position. In 2004, he had already withdrawn his name as a candidate by the time we in California had the opportunity to vote, and in the back of my head, I wish we had another shot at it. We don't need another repeat of John Kerry, and Hillary, although formidable, simply can't expect to overcome the hatred of the shallow South. It should be an interesting few years.

Listening to ''Inner Depth'', by Jerry Bonham (Play Count: 3)

Crashing The Gate

At times, it's hard to remember that politics is a lot more than rooting for your favorite party, in the way we cheer on our favorite sports teams - hoping that good will triumph over evil. Unlike professional sports, a major tenet of our government is the idea of democracy, that people can both vote and govern, and provide influence to see their policies and leaders enacted. And for me personally, while I've suffered through the last several election cycles, watching the Republican-dominated majority embarrass themselves and our country, I've done little but rant, complain and vote when asked.

But there remain key issues that are plaguing the Democratic Party that are exposed and analyzed in Crashing the Gate - an insightful piece penned by Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos and Jerome Armstrong of MyDD. The two bloggers change the medium, but not the message, as they pick apart how the Democratic Party, once united, has devolved into isolated factions of splinter groups, who favor their own single issue platforms, even when it may mean the downfall of party candidates.

While the Republicans have certainly made a mess of things, we can't expect for them to fall on their swords, and for the Democrats to swoop in on the carcass to wrest away victory. That simply won't happen - not with the Republican donors continuing to come out in full force, rallied by morality-based issues that extend well beyond traditional politics. Instead, we as a party need to cohesively determine a platform that isn't an amalgam of edge issues - one that can be defended beyond the party base, even when you may see one or two items that don't meet with your ideal agenda. Instead, we must take a long-term view, as the Republicans have, and recognize those who embrace the party's core values and despise the cronyism and hatred espoused by the Republican party. We must do all we can to support party candidates and issues, locally, regionally and nationally, so that we don't endure four more years with characters like Schwarzenneger, Bush, Cheney, DeLay, and Frist.

One of the first steps is to make sure you've read Crashing the Gate. It's been on my to-do list for a long time, and I've finally managed to break into it (from San Jose to Chicago). You won't be sorry you did, and neither will the party.

Listening to ''Zeta Reticula - EP2'', by Dave Clarke (Play Count: 5)

CDC Issues Virus Warning

The Center for Disease Control has issued a warning about a new virulent strain of Sexually Transmitted Disease. The disease is contracted through dangerous and high-risk behavior.

The disease is called Gonorrhea Lectim and pronounced "gonna re-elect him." Many victims contracted it in 2004, after having been screwed for the past four years.

Cognitive characteristics of individuals infected include: anti-social personality disorders, delusions of grandeur with messianic overtones, extreme cognitive dissonance, inability to incorporate new information, pronounced xenophobia and paranoia, inability to accept responsibility for own actions, cowardice masked by misplaced bravado, uncontrolled facial smirking, ignorance of geography and history, tendencies towards evangelical theocracy, categorical all-or-nothing behavior.

Naturalists and epidemiologists are amazed at how this destructive disease originated only a few years ago from a bush found in Texas.

Listening to ''Black Day'', by Depeche Mode (Play Count: 6)

Bush's Trip Impact: Prisoners At the Office

As mentioned on Wednesday, Bush and his team flew into Silicon Valley today to meet at Cisco Systems, ostensibly for a panel on technology and education. Unfortunately, for those who work near the area, traffic on the streets nearby the shindig was dramatically effected. Before noon today, we were told that "in and out" access to the streets bordering our corporate headquarters were completely closed down. That meant no customers or partners could visit, and if they were already there, they couldn't leave, and through at least 4 p.m. this afternoon, nobody can come or go.

Every corner has security and every street intersection is lined with bright orange cones, and those working away at the office are literally prisoners in their own country - something we've gotten used to the last six years, but certainly brought home today.

Welcome to California, Mr. President.

Listening to ''Animal'', by Lost It.Com (Play Count: 4)

Nation and Media Turning Against Bush

I've chronicled my strong dislike for Bush and his administration's policies frequently here, and it's no secret I'd be eager to see him replaced well before the proposed departure date of January 20th, 2009. It seems that with every day he and his team remain in office, America dies a little. And it's not just figurative speech. Our troops are dying in an ill-defined, ill-led multi-faceted conflict designed on falsified issues, while assaults on our environment, education, and The Constitution lower the quality of life for those who remain here.

Yet today, I was annoyed to hear the loud thumping of multiple helicopters landing near the office as President Bush's cronies prepared for a speech at nearby Cisco Systems. With two white helicopters bearing the US flag, and two military helicopters patrolling the air search for who knows what, it was clear our tax dollars were being spent to have the liar in chief drum up more support (and by support, he means money) in the Silicon Valley - one that has frowned upon the administration's policies on outsourcing and immigration, to the War on Iraq.

But my disdain was not alone. According to a recent Survey USA poll, Bush has strong unfavorable ratings from states that used to be solid "Red" Republican states. The poll shows that with continued blunders, Bush has lost the support of Montana, South Dakota, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada, to name a few, while those who always opposed him do so with more strength than ever. Aside from the backward South, only Utah, Wyoming and Idaho offer their support, and those states haven't overwhelmed us with any stream of intellectuality.

Meanwhile, famed reporter Carl Bernstein writes in Vanity Fair that the Senate should hold hearings into the Bush Administration's deceit immediately. Additionally, Rolling Stone asks in a cover story, is Bush "The Worst President In History"? It's certainly looking that way. Good luck to us all.

Listening to ''Closer Now'', by Filo & Perl featuring Fischer (Play Count: 5)

Bush Considering Nuclear Attack on Iran

It seems unthinkable, but in highly classified discussions about how to approach Iran's continued development of nuclear plants, presumably for weaponry rather than their said need for power, the White House administration is strongly considering preemptive attacks against production plants in Iran - and not just with conventional weapons, but nuclear weapons. This has come to light from a piece in The New Yorker, by Seymour Hersh, the same investigative reporter who uncovered My Lai in the Vietnam War, and first disclosed the treatment of detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

We've already seen widespread acceptance for the concept of preemptive war - Iraq being the best example, but Hersh reports that the Bush administration's focus all along was on Iran, and that Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is seen as a potential Adolph Hitler, having already stated his belief that the Holocaust was a fable, and that Israel should be "wiped off the map". But I am surprised that the United States would discuss the usage of nuclear arms as part of a campaign to thwart a hostile country's acquisition of nuclear weapons themselves.

Given Hersh's background and reputation for accuracy, combined with the administration's history for aggressiveness in the Middle East, this is an eye opening development.

The New Yorker: The Iran Plans
CNN: Report: US Steps Up Iran Options
Google News: "Seymour Hersh & nuclear"

Listening to ''Adrenalin'', by Purple Haze (Play Count: 1)

Kerry to Bush: Stop Lying, Save Lives

It seems that the Democrats are mad as hell and aren't going to take it any more - finally. After years of being pushed around by the Republican agenda, voices are rising up against the administration and its lacking ethics, the ongoing war in Iraq that seems to not have an end - or progress for that matter. From Russ Feingold's call for censure to Madeline Albright's words of fury in the LA Times, you can see the fury develop. Today, former presidential candidate and current senator John Kerry sounded off with some of his strongest words yet - saying the president needs to tell the truth, fire the incompetents and find Osama Bin Laden (long time since we heard of him, no?)

His best line? "The Bush administration is wondering when Iraq will have a functioning government. I want to know when we're going to have a functioning government."
Kerry didn't sound so strong in his failed presidential bid in 2004 - known as the candidate who couldn't keep a firm position, best evidenced by his "I voted for it before I voted against it," line. Now, he's struggling to stay relevant at a time when Howard Dean is running the Democratic National Committee and Kerry is seen more as someone with a political past than a political future. In fact, the Republican spokespeople have focused on Kerry in their response rather than the issues, of course, saying he "deserves credit for continuing to take himself so seriously, despite the fact that no one else does." Ouch! Of course, they couldn't have stood behind the president's record on Katrina, Iraq, wiretapping, leaking classified information, shooting friends on hunting trips, or any other of the litany of foolish things the administration has done to damage our reputation at home and abroad.

While Kerry may not be the ideal spokesperson for the Democratic Party, it is time for him and others to continue fighting for what they know to be right. As Kerry said, more than half of the American deaths in Vietnam occurred after Washington politicos had determined we were not going to win the conflict. He doesn't want to see a similar wall for this war - or combination of wars to wherever Bush has plans to send us next.

Related Links: New York Times | Daily Kos

Listening to ''Made Of Sun (KvA Hard Dub - AvB Edit)'', by Kyau Vs Albert (Play Count: 4)

Tom Delay Retires - Crime Doesn't Pay

At times during the Bush administration, it has seemed that cronies in the Republican party would have to commit murder in order to see any negative ramifications to their actions. Heck, even the vice president shot his friend in the face on a hunting trip - only to be apologized to later by his victim! Now, tonight, with the nation's eyes turned toward NCAA hoops and baseball's opening night (Damn Yankees are crushing the A's 13-1 right now), Tom Delay has officially announced his retirement from the political limelight, bringing an end to one of the most notorious blights on the political landscape.

Of course, it's not as if he's actually going to jail for his crimes of embezzlement and deceit, but instead, it looked as if he retired because he realized he was in serious danger of losing the election. So, while we have his smiling mug shot around to remind us the man should be in jail, we can at least rest comfortably knowing one fewer crook is running the asylum. How many more of these jokers will go down in flames on their own without giving the electorate the opportunity to throw them out on their ears?

Listening to ''Les Yper-Sound'', by Stereolab (Play Count: 9)

Survey USA Poll Shows Bush Unliked Nationwide

From Survey USA:



So, as long as you stay out of Utah, Alabama and Wyoming, you could go coast to coast in the US and not run into a state where Bush's popularity rating is above fifty percent. It's not about red state vs. blue state any more. The whole country is blue - we're practically suffocating.

More here: Daily Kos: GOP Starts to Sour on Bush

Listening to ''Thomas Trouble'', by Echoes (Play Count: 7)

Albright: Good vs. Evil Isn't Policy

For the last five-plus years, we've gotten used to Bush's platitudes of "good vs. evil" and how the "evil-doers" hate freedom. For those of us with a higher education beyond the sixth-grade level, which excludes pretty much anybody who voted for Bush in November of 2004, the oversimplification and labeling of whole groups of people as black vs. white, good vs. bad, has been insulting - both to them, and to those of us expected to swallow the tripe.

Today, in a scathing contribution to the LA Times, former secretary of state Madeline Albright takes the conversation up a few pegs by intelligently outlining that "Good vs. Evil Isn't a Strategy" at all. As she writes, "It is sometimes convenient, for purposes of rhetorical effect, for national leaders to talk of a globe neatly divided into good and bad. It is quite another, however, to base the policies of the world's most powerful nation upon that fiction." In all seriousness, this isn't like Star Wars with a Rebel Alliance facing "The Dark Side". International politics, globalization and how it intermixes with religion, cannot be simplified by a black vs. white, us vs. them, good vs. evil mentality.

As we've learned, President Bush and his cronies are not interested in learning the truths that may conflict with their elementary conclusions. It wasn't until 2005 that Bush even realized that Sunnis and Shiites were different sects in Iraq, after all, and that the two groups might occasionally disagree. (Big understatement) In fact, even if some of Bush's goals are well-intended, his oversimplification and saber-rattling has served to turn the global forces against us, making it more and more unlikely that our wishes will be enacted. Albright spells this out, saying, "In today's warped political environment, nothing strengthens a radical government more than Washington's overt antagonism."

It's a shame that it has turned out like this. Bush's predecessors in the Republican party, including his father and Reagan, always commanded some level of respect when it came to foreign policy, and while they too may have had shady dealings, they didn't try to simplify the enemy so much so that talks were impossible. Even the Soviet Union's "Evil Empire" came to the table to reduce the nuclear arms race. With this group of dunderheads making policy, there's no chance we would see Iraq, Iran, or North Korea offer similar compromise.

Bush: Iraq War May Outlast His Presidency

I'll shy away from stating the obvious, where I make the point that George W's presidency should have ended before it began, but as his bumbling and avoidance of reality has become so commonplace, I almost feel like we should present him with a medal on those rare occasions where he is asked a direct question, and answers correctly, stating the obvious.

Following month after month, year after year, of continued violence in Iraq, and continued denials from the administration that the insurgents (as they are called) are making headway, Bush told reporters today that it's highly possible the Iraq War will be ongoing even after he leaves the White House. On the flip side, he continues to say that Iraq is not in a civil war, and taunts Democrats who have said he broke the law through the domestic spying program, but haven't called for its dismissal.

What Democrats have done all year is call attention to the lies that got us into this mess, the illegalities at home and abroad, the bumbling, lying, cluelessness that seems to be the accepted status quo in the administration and through the Republican party. Yet, when some of the more outspoken congressmen, including John Murtha, have asked us to investigate reducing our presence in Iraq, he and others are called cowards, who are said to "cut and run". Those who have questioned the administration's lies have been thrown under the bus and mocked for their questioning, but now, even our misleader in chief is recognizing we are not being welcomed as liberators - that instead, his legacy of death will have long-term implications far beyond what anyone in Washington D.C. ever imagined.

White House Focus: Intimidate the Media

Those in power and those who report on those that hold the power have never had the best of relationships. From Nixon's Watergate details being unveiled through the Washington Post to the innumerable quasi-scandals that dogged Clinton during his eight years in office, the press has often considered itself the fourth branch of government (the other three being executive, legislative and judicial of course). Armed with some stories of success and the need to drive ratings through sensationalism, skepticism or controversy, a hostile press can be very damaging to an administration.

Under the Bush White House, the administration's focus on PR tactics gained them a considerable amount of leeway - as following the terrorist attacks on Washington and New York, with Bush's approval ratings through the roof (odd how letting that happen helped others opinions of him), the administration marched into Afghanistan and Iraq on a glimpse of reason, while at the same time limiting privacy at home, and engaging in secret activities. While this "honeymoon" lasted the better part of a year or two, the culmination of bad news and bad publicity around the continued War in Iraq, Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath, the continued lack of finding Osama Bin Laden, and a series of unqualified nominations for every public position from the Supreme Court on down, eventually turned the press to be more inquisitive, and this is driving the Bush White House nuts.

In the last year, the press has gotten ahold of and aired imagery on Abu Ghraib, uncovered secret international prisons run by the CIA, and discussed secret wiretapping of US citizens. Had it not been for the tenacity of the press in these cases, we could likely still be in the dark, as the administration has not exactly displayed a historic level of openness. Now, according to a story in the Washington Post today, the Bush administration has launched initiatives targeting journalists and their potential sources. This inquisition has extended beyond the federal realm in Washington DC, reaching to places including the Sacramento Bee, who has seen FBI agents from Los Angeles target the paper following a story on a terrorism case in Lodi.

The first amendment to the US Constitution protects freedom of the press to disseminate information - and for those leaders in office who make the laws and are expected to be truthful to be attempting to undermine this relationship and go after those who may have inconveniently revealed data they had wanted sealed only makes the situation worse - not that we would expect anything more from the Bush White House who has made bad decisions and idiocy an art unto itself.

Bush Approval Ratings at All-Time Low of 34%

According to the latest CBS News poll, President-select Bush's approval ratings are at an all-time low of 34%, while his part-time vice president, part-time friend shooter, Dick Cheney scored even worse, with an 18% approval rating. Think about that for a second... when the old commercials used to say "Four out of Five dentists prefer you brush with toothpaste every day", there was always the one rogue dentist who didn't see eye to eye with reality. That one out of five nut job just happens to be the head case who also thinks the administration is doing well. Time to take the guy's car keys away, cancel any licenses he may have, and bar them from voting in any election ever.

If after mishandling Hurricane Katrina, leading us into an unjust, unending war in Iraq with falsified evidence, and spying on innocent American citizens wasn't enough to deter them from approving of the administration's activities, then maybe the Valerie Plame affair or the latest Dubai ports conflict will push them further toward sanity. After all, according to the same poll, seven in ten Americans is opposed to the agreement, including 58 percent of Republicans, and two out of three think our work in Iraq is destabilizing the region.

Meanwile, instead of enacting policy, Bush has been giving interviews to a book author chronicling his presidency, for a piece called "Strategery". I feel safer already.

Download the full survey in PDF

Who's The Victim Here?

As we all know by now, Vice President Cheney became the second US VP to shoot a man while in office (the first being Aaron Burr), when on a hunting expedition last week, he peppered a friend with birdshot, claiming the man had not announced his position, and that it was a simple hunting accident. In the days afterward, we learned that the news had been delayed a full day before reaching the press, and when it was announced, it was through a small local paper, through a private citizen, and not through government channels. It was also learned that Cheney had consumed alcohol earlier in the day, despite his comments that none in the hunting party were drinking while shooting. During the week, the victim even suffered a "mild" heart attack, due to irritation from the birdshot that was lodged in his heart. Quite a week for anyone, let alone a 78-year-old.

So, today, he was released from the hospital, having largely recovered from the injuries. What did he do? Threaten to sue? Lambast Cheney for his poor aim and public drunkenness? No. Surprisingly, he apologized for all the pain and suffering that Cheney and has family had undergone in questioning about the incident. Maybe it's really not that big of a surprise, after all, he did contribute $1,000 and $2,000 respectively to Bush's presidential campaigns in both 2000 and 2004. But just imagine the hoopla that would have occurred if say... Hillary Clinton were to have accidentally shot a member of her hunting party. Or Ted Kennedy. Wait - bad example. I think Hillary would have been hung from the gallows by a rabid right-wing contingent eager to see her go down. But if Cheney isn't caught on film performing the torture at Abu Ghraib, or hadn't shot the man in the head and causing his death, he could get away with murder. In fact, he got to cry and whine about how terrible his situation was to a very charitable Fox News.

What a crock. They called Ronald Reagan the Teflon President, but this administration is plenty slippery and has managed to have little stick to it, considering their range of ridiculous antics.

VP Dick Cheney Shoots Friend

It's one of those headlines you can't believe is really true, and to start on the road of mocking the accident seems crass, but wholly obvious. You take a powerful political figure who is universally unloved by the American people, in a political party that has championed the availability of guns ever since they could spell NRA, and it just so happens he fills his friend full of birdshot on a hunting expedition.

Idiot.

Dick Cheney turned around to shoot quail during a weekend hunting trip in Texas, and nailed the lawyer (can't make this up) with birdshot, claiming he didn't know the guy was there. (See: Cheney Accidentally Shoots Hunting Companion)

In mock amusement, James Brady and his wife, who have long fought for increased gun control, were quoted as saying, "Now I understand why Dick Cheney keeps asking me to go hunting with him."

Just think... these guys have the finger on "the button". Not good.

Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton

An article in the New York Times this morning highlights the closeness between former president Bill Clinton and both current and former presidents Bush. The two-somes or three-somes can be seen at public events or enjoying one another privately. In fact, in a recent TV interview, W postulated that if Hillary were to run in 2008 and win, the presidents in order would read "Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton".

In fact, when asked about her chances, W called her "formidable".

I read Bill Clinton's "My Life" biography over the last few months (off and on - it's not that I read slow), and through the book, gained more admiration of Hillary, her background and strengths. Surely, it's a husband discussing his wife, or a sly political move, but I came away with significant respect of her roots and ambitions. Hillary is a very intelligent, focused individual with high expectations for herself. If she doesn't get smeared and slammed by a right-wing PR machine, it'd be very interesting to see if she gives 2008 a shot.

And... go buy the book. I really enjoyed it.

Haven't We Seen this Before?

Courtesy: Tom Tomorrow, This Modern World. Buy the Sticker

Three More Years

It's January 20th - inauguration day. Well, if it wasn't 2006 anyway. We've got three more full years of Bush as our president, barring any unforeseen changes. With the elimination of civil liberties and usurping of power, the Constitution may be amended to allow third terms. Who knows? Just a thought - not a pleasant one.

To Be Right, Think Left

When I was MUCH younger, I was a died-in-the-wool Republican. I wrote Ronald Reagan when I was a few days short of my 10th birthday, telling him he was doing a wonderful job, that he should wish George Shultz well in the Mid-East peace process, and I openly rooted for Jesse Jackson to win the Democratic nomination against Dukakis, as in my immortal words, "he didn't stand a chance against Bush." Of course, given that I ended my two-page letter by begging the jelly bean bearing septuagenerian for his massive horde of canceled stamps to increase my own collection, my focuses weren't exactly grounded in sound politics.

As I grew older, I was an on the fence political player, voting for the best candidates, regardless of party. It seemed often the Republicans would have interesting options, and at other times, the Democrats stood for those things I was looking for. But by 1992, things had irrevocably changed. The Republican party was not the party of common sense at all, but grounded in right-wing fundamentalism, religious warfare and cronyism. Clinton did some fantastic things while holding office, but didn't have the benefit of a Democratic congress for long, and was stymied through real and faux scandals like no other president in our history.

As we know, his foibles helped aid George Jr's ascendancy to the top step, and for the last six years, we've had to be overwhelmingly embarrassed, frightened and offended by what's gone on in Washington. The idea that such a shady cast of characters could single-handedly more than roll back decades of good will both domestically and around the globe is astounding. The clear ignorance of consequence and knowledge of history is dumbfounding, and scary to behold as we see things go more and more off-track - with very real allegations of lies and deceit coming from every direction, whether it be a made-up costly war under false pretense and wacky ideology, or a silent war against our own citizens through wire-tapping, artificial no-fly lists, and infiltration of private groups. I fear that even if the Democrats were to take over both houses of Congress and elect a presidential candidate, it will take decades to undo the damage, and we may never recover. The unabashed excesses of violence we have inflicted in the Arab states has surely created more hatred against America than ever existed before it, and we may be forever defending ourselves against new enemies at overwhelming personal and financial cost.

We need change. We need it now, and I don't think we can wait until 2008 to take a chance in trusting the foolish American electorate again.