Too Progressive

Over the past few decades Republicans have shown time and time again that they see nothing wrong with using American soldiers as political ploys. Touting their commitment to taking care of our veterans but not really ever backing it up with any sort of substantial legislation. Talking the talk, but not walking the walk, so to speak. Fortunately, Democrats have shown time and time again they are willing to look out for those who risk their lives looking out for us. The latest example being Senator Jim Webb’s “G.I. bill”:

Sen. Webb’s “New GI Bill,” which went into effect Aug. 1, returns a full measure of educational aid to Americans who’ve served since 9/11, when falling towers and a flaming Pentagon signaled the start of a long war against a new set of lethal enemies. The fierce fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan–between them, the wars have killed more than 5,000 Americans and wounded perhaps 10 times that number–justifies a robust GI Bill, especially since, as Mr. Webb last year told Free Lance-Star readers, “Seventy percent of the Marine Corps and 75 percent of the Army leave at or before the end of their first enlistment, so the all-volunteer military is not an all-career military. When the overwhelming majority are leaving at the end of one enlistment, you still have a citizen-soldier, and those are the people who have not been taken care of.”

Via Democracy In Action:

For more than 200 years, federal laws have protected the American people against the use of military forces on our own soil.  Strengthened in 1878 by the Posse Comitatus Act, these laws have guaranteed that the federal government could not use the military for domestic law enforcement purposes.

Without such protection, the federal government could use the might of our army to violate state and individual rights.  Moreover, minor incursions by the military into domestic law enforcement activity could lay the foundation for the imposition of martial law at a moment’s notice.  This is one slippery slope we don’t want to start sliding down.

That is why we should all be deeply disturbed by the news that President Bush has assigned the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team to be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army component of Northern Command (NorthCom).  According to an article in Army Times, the soldiers could be called upon for a variety of tasks, including quelling “civil unrest.”  They are apparently engaged in training with shields and batons, beanbag bullets, and Tasers.

I’m just going to go out on a limb and say this was probably done because the Bush administration expects the economy is more than likely about to totally collapse under the weight of the failed Bushenomics of the past eight years.

Since the Obama campaign can’t seem to figure out a way to hit back against the McCain campaign, I’ve decided to provide them with some fodder I think would be perfect to use!  Via Think Progress:

QUESTIONER: If we don’t reenact the draft, I don’t think we’ll have anyone to chase Bin Laden to the gates of hell.

[Appaluse]

MCCAIN: Ma’am, let me say that I don’t disagree with anything you said.

So there you go Obama campaign, have at it!!

Governor Tim Kaine signed twelve bills into law yesterday that will pave the way for expanding benefits for Virginia’s military veterans, active service members and their families. The bills covered health care, voting rights, driver’s licenses, benefits and more. One of the longest over-due pieces of legislation being the “Wounded Warrior Initiative” provides $4.5 million to expand treatment for mental-health disorders which effect nearly two-thirds of those returning from active military duty according to the Richmond Times Dispatch. Also, Kaine signed bills into law that make the process of establishing eligibility for veterans services much easier and a bill that makes it easier for service members to continue to hold an active driver’s license and vote while serving overseas.

“These bills take important steps toward improving the lives of those who have served or are serving our country, as well as their families,” Kaine said in a statement, noting later that one of every 10 Virginians is a veteran.

Take a look at the complete run down of the bills signed into law yesterday by Governor Kaine after the jump!

Not like he’ll listen, but they tried again anyway:

Behind the Pentagon’s closed doors, U.S. military leaders told President Bush Wednesday they are worried about the Iraq war’s mounting strain on troops and their families. But they indicated they’d go along with a brief halt in pulling out troops this summer.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff did say senior commanders in Iraq should make more frequent assessments of security conditions, an idea that appeared aimed at increasing pressure for more rapid troop reductions.

The chiefs’ concern is that U.S. forces are being worn thin, compromising the Pentagon’s ability to handle crises elsewhere in the world.

More so called progress in Iraq! The death toll following yesterday’s truck bombing in the northern part of Iraq now stands at at least 500.

The Tuesday truck bombs that targeted the villages of Qahtaniya, al-Jazeera and Tal Uzair, in northern Iraq near the border with Syria, were a “trademark al Qaeda event” designed to sway U.S. public opinion against the war, a U.S. general said Wednesday.

The attacks, targeting Kurdish villages of the Yazidi religious minority, were attempts to “break the will” of the American people and show that the U.S. troop escalation — the “surge” — is failing, Maj. Gen. Benjamin Mixon said.

The bombings highlight the kind of sectarian tensions the troop surge was designed to stop.

Major General Mixon went on to say “this is an act of ethnic cleansing, if you will — almost genocide when you consider the fact the target they attacked and the fact that these Yazidis, out in a very remote part of Nineveh province, where there is very little security and really no security required to this point.”

Get our troops out from the midst of the Iraqi civil war NOW!

I applaud the U.S. House of Representatives for it’s passage of a bill today that would fix flaws in the national gun background check system that allowed a Virginia Tech student to obtain weapons despite mental problems. I applaud the NRA for endorsing the bill, and I applaud the fact that it looks like the bill will get passage in the U.S. Senate as well. That having been said, I have a major problem with concessions that were made to the NRA in order to get them to endorse the bill.

The NRA did win some concessions in negotiating the final product.

It would automatically restore the purchasing rights of veterans who were diagnosed with mental problems as part of the process of obtaining disability benefits. LaPierre said the Clinton administration put about 80,000 such veterans into the background check system.

So let me get this straight, you can be mentally insane and still purchase weapons, as long as you’re an armed services veteran? Now, I have nothing against those who serve in the military, or those who have done so previously, but why the hell should anyone, regardless of military background (or lack thereof) be allowed to purchase weapons if they have been diagnosed with mental problems?

Not only that, but why aren’t the background checks being extended to every single American wishing to purchase a gun, period! As some of you already know, I’m getting ready to move to Arlington — and in looking for a new apartment, I was told I would have to have a background check run on myself at nearly every single place I was interested in. If having a background check run is almost always necessary in seeking a place to live, why isn’t it a necessity when looking to purchase a deadly weapon?

[Cross posted at Daily Kos]

Hey look! Instead of killing our enemies during war, some dumb fuck somewhere in the Bush administration proposed a plan (and the military researched continues to research it too!) to build a bomb to turn our enemies gay!

A Berkeley watchdog organization that tracks military spending said it uncovered a strange U.S. military proposal to create a hormone bomb that could purportedly turn enemy soldiers into homosexuals and make them more interested in sex than fighting.

So the military believes that the only thing on the mind of homosexuals is sex?

The documents show the Air Force lab asked for $7.5 million to develop such a chemical weapon.

Your tax dollars hard at work!!

“The Ohio Air Force lab proposed that a bomb be developed that contained a chemical that would cause enemy soldiers to become gay, and to have their units break down because all their soldiers became irresistibly attractive to one another,” Hammond said after reviewing the documents.

All gay people are irresistibly attracted to each other! Just like all black people are irresistibly attracted to one another, and all Jews are irresistibly attracted to one another!!!!!

“The Department of Defense is committed to identifying, researching and developing non-lethal weapons that will support our men and women in uniform,” said a DOD spokesperson, who indicated that the “gay bomb” idea was quickly dismissed.

However, Hammond said the government records he obtained suggest the military gave the plan much stronger consideration than it has acknowledged.

“The truth of the matter is it would have never come to my attention if it was dismissed at the time it was proposed,” he said. “In fact, the Pentagon has used it repeatedly and subsequently in an effort to promote non-lethal weapons, and in fact they submitted it to the highest scientific review body in the country for them to consider.”

What a bunch of jackasses. Homosexuality is something you’re born with. It’s not something you choose, and it’s not something that is a product of how you were raised, or circumstances you may have faced in the past. It is not a disease, you cannot cure it, and I highly doubt you can create some magic chemical to turn people gay. But, you know, don’t let science get in the way of anything.

[Cross posted at Daily Kos]

Why is it that there are still (some) people who believe the U.S. is fighting a true “global war on terror” while the Bush administration arms the entire fucking planet to the teeth? Checkout how our government essentially props up our GDP via A Nation of Firsts Arms the World:

-First in Sales of Surface-to-Air Missiles:

Between 2001 and 2005, the United States delivered 2,099 surface-to-air missiles to nations in the developing world, 20% more than Russia, the next largest supplier.

-First in Sales of Military Ships:

During that same period, the U.S. sent 10 “major surface combatants” like aircraft carriers and destroyers to developing nations. Collectively, the four major European weapons producers shipped thirteen. (And we were first in the anti-ship missiles that go along with such ships, with nearly double (338) the exports of the next largest supplier Russia (180).

First in Military Training:

A thoughtful empire knows that it is not enough to send weapons; you have to teach people how to use them. The Pentagon plans on training the militaries of 138 nations in 2008 at a cost of nearly $90 million. No other nation comes close.

First in Weapons Sales:

Since 2001, U.S. global military sales have normally totaled between $10 and $13 billion. That’s a lot of weapons, but in fiscal year 2006, the Pentagon broke its own recent record, inking arms sales agreements worth $21 billion. It almost goes without saying that this is significantly more than any other nation in the world.

The U.S. also ranks first in oil consumption, carbon dioxide emissions, external debt, military expenditures, private military personnel, and radical Christian extremists!

Thanks a lot George Bush and co.!

[Cross posted at Daily Kos, and Raising Kaine]

BREAKING! Ha ha, just kidding we already knew this, but it’s still pathetic, and sad nonetheless! John McCain, now serving his 239th term in the U.S. Senate, is completely nuts! Via The Advocate:

Gay troops pose “an intolerable risk” to national security, U.S. senator and Republican presidential hopeful John McCain wrote last month to a gay rights group seeking to change his position on “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

In an April 16 letter to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, McCain said, “I believe polarization of personnel and breakdown of unit effectiveness is too high a price to pay for well-intentioned but misguided efforts to elevate the interests of a minority of homosexual service members above those of their units.

“Most importantly, the national security of the United States, not to mention the lives of our men and women in uniform, are put at grave risk by policies detrimental to the good order and discipline which so distinguish America’s armed services.”

According to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network the Pentagon fires two homosexuals each day, and in a time where our military is already overstretched, that adds up quick.

McCain’s remark comes just a couple of months after Secretary of State, and closet lesbian Condoleezza Rice expressed concern about lack of “foreign-language speakers” available for Iraq, but (conveniently) refused to discuss the dozens of linguists who have been fired under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. It was also revealed that the U.S. army is granting “moral waivers” to the tune of about 125,000 a year that allow convicted criminals to join the armed forces.

So allowing convicted criminals to join the army is perfectly acceptable, but homosexual troops are a “risk” insane McCain (among others) just isn’t willing to take.

Most had said long before the November elections that if Democrats took control, many Republicans in Congress would be “jumping ship” so to speak. That is, they would likely begin to speak out against Bush’s failed policy - not only in Iraq, but at home too. After dropping the hammer on “Conda-liesa-liesa-liesa-lot” in Senate hearings last week, Chuck Hagel (R-NE) on CNN today slammed the Bush administration again, AND claimed Congress needs to be more assertive, saying “this is not a monarchy,” and going on to say:

“We are no longer just going to quietly stand by, as we have done for the last four years, and let our young men and women be thrown into this conflict when they cannot affect the outcome.”

He can join a growing number of Republicans who oppose the McCain doctrine, and while some media reports claim he’s the “second” one to come out against it, he’s actually the seventh, including Sam Brownback of Kansas, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Gordon Smith of Oregon, George Voinovich of Ohio, Susan Collins of Maine, and Olympia Snowe of Maine.

According to an article on CNN’s website:

Acknowledging their party is divided on Iraq, Republican leaders are trying to stave off a showdown in Congress by casting Democratic efforts as a political ploy to embarrass the president.

The White House cautioned lawmakers about the consequences of voting against a buildup.

“The one thing the president has said is, whatever you do, make sure you support the troops,” Snow said at the White House. “And the question people who support this resolution will have to ask is, how does this support the troops?”

Awww, so George Bush thinks he can make idle threats now? CONSEQUENCES of voting against sending our troops into a civil war in Iraq? Now what would they be, pray tell? My guess would be that Bush would send them anyway! And to the Republican leaders: George Bush has done a fine job embarrassing himself, Democratic “efforts” to save the country aren’t responsible for it.

Via AmericaBlog, I see that Bob Geiger has posted an entry regarding Senator Jim Webb “walking the walk” when it comes to supporting the troops:

“Keeping a promise he made on the campaign trail in 2006, Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) did more for the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan on his first day in the Senate than the man he ousted, George Felix Allen, did in the entire previous Congress.

As a veteran who hails from a family with a long history of military service, I am proud to offer this bill as my first piece of legislation in the United States Senate,” said Webb, in introducing his bill last week. “The G.I. bill program was designed to help veterans readjust to civilian life, avoid high levels of unemployment, and give veterans the opportunity to receive the education and training that they missed while bravely serving in the military.”

I have to agree with “Joe in DC” over at AmericaBlog when he says:

Lots of Senators, especially Republicans, talk about supporting the troops. Talk is cheap.

And then goes on to say:

“Let’s see if the GOP will put its money where its mouth is.”

Wait for it…wait for it… Unbelievable - YES to surge, NO to body armor!

Can Republican Senator John Warner please tell Virginians where he stands on the war in Iraq and Bush’s plan to send 21,500 additional U.S. troops to the war zone? He’s for it, he doesn’t know, he’s against it, WHO KNOWS! In October, Warner said the war in Iraq was “drifting sideways,” and the following excerpt appeared on NewsMax on October 6, 2006:

He (John Warner) said the military had done what it could and that Congress must make some “bold decisions” if, after three months, progress is not made by the Iraqis to calm ethnic violence and hasten reconstruction.

Warner did not say what he thinks Congress should do, but added all options will be considered. Lawmakers have suggested various remedies, including setting a timetable to pull out U.S. troops and dividing the country into smaller independent ethnic states.

Well, Senator Warner, it’s been more than three months, get moving! What’s your plan? What’s your idea? Are you for or against the McCain doctrine?

Wednesday night, after George Bush spoke to the nation regarding his plan, Warner said the following regarding the President’s speech:

“I found the speech to be credible, and sincere that reflects a lot of study by the Executive Branch, and a lot of advice the President took into consideration.”

Well, Warner didn’t exactly endorse the plan (with this quote, at least), I’ll give him that. However, his inability to express his concerns about the plan on national TV accurately reflects the GOP over the past few years: the political party where party loyalty comes before doing the right thing, and opposition to fellow Republicans is supposed to be expressed “privately.”

So what is Senator Warner’s position on the McCain doctrine, and the Iraq war in general at this hour? Well, at last check, he supports the plan to send additional U.S. troops into the midst of the civil war in Iraq, but not quite the 21,500 Bush plans to send. Not yet, at least. Warner told Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Peter Pace that instead of 21,500 troops, the U.S. should start with several thousand troops instead. According to the Richmond Times Dispatch, Warner went on to say:

“Shouldn’t we walk a few steps along this line and then see how quickly — hopefully — the Iraqis begin to take up their responsibilities?”

No, Senator Warner, we shouldn’t. First of all, we’ve waited long enough for the Iraqis to “take control,” but instead, the country sinks further and further into civil war every day. Not only that, but as I reported in a December 19, 2006 entry regarding the Joint Chiefs opposition to the troop “surge” via a WaPo article:

At regular interagency meetings and in briefing President Bush last week, the Pentagon has warned that any short-term mission may only set up the United States for bigger problems when it ends. The service chiefs have warned that a short-term mission could give an enormous edge to virtually all the armed factions in Iraq — including al-Qaeda’s foreign fighters, Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias — without giving an enduring boost to the U.S military mission or to the Iraqi army, the officials said.

And here’s the kicker! Senator John Warner, please pay attention:

The Pentagon has cautioned that a modest surge could lead to more attacks by al-Qaeda, provide more targets for Sunni insurgents and fuel the jihadist appeal for more foreign fighters to flock to Iraq to attack U.S. troops, the officials said.

Hear that? If the Bush administration and other supporters of the McCain doctrine really want to fuel terrorists recruiting, “all” they have to do is continue with this dangerous plan to SEND MORE U.S. TROOPS TO IRAQ!

General John Abizaid, the U.S. military commander of forces in the Middle East opposes the plan too, saying in November that “Troop levels need to stay where they are.” While, as I wrote on December 28, 2006, according to an article published by the AP, U.S. soldiers on the ground in Iraq are increasingly against the war too:

“Nothing’s going to help. It’s a religious war, and we’re caught in the middle of it,” said Sgt. Josh Keim, a native of Canton, Ohio, who is on his second tour in Iraq. “It’s hard to be somewhere where there’s no mission and we just drive around.”

But James said more troops in combat would likely not have the desired effect.

One Lieutenant General slammed the “troop surge” saying instead of more troops, he wants better equipment for the soldiers already on the ground:

During a recent interview, Lt. Gen. Nasier Abadi, deputy chief of staff for the Iraqi army, said that instead of sending more U.S. soldiers, Washington should focus on furnishing his men with better equipment.

“We are hoping 2007 will be the year of supplies,” he said.

Unfortunately though, as Jaime over at West of Shockoe told us on Wednesday, it doesn’t appear as though Lieutenant General Nasier Abadi is going to get his wish:

The thousands of troops that President Bush is expected to order to Iraq will join the fight largely without the protection of the latest armored vehicles that withstand bomb blasts far better than the Humvees in wide use, military officers said.

One soldier, who had his contract involuntarily extended (indefinitely, I’m assuming), flat out claimed the U.S. was losing the war, and that a troop surge was not a good idea:

Sgt. Justin Thompson, a San Antonio native, said he signed up for delayed enlistment before the Sept. 11 terror attacks, then was forced to go to a war he didn’t agree with.

A troop surge is “not going to stop the hatred between Shia and Sunni,” said Thompson, who is especially bitter because his 4-year contract was involuntarily extended in June. “This is a civil war, and we’re just making things worse. We’re losing. I’m not afraid to say it.”

Still not convinced? Consider this, in 2004 support of the war among active duty military members was at 63 percent. Support from the military now? Only 35 percent of the servicemen and women said they approve of the way President George W. Bush is handling the war. My, my, so much for that “the media only reports the bad news from Iraq” theory, huh?

So, you see Mr. ‘come 2009 FORMER’ Senator John Warner, dancing around your stance on the McCain doctrine, and trying to take the middle road by suggesting even a “moderate” troop surge, as you did, is NOT a good idea. Not only that, but Virginians have a right to know your thoughts, so stop dancing around the issue in order to save face among your degenerate fellow party members.

Once again, as I headlined the other day, I would like to reiterate the need for Democrats to start getting SERIOUS about challenging John Warner for his Senate seat in 2008. We may be getting a pleasant surprise too! I’ve been told (and I’m sure many others may have heard as well) that former Governor Mark Warner is doing “polling” ahead of a possible 2008 Virginia Senate bid.

UPDATE: I meant to give mention to the fact that the Pentagon has abandoned its limit on time citizen-soldiers can be required to serve on active duty. More proof that the U.S. military has sadly been stretched dangerously thin. I’d also like to mention a “Catzmaw’s Commentary” post from earlier today revealing a classified Pentagon memo which projects “10,000 casualties, and 100,000 wounded” in Iraq by the end of 2008.

[Cross posted at Daily Kos, and Raising Kaine!]

Here’s a copy of Howard Dean’s response to George Bush’s speech last night (I’ve highlighted a few key points):

Last night, George Bush plans announce that he wants to send tens of thousands more troops to Iraq.

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

I will be posting the remainder of my updates (with the exception of ‘urgent’ updates) tonight in this thread.

UPDATE: Olbermann: A Look Backward at the Commander’s Credibility (video included).

Keith: We would be greeted as liberators, with flowers. As they stood up–we would stand down, we would stay the course, we were never ’stay the course’,The enemy was al Qaeda, was foreigners, terrorists, Baathists. The war would pay for itself, it would cost 1-point-7 billion dollars, 100 billion, 400 billion, half a trillion dollars.

President Bush makes no secret of his distaste for looking backward, for assessing past results.

UPDATE #2: Democrats To Bush: You Are So High It’s Not Even Funny.

UPDATE #3: AmericaBlog has the entire text of Bush’s speech posted.

UPDATE #4: Oh look, while all other major cable media outlets are still doing extensive coverage of the Bush speech, I see that Greta Van Susteren of Faux News is devoting the hour to cover the “Rosie v Trump” feud. I guess she’s simply not capable of doing REAL stories.

UPDATE #5: View the White House’s Iraq strategy review PowerPoint by clicking here.

UPDATE #6: Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) told CNN:

“My heart fell as I heard it (the “surge” announcement) because I see no evidence from the past that this kind of surge will work.”

Press release from Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, and Senate Assistant Democratic Leader Richard Durbin:

“Last November, the American people delivered a strong message of no confidence in the President’s Iraq policy and clearly expressed their desire for a new direction. The President had an opportunity tonight to demonstrate that he understood the depth of the concern in the country, make a long overdue course correction, and articulate a clear mission for our engagement in Iraq. Instead, he chose to escalate our involvement in Iraq’s civil war by proposing a substantial increase in the number of our forces there. This proposal endangers our national security by placing additional burdens on our already over-extended military thereby making it even more difficult to respond to other crises.

“In the days ahead, Congress will exercise its Constitutional responsibilities by giving the President’s latest proposal the scrutiny our troops and the American people expect. We will demand answers to the tough questions that have not been asked or answered to date. The American people want a change of course in Iraq. We intend to keep pressing President Bush to provide it.”

BREAKING: Hillary Clinton has just released a statement saying she CANNOT support the President’s degenerate’s proposal of escalation of war in iraq.

BREAKING: Well, we all pretty much knew this was coming, but let it be known that it’s now official, degenerate George W. Bush has committed over 20,000 additional Americans to be placed in the midst of a civil war in Iraq.

UPDATE: Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) is giving the Democratic response.

UPDATE #2: Senator Barack Obama (D-Illinois) will apparently be responding as well. C-Span is covering Dick Durbin’s press conference, while ALL of the major media outlets are ignoring it, I’m not sure why.

UPDATE #3: Via a reader comment left on News Hounds:

“‘Top Video’ on FoxNews.com right now? Bush’s umpteenth Iraq PR speech? NO. Fox News’ ‘Top Video’ is… ‘PARTY NAKED
Ivy league students bare their minds and bodies at wild off-campus parties.’”

Oh, that is RICH!

UPDATE #4: Oh look, even far right wing Oliver North acknowledges that the vast majority of American troops in Iraq are opposed to Bush’s plan (video included).

UPDATE #5: “Demonstrations” have already begun in front of the White House tonight. Remember, there are hundreds of rallies planned nationwide tomorrow to protest this absolutely insane plan.

UPDATE #6: Another blunder by Fox News. They actually had a CLOCK UP ON THE SCREEN which read “Where’s their (the Democrats) plan?” counting from the time Bush’s speech ended. Fair and Balanced MY ASS. Sounds like a bunch of small children using juvenile excuses to get themselves out of trouble.

UPDATE #7: Bush is Stuck on Replay - Four Years On, He Continues the Lie: Iraq is Linked to 9/11.

Jaime over at West of Shockoe is all over two disturbing breaking stories coming from the Bush administration tonight leading up to King George’s speech this evening where he is expected to announce a U.S. troop “surge” of about 22,000+ troops to Iraq.

First, it looks like the “surge” is already underway. Second, it appears that Bush will be sending the new troops, but won’t be sending the armor.

For the record, virtually NO ONE is behind this plan either. In fact, (if you can believe it) the percentage of Americans who support the troop “surge” plan is even lower than Bush’s approval numbers! Now THAT’S saying something.

UPDATE: Wonkette has a post up on the early “surge” too.