Kucinich introduces resolution to impeach Dick Cheney

Go DK!

Also, looks like other people are catching on to the Kucinich conspiracy to rig online candidate-matching quizzes.

But remember, guys, the important thing about Kucinich is not that this legislation, nor that he's the only candidate who's never voted to fund the war (and is actually for defunding it), nor that he wants to start a "Dept. of Peace," nor that he believes we should pull out of NAFTA or turn Medicare into a single-payer government health insurer of all Americans.

No no no. What is important is that he once saw a UFO with Shirley MacLaine and has a smokin' hot wife. Those are what are important to know about Kucinich, and thus must be the beginning and end of every conversation about him, like Edwards' haircut and Hillary's pantsuits.

your liberal media

From Huffington Post, re: NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams:

For Williams, it all went back to Sept. 11, 2001. As a citizen, he thought on that fateful day, thank God that Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and Colin Powell were on the team.

bio of the prez

Every time I read another bio piece on Bush, I am striken by the jaw-dropping incompetence of the man who's "had his finger on the button" for the last 7 years. It's not just that his flaws are so egregious; it's that they're so manifest. Blumenthal paints a picture of a man with a messianic complex so gargantuan in its proportions that he's become dangerous to the very causes he champions. In his unawareness of realities around him, and in his refusal to accept other realities, he's become a virtually delusional decision-maker. He picks on his underlings and throws tantrums at them, impotently venting his frustration, while they use his bloated ego to manipulate him, his soft intellect unable to perceive their ulterior motives.

Bush's father, along with Prince Bandar, Jim Baker and a couple of others, really did install him like a child king, expecting to teach him the fundamentals while he remained completely reliant on their advice. Then one of them (Dick Cheney) decided to keep the boy-king to himself and convince him to rebel against the others, and the rest is history.

why didn't I think of that?

John Aravosis figured out why the Democrats chose to issue warrantless wiretapping subpoenas now:

But of course, Cheney just said he and his office are not part of the executive branch. But he'll have to change his tune immediately in order to squash the subpoena by claiming executive privelege. And that is why the subpoena was issued right now, to force Cheney to recant his recent claim that he's a new and independent 4th branch of government. Two points for the Dems.

I don't give Patrick Leahy enough credit sometimes.

the root of all evil

Here is the beginning of a fantastic, comprehensive piece the Washington Post is putting together on the Vice President and just how much power he holds within the White House. And just how much of a secretive, creepy f**ker is he?:

Across the board, the vice president's office goes to unusual lengths to avoid transparency. Cheney declines to disclose the names or even the size of his staff, generally releases no public calendar and ordered the Secret Service to destroy his visitor logs. His general counsel has asserted that "the vice presidency is a unique office that is neither a part of the executive branch nor a part of the legislative branch," and is therefore exempt from rules governing either. Cheney is refusing to observe an executive order on the handling of national security secrets, and he proposed to abolish a federal office that insisted on auditing his compliance.

I put that one sentence in bold because, frankly, it's the scariest sentence of all. It can be a little tricky to describe the full potential ramifications of that sentence, as we're so used to thinking within the constraints of the constitution that it's hard to imagine what a government agency could do if it suddenly found itself without them. Perhaps it's become important to start thinking about those possibilities, as one government is now claiming that it's outside the circumscribed boundaries of the constitution, holding as much executive power as it pleases but answerable to no one. That means that Cheney believes that there is no government entity with the power to reign him in or prevent him from acting out his whims. Except perhaps the president, who is virtually a dictator in Cheney's mind, and yet intellectually subservient to him in reality. It's like we have 2 dictators!

a grand harmonic convergence of wingnuttery

A couple of days ago Josh Marshall tried to answer the $64,000 question: why did we invade Iraq? A lot of people are arguing about it over at TPM, but I've always felt like the answers we tend to hear don't really cut it. There's too much countervailing and/or inconsistent behavior to explain. Atrios has a take that, I think, at least forwards the discussion and brings us a little closer:

Josh Marshall heads down the path to madness in order to try to answer that question.

The answer is unknowable because there isn't one. There are a variety of powerful actors who have different motives. It's as true, if not more true, for the continued occupation as it was for the initial invasion.

George Bush started the war because Saddam tried to killed his Dad and because he wanted to prance around on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit. He later got stubborn about the whole thing when those mean Democrats started criticizing him, and he began to buy into the transformational rhetoric due to his increasing messianic bent. And, now, it's about his "legacy."

Dick Cheney started the war because of his insatiable lust for the black stuff. Dick Cheney keeps us in Iraq because of his insatiable lust for the black stuff.

Don Rumsfeld went to war to prove that he could achieve any military result with 3 marines, an armed aerial drone, and his left pinky. He stayed in Iraq because George Bush told him to and because he still needed to prove his awesomeness.

AEI and Viceroy Jerry went to war because they were excited about their new libertarian paradise laboratory.

Paul Wolfowitz had grand dreams about transforming the Middle East into who knows what.

Tom Friedman and others went to war because they have the mentality of 5 years olds and they thought that the smartest thing we could do was whip out our giant schlong and wave it around for awhile. Tom Friedman and others stay in Iraq because they think that if they don't keep popping cialis ("If your occupation lasts longer than 6 months...") the world will notice our little tiny shriveled up thingy.

Karl Rove went to war so his boy could prance on the aircraft carrier and win re-election. He stays because leaving Iraq will anger wingnuttia.

Lots of other people stay in Iraq just because they don't like to admit they're wrong. Their egos are more important anything.

The sensible liberals at Brookings were so stupid they thought Saddam was a threat. They were the stupidest people of all, because that was about the only thing which had nothing to do with why we invaded Iraq. They stay in Iraq because they're unable to accept responsibility for their actions.

Democrats went to war because they were scared of losing their elections. They stay there because they're scared of losing elections.

Ultimately it's all centered around oil, the endless needs of the military industrial complex, and various other financial interests masquerading as ideology. But there isn't one reason, just a grand harmonic convergence of wingnuttery.

I'm not so sure about the details (e.g., I think hubris re: the power of the American military and the fact that "war presidents" rarely lose elections had at least as much to do with W's thinking as "Saddam tried to kill my daddy"-- the former set him upon looking for more war, while the latter pointed him to Iraq. Taking down 2 countries in one term would've virtually guaranteed him a second term and a positive legacy), but Atrios' point that different actors had different motives, and that Iraq was uniquely equipped by geography and circumstance to satisfy many different motivations to various nefarious characters (and the spineless sycophants and nemeses that follow them), is probably by itself closer to the truth than anyone else has gotten. Perhaps the day George Bush's idiot son was selected, with arch-neocon and war profiteer Dick Cheney as his runningmate, Iraq's fate was sealed.

YADOWWWWWWWWWW!!!!

I knew there was a reason I loved Heroes:

NBC's hit series "Heroes" was the most-watched new show on network television this year despite its demanding plot lines and stretches of subtitled Japanese. Its season finale, which aired May 21, dominated the 9 p.m. time slot. What explains the show's popularity, especially with younger viewers? I think it is that, like the Fox thriller "24," "Heroes" is a response to Sept. 11 and the rise of international terrorism. But while "24" skews to the right politically, "Heroes" seems like a left-wing response to those events. In fact, it functions as a thoughtful critique of Vice President Dick Cheney's doctrine on counterterrorism.

Read the article; it's an interesting essay on the political and moral underpinnings of Heroes vis-a-vis 24, and by association, the Bush Administration. Some of the points I'd thought of before, but many I hadn't. It's all true, though: the Gandhian critique of deploying evil to stop evil, otherwise known as "the ends justify the means," the recognition of humans' propensity to both good and evil, the emphasis on diversity as a strength, rather than a weakness...

It's very, very good to hear that this message is resonating more with the nation's youth.

Dear Salon

Camille Paglia makes me want to shoot myself in the face. Seriously, I'm setting up a hunting trip with the Vice President as I write this.

Just thought you should know.

Cheers,
el ranchero

Libby's a new wife

Ruh roh Raggy, here's more bad press for the "faggot" Right and the party of Walter Reed (which Jack Cafferty, BTW, thinks will be the next Katrina). The Republican Vice President's (until his indictment) Chief of Staff is officially a felon, and the line that he was told Plame's identity by reporters is officially a lie.

Ya gotta feel for Tony Snow, it's been one hell of a week and a half.

And the current Resident-in-Chief's approvals?

Zogby: 30%
USA Today/Gallup: 33
Newsweek: 31
FOX/Opinion Dynamics RV: 34
CBS/New York Times: 29 (!)
Time RV: 34
ABC/Washington Post: 36
Diageo/Hotline RV: 36

How much lower will they go? How much lower can they get?