No Time Out for the Iraqi People

In another time and place, this guy was a Maverick, too.

I like this brief essay, but also must add that we consider the needs of the innocent people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and any other country we are bombing and/or intimidating into submission to full spectrum dominance.
Our Troops Don't Get a Time-Out for the Financial Crisis
Jon Soltz Posted September 24, 2008 05:56 PM (EST)
So, because there's a financial crisis, Senator McCain cannot take 90 minutes to address how he will face challenges around the world, including how and when he will send American troops to fight, and possibly die.
Wow. Troops would sure love that luxury.
Unfortunately, though, insurgents in Iraq don't stop shooting at us, or setting IEDs, because our Commander in Chief needs a breather to figure out Wall Street.
Al Qaeda in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region don't send our troops notes that read, "Hey, I hear you guys are tied up with Wall Street. Your President needs to concentrate on other things, so we'll give you a break. So, to make things easier on you, here's our coordinates."
Nor do our troops get a few days to figure out how to hold onto an area we've secured, if there's an unexpected attack. Sometimes we need to deal with multiple flare-ups at once in any warzone. We'd sure love a time-out, but sadly, the world isn't such a nice place that it gives us that kind of pity.
When you're Commander in Chief, I don't think there'd be a worse signal to send to our troops in harm's way than to say, "Hey, hold on guys. I know you're getting killed over there, but I have to get a time-out here to deal with Wall Street."
If troops need to multi-task without a break, is it so wrong that we demand that a potential President-in-waiting prove that he can manage a financial crisis, and still address crises around the world for 90 minutes? And, if a potential President-to-be can't manage that, is it wrong to think that maybe he ought not just suspend a debate and the campaign, but move aside and get out of the race?
Just something to think about.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-soltz/our-troops-dont-get-a-tim_b_129055.html

Air America is a Big Fucking Whore!

Liberals cannot take a joke. Clearly, the censors at Air America were more concerned they might lose corporate funding than growing their audience. Just watch the video and you'll see the crowd was intensly responsive. As for use of the "fuck" word, Randi's a veteran, what the hell did they expect?!!! I'd just like to know where this happened, the context, etc.
From The Huffington Post:
Air America host Randi Rhodes called both Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton "whores" in a recent appearance, seen below. Rhodes, who hosts a weekday radio show on Air America, said to the cheering crowd, "What a whore Geraldine Ferraro is! She's such a fucking whore!" She then proceeded to say, "Hillary is a big fucking whore, too" to a mixed audience reaction. "You know why she's a big fucking whore? Because her deal is always, 'Read the fine print, asshole!'"
Watch:

When Can Harry Hear Sibel?

From The Huffington Post:
Harry Shearer
Why Does Rupert Define This as News Only in Britain?
Posted January 21, 2008 06:56 PM (EST)
I guess, in a way, it's proof of the oft-derided claim that Rupert Murdoch really doesn't control his "classy" media -- The Times of London, the Sunday Times, The Australian, now the WSJ -- the way he does his trashy ones -- the Brit and Australian tabloids, the NY Post. But his Times has been hard on a story I only started paying attention to thanks to a commenter on an earlier post: the Sibel Edmonds story. Last Sunday's Times advanced the story substantially: responding to a Freedom of Information Act request for a named file (one which Edmonds, a former FBI translator, says would support her story of American nuke materials making their way to Pakistan and elsewhere through Turkish intermediaries), the FBI denied that the file existed. The Sunday Times, though, says it has an internal document indicating that the file does indeed exist.
The theft of US nuclear secrets, the diverting of them to Pakistan (and, according to Edmonds, Saudi Arabia), the involvement of Israel in the scheme -- all of these would justify as jaw-droppingly newsworthy in a rational journalistic universe. Clearly, that's not where we live.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harry-shearer/why-does-rupert-define-th_b_82552.html

More Corporate Meddling

Did you get the memo that Chevron supported Saddam Hussein’s government even as our “government” held the people of Iraq as economic hostages? Not likely that the PR firms and lawyers have kept this oil giant's misadventures in the shadows. Judy Dugan’s report on the Huffington Post shows the complete fallacy of nationalism in these days of corporatocracy. A finger in every pie? You bet, and extra digits in Burma (Myranmar) Ecuador, Russia and, my personal favorite, Kazakhstan.

What would you do with $3 BILLION?

Bush & buddy, Nursultan Nazharbaev

The Dictator Penalty
Judy Dugan
Posted November 16, 2007
Chevron's $30 million settlement Thursday of charges involving illegal kickbacks to Saddam Hussein's government in 2001-2002 won't be much of a ding to its bottom line. It's more a reminder of the "dictator penalty" in Big Oil's dealings with the world's worst governments. There may also be criminal charges to come against Chevron in the Iraq case, which occurred during the old Axis of Evil days.
[…]Kazakhstan: Chevron boasts of being "Kazakhstan's largest private oil producer." Political opposition leaders, suppressed and often jailed by President-since-1991 Nursultan Nazarbaev, charge that his corrupt regime is supported not just by direct oil income but by huge illegal kickbacks. In 2005, after elections in which the main opposition party was banned outright, Chevron pledged $3 billion in new investment for a fivefold boost in the nation's crude oil production.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/judy-dugan/the-dictator-penalty_b_73097.html