Just ignore the pictures of what bush was doing as the disaster of Katrina unfolded, because it's not my point.  Here, go read.

When you're done, there's more on the flip...

If I am elected, my first order of business is to impeach George W. Bush

Of course, my vote will fall to the left... but if a Republican says impeach and a Democrat doesn't, I'm voting for the Republican.

After all, that's really our first order of business, right?

In the spirit of Westegg's generous assist for Bill Keller, I have decided to join the White House Press Corps.  And you can too.

Do you remember during the presidential debates, that one debate where the audience came up with the questions?  Those questions were fantastic, as I recall... and there's no reason why we can't do that now.

Mr. Rumsfeld also called on the Iraqi government to assume greater responsibility over time for the 15,000 detainees now in American custody in Iraq; to allocate enough money in future Iraqi budgets to field security forces that are capable of replacing many of the 22,000 foreign allied forces that plan to leave Iraq by year's end; and to improve cooperation between the Iraqi defense and interior ministries to enhance the combat readiness of Iraq's 170,000 military and paramilitary police forces.

So let me get this straight... Rumsfeld himself has popped up in Iraq, and he is essentially announcing terms for withdrawal.  He is not out playing grand marshall at the Pepsi 400, he's in Iraq with a different audience...

The part that caught my eye was setting an exit date for their evacuation.  I don't know about you, but that's the first time I have seen the withdrawal of coalition forces from Iraq referred to as an evacuation.

The short version: You're either with us or against us. Sound familiar?

I wrote this as part of an ongoing email exchange with a Republican friend.  It represents a lot of my thoughts in one place, so I thought I would share.

I am a registered Democrat, but I consider myself a left leaning independent.  I'm registered as a Democrat because my state doesn't allow unregistered primary voting.

Anyway, I would have absolutely supported Dean, but not because of his platform.  He came out against the Iraq invasion, and that's really all I needed to know as far as positions are concerned.  The main reason I was for Dean was because I think he was a glimpse of something to come... where leaders derive their base from a network model.  I don't think Dean ever intended to be president, I think he meant to drive the Democratic party to the left.  He was successful in that I think, and perhaps even damaged the eventual nominee a little in the process.  Anyway, I think his campaign unexpectedly took off for two primary reasons... it was funded in small increments by a broad network of indivuals, and his campaign was also willing to evolve it's platform using that same network.

to me, the notion that it's "the blogging phenomenon itself that may need the last rites" is simply not true.  rather, i think the surface of the phenomenon has only been scratched. because of the blogging tools on the internet, an individual has the potential capability to inexpensively reach a global audience.  if that's not power, i don't know what is.  some examples:

the image of the war president is one of my favorites (and as such, i have posted in an open thread on this before, so forgive the repeat please).  the first place i saw it was on the home page of michaelmoore.com.  which led me to the blog of the guy who made it, joe wezorek of american leftist.  the next time i saw it was on the bbc international site, in an article about war images.  then i saw it again on the bbc site, this time in the context of a protest in south korea (it's image #3).  to summarize, one guy (who could really be anyone) creates an image and posts it on his blog.  because of the exchange of information that the internet allows the image gets support from michael moore, and appears twice on the bbc international site... once because it's in a protest in south korea.  and if you google it, you'll find references to it in a lot of places and in different languages.

'If I recall correctly, part of the reason Mr. Cheney was on the ticket in 2000 was to reassure those who thought Mr. Bush didn't have enough experience.  Well look where the Vice President's experience has gotten us...  secret meetings to determine our country's energy policy, no bid contracts with his former company, warnings that if my running mate is elected then we'll have a terrorist attack, etc, etc'.

Can you think of any?

if you haven't seen the new dnc ad, 'guard', it's the best one i've seen so far.  view it here.  pretty effectively calls out the difference between what bush claims and reality in regard to iraq and to the economy.

and if you pay heed to polls at this point, things are looking good there too.