Beginning the long journey home now. Access to the net may again be sporadic. We'll see. So we'll leave it to our fine Guest Bloggers to jump in once again, as they have time, to help save the world in my possible absense.

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

Yesterday, I focused briefly on the King of Republican Lies and Moral Depravity: Rush Limbaugh, in his role as "apologist" for the torturers and murderers at Abu Ghraib.

Today, we'll take a look at the Crown Prince, Sean Hannity.

The Center for American Progress, has put together a swell list of just 15 of his greatest "hits". I think it's a good idea to occassional post one or two here to remind our friends on the Right of just who it is they are getting their Talking Points from, the accuracy of that information, and the veracity of the person they are counting on to give them their "information".

So here's the first in a series. All of these quotes are from the "Hannity and Colmes" show on the Fox "News" Channel.

In case you're wondering, the definition of "Patriotism", the only one given by Merriam-Webster, is as follows:

Patriotism
Function: noun
: love for or devotion to one's country

Saying one thing, doing another. Flip-flopping. Lying. Misleading. However you wanna put it, it's the stock-in-trade for the Right's newest Golden Boy. No wonder the Rightwingers commenting here and elsewhere can't seem to get any of their facts correct. Look who their role models are!

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

"People were --- they were saying he was a walking dead man, he was walking around with a bullseye on his head. It was scary."

So said Maxine Carroll, the sister-in-law of Army reservist Spc. Joseph M. Darby on ABC's "Good Morning America" last Monday about her brother-in-law and sister now in protective military custody. Somewhere.

Carroll doesn't know where her sister and brother-in-law Darby are now. For their own protection. Due to the many death threats he's received.

What did Darby do to bring such threats upon himself? He tipped off investigators to the abuse by his fellow soldiers at the Abu Ghraib prison.

Mind you, he didn't tell the media. He told military investigators about what was going on.

Darby would seem to be a very courageous and upstanding American to do what he did, turning in criminals who were damaging our efforts to win the peace in Iraq.

So seriously, who would put a "bullseye" on such a man's head? Who would threaten such a person with death?

I'd not think that terrorists, like al-Qaeda would do so. After all, it's arguable that folks sympathetic to their cause might have found the confirmation they were looking for in the photos that subsequently came out of Abu Ghraib.

I don't think Democrats or supporters of John Kerry would threaten Darby, given that the scandal only served to help support their argument that this war was being run irresponsibly, chaotically, and without the necessary resources.

So really, all bias aside, in all reality, what sort of people would do such a thing? What sort of people would stoop so low? Who's supporters would possibly be interested in threatening the life of the brave Army Spc. Joseph M. Darby?!

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

Even as the Rightwingnuts try to apologize for everything from killing thousands of innocent men, women, children and babies in Iraq (see the Comments on this item wherein they justify the killing of tens of thousands of civilians, for instance) to the refusal to allow American's to see their own sitting President if they won't sign a loyality oath, or dare to wear a sticker on their shirt that supports the other candidate, the truth is, they get their marching orders from one man; Rush Limbaugh.

Rush sets not only the agenda for the entire marching band of Rightwing nutballs, but he is their "moral" and "spiritual" inspiration for justifying and apologizing for every appalling act committed against the people of the world, and of course, the Constitution of the United States of America.

Why do these folks despise everything that America stands for? I'll have to assume it's the love of power. How else to explain the moral depravity found in their inspirational leader as exemplified by this montage of Rush clips concerning Abu Ghraib?

Give it a listen!

Be prepared to be appalled. But perhaps it'll give you some idea of who these guys idolize, and how they feel justified spewing the sort of moral depravity that they do every day. If the most popular radio show in America has those sorts of things to say every day, it's little wonder that so do his fans.

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

Loyalty oaths, journalist nationalities profiled, T-shirts banned, and now a tiny sticker will get you tossed from a Bush/Cheney rally. Noticing a pattern here yet?

From the Traverse City Record-Eagle:

Remind me again...what is we're supposedly fighting for in Iraq? Why does Bush/Cheney '04 hate freedom?

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

First Bush exploited and politicized the victims of 9/11 by showing dead people in the rubble in one campaign spot. And now he's doing it again, using the Iraq soccer team in his latest campaign spots, and in his latest stump speeches.

He didn't ask the 9/11 families if they liked the idea, and I guess he didn't bother to ask the Iraqi soccer team either, according to this piece from Sports Illustrated. It turns out, they don't like it any more than the 9/11 Families did:

For the record, as of 8/19/04:

Total number of American civilians killed on 9/11: 2,976
Minimum number of Iraqi civilians killed in the war so far: 11,619

Geez, what are they so angry about?!

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

(Brad still blogging from the road...)

Updating the recent embarrassing Bush "sovereignty" quote as blogged a few days ago. Alert BB commenter Corey has sent a link to the video of the quote.

If you thought reading the quote itself was either troubling or funny, take a look at the actual video! (Listen for the tittering in the background from the impressed crowd).

Then try to tell us how it's just a slip of the tongue versus a guy who doesn't know what the hell he's actually talking about.

Then tell us how you could possibly feel good about this guy being the leader of your country, much less the free world.

Then tell us what drugs you're taking, which grade you were able to complete in elementary school before dropping out or what it's like being married to your own sister...or what county in Texas you're actually from.

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

Ya know, when I started this blog, it wasn't really meant as a Bash Bush Blog. But the stakes are so high now, and he makes it so damn easy...I look forward to turning on Kerry after the current resident of 1600 gets the boot. But for now...there's a democracy to save...

First loyalty oaths must be signed to see Cheney at a rally in a public high school, then journalists are forced to give their nationalities to the campaign before being given credentials to cover events.

Now, wearing a Kerry-Edwards T-shirt will get you tossed out of a Bush event all together. From Richard Leiby's piece in The Washington Post:

Welcome to George W. Bush's Amerka.

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

While Bush has not only refused to condemn the ads of the ironically named "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth", he's using them to his advantage wherever possible.

Consider this exchange brought to my attention by a must-read Josh Marshall piece as Bush took this question at an "Ask the President" session in Oregon last week:

In the words of former Congressman Dan Burton in reference to a previous President, what a "scumbag".

Anyway, the SBVT stories are beginning to unravel hard, as reported in this morning's Washington Post. But read Josh's article for a fine summation and analysis of the entire ugly mess that has become become the Bush/Cheney '04 campaign's only pathetic and shameful hope.

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

What? A tool!

Cheese Wiz!

"Nice gouda, m'am"
Dubya delights the workers! Smiles everyone! Smiles!

The sun sets on the Bush "Presidency"

This article posted on Drudge from Rupert Murdoch's newspaper The NY Post about a woman running an anti-Bruce ad on Rupert Murdoch's "news" station Fox News in a limited area, but hoping to run it more if only she can somehow receive more funds to do so, is, in and of itself, an object lesson in how the Conservative Echo Chamber works. Anyone have a feeling that that 3-pronged pop today alone will get her the funds she's looking for? I haven't been listening to Rush or Sean today, but I have no doubt that both are covering the "story" (since they essentially repeat Drudge and/or Fox all day long, and so it goes), and Sean no doubt will soon be featuring his "exclusive" interview with the woman behind the ad.

The call is to boycott Bruce Springsteen now since he is apparently not in favor of George W. Bush.

Perhaps they've never forgiven Bruce for turning down the Reagan campaign's request in 1984 to use "Born in the U.S.A." as their theme song. Apparently, nobody in the Reagan camp ever bothered to actually listen to the lyrics of the song before making the request. But I digress.

What is it with these Rightwing Whackos (aka The Republican Party)? Apparently supporting their guy is not enough, they've got to attack --- personally, professionally and/or economically --- any American who doesn't support their guy.

I don't see Democrats calling for boycotts of Charlie Daniels or Toby Kieth or Mel Gibson or hell, even the Fox News Channel!

MEMO TO REPUBLICANS: It's America. Some people support one guy, some support the other. It's an election year. In a democracy, people are prone to express their support for one of the (sadly only) two candidates. You may wish to get used to the fact that some Americans may favor someone other than you do. You already own the Media, isn't that enough? Apparently not.

In the meantime, Bush has still failed to condemn, as John McCain has called on him to do, the "dishonest and dishonerable" TV ads of the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth". But why would he? This is the mother of all smear campaigns afoot. Fasten your seatbelts. I do believe we ain't seen nothin' yet.

Cause, baby, he was born to run...

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

The Florida 2000 election was clearly an aberration of our Democracy on more levels than one may care to count. From the elderly Jews "voting" for Pat Buchanan on the butterfly ballot, to the grossly racist and inaccurate corporate purging of "felons" from the voter rolls, to the military absentee ballots postmarked days after the election but left unchallenged by a cowed Gore campaign, to the staged demonstrations of "angry" Republican campaign workers storming the vote counters meant to look like a voter uprising (as seen at Right, and published, without the identifying numbers in that "Liberal" paper the Washington Post - click it for more info!), to the Florida Secretary of State/Bush Campaign Co-Chair "confirming" the count of uncounted ballots, etc. etc. etc.

To put it bluntly, it was a debacle and a blight on our country's record of free, fair, honest and open elections.

And yet, I was prepared to look back at it all it as a one-time anomaly of a bitterly divided country and a virtually tied state run by the brother of the Republican nominee as he was looking to find that one foot in the door to snatch the deciding edge in a nearly evenly divided national electorate.

In other words, it sucked, it was un-American, un-Democratic and un-seemly, but it was over and it could never happen again.

Am I naive, or what?

That "one-time anomaly" was likely nothing of the sort. And it looks like the Bush Bros. may be preparing to do it again. Seeking any and all opportunities to squeeze out just enough votes to put them over again. Or more appropriately perhaps; Squeeze out enough votes to make it look as though they've won yet again.

This column from Bob Herbert in Monday's NY Times may be an ominous sign of who and what is at work in Florida again for this year's crucial Presidential election.

The elderly black vote in Florida is crucial to a Kerry win, and so the piece is particularly ominous and frightening. Since you have to subscribe to the Times (it's free, though!) to read the article, I'll post more of the column here than I usually might. It's a short piece though, and worth subscribing if only to read the whole thing:

Chilled yet?

One woman who was questioned is quoted in the column as asking "Am I going to go to jail now because I voted by absentee ballot?"

Joseph Egan, an attorney for one of the 73 year old vote workers being "investigated", speaks of the blanket of fear and intimidation that is beginning to emanate through the community:

If this is the one story that has been picked up by the media about possible chicanery in the Sunshine State, imagine what may be going on that we don't yet know about down there.

When I received an Email last night asking me to join as an "Election Protection Volunteer", it seemed perhaps to be a bit of overkill. This morning however, I'm beginning to think differently. If the people won't step up to ensure a free and fair election this time around, who will? Jeb's thugs? James Baker? The Supreme Court?

And with the margin of victory as close as it could be, how na�ve would we be to make the assumption that BushCo won't do anything and everything again this time to "win" the election once more.

As it's been said..."Fool me once ... shame on ... shame on you ... ... ... if ya fool me, ya can't get fooled again."

Pay attention.

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)

Still trolling the great Pacific Northwest in search of those elusive "swing voters". And combing the local papers when I came across this in the obit section of The Olympian...

You wouldn't want to betray a dead patriot and Mariners fan's "final wishes" now would you?! I didn't think so.

(Blogged by Brad from the road...)