• Home

  • American Entropy is dedicated to the disruption and discrediting of neoconservative actions and the extreme ideals of the religious right.

    Add to Technorati Favorites

    Top Blogs

    My Zimbio

    Get Firefox!

    07 October 2005

    Shame! Shame! Shame!

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button
    It was the first major House vote since Texan Tom DeLay was forced to step down as majority leader after being indicted on felony charges. Republicans won in a roll call vote that ran 44 minutes, far beyond the allotted five minutes.

    Some 13 Republicans, mostly from Northeast states, ultimately voted with 196 Democrats and 1 independent against the bill. No Democrats voted for it.

    Democrats in the chamber chanted "shame, shame, shame" as the final tally was announced.

    When over two dozen Republicans initially voted no, DeLay, Barton, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and new Majority Leader Roy Blunt circled the chamber to cajole holdouts.

    Republican Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland was the last to switch. With the tally stuck at 211-211, Gilchrest changed his vote, making it 212-210. Barton promptly shook his hand and Republican Mike Simpson, who presided over the vote, gaveled it to an end.

    Every last one of you.

    Posted by Geoff

    Culture of coruption

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button
    Let's look at some of the God loving fearing Repubs tonight...

    Rove asserted that he had nothing to do with the outing of Val Plame way back when....

    After four trips in front of the grand jury on the matter I dare anyone to question his honesty or as the pResident would say, his character. Nothing to see here, let's move on...

    [UPDATE] Here's something to speculate about.

    Mr. Bug-man himself managed to have his lawyer crawl out of their holes and, not defend their client but, smear the prosecuters of DeLay claiming the charges were brought up under coercesion. Nice defense guys! I think I get it, Republicans aren't slime...

    Ha! Almost did that with out laughing. In reality, fuck every last one of you. Ooops! I meant, you guys suck. Honestly.

    Posted by Geoff

    Lang is on a roll

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button
    Today Col. Pat Lang writes about the Presidents insistence that the war in Iraq has everything to do with the bigger picture; the Global War on Terror(ism). Of course his claim to this is very weak and only accepted by the ignorant and those who have something at stake. Mr. Bush falls into both categories.

    Lang writes
    The president's rationale for intervention in Iraq has disintegrated into progressively more embarrassing disarray. WMD? Out. AQ-Saddam Alliance? Out. Fight them there rather than in Cleveland? Madrid and London pretty much defeat that argument. Fighting Terrorism wherever we find it? The number of lethal terrorist incidents is dramatically up the last two years. What is left? What is left is the assertion (made yesterday) that Iraq is THE central battlefield in the war against religious fanatics (now specifically Islamic) who are the most fell enemy the human race has faced in millennia, and who threaten the very existence of life as we know it. It is interesting if a few thousand jihadis from 3rd world countries are that potent. Interesting.

    In any event, this assertion is the president's last ditch defense against those [who] wish him ill as well as those afflicted with sadness because more marines and soldiers are reporting for duty in heaven every day.

    If the majority of the insurgents are Iraqis fighting us for specifically Iraqi reasons, then the president's argument over Iraq falls to bits. He doesn't have many more places of refuge in his rhetoric.

    Indeed. Yesterday Mr. Lang had some flames for the present class of Military generals, let us read
    There a lot of generals out there who are scared silly of Rumsfeld and Bush and would never talk to me in [public] for fear that Rummy might find out. Warriors? A lot of them are reading this now. My father was a tough old soldier, rather like one of the senior sergeants in "From Here to Eternity." He retired as an officer, but in his heart he was always a sergeant major. He told me often that whenever I might be tempted to trust a general officer I should remember how he "got to be one." There are generals whom I admire. You know who you are, but the craven behavior of present day generals is depressing. Why has no one resigned in the face of stupidity on both the strategic and tactical level? Why?

    There are a lot of people out there in "cloud cuckoo land" who would like to "turn Iraq into a glassy parking lot." That would work, but we are not going to do that. The American people will not allow that. That being the case, let us all think positively about solutions for this awful dilemma that we have made for ourselves. Above all, remember that "Specialist Snuffy Smith" of the Arkansas National Guard or "Lance Corporal Jones" of the 1st Marine Regiment were sent there by the government that we elected. They did not pick this war or this enemy and they only volunteered once, when they joined up.

    I agree, if one more person says I don't support the troops I'm going to... well I'm not going to do anything, but inform them that supporting the troops and supporting those who command them and those very commands are two very different things. I think it is scary state of our nation when not one person in the armed forces has expressed outrage at the course this country took towards war. Lang speaks of fear of Rummy, Bush, et cetera. This fear is a sign a horrible things to come if a change is not made soon.

    Juan Cole adds another post to his Arguing with Bush series. It is long, but a must read. Let's take a look...

    Of course Bush used 11 September 2001 as his theme, making the war on Iraq necessary and just... to which Cole writes
    September 11 was a horrible moment that traumatized all Americans and killed nearly 3,000 persons. I myself had two cousins in the Pentagon that day. But it had nothing, repeat, nothing whatsoever to do with Iraq.

    Bush then mentions some of the other terrorist attacks (most of them after September 11 and therefore theoretically preventable if Bush had put real resources into fighting al-Qaeda instead of running off to tangle with Baathists in Iraq.)

    too much to paste it all go read it, he makes some strong point. He (Cole) and Lang deserve much credit, they are both experts on the subject.

    note: emphasis and spelling corrections were made to Col. Lang's writing. See his site for original

    Posted by Geoff

    06 October 2005

    The Bible is no longer credible

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button
    Ha! Ha!
    THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.

    The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect "total accuracy" from the Bible.

    "We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision," they say in The Gift of Scripture.

    No kidding?

    Bush on Iraq

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button
    Mr. Bush the war in Iraq has nothing to do with 911 with the exception that we're now training the next set of hijackers; just like the US and USSR did in Afghanistan in the 80s.

    Bush said today
    "Wars are not won without sacrifice, and this war will require more sacrifice, more time, and more resolve. The terrorists are as brutal an enemy as we have ever faced,"

    So how 'bout we decide how we are going to pay for and fund this sacrifice? Or why don't you make a sacrifice like giving up your neocon dream of the war and its intended results and ask some experts for advice for once; not fire them.


    Posted by Geoff

    05 October 2005

    Drinking Liberally - Charleston

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button
    Good Lord! I think the Idiot-in-Chief has outdone himself with Harriet, don't you? Rush Limbaugh called her "a pick made from weakness," and Pat Buchanan said, "Handed a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to return the court to constitutionalism, George W. Bush passed over a dozen of the finest jurists of his day - to name his personal lawyer." Sure is scary when I don't like the same things that Rush & Pat don't like.

    And was DeLay speaking of himself when asked about the new indictments:
    "...politics at its sleaziest..." ?

    Who knows? Who can explain? Probably none of us, but at least we can talk about it at this week's version of Drinking Liberally Charleston! Please join us for a healthy dose of liberalism and help promote democracy one pint at a time.

    Voodoo Lounge
    15 Magnolia Road
    West Ashley

    "Republican majority leader Tom DeLay was indicted and he was stripped of his congressional leadership powers. When asked what it feels like to lose all his power, DeLay said, 'I feel like a Democrat.'"
    --Conan O'Brien

    02 October 2005

    Stephanopoulos on Bush Cheney re. Plame

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button
    Today on this week with George Stephanopoulos, Stephanopoulos made a closing remark that has stirred up a lot of speculation in the blogosphere (Win, QT video). I don't believe it, nor do I have any confidence that if this went all the way up to the White House they would let it become public. We'll see...
    Definitely a political problem but I wonder, George Will, do you think it’s a manageable one for the White House especially if we don’t know whether Fitzgerald is going to write a report or have indictments but if he is able to show as a source close to this told me this week, that President Bush and Vice President Cheney were actually involved in some of these discussions.

    Posted by Geoff

    [UPDATE] Juan Cole on this, monday morning


    AddThis Feed Button

    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    B l o g R o l l