Basic in the Kitchen

I got a lot of e-mails on last week's post and was a little fearful about opening them. I was thinking, "Oh, I must have offended someone with my comments" (and figured it was about impeachment).

That wasn't the case. So we're going to have some kitchen basics.

A number of you wrote to say you were glad that canned foods were being noted and this was apparently the thing no one wanted to raise. There's no reason to feel guilty about using canned foods. I'm very glad that Rita and Laraine both tried the Del Monte Fresh Cut Zucchini and recommend it highly.

But the canned food issue has raised some other ones. So, again, this is just some kitchen basics.

Frozen food. What should I have on hand?

You should have what you like.

Let's talk berries first because (a) some areas do not have fresh all the time and (b) transporting fresh around the country costs a lot more than transporting frozen.

My husband and my son Mike are both allergic to fresh strawberries. I'm pretty sure Mike outgrew that but he may not have. If we have strawberry shortcake, we have it with frozen strawberries. Blueberries are more common in the frozen section these days so you could try those to see what you think of them.

I wasn't aware that a number of people were unsure in the frozen section of the grocer. Cheryl wanted to know what's easiest because she usually grabs Green Giant roasted potatoes and tosses it in the microwave but doesn't go with anything else.

I believe all frozen foods are microwaveable for the most part (if they need cooking). An exception is corn on the cob. If you like corn, that would be my recommendation. You boil water (salt it if you want) and boil the corn. It's a very easy to fix food. You're not even having to take the husks off.

One dish I enjoy (in single serving size) is creamed spinach. I've never made creamed spinach in my life and only know it from the frozen section. (I do have a spinach recipe that I'll share next week provided Wally's mother has no problem with it. It requires fresh spinach, however. But there were requests for spinach recipes in this week's e-mails.)

You may not care for creamed spinach. That's your real clue. Even if something is easy to cook, don't pick it up if you don't generally like it.

I don't like frozen beans or peas. If I'm making split-pea salad, for instance, I use canned. If I'm having beans (other than green beans), I generally buy them dry. But that's a personal taste issue and if you enjoy them frozen, that's for you to decide.

That's really the point in all the e-mails, people are worried about what they are eating or wanting to eat. No one wrote, "Is it okay to eat Death By Chocolate for every meal?" So everyone writing grasps the importance of increasing fruits and vegetables (for yourselves and/or your families).

I've obviously done several things wrong if people are worried what I'm going to think. If you need to picture me in the kitchen with you, know that I'm just happy someone else is cooking and, if you know it tastes wonderful, I'm sure I'll love it as well.

But at least one e-mail indicates it's not just me. Kent e-mails about a PBS cooking show (he doesn't name it but I think I know which one he means and I caught it as well). Kent lives in Texas. The host is from the east. He made a big to-do about refried beans and insulted every canned variety offered to him -- comparing them to dog food.

I met Kent when we were all in Texas last March. Kent can't get over the nonsense of that host (it's not just Kent having that problem). Here's the deal for anyone in Kent's situation: You live in Texas, you know more about Tex-Mex food than an outsider.

I thought that segment was ridiculous when I saw it. He was being spooned refried beans out of a can. I can't imagine anything he'd enjoy being spooned out of a can. He just wanted to be snide and he achieved that. Ignore him. Ignore his program.

If you're outside of Texas (or the southwest), you may not grasp that you season the refried beans if you're using canned. (You also season them if you're using dried pintos from scratch.)
That can include a fresh pepper, a clove of garlic, pepper, you name it.

If I say something here that makes you uncomfortable, by all means let me know. I certainly am not trying to make anyone feel nervous in their own kitchen. It's your kitchen and you're in charge. Everyone else, including me, is a guest and a guest trying to take over your kitchen is like someone in the backseat trying to tell you how to drive. Blow them off. Unless it's me. If it's me, let me know. Because the whole point of this site is that people who aren't (or weren't) comfortable in their kitchens would realize that it's not scary and they can handle it.

If you're vegan, you already know your basics. If you're not vegan, I'd recommend keeping the following in your kitchen: eggs, your favorite cheese, bread, flour and sugar at a minimum. Milk? I have a big family so we never have milk go bad unless we're away from home. But milk is so expensive these days that I'd hesitate to recommend anyone keep it on hand unless they normally do.

I normally have rice and dried pasta on hand. But that's because I like to eat those things. If you don't, there's really no point in keeping them on hand except for an emergency situation when you have nothing else to eat.

A big question from the men was if it was okay to just cook one dish. I'm assuming they are cooking for themselves because two people are rarely in synch enough to take the same meal day after day. But if you want to do that, there's a plus to it. The more you cook something, the more comfortable you are with it and the easier it is for you to cook it. You can try different spices or other things if you'd like.

I think I've shared this before but C.I. and Ava are usually here every Friday (usually with Kat) and one night, when Wally was also here so it was during the summer, I was embarrassed to find out that they were cooking pigs in a blanket. I felt like I'd failed or something as a host. I hadn't. They wanted to fix something quick and easy that everyone would eat. I ended up having some as well and the best meal is always something someone else cooked.

So just eat what you want. If we work at listening to our bodies, we'll know what we need. I know that may cause a panic for some because you may think you'll be eating sweets non-stop. But if you're making a point to increase your fruits and vegetables, you should find that you really begin to want to eat them.

One e-mail came in from a woman who's just switched apartments. It's a downgrade, due to the economy, and she hates it. In terms of the kitchen, she has no windows and she says the kitchen is tiny and she feels like she's in a jail cell everytime she's in there. We exchanged e-mails and one of the things she's done is hang up pots and pans which has given her a lot more room (she only had one cabinet below waist level (it's under the sink) and the two cabinets on the wall are being used for glasses, plates, etc. She liked the idea of hanging pots and pans but checked a hanging device and it was too expensive. I don't know what the item is called, she found it at Target, but you can get a thing (wooden or metal) that is just hooks on an expandable base. She got it in metal for less than ten bucks, hung it up and all her skillets and pans are hanging from it now. She also tried my suggestion of moving a radio into the kitchen and it feels less like a jail cell for her now. As we were exchanging e-mails, I thought about two things.

First, with the awful economy, I'm sure she's not the only one downgrading just to stay above water. Two, whether you downgrade or stay where you are, if the kitcehn is a source of grief, you're not going to want to go in there. One of my son's 'decorating style' (I'm laughing kindly) is NBA. He's a big basketball fan and if you go into his kitchen, he's got action figures hanging on the walls (in their original boxes), trading cards and everything else up on the walls. It makes it a room he wants to be in. So you may want to try that. I have a friend who, when she was really depressed for a series of month, would clip out a comic strip from the paper each week and put it on her fridge.

There are little touches you can do (and I don't mean things you have to go out and shop for) that will make the kitchen feel more like your room.

The last e-mail was from a man who has a skillet, one large pot and two sauce pans. He said a friend's been "ribbing" him about that. It's wonderful to have a large number of pots and pans but he can cook a full meal with what he has on hand.

Again, a large number of e-mails seemed to be about permission. You give yourself permission. If you want mine, you've got it.

So the illegal war? We found out this week that the Iraq War is not only not planned to end anytime soon, but the government is telling us it will go on much longer than most of us have expected in our worst nightmares. And if they're admitting to five more years, you know they're hoping for even more.

The illegal war is not going to end in phases, my opinion. It's going to end or it's not going to end. It could last a century (didn't John McCain suggest that earlier this month?). Troops come home or they stay. Even a partial number staying risks more being sent back over.

The Iraqi government can't get it together because it's not a government of the people. It's a government the US has installed. As long as US forces are on the ground there, the government will look to the US for approval. It will not be representing Iraqis.

Bully Boy is attempting to by-pass the United Nations and create agreements with his puppet (al-Maliki) that will allow the US to stay as long as the puppet (or later puppets) want. That is appalling. The US should not have gone into Iraq and it should not be over there now. But we should not mistake whatever a puppet agrees to with the will of the Iraqi people.

The Iraqi people, in poll after poll, has made it clear that they want all foreign forces out of their country.

We would feel the same way.

And maybe that's one of the answers? Realizing what we we'd feel like in their shoes? Realizing that they aren't the "other" but people just like us. Adults, not children, who can steer their own course and should.

We hear a lot about how US troops have to remain in Iraq to protect "them." Who is "them"? Iraqis? Who is the US protecting "them" from? I wasn't aware that another country had annexed parts of Iraq. (Though some parts do want to split off.)

The US is doing what it did during Vietnam: Propping up a government that doesn't represent the will of the people. Year after year, it can be propped up but it's not a legitimate government or one that can stand on its own because it is not a government that came up from the country, it's one being imposed from outside.

There was violence when the US left Vietnam. There was also a healing period. We now have diplomatic (and economic) relations with Vietnam and their current government is not the puppet government the US spent years propping up.

A legitimate government is of the people and by the people. The US military or US government is not composed of Iraqis and should not be in the business of propping up governments in foreign countries.

We were lied to about why the US needed to go into Iraq. We're being lied to now about why the US has to stay.

(If I seem especially focused tonight, I should note that I'm ripping off from a presenation C.I. gave to the Iraq study group tonight. I do have permission to write about this and I have added my own thoughts and not just provided a transcript.)

"The lies of war" is how C.I. opened it and I thought we were going to hear about WMDs, democracy, liberation and all the usual lies of war that we know by heart.

But C.I.'s point was that those lies got the US over there. There are new lies that keep the US there. We need to start thinking about that and exploring that. We need to be exposing that. I can't do justice to the section where C.I. was talking about the bombs being dropped. But I will note that when the US has to drop bombs on a country, there is no democracy, there is no legitmacy to the puppet government.

Lies got us into war and we can hear that over and over from the ones who think talking about Iraq means bringing up Judith Miller, et al. But lies are keeping us there and addressing that may be one way to end the illegal war.

This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:

Friday, January 17, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the illegal war keeps going (and gets extended?), John Edwards addresses the realities of Ronald Reagan, and more.

Starting with war resisters, Courage to Resist has posted a number of interviews with war resisters. Today we'll focus on their interview with Brandon Hughey who spoke of how he turned against the illegal war, advised his superior of it and finally took matters into his own hands by checking out from Fort Hood for 28 days (starting in January 2004) "to see if maybe they would boot me out. Once I go AWOL and once I show that I'm not a 'good soldier' maybe they'd just boot me out. So I came back in 28 days, instead of kicking me out of the army they said, 'We're glad to have you back. We're going to give you extra duty and dock your pay. But I suggest you pack your backs and start getting ready to go to Iraq.' So basically that idea I had backfired. I had tried to get myself booted out and even that didn't work. So at that point, I began to feel like I was trapped. There was no way out."

Courage to Resist: And none of your superiors ever informed you of Conscientious Objector status?

Brandon Hughey: No, I had never even heard of that. I didn't even know that existed until I after I came to Canada.

Courage to Resist: So you were told to get ready to ship out to Iraq after being AWOL for 28 days? What did you do then?

Brandon Hughey: Basically, I began to think of what other options I had to get out of the military. You know, I couldn't really think of anything. I tried going AWOL and coming back, at that point I just felt trapped. I had remembered that tens of thousands of people had come up -- during Vietnam -- had come up to Canada and I thought at the time, 'Maybe as a last resort option I could leave the country?" And so I kept that in the back of my mind and when I realized that, you know, there didn't seem like any other way I could get out I began to feel like, "Okay, leaving the country is an option." So, at that point, I began to make plans to go to Canada.

Courage to Resist: How did you prepare yourself to make this huge decision?

Brandon Hughey: I was just going to pack my bags and drive myself there -- try to set aside whatever money I could and hopefully have enough to get myself started in a new life and a new country. I really didn't have much a plan because I didn't know what I was getting myself into. And that was pretty much it.

Courage to Resist: And when did you actually make the move?

Brandon Hughey: I came up in March of 2004, when I arrived.

Courage to Resist: Did you make contact right away with anybody with the War Resisters Support Campaign or any other resisters.

Brandon Hughey: Well the War Resisters Support Campaign hadn't been formed yet when I arrived. But I was staying with a Quaker family for a few months when I first arrived. So the Quaker community did a lot and they, you know, they did a lot to support me. That was really my first support network when I came to Canada.

Courage to Resist's audio interviews are part of their ongoing Audio Project.

A number of war resisters have gone to Canada and attempted to be granted asylum.
November 15th, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the appeals of war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Parliament is the solution.Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26. The War Resisters Support Campaign has more on the action in Canada:

The War Resisters Support Campaign has called a pan-Canadian mobilization on Saturday, January 26th, 2008 to ensure : 1) that deportation proceedings against U.S. war resisters currently in Canada cease immediately; and 2) that a provision be enacted by Parliament ensuring that U.S. war resisters refusing to fight in Iraq have a means to gain status in Canada. For listings of local actions, see our Events page. If you are able to organize a rally in your community, contact the Campaign -- we will list events as details come in.

Courage to Resist notes:

Join and support January 25 vigils and delegations in support of U.S. war resisters currently seeking sanctuary Canada. Actions are being planned in Washington D.C., New York, Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Supporters will meet with officials at Canadian Consulates across the United States in order underscore that many Americans hope that the Canadian Parliament votes (possible as early as February) in favor of a provision to allow war resisters to remain. Download and distribute Jan. 25-26 action leaflet (PDF).Supporting the war resisters in Canada is a concrete way to demonstrate your support of the troops who refuse to fight. Help end the war by supporting the growing GI resistance movement today!
Details January 25-26 actions/events in support of U.S. war resisters.
Sign the letter "Dear Canada: Let U.S. War Resisters Stay!" and encourage others to sign.
Organize a delegation to a Canadian Consulate near you .
Host an event or house-party in support of war resisters.


There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'."

And the war drags on and on. Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) pieces together several press conferences to explain, "Gates and top uniformed officers sketched out a plan that runs counter to pledges by Democratic presidential contenders to bring about a rapid drawdown of the U.S. military presence in Iraq" and cites Lt. General Raymond Odierno (the number two) declaring that it "could be five to 10 years" that the US forces remain in Iraq. Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) observes, "Senior U.S. military officials projected yesterday that the Iraqi army and police will grow to an estimated 580,000 members by the end of the year but that shortages of key personnel, equipment, weaponry and logistical capabilities mean that Iraq's security forces will probably require U.S. military support for as long as a decade." Julian E. Barnes (Los Angeles Times) reminds, "Iraq's defense minister, Abdul-Qader Mohammed Jassim Mifarji, has said Iraqi forces will not be able to assume responsibility for internal security until 2012 or be able to defend the country's borders before 2019."

In the face of that, the alleged 'anti-war groups' cave again. They aren't anti-war groups, they aren't peace groups. They are Win Without War and all the other useless groups that do nothing to end the illegal war. Nothing the reports of the cave, PR Watch explains that "Ryan Grim reports that the biggest and best-funded organizations in the liberal peace movement, primarily MoveOn and the groups in its Americans Against Escalation in Iraq (AAEI) coalition, are no longer advocating that Congress end the war. This year "the groups instead will lower their sights and push for legislation to prevent President Bush from entering into a long-term agreement with the Iraqi government that could keep significant numbers of troops in Iraq for years to come. ... The groups believe this switch in strategy can draw contrasts with Republicans that will help Democrats gain ground in November." AAEI's PR spokesperson, Moira Mack of Hildebrand Tewes Consulting, called it "the perfect legislative opportunity." In other words, as Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber pointed out last March, for MoveOn and other Democrat-aligned peace groups it's not about ending the war, it's about electing Democrats. Most of the tens of millions of dollars that MoveOn and AAEI have spent lobbying and organizing for "peace" has been directed at pressuring and embarrassing pro-war Republicans, while the Democratic Congress has continued to fund the war and pro-war Democrats have generally been given a pass." All those 'groups' have to offer is silent vigils and online petitions. And we've seen serveral years before.

A rude comment on IVAW comes from a surprising online source. We're not linking to it. We're not linking to that site while it's up. (The same way all the ones lying about Gloria Steinem aren't being linked to. See The Third Estate Sunday Review for a piece tentatively titled "Hey Little Girl Are You All Alone, Did You Go and Leave Your Brain at Home" dedicated to the Mud Flap Gals and all the other useless play-feminists online who never thought they needed to educated themselves on any topic before weighing in.) IVAW is being slammed for not allowing an event that marks the anniversary of the illegal war. Buy a clue, idiots, IVAW's Winter Soldier Investigation ends before the anniversary. But apparently, the 5th anniversary of the illegal war can't be marked if it can't be done on a weekend. Apparently, we're supposed to have "5th Anniversary of the Illegal War" observed and then, during the week, the actual date?

It's too damn bad that there are some hurt feelings and people whining and carping about IVAW. IVAW isn't preventing anyone from doing anything. They have planned the Winter Soldiers' Investigation and the dates are March 13th through March 16th. You have to be really STUPID not to grasp that the 5th anniversay of the illegal war is AFTER the Winter Soldiers' Investigation. IVAW's Kelly Dougherty observes:

As we enter 2008, please stop for a moment and consider where we are now, and where we are going. In just over a year, America will have a new President. We will have endured a year of campaign commercials and attack ads. We'll have watched debates devoid of any real discussion of the withdrawal from Iraq that a growing number of Americans now call for. We'll have waited, for yet another year, for our leaders to find a way to say what we know in our hearts: we must leave Iraq.
But what will have changed in the next year that will make that happen?
We must face this fact: we run the serious risk that one year from today we'll be right where we are now, but with another year's worth of casualties, a year's worth of grieving families, a year's worth of Iraqi anger and suffering built on our occupation of a country we now know was no threat to us. Ending this war in a year is different than ending it now, just as ending it now is different than ending it a year ago, or a year before that. There is a price to pay for every day that we wait.

She's exactly right. And in 2004, we saw the peace movement shut down shop because the most important thing wasn't ending the illegal war, it was 'elections!' The peace movement can't make the same mistake in 2008. If people have hurt little feelings, too damn bad. Too much time has been wasted with the peace movement wasting their energies on the John Kerry presidential bid or the Democrats 2006 Congressional races. People in the peace movement will most likely favor a candidate on their own. That's to be expected. But the peace movement is not a get-out-the-vote movement nor should it be hijacked (willingly or not) by political parties.

IVAW is not the only thing happening in DC. March for Peace exists around it and blocks out the 13th through the 16th for IVAW. Possibly, those whining online about IVAW don't believe students matter and that's why they flaunt their ignorance of March for Peace? You can find their schedule here.

CBS and AP report that Turkey is declaring that they "bombed nearly 60 Kurdish rebel targets in an attack this week in northern Iraq." Christian Peacemaker Teams have protested noting that the bombings -- as with all ariel bombings including the ones the US is doing in Iraq -- are indiscriminate and targeting civilians.

In other reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing that claimed 2 lives and left four wounded, a Baquba home bombing left 2 police officers dead and two more wounded while another Baquba home bombing claimed the lives of 2 children and four adults wounded.

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed clash in Basra that left at least two soldiers injured, three Iraqi police officers injured and an unknown number of civilians injured while Dr. Luma Salih was shot dead in a seperate incident as she left the hospital, a Wajihiyah armed clash left 2 police officers dead and three more wounded, 8 people were shot dead in Kirkuk and a Nasriyah Province clash in which 9 people were killed and at least forty wounded.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 3 in Diyala Province. Reuters reports 7 corpses "were found after one" US "air strike in the town of Riyadh".

In US political news, the Green Party has scheduled another presidential candidate forum for February 2nd at Busboys & Poets in DC (14th and V Streets) at ten in the morning -- Jesse Johnson and Kent Mesplay are confirmed to appear others may or may not. More info click here. They've also created a new webpage for videos with the San Francisco forum held Sunday already on it and plans for more videos to be added. The Green Party's official blog can be found here and certainly if it's happening and known Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) is probably posting about it. In Democratic presidential politics, Shailagh Murraqy (Washington Post) quotes John Edwards response to Barack Obama's praise of Ronald Reagan (see yesterday's snapshot): "When you think about what Ronald Reagan did to the American people, to the middle class to the working people. He was openly -- openly -- intolerant of unions and the right to organize. He openly fought against the union and the organized labor movement in this country . . . He openly did extraordinary damage to the middle class and working people, created a tax structure that favored the very wealthiest Americans and caused the middle class and working people to struggle every single day. The destruction of the environment, you know, eliminating regulation of companies that were polluting and doing extraordinary damage to the environment. I can promise you this: thie president will never use Ronald Reagan as an example of change."

This MLK weekend, PBS' Bill Moyers Journal includes an essay by Moyers (who served in the Johnson White House) reflecting on history and present day -- in addition, he speaks with the New York Times David Cay Johnston about the truths regarding taxation and spending. In most markets, that airs tonight. It will stream online and provide transcripts and audio.

iraq
iraq veterans against the war
nancy a. youssefmcclatchy newspapersann scott tysonthe washington postjulian e. barnesthe los angeles times
bill moyersbill moyers journal
kimberly wilder

Mushroom and Pepper Omelet

I had an e-mail asking about omelets. Jean wrote that her mother made the best omelets in the world but she can't seem to get the knack of it. We exchanged a few e-mails on the topic and the big problem appeared to be that Jean can't flip the omelet to cook the other side so it remains a large, fluffy circle.

That's something that requires a great deal of practice and, often, a lot of butter, spray or oil for beginners. But you don't have to flip it. If you eat out very often, you'll notice that most places now make omelets that are basically in the shape of a "D" and that's because it's far easier to make those. If you're attempting to make an omelet in a circle, I would advise you to use the smallest skillet you have. I have a huge non-stick one and my youngest daughter always thought she could manage an omelet easier in that but that's really not the case. You really need a small skillet that the omelet will fill up, then you go around it with the spatula and then you flip it with the spatula.

However, it is much easier to just fold it in half instead of flipping it -- hence the "D" shape -- when it's cooking and then flip the "D" over after if it's cooked some more.

Mushroom and Pepper Omelet
1 small can of mushrooms or 1 fresh mushroom chopped
1/2 onion, chopped
1 whole jalapeno pepper from a jar of them, chopped
dash of pepper
dash of Parmesan cheese
2 ounces of mozzarella cheese shredded
3 eggs

Break the 3 eggs in a bowl, add pepper and Parmesan cheese. Using a whisk or fork, stir repeatedly for about 1 minute. Add the onion, mushroom and jalapeno pepper. If you're using a spray, spray your skillet. If you're using an oil or butter or a butter substitute, add it to the skillet. Place the skillet on a stove burner. Stir the contents of the bowl and then add to the skillet (if you're using butter or a substitute, you'll need to allow time for it to melt). Pour the mixture from the bowl into the hot skillet.

If you're using butter, the temptation is to put the burner on high to melt the butter quickly. That's fine but you need to turn the burner to medium or medium low to cook the omelet. If you leave it on high, you're going to burn it.

As it cooks, the mixture will thicken. Use your spatula to make sure the edges do not stick. When you're ready to 'flip' it, instead of flipping, use the spatula to lift half of it and fold it over into a "D". This will cause some of the mixture to run so you'll allow it to cook for a bit more before flipping the "D" over.

When the "D" is sealed and cooked on both sides, the omelet is ready to serve.

I make garden omelets and many kinds of them. I went with those ingredients because they were Jean's favorites. However, you can leave out any of them -- you can make an omelet with just eggs and cheese -- or you can add anything you want. Olives -- green or black -- are very good. I've added celery before when I've had celery on hand for another dish and more than I needed for that dish. Anchovies will work, I have an aunt who loves them, but with those, tomatoes or anything damp or oily, you need to be sure that they cook.

By adding vegetables, you're increasing the nutritional value. Generally speaking, if it can be a pizza topping, it can go into an omelet. That includes meat toppings. If I'm making omelets for dinner, I might add meat -- chopped ham, Canadian Bacon, etc. -- but in the morning or afternoon, I generally just add vegetables. (Usually, onions, olives -- black and green -- and mushrooms.)

A note of caution if you're cooking it for someone. Do not be upset if they grab the catsup. Some people use it on eggs. When I first got married and cooked omelets, I was so offended when my husband added catsup to it. I thought it was saying, "I need to do something to make this taste good." His family, however, adds catsup to omelets and scrambled eggs. I had never encountered that before. I have a neighbor who adds honey to a cooked omelet and, these days, a number of people enjoy serving it with fresh salsa.

I've left out salt because the cheese should contain enough sodium for taste. But if you're someone who adds salt to everything, you can add a dash of it in the first step, when you're first mixing it in the bowl.

Please read Ava and C.I.'s excellent "TV: The Dead and Missing Persons." Between that and "Roundtable," Third really sets the bar. On the latter, Mike (Mikey Likes It!) left me a note to call C.I. before reading. C.I. does not like Dennis Kucinich. That's fine. And I certainly agree with it; however, the question in the e-mails is basically: Did you know?


Never. C.I. never said, "Trina, your support is wrong." C.I., in fact, helped me find things to note many weekends. But it was never an issue. I called C.I. (after church, I was on my way out when I saw the note) and asked what was up? C.I. explained what was discussed and made sure that I understood that my support wasn't a problem. I appreciated that but I wouldn't have doubted it myself because I knew it was a non-issue just by the fact that when I was happy I had picked Kucinich, C.I. was happy for me being happy. I have no idea who C.I. will support and believe 100% that C.I. doesn't even know right now. The Iraq War is a bit more important than front runners who don't want to end it.

Kucinich has no chance in winning. That's reality. He gave away his Iowa support and revealed himself not to be running a real campaign. I got an e-mail Friday that only drove that point home further:


URGENT: Help defend the rights of American voters
Friends,
Once again, America is faced with questions about the integrity of machine-counted ballots and about the rights of Americans to decide for themselves who they should be allowed to vote for in this crucial Presidential election.
In New Hampshire, it's a question of whether votes were counted or manipulated. In Nevada, it's a question of whether the GE-owned NBC television network should have the power to decide who your choices should be for President.
The vote counts in New Hampshire are suspicious. And, today's decision by NBC to exclude Dennis from next week's Presidential debate - even though he met the criteria - is outrageous. And, we need your help to deal with both of these matters. Because of the unexplained disparities between hand-counted and machine-counted ballots in New Hampshire, Dennis has asked for a recount. "I am not making this request in the expectation that a recount will significantly affect the number of votes that were cast on my behalf," Dennis said in his letter to the Secretary of State of New Hampshire. But, he cited “serious and credible reports, allegations and rumors" that question the integrity of the machine-controlled process.
If New Hampshire agrees to a recount, this campaign will have to pay for it. And we can't investigate what happened in New Hampshire - or protect every other state in the Union - without your help.
Likewise, NBC and MSNBC have made a corporate decision to exclude the one and only voice who represents you and those things that the Democratic Party should stand for. If you are as outraged as we are, feel free to call:
NBC/MSNBC at ********************
email NBC/MSNBC at****************
PLEASE share this message with everyone you know so that the voice of the people will be heard and their votes WILL be counted.
Strength through Peace,
The Kucinich Campaign

It's Kucinich trying to glom on something that will get attention. He's not helping anyone. New Hampshire hasn't been up in arms about the results and no reports were made about voter fraud in real time. But it's one more stunt for him to pull that takes away from the issues and marginalizes him. It's not a real issue. If you believe fraud took place, it doesn't matter. You may believe a friend should leave her husband. If she doesn't share your opinion, you don't launch a "I WILL PROTECT HER!" campaign. It basically says that New Hampshire voters are too stupid to know a theft has taken place.

He says it won't change his results (it won't) and New Hampshire voters aren't taking to the streets. So this isn't about a real issue, this is one more attempt for him to play wack-job and get some press coverage that way -- he'll embrace the ridicule if only they'll mention his name.

He's being excluded from another debate! Oh my. He had nothing to offer but his jokes and they won't be missed. I made that point here somewhere awhile back, about how I wished he would stop trying to be funny. I said maybe others felt differently. But it really did bother me that the candidate I was taking seriously didn't appear to take his own campaign seriously.

I wasted my time and I wasted your time.


I'm going to try not to waste time in the future. For instance, no "impeachment!" talk here because it's now 2008 and, barring a discovery that forces the Dems to investigate, it's not happening. It's not happening in a state like Washington either. Maybe in Texas or a state where the Democrats don't have much pull. But the Democratic National Party does not want impeachment, has made that very clear. They will not allow it to go through.

The destruction of CIA videos of torture might change that. Sibel Edmunds talking in non-code might. But unless something emerges that forces the Congress to begin impeachment, it's not happening. The people cannot force it in the limited time Bully Boy is in office (he'll be gone in almost exactly one year) because the Democrats in power don't want it. They think it will hurt their chances at election so they're not going to do a thing.

I'm not trying to pee on anyone's parade. I would love nothing more than to see Bully Boy impeached. But it's an election year and those are rarely times of bravery. A stunning revelation could force Congress to act; however, with their inaction in 2007, I do not see it happening from we the people applying pressure. They have ignored us on the Iraq War and they have ignored us on impeachment.

So I won't be pushing impeachment here unless there's something that comes up, some revelation. I'll probably focus on the Iraq War, war resisters and topics like that.

I certainly won't be focusing on Kucinich's attention-getting stunts. I thought it was a huge mistake to go for impeachment of Cheney instead of Bully Boy. Supposedly, he was going for Cheney first. Well the Cheney motion is buried in committee and going nowhere.

I think a large portion of the people do support impeaching Bully Boy. I think going after Cheney is a big mistake. What I fear would happen, if the motion went forward, is that the media which is hostile to impeachment, would be issuing decrees (and when the press talks, politicians listen) so that if Cheney was impeached, the attitude of Congress would be, "That's over." There would be no higher up.

I'm basing that on Richard Nixon. He should have been impeached. Instead, Gerry Ford pardoned him. Ford was not called out for that (though he should have been) and the press was pleased as punch with Gerry. I think we'd see the press undermining an impeachment process (of Cheney) and, when it came to an end, if Congress had the guts to defy the establishment press, that would be all the guts they had. There would be no, "Now we go after the Bully Boy!" It would be, "We impeached Cheney!"

It is 2008, an election year. By September, I doubt Congress will be doing anything at all other than show votes. The House, where impeachment originates (the Senate tries the 'case'), has members who are elected every two years so everyone in the House will be up for re-election. In 2007, if they'd listened to the people, I think impeachment was possible; however, they didn't and the closer we get to the election, the less likely impeachment is.

If the White House declares war on Iran, that, supposedly, would lead to impeachment, based on statements by senators such as Joe Biden.

I do think Bully Boy (and Cheney) need to be impeached. I just do not see how we're going to see that happen in 2008. Maybe Cindy Sheehan's campaign will be so hugely popular (I don't doubt that it will be), that Nancy Pelosi will say, "Cindy, if you drop out of the race, I will move impeachment to the floor." That could bring about impeachment. So those really wanting impeachment could make a real difference by supporting Cindy Sheehan.

I know John Conyers said, on KPFK (because C.I. noted it and, suddenly, a day later, the impeachment blogger 'found' it) that Bully Boy could be impeached after he left office. Do we believe John Conyers?

I like Conyers but he's been up against Pelosi all last year and I can't imagine him having any real sway on this issue in 2009. I would like to believe he would. But I also know how the establishment press works which is to always say, "We need to move on." So if impeachment is impossible while Bully Boy's in office, I think trying to impeach him after he's out of office is even more difficult.

If you disagree with any of the points I'm making, that's great. Use your energy to prove me wrong. I'm not being sarcastic when I say that. If impeachment is your big issue, you should devote as much time as you can to it. I won't assume you're wasting your time because you really think it can happen. But, on my end, I don't see it happening and it would be false of me to blog otherwise.

Before Kucinich sold his supporters out by making a deal with Bambi Obama for Iowa, I was already beginning to wonder. I had doubt for about two weeks, serious doubts. He was still playing funny-guy and using a ton of time to talk about every issue in the world and defocus from his strongest points -- healthcare and the illegal war. Before the deal, my last post wasn't even about Kucinich. It was about Bambi and how people shouldn't get fooled.

So I was even more offended that Kucinich sold us out and told us to support Bambi.

And the lesson for me in it was that I'm blogging, from now on, in only what I strongly believe in. That's ending the illegal war. If you disagree with me, please start your own blog and advocate for what you believe in. Don't think, "Trina says it's not happening, so it's not." I could be wrong. If your reaction reading this is, "I disagree," please fight for what you believe in. Blogger/Blogspot is free and if I can do a blog, anyone can. So if you disagree, please consider starting your own site to make your case and get your voice out there.

This post was started last night and I completed about half of it. But we all looked at Rebecca (Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude), who was flushed and sweat was pouring off her. She had a nasty bug. Since she's a friend and a house guest, I offered to take care of but C.I. pointed out that my son and his wife had gone off for a weekend because I'd agreed to watch their baby. Point was, if I got sick, I would either be no help there or else pass it on to my grand baby. C.I. said Elaine (Like Maria Said Paz) gets so little time to spend with my other son (Mike) that they shouldn't give up 'relationship time.'

There's a point to this. C.I. was so tired but stayed up all night taking care of Rebecca (her husband was watching their baby). My grand baby woke up around three this morning and I took her into the kitchen to get a bottle. Rebecca's fever had finally broken and C.I. was in here working on the morning entry at The Common Ills (which Mike will post when all the community sites have posted this morning). And I thought about how we all expect C.I. to cover Iraq every day, every entry. C.I. shows a focus that no one else does. That's no one in the community, no one outside of it.

Think about paid media -- Big or Small -- and how they don't cover Iraq. Even if that's their alleged area. They drop it when Lebanon is under attack or when something else in the MidEast flares up. C.I. just stays focused on Iraq.

I supported Dennis Kucinich when I thought he was a real candidate. I supported him first and foremost because of his position on the illegal war. He's not a real candidate and pinning false hopes on his campaign isn't ending the illegal war. So, due to all the above, I just want to focus on what matters. I don't want to be like The Nation magazine, hopping all over the place and never having any impact.

Betty's latest chapter ("Unbelievable") is up, so please read that. Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" from yesterday:

Friday, January 11, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, false predictions come back to haunt the White House, Adam Kokesh and Cindy Sheehan receive good legal news, guess who's made an agreement with the US to transport Iraqi oil, and more.

Starting with war resisters. In 2005, David Hughey spoke at the Veterans for Peace conference in Irving, Texas:

I am the father of Private Brandon Hughey who is at this time in Canada. I'm basically a card-carrying Republican. Used to be.
My story basically began when my young son called me from Canada and told me that he didn't want to risk his life for Bush and Cheney's son. That cuased me a great deal of concern. As a matter of fact, it caused great conflicts. Our first several conversations over the telephone were basically fights.
But I started reading. I did a lot of research, an incredible amount of research. And I actually found myself not being able to believe what I was seeing happen to this country. So I sent my son basically a manifesto that said I support him. It took a lot out of me.
as I guess you can tell, I'm not much of a speaker.
So it's brought me to this point, basically, to make a long story short. You know, I've read the Constitution of the United States of America. I've read a lot of books written by a man named James Madison, a lot of things by Thomas Jefferson. When I did that, it helped me figure out that all of this is totally wrong.
I had some really good quotes, but I can't recall 'em off the top of my head.
I just thought I'd come up and introduce myself. I do support my son.

The speech can be found in journalist Peter Laufer's Mission Rejected: U.S. Soldiers Who Say No to Iraq. Laufer co-hosts Washington Monthly Radio which will feature, among other guests, Gore Vidal on the January 13th broadcast. Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey were the first war resisters to publicy seek refugee status in Canada. November 15th, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the appeals of war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Parliament is the solution.Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26. The War Resisters Support Campaign has more on the action in Canada:

The War Resisters Support Campaign has called a pan-Canadian mobilization on Saturday, January 26th, 2008 to ensure : 1) that deportation proceedings against U.S. war resisters currently in Canada cease immediately; and 2) that a provision be enacted by Parliament ensuring that U.S. war resisters refusing to fight in Iraq have a means to gain status in Canada. For listings of local actions, see our Events page. If you are able to organize a rally in your community, contact the Campaign -- we will list events as details come in.

Courage to Resist notes:

Join and support January 25 vigils and delegations in support of U.S. war resisters currently seeking sanctuary Canada. Actions are being planned in Washington D.C., New York, Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Supporters will meet with officials at Canadian Consulates across the United States in order underscore that many Americans hope that the Canadian Parliament votes (possible as early as February) in favor of a provision to allow war resisters to remain. Download and distribute Jan. 25-26 action leaflet (PDF).Supporting the war resisters in Canada is a concrete way to demonstrate your support of the troops who refuse to fight. Help end the war by supporting the growing GI resistance movement today!
Details January 25-26 actions/events in support of U.S. war resisters.
Sign the letter "Dear Canada: Let U.S. War Resisters Stay!" and encourage others to sign.
Organize a delegation to a Canadian Consulate near you .
Host an event or house-party in support of war resisters.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

Yesterday, we ntoed that Maria Lauterbach had been missing since mid-December. The soldier who was eight months pregnant when she went missing is now said to have been murdered and CNN reports that Onslow Country Sherriff Ed Brown stated today that they are looking for her corpse and that Ceasar Armando Lauren ("a fellow Marine whom Lauterbach had accused of sexual assault") is a suspect. WTOL quotes family neighbor Kent Zimmerman saying that Maria Lauterbach was "very polite, very respectful." The Cleveland Leader states, "According to court documents, the anticipated birth of Lauterbach's baby 'might provide evidentiary credence to charges that she was sexually assaulted by a senior military person.' Investigators also said that the military had been pursuing rape charges against Lauren, and had plans to hold a hearing in December."

Currently there is tension in Australia and England over the issue of blood provided by the US in Iraq and Afghanistan. Richard Norton-Taylor (Guardian of London) reports, "British soldiers and civilians contractors seriously injured in Iraq and Afghanistan are being tested for HIV, hepatitis and other diseases as a health campaigners reacted angrily to the news that they had been given blood from American donors who [had] not been properly screened. British defence officials confirmed that the US military had not followed its own procedures by testing all the donors after the blood was given to 18 British service personnel and six civilians." The Daily Mall reports that Frances Shine, whose son Steve Shine lost "his left leg when his tank was blown up in Basra, southern Iraq" and who now must wait to find out if he received tainted blood. In Australia, Mark Dodd (The Australian) reports, "Defence officials are urgently checking whether Australian soldiers have been exposed to contaminated blood amid fears 18 British troops wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan received tainted transfusions. . . . ADF spokesman Brigadier Andrew Nikolic said he believed the risk of Australian troops being infected was low but checks were being made." The Australian Defence Force spokesperson states, "It's a very low probability any of our people would have been infected." Michael Evans (Times of London) explains, "The Pentagon revealed at a meeting in Washington in early November that, according to its records, 11 British servicemen had received life-saving blood transfusions from American volunteer donors at US military centres in Iraq and Afghanistan over the six-year period. None of the donors had been pre-screened to detect for any sign of HIV, hepatitis C, syphilis or other blood diseases." CNN quotes the UK undersecretary of defense Derek Twigg stating, "The (U.S. Defense Department) has told us that for the British service personnel they have records for, they know that the blood that they received is clean. However they do admit that their records are incomplete." Thomas Harding (Telegraph of London) points out, "The infections could have occurred any time between 2001 and last year to soldiers or civilian security guards who needed emergency blood transfusion while being treated in American field hospitals in Iraq or Afghanistan." Pay attention to this from the CBC: "In emergency situations, military forces sometimes use other coalition medical facilities, blood or blood products if they are available sooner, the ministry explained on its website. If supplies are exhausted, medical officials use emergency donor panels which are later screened." The warning went out in November -- so why did the UK wait so long to notify anyone? And when you put the above together, it may apply to US service members serving in Iraq and Afghanistan as well. The US military supplied the blood -- not some US hospital's mobile blood bank doing runs through Ramadi.

Yesterday at the US State Department, the department's deputy spokesperson Tom Casey delivered the briefing. He was asked, "Mr. Casey, on Turkey, do you favor a political dialogue between Turkey and the Kurdish organization PKK?" He rsponsed, "We favor putting the PKK out of business. It's a terrorist organization. . . . We want a political dialogue between the Government of Turkey and the Government of Iraq, which is ongoing and continuous, over how to defeat the PKK. I don't believe anyone in the U.S. Administration has ever called for dialogue with a terrorist organization." That was yesterday. Today Reuters reports, "Turkish artillery shelled northern Iraq on Friday morning, but there were no immediate reports of any casualties or material damage, a Kurdish government official said." This as Reuters reports that Turkey and the US have reached an agreement where "Turkey will help the United States to operate and transport neighbouring Iraq's oil as part of its drive to become an energy hunb" according Hilmi Guler, the Energy Minister of Turkey.

Meanwhile, the escalation is set to wind down in Iraq. Thomas E. Ricks and Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) noted yesterday that it was one year since Bully Boy announced that the "surge" would take place (and Congress, of course, rolled over offering only 'symbolic' resistance). Ricks and DeYoung observe, "In many cases -- particularly on the political front -- Iraqi solutions bear little resemblance to the ambitious goals for 2007 that Bush laid out in his speech to the nation last Jan. 10. 'To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis,' he pledged. 'Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year . . . the government will reform de-Baathification laws, and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution.' Although some progress has been made and legislation in some cases has begun to slowly work its way through the parliament, none of these benchmarks has been achieved. Nor has the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki taken over security responsibility for all 18 provinces, as Bush forecast it would. Last month's transfer of Basra province by British forces brought to nine the number of provinces under Iraqi control." There were no provincial elections, there was nothing. Yesterday, in a Pentagon briefing, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates declared, "And so I think that our hope is that in the relatively near future we will see some progress on one or more of the key pieces of legislation that we've talked about at the national level, but we clearly are hoping that the reconciliation and improvement in the political environment that has taken place at the local and provincial level over the past number of months will now meet further progress coming at the national level." Yes, we have repeatedly heard that song and dance every year of the illegal war.

As the US Institute of Peace's Barbara Slavin (on leave from USA Today) declared on the second hour of NPR's The Diane Rehm Show today, "One disturbing note, I mean, there has been an increase in violence apart from the US combat. There have been more suicide bombings, more attacks. It seems to be stepping up again. So you know, we've had all these stories celebrating the surge and saying what a huge success it's been, obviously it has not succeed in securing the country." To see the failures of Bully Boy you don't have to drop back a year. South of Baghdad and Diyala Province (to the north) are targeted for slaughter this week. In ten minutes Thursday, 40,000 pounds of bombs were dropped outside of Arab Jabour and Jamie Gumbrecht and Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) remind the administration "recently held" the region "up as a security success" with Bully Boy, speaking in November, declaring, "Slowly but surely the people of Iraq are reclaiming a normal society. You see, when Iraqis don't have to fear the terrorists, they have a chance to build better lives for themselves."

From Bully Boy's November 2, 2007 speech at Fort Jackson, South Carolina (remember, he can't really appear before the general public with his disapproval ratings):

Here's what this progress means to one shopkeeper in the former al Qaeda stronghold of Arab Jabour. He's a local butcher. He says that as recently as June, he was selling only one or two sheep per week. Now, the terrorists cleaned out and residents returning home, he's selling one or two sheep per day. Slowly but surely, the people of Iraq are reclaiming a normal society. You see, when Iraqis don't have to fear the terrorists, they have a chance to build better lives for themselves. You must undertand an Iraqi mom wants her child to grow up in peach just like an American mom does.

Does that "Iraqi mom" see the bombs falling and say, "It's okay, it's just the US bombing us this time?" Or does she it as terrorism as well? In the same speech, Bully Boy got a qucik shout out to Diyala Province, "In Diyala province, tribal groups come together for the first time to foster reconcillation." The 'success' stories only a two months ago has fallen apart and civilian populations are now being targeted in collective punishment which is in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted today, "The US is claiming success in a massive air-strike campaign sough of Baghdad. More than 40,000 pounds of bombs were dropped on the Arab Jabour district in one of the most intense air attacks since the US invasion. . . . The Pentagon says no civilians were killed but the claim hasn't been independently verified." However, in their briefing yesterday Gates babbled on -- apparently thinking no one was listening -- and declared the latest attacks on the population were going well because "frankly, after these places, there's not much else -- not many places they can go." That statement led to this, "Three follow-ups, then. The current bombing south of Baghdad, after this you say there's not many places they can go. I mean, after this, is it all over? And what should Americans, after yesterday seeing -- nine service members killed in Iraq, what would you say to the American people? Should they still expect days of heavy casualties? What do you forecast?" Gates had no real replies but noted he didn't find it to be "a suprise" that the US would "see some higher casualties" -- all heart -- and that "this job is not finished. There is more to do." Yeah, we've heard that every year of the illegal war as well.

But, hey, speaking with NBC's David Gregory today (link has text and video), Bully Boy showed no concern. NBC reports: "Asked about recent comments by Republican presidential hopefuly Sen. John McCain that it would be fine to have a U.S. military presence in Iraq for 100 years, Bush said it's up to Iraq. 'That's a long time,' he said, adding that there could 'very well be' a long-term U.S. presence in Iraq at the invitation of the government in Baghdad. When asked if it could be 10 years, Bush replied, 'It could easily be that, absolutely."

So, as Barbara Slavin noted, "Obviously" the escalation has "not succeeded in securing" Iraq.

It's Friday, very little violence gets reported. Among the reported violence today . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing claimed 2 lives with eight more wounded. Reuters notes a Mahmudiya roadside bombing that left three police officers injured.

Shootings?The US military announces it shot 2 people yesterday and labels them "terrorists" -- strangely the 11 also arrested are just "suspects". If you die, you're a terrorist, apparently.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

IVAW co-chair Adam Kokesh blogs, "After the government had three and a half months to preapre their case against those of us challenging our arrests from September 15th, the case finally went to trial January 3rd. Sort of. One of my tendefendants, Sholom Keller had come down from Philadelphia the day before and was staying at our new house in the Petworth neighborhood where our new office is set up. S**** ***** (an active duty US Army soldier and member of IVAW) who had been present on September 15th came up from Pensacola as a witness." "How do you resist liars?" Kokesh asked speaking to the September 15th rally before answering, "Speak the truth. How do you stop a war based on lies? It starts with the truth!" He ended his speech (available in full here) stating, "Today may very well mark the beginning of the American anti-fascism revolution. March with us. Honor the dead with us. If you are willing to risk arrest, lie in the street, if not, lie in the grass. Die-in when you hear the air raid sirens. Raise your voice and your fist with us in defiance to send a message to our leadership. If you will not make peace for us, we will make it for ourselves! Power to the people!" As Karissa Marcum (The Hill) reported that day, approximately 200 demonstrators were arrested, "[a]t least two protestors were pepper-sprayed after they tried to breach the police barricade on the west end of the Capitol. The men joined the 187 other anti-war activists who were arrested after crossing a police line. One person was charged with a felony. Iraq Veterans Against the War co-chairman-elect Adam Kokesh stood on the concrete fence and was arrested by Capitol Police wearing riot gear." In other peace and legal news, Reuters reports, "A U.S. appeals court on Friday overturned Iraq war protester Cindy Sheehan's conviction for demonstrating without a permit on the White House sidewalk in 2005 and ordered a new trial. The unanimous three-judge panel ruled that Sheehan's conviction had been based on errors of law by the magistrate judge that eliminated the prosecutor's burden to show her criminal intent." On a related note, this Sunday, January 13th, the Green Party presidential debate is held in San Francisco (moderated by Cindy Sheehan) with Cynthia McKinney, Kent Mesplay, Jard Bell, Kat Swift, Jesse Johnson Jr. and Ralph Nader to participate. The Green Party notes, "The first, and only, live debate between candidates on the Green Party's California ballot for President of the United States - featuring a former Democratic Party member of Congress, consumer protection icon, professor and environmental engineer - is scheduled here January 13, said John Morton of the Green Party Presidential Debate Committee." The debate starts at two p.m., Herbst Theater in the Veterans Memorial Building on 401 Van Ness Avenue.

Today a photo exhibit of the work of artist and journalist David Bacon opens at the Galeria de la Raza (2857 24th St, San Francisco 94110): "Living under the trees" "Viviendo bajo los arboles." The exhibit is from January 11th through February 23rd (Enero 11 - Febrero 23, 2008). "An exhibition documenting communities of indigenous Mexican farm workers in California through photographs and the narrative experiences of community residents and leaders" y "Una exposicion que documenta a traves de fotografias y testmonios de lideres y residentes las comundades indigenas de campesinos mexicanos." Inauguracion de exposicion (Opening Reception) Enero 11 7:30 p.m. (January 11th). Y mesa redonda de fotografos (photographers' panel) Sabado, Enero 26, 2:00 p.m. (photographers' panel, Saturday, January 26). And on WBAI, Sunday, The Next Hour features Malachy McCourt (broadcasts NYC, streams live online, 11:00 am to noon) while Monday's Cat Radio Cafe finds Janet Coleman and David Dozer joined by Hattie Gossert (author of "the immigrant suite: hey zenophobe! who you calling a foreigner?), Paul Browde and Murray Nossel (from the Barrow Street Fortnight's Two Men Talking), Dan Barrett (International Street Cannibals) and the latest on the Save Carnegie Hall Towers actions. Lastly in audio Time 4 Hemp is a podcast (free podcast) whose broadcasts feature, among others Ed Rosenthal (a regular guest on Kris Welch's Living Room), Tere Joyce, Keith Stroup, Steve Hager, Allen St. Pierre, Steve Bloom, Jack Cole, Gatewood Galbraith and Carl Olsen. Upcoming interviews will include Andy Dick.

iraq
jeremy hinzmanbrandon hughey
adam kokesh
iraq veterans against the war
cindy sheehan
peter laufer
mcclatchy newspapers
the washington postkaren deyoungthomas e. ricks
mcclatchy newspapersnancy a. youssef
radio
the diane rehm showwbaithe next hourcat radio cafe

Cheese & Bacon Dennis' Funeral Dip in the Kitchen

Cheese & Bacon Dennis' Funeral Dip
1/2 cup of sour cream
3 ounces cream cheese
4 ounces blue cheese
4 slices bacon (cooked and crumbled)
1/2 onion sliced
dash of Tabasco
1 minced garlic clove
dash of fresh pepper
dash of cumin
dash of red pepper

Put ingredients into a food processor and process until smooth. (You can use a blender as well). Place in the fridge to chill.

Serve with pita chips, potato chips, Trisquits or another form of cracker.

That's a recipe my friend Gail makes whenever there's a death. She always apologizes for bringing "just a dip" but it's always the first thing that's all gone.

It's funeral time.

Time to bury the candidate.

I'm referring to Dennis Kucinich.

I've wasted everyone's time for a year and I apologize to one and all.

If anyone's angry, I'm angry at myself.

I thought Dennis Kucinich was a candidate who would stand up.

I should probably note here that Green Party members e-mailed me over the last few months talking about how Kucinich betrayed his followers in 2004 at the DNC convention. So I can't claim that I didn't have warnings.

I assumed he was the real deal.

He wasn't.

I was fine with getting the word out on him. I didn't know whether he'd win or lose. That didn't matter because I believed in what he stood for and I thought he believed in what he stood for. He believed in nothing.

He made a deal with Barack Obama to toss his supporters his way in Iowa.

Barack Obama is a War Hawk.

"I am the only one on this stage . . ." How many times did we hear Dennis say that?

And he tosses his votes.

If you look at the results, you'll see that there were still some "undecided"s, even with the rigged system that is an Iowa caucus. Dennis Kucinich supporters didn't have to go anywhere. In fact, on CNN, I saw a woman arguing with a Richardson captain that she she didn't want to go to another candidate. (Richardson, Biden and Dodd are also rumored to have made deals with Obama.) So no one needed to be told to go elsewhere.

Dennis Kucinich doesn't respect the people who support him.

He certainly doesn't respect me.

A claim, that his campaign has tried to put out, that "This was just for Iowa" is nonsense. He's running for national office. Everything he does sends a message.

The message he sent was: "The illegal war doesn't matter."

If he'd tossed to John Edwards (who I am probably now supporting) that would be one thing. Edwards' plan isn't as good as Kucinich's, but he's not a war hawk.

He disrespected all of his supporters.

He didn't have to endorse anyone (any of his opponents). If he felt he had to, he could have gone with the most anti-war of the 'front runners.'

Instead, he went with Obama.

Kucinich is a joke now.

Again, there's a good chance he would have lost. I knew that. I also knew that if we tried really hard, worked really hard, got the word out on him, it might make a difference.

So I wasted weeks on him.

His campaign is dead.

He killed it.

I grimaced when he made himself a joke. (I grimaced when Al Gore did the same.) But I overlooked that.

He wants to laugh at himself, that's one thing. He wants to laugh at those of us who have supported him, turn us into a cheap joke?

That's what "My people should vote for Obama" is. It disrespects our position on the illegal war, yes.

But it also says that Kucinich supporters are a dumb cult and when "Leader" tells us to do something, we say, "Yes, master."

Screw Dennis Kucinich. His tired ass needs to drop out of the race immediately.

His actions demonstrate that he is not a candidate trying to fight. If you're not fighting, you're not a candidate. (One of my problems with Edwards. He won't stand up to Obama.)

He's wasted everyone's time.

He's certainly wasted my time.

Meanwhile, if you're voting Democratic or thinking about it, you should have a chance to vote for a candidate that's going to fight. He's fooling everyone by staying in the race.

He is a weakling. He is a coward.

At this point, should he lose his House seat, I won't even care.

It's amazing how many times he's called on people to support him. Whether it was on impeachment or anything else. And people have. They've backed him. The only one who won't back Dennis Kucinich is Dennis Kucinich.

Whether he gets out of the race or not, his presidential campaign is now dead.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, Janurary 4, 2007. Chaos and violence continue and the little state of Iowa leads to a lot of gas baggery.

World Report notes that January 26th is a day for national demonstrations in Canada in support of war resisters, "The date commemorates the day four years ago when Jeremy Hinzman first applied for refugee status in Canada. The Nelson event, which is planned for the United Church, will be held inside because of the harsh January weather. Ryan Johnson suggests 'some light refreshments and a time to write hand written letters with someone delivering them to the post office afterwards. . . It would be a huge statement to have a box full of letters going to parliament. In Tonronto they are mraching to the Canada Post to drop them in the box'."

What's it about? In Canada where some war resisters went to seek asylum, the Canadian Parliament has the power to let war resisters stay in Canada. November 15th, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the appeals of war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Parliament is the solution.Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

Yesterday, three US service members were announced dead by the US military. How did that play out in the media? To note two outlets, Democracy Now! and the New York Times, not very well. DN! covered the four people who died in Turkey in headlines and didn't note the three US service members killed in Iraq. The New York Times noted both on A9 of this morning's paper. Sabrina Tavernise covered "Bomb Explosion Kills 5 in Kurdish Area in Turkey" -- yes, it got it's own story -- and in a 14 paragraph story by Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Khalid al-Ansary, it was noted in paragraph four: "In another development on Thursday, two American soldiers were shot dead and a third soldier was wounded in Diyala Province, the American military said. On Wednesday a soldier was killed by an improvised bomb south of Baghdad, the first death of an American soldier this year." It's not important to US outlets. It doesn't matter. They know nothing about the five killed in Turkey but that's more important to them. It says a great deal.

Meanwhile Donna St. George (Washington Post) reports on Hannah Gunterman McKinney, a woman serving in Iraq who was killed when the man she had sex (apparently consensual but it's sketchy) with ran her over and how her parents, Barbie and Matt Hearvin, were offered a variety of explanations for the September 4, 2006 death, "Her case would become one in a litany of noncombat deaths in Iraq, which number more than 700, from crashes, suicides, illnesses and accidents that sometimes reveal messy truths about life in the war zone. The cases can be especially brutal for parents who lose a child and struggle to understand why. In McKinney's case, many of the details are in a 1,460-page file and court-martial transcript obtained by The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act."

Another woman is the subject of Sanhita SinhaRoy's Q & A (In These Times) where she interviews Iraqi Haifa Zangana who favors the US withdrawing from Iraq immediately ("gradual withdrawal is actually a gradual building of bases in Iraq") and notes of the illegal war:

But here we are with troops, with military occupation, with economic occupation and the cultural occupation. They try to erase our memory, our history, our archaeological sites and kill our civilians.
In four and a half years, we have lost 1 million Iraqis. And that's terminated, physically. We're not talking about the consequences of conventional weapons, the depleted uranium, the phosphorous, the cluster bombs.
As for detentions, the International Red Cross has recorded up to 60,000. And those are security detainees.

Zangana is the author of City of Widows: An Iraqi Woman's Account of War and Resistance, (Seven Stories Press). Today KUNA reports that the UK base in southern Iraq (Basra Airport) was attacked with a missile yesterday.

In other news of violence . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Baghdad roadside bombings (no known casualties) and a tanker bombing in Maysan that claimed the lives of 2 police officers with "others" wounded. Reuters notes an attack by a US helicopter which fired a rocket outside Baghdad and killed 1 person with two more wounded.

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a US attack/raid "with air cover" in Najaf that wounded four (on Thursday). Reuters notes an Iraqi was shot dead in Jurf al-Sakhar.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad.



Let's do US presidential politics. Shortly before noon yesterday, the Chris Dodd campaign e-mailed supporters asserting, "We've led in Washignton, D.C. on ending the war in Iraq and restoring the Constitution, but tonight all eyes are focused on Iowa . . . You'll hear from me later tonight. And when we earn that ticket to New Hampshire, I hope you are ready to provide the fuel we need to hit the ground running." Iowa was the first shot (as always) for the country to weigh in (at over 90% Anglo-White, Iowa is veeery representative -- that was sarcasm) and the country weighed in yesterday, Iowans, people posing as Iowans, they made their voices heard the in the corrupt scam that gets trotted out every four years as an example of "democracy." Like Dodd, Joe Biden's campaign declared, "Simply put, the Biden for President campaign will shock the world on Januray 3rd." As The Detroit Free Press reported today, both Biden and Dodd have dropped out of the race. Pay attention to Dodd's departure (it matters in a moment). Before we go further, let's quote Iowa's Secretary of State, "Although not an election, the Iowa Caucuses are the method by which citizens select presidential delegates to the county conventions. The political parties run the caucuses according to party rules. The Iowa Caucuses are not governed by the Secretary of State's Office." Translation, don't blame this on them. In December former editor of The Des Moines Register Gilbert Cranberg, former executive secretary of the state's Freedome of Information Council Herb Strentz and former director of research for The Des Moines Register Glenn Roberts contributed a column to the New York Times entitled "Iowa's Undemocratic Caucuses" noted that, unlike the GOP, the Democratic Party operated in secrecy, "The one-person, one-vote results from each caucus are snail-mailed to party headquarters and placed in a database, never disclosed to the press or made available for inspection." Wayne Ford could (and did) lie on Democracy Now! today that the Iowa represented "the purest form of democracy" but there's no reason everyone else had to go along with it. "We've been doing it since the 60s," he insisted. Exactly why Iowa goes first -- because it is non-reflective and undemocratic and the '60s' is when the system changed. By holding onto Iowa as the "kick off," the party machine tries to control. Make no mistek that's what happens every four years and -- as Wally and Cedric have repeatedly noted, even with the Olympics, they rotate it every four years. With those realities in mind, add, as Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted January 28, 2004, John Kerry, in 2004, was "only the third Democrat in three decades to win both Iowa and New Hampshire in contested races." That's a reality not noted in the press today -- the same press that (big or small) announces it's over for either John Edwards or Hillary Clinton but applaud John McCain who tied for third with a TV actor.

Here are the totals the Iowa Democratic Party says are final:

Senator Barack Obama: 37.58%
Senator John Edwards: 29.75%
Senator Hillary Clinton: 29.47%
Governor Bill Richardson: 2.11%
Senator Joe Bide: .93%
Uncommitted: 0.14%
Senator Chris Dodd: 0.02%
Precincts Reporting: 1781 of 1781

Along with multiple rounds of selection, Iowa's caucus allows those present in the location to know how others are voting. It's not a fair ballot, it's not a secret ballot and if the Democratic Party couldn't control it, Iowa would have long ago been ditched (as it should be) as the "kick off" each presidential election.

Robert Parry (Consortium News) offers: "Sen. Barack Obama thrashing Sen. Clinton". Ruth Conniff (The Progressive) is gleeful as well (it's nice to see Conniff offer something, anything, indicating life), "Since she lost in Iowa, it's hard to see what is left." As Conniff offers up razor blades and sleeping pills and our online latter day Dylan throws in the towel (no link, we don't link to trash), one wonders how Hillary is a "loser" and Barack a "sure thing" off one race?

It takes an informed woman and, in this case, it's Deliah Boyd (A Scriverner's Lament) who explains delegates and super delegates and points out the obvious: Michigan has 156 delegates. Matters because? Hillary's on Michigan's ballot. Who's else is? Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. Chris Dodd was but he's ended his campaign. Biden, Edwards, Obama and Richardson all sucked up to the DNC and refused to get on the ballot. So the reality is Hillary is close to Bambi and, apparently, has the lock on the 156 delegates in Michigan. (The DNC says they'll refuse to allow Michigan delegates. They may or may not be able to pull off that threat.)

Over at The Nation -- where few ever grasp anything -- Ari Melber demonstrates (by omission) why it matters that readers be informed and not trust The Nation. The mag that called Hillary out on a vote she missed . . . due to Bill having heart surgery, offers Ari's wet dreams of "Why Obama's Win Is Bigger Than You Think" which takes Hillary to task for spending $7 million of her campaign money. How much did Obama spend? Melber's not interested in saying. $9 million. Doesn't fit with the spin Ari wants to blow out his butt so it doesn't make his blog post. He's not really a reporter (real ones don't work for that rag), so let's turn to a real reporter.

Amy Goodman: I think one big difference, Ellen Chesler [cross talk] I think one big difference and I think this has certainly been brought out is that Barack Obama said he was opposed to the illegal war from the beginning and of course Senator Clinton voted for it.

See the problem? Obama tells Monica Davey (New York Times, July 26, 2004) he doesn't know how he would have voted if he'd been in the Senate. Two years later, he's telling David Remnick (The New Yorker) he doesn't know how he would have voted. Why is Amy Goodman not noting that or the fact that, until the summer of 2007, he voted for every authorization? Why is she noting in the segment that Hillary Clinton's campaign offices have been occupied by peace activists but not noting that Barack's have as well? Shouldn't Wayne Ford have been asked about that?

Hillary's a War Hawk. That's who she is and needs to be pointed out. So is Barack Obama. And these attempts to shield the public from reality may be part of what a political party does (or tries to) but it's not reality and has no place in journalism. Ari thinks it's cute to call Hillary out for her millions spent in Iowa while ignoring how much money Obama spent (like he thought it was cute to call her out for missing a vote when Bill was having surgery). Glen Ford and Bruce Dixon (Black Agenda Report) have repeatedly pointed out that Hillary and Barack are siamese twins. So it's not impossible to report the truth. And it's not impossible to give readers, viewers, listeners the information and trust them to make their own decisions.

Ellen Chesler, speaking for Clinton's campaign, needs to get her act together. Stating that Obama wasn't in the Senate isn't telling the full story. Obviously, Goodman isn't going to bring up the illegal war with Barack's supporter Wayne Ford. Rebecca, back when Obama was lying on stage and hitting Edwards with Edwards' 2002 vote, made the point that Obama needed to be challenged on that nonsense. Obviously the press isn't going to do that (maybe Big Media, but not Little), so any supporter needs to drive the reality home. [Note, the transcript at DN! is currently wrong. Amy Goodman, not Ellen Chesler, says, "Well, let me put the question to Danny Glover. Do you think John Edwards has the same position as Obama, as Clinton, on the war?"]

This isn't minor. The war was a question for Chesler and for Danny Glover (speaking for John Edwards' campaign). For Obama? Wayne Ford wasn't asked one word. If you're not seeing the problem, you're lying to yourself. A bit like the lie being spread that "Obama's a closet socialist, hop on board, he's big time left, he just can't say so." He's not and he's not left. Do we want a War Hawk in the White House, as the US moves to the wars to Africa, who can lie to the camera and say, "Oh, my father was from Kenya, this is a just war, don't even ask me that!"

I haven't decided who I will vote for in 2008. We'll note one excerpt from a guest in that roundtable, Danny Glover speaking of John Edwards:

Well, I certainly, when we look at what has happened over the last few years -- and certainly the present administration is indicative of what has happened over the last few years in terms of just corporate greed -- certainly I don't believe that. I think that when people begin to address the issues of globalization, they look at corporate greed. When they begin to identify what is happening in the community, they look at greed, whether it's corporate greed, whether it's the greed that gentrifies the community or the greed that gentrifies a whole nation of people. I think that it's important that we look at the real issue, the real issues around poverty in this country. And [inaudible] poverty, those numbers are thirty-seven million, are indicative of the level of poverty and what people face. We look at the issue around the middle class. We look at the issue around the disparity in wages and the increasing gap between wealth in this country. And those are real issues here, you know? I mean, at some point in time, we're going to have to address that. And I don't think--I think that John Edwards says he spent less than anyone else. He's been--and I believe if it's a two-person race, then that "two-person" is between Obama and Edwards.

If the illegal war matters (I obviously think that it does) then it matters that all the candidates be held to the same standard. Amy Goodman asks Hillary's supporter and John Edwards' supporter about the illegal war. Wayne Ford's not asked a word about. Meanwhile, Reuters lies about Obama's Iraq 'plan' claiming that "all troops out within 16 months" is the 'plan.' It's not. He would leave 'trainers' and other classifications and the "one or two brigades a month" is not firm and he's stated he might increase the number or halt the deployment based on what was happening.

If there's a winner on the Dem side in Iowa, it's Edwards. But we all do grasp that only 16% of the people in Iowa caucused, right? The 'process' is nothing like the rest of the country, it's a tiny state with only 7 electoral college votes. Now tiny New Hampshire (4 electoral college votes) with a 95.8% White population will weigh in. February 5th will better determine who the candidate for the two major parties will be. So why the narratives from the press and why is Little Media unable to hold Obama to the same standards they use to crucify Hillary?

16% of 'Iowans' turned out for their non-secret ballot caucus and it's being used to shape narratives. Left out of the narratives are the backdoor deals Obama made with other candidates. Like the idiot Wayne Ford, they pretend they're talking about something but they're just blowing gas. Ford declared today, "I want to talk about the reasons why Obam womn" but he had nothing to talk about. He didn't have anything to talk about in 2004 when he appeared on the program as a John Edwards supporter: "But I have always said that until we have a president who is going to say that one of the top problems in this country is race, and I'm willing to risk and deal with this problem to bring all Americans together." Blah-blah-blah. And that 'reason' was why he backed Edwards in 2004. He's a gas bag. Iowa means nothing and meant nothing. It's not representative. If there was a need for all the post-coverage it would be to examine where the candidates stood on the issue. In outlet after outlet, Iraq was not addressed because Obama was given yet another pass. Meanwhile, Allan Nairn (at CounterPunch) argues that the 2008 general election was decided long ago.

Two other candidates appear tonight on PBS' Bill Moyers Journal:Thousands of media outlets descended on Iowa, erecting a powerful wall of TV cameras and reporters between the voters and candidates. This week on Bill Moyers Journal in two interviews, Bill Moyers talks with Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, candidates with an inside view of the process who know well the power of the press to set expectations and transform the agenda. Also on the program, leading expert on media and elections Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, examines the campaigns and coverage in Iowa and looks at the media's power to benefit some candidates and disadvantage others.


Added artist and journalist David Bacon has a photo exhibit at the Galeria de la Raza (2857 24th St, San Francisco 94110): "Living under the trees" "Viviendo bajo los arboles." The exhibit is from January 11th through February 23rd (Enero 11 - Febrero 23, 2008). "An exhibition documenting communities of indigenous Mexican farm workers in California through photographs and the narrative experiences of community residents and leaders" y
"Una exposicion que documenta a traves de fotografias y testmonios de lideres y residentes las comundades indigenas de campesinos mexicanos." Inauguracion de exposicion (Opening Reception) Enero 11 7:30 p.m. (January 11th). Y mesa redonda de fotografos (photographers' panel) Sabado, Enero 26, 2:00 p.m. (photographers' panel, Saturday, January 26).


iraq
iraq veterans against the war
mcclatchy newspapers
sanhita sinharoy
amy goodmandemocracy now
david bacon
bill moyersbill moyers journalpbs
the new york timesrichard a. oppel jr.the washington postdonna st. george
robert parry
ruth conniff