November 2007 archive

I saw that on a bumpersticker recently, and thought it was a cogent reminder to so-called right-to-lifers that saving lives of real, whole people who actually exist and function as human beings should be at least as important as saving unborn fetuses or frozen embryos.

But to the religious right, and to the Catholic church, which I don’t lump in with the evangelicals, some “beating hearts” are more important than others.

When you go to Abortion Stops a Beating Heart website, you discover that Pro-Life Ministries “supports President Bush and our brave soldiers fighting Islamic terrorism.”  A link takes you to this explanation of Islam:  

Why you Need to Understand Islam and Islam’s False Religion of Hate, Intolerance and Errors Which Leads its’ Followers to Hell and Eternal Separation from God and Become a Follower of Jesus Who is the Christ, the ONLY Son of God, and sits at God’s Right Hand!

But are their Islamic hearts, and the hearts of Iraqi civilians, beating, or is it only the US military, whose hearts beat true for the red, white and blue?

What prompts this post not anything new from the fundamentalists, but a recent statement by the Catholic bishops.

After our Monday Morning News Drop story appeared here and on Kos, Keith Olbermann and John Dean ran with it as documented on Raw Story.

“It is a component of a larger investigation,” Dean asserted, “and I cannot escape the metaphor that has been running through my head, that we might see Waxman running into a cookie that is starting to crumble because it’s run into a buzzsaw brother. … Waxman isn’t one who will turn away from digging this entire matter out.”

Since then it was discovered that Mother Jones has been doing their own research on the issue where we learn some of the corruption charges:

Krongard stands accused of inadequate oversight of construction contractors at the new, $600-million U.S. Embassy in Baghdad; refusing to pursue procurement fraud charges in a case related to a DynCorp contract; intervening in an ongoing investigation of former Broadcasting Board of Governors Chairman Kenneth Tomlinson; questionable auditing of State Department financial statements; and an “abusive management style” that has contributed to an almost wholesale revolt against him by his own staff.

Some news and your Wednesday afternoon open thread.

1. The Burlington Hawk Eye reports a Collapsed corn bin spills bushels on Hillsboro, Iowa house. A family was “rescued after a grain bin full of corn collapsed near their home in Hillsboro in Henry County. Rescue workers labored into the night Tuesday to free a father and son from the rubble of their home after the corn bin collapsed, spilling corn over a wide area.” Today, the Family sifts through remains of their home. “Wading through corn and scrambling over the crushed remains of a one-story house Tuesday, friends and relatives helped a Hillsboro family salvage small pieces of their lives. A full 519,000 bushel grain bin owned by Chem Gro of Houghton — only 20 feet from the house at 205 E. Main St. — burst Monday shortly after 8 p.m., according to neighbors. Jennifer and Jesse Kellett and their two children Jordan Walter, 11, and Sheyanne Walter, 9, were at home when the bin collapsed. Corn swept the house 30 feet off its foundation, trapping the family under rubble and grain.”

2. The Washington Post reports Huckabee gaining ground in Iowa. “Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, buoyed by strong support from Christian conservatives, has surged past three of his better-known presidential rivals and is now challenging former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney for the lead in the Iowa Republican caucuses, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News Poll. Huckabee has tripled his support in Iowa since late July… His support in Iowa appears stronger and more enthusiastic than that of his rivals… Romney outperforms Huckabee and other Republicans on key attributes, with two notable exceptions — perceptions of which candidate best understands people’s problems and which candidate is the most honest and trustworthy. On both, Romney and Huckabee are tied.” 1960 campaign was the last time a senator went on to win presidential election. The Democrats did it then with John F. Kennedy. Huckabee may have enough faux-populist hogwash to convince America.

3. The New York Times has a piece about the Kerry-Edwards campaign of 2004 called For Edwards, a relationship that never quite fit. “To the end of their disappointing run, the two men were unable to agree on the script, whether for slogans or more substantive matters. And like so many political marriages, the one between Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards – Senate colleagues who became rivals then running mates but never really friends – ended in recrimination and regrets…. Kerry supporters say Mr. Edwards refused to play the traditional vice-presidential role of attack dog even going up against a purebred, Dick Cheney… To Mr. Edwards, Mr. Kerry seemed unable to get out of his own way. He ignored Mr. Edwards’s warning not to go windsurfing, one aide recalled, which led to the infamous ‘whichever way the wind blows’ advertisement mocking Mr. Kerry’s statements on the war. And in the end, Mr. Edwards concluded that Mr. Kerry lacked fight for not filing a legal challenge to the election results… Once the sunny centrist who did not want to criticize his rivals by name, Mr. Edwards has become the most confrontational candidate in the race. And he has courted his party’s left wing by renouncing his vote on the war, something he counseled Mr. Kerry not to do… On Election Day, the running mates spent much of the day believing exit polls that showed them winning. The next morning, with Ohio still up in the air, Mr. Edwards pressed to send lawyers to Columbus to challenge the way the state counted provisional ballots. But Mr. Kerry finally concluded that even winning all those ballots would not make him president.”

4. The Los Angeles Times reports Early caucuses put student pro-Obama vote in play. “The Iowa caucuses are being held Jan. 3, the middle of winter break. With college students home for the holidays, campuses across the state will be empty. But the early caucus date could shift voter dynamics, adding young voices at their hometown caucuses across the state while diminishing the turnout at college precincts. Or, it could mean even fewer college students will take part in the electoral process. Either outcome will affect the tally for Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois… The Obama campaign is banking on young voters, and the timing of this year’s caucuses could work to his advantage… Although students tend to register as voters on campus in Iowa, it’s easy to switch their registration on caucus night and vote at precincts in their hometowns… Of the Democratic candidates, the Illinois senator has the greatest support among young people and the least among senior citizens… If fewer college students vote, that would hamper Obama’s efforts and help former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, who has weaker support among young people and higher support among baby boomers, [according to Iowa State University political science professor Dianne Bystrom]. Clinton’s candidacy is unlikely to be affected because she has broad support across age groups.”

There’s a bonus story about an enormous, new national park in Canada below the fold.

Booman:

The non-stop shilling for Clinton continues at Talk Left where Armando is at it full-time.

Have whatever opinion of the actual Bill Clinton Presidency, but you have to deal with the fact that Bill Clinton remains extremely popular and his Presidency remembered fondly.

It's funny, but I don't remember Bill Clinton's presidency all that fondly. The first two years could only be described as a total disaster.

Funny, I do not recall writing that BOOMAN remembered the Clinton Presidency fondly. I cited an article which stated:

Bill Clinton enjoys a 66 percent approval rating in a Washington Post/ABC News Poll released last month.

Booman's hatred of Hillary is so blinding that he denies the obvious – Bill Clinton is popular, whether Booman likes Bill or not. He sounds like a Republican now. Denying obvious facts. That is quintessential Hillary Hate. Makes people idiots.

Such a deal.

The Iraq war already has cost a family of four $16,500, but you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

A new report from the Congressional Joint Economic Committee says the cost per family is going to be $36,900.

And total expenditures, direct and indirect, could exceed $3.5-trillion if the U.S. stays the course and keeps even 75,000 troops in Iraq through 2017 — hardly a rash assumption, since none of the leading presidential candidates in either party will pledge to have the troops home by 2013.  (To be fair, “only” $2.8-trillion is for Iraq, with the rest for war in Afghanistan.)

Amitabh Pal for The Progressive online:

Predictably, the analysis has the Republicans crying foul. They allege that the Democrats in charge of the committee have played with the numbers. But this is the right way to measure the cost of that unnecessary conflict. The budgetary impact, as large as it is, captures only a fraction of the economic toll on this country.

The report details the multiple ways in which the war has been detrimental to the U.S. economy. Most obviously, the turmoil in Iraq has contributed to a diminished global oil production, making all of us pay higher prices at the pump. The report estimates that the Iraq fiasco has contributed at least $5 per barrel to the increase in oil prices.

And then there are several other costs, too. The government has had to spend borrowed money for the war, diverting spending from more productive uses and paying massive interest payments on its war profligacy. Substantial sums have had to be paid for treating wounded war veterans. There have been several lifetimes of lost productivity for the injured. Considerable military equipment has been damaged. And the list goes on.

Even that dollar count, of course, doesn’t count the real toll of the hundreds of thousands of lives shattered beyond repair, a cost the world will continue to bear for decades.

UPDATE: The Pentagon has found one way to cut costs: By asking wounded vets to give back the signing bonuses they got for enlisting, because they couldn’t fulfill their contracts. More here.

Pal continues:

I’m not going to do that whole guns versus butter thing and lament about all the productive expenditure this money could have been utilized for. It’s giving the Bush Administration too much credit to assume that they would have guided all that amount to more rational uses. (For those interested in such numbers, the American Friends Service Committee has some heartbreaking comparative statistics on the myriad ways the funds could have been better spent.)

Cross-posted on Out of Iraq Bloggers Caucus.