TOO BIG TO FAIL.

That concept is as old as Goliath, but a hell of a lot more durable.  The term was popularized about 20 years ago when the Federal Reserve bailed out a Midwestern bank to (the then) unheard of tune of $1 Billion.  Congress was dismayed by this largesse and promptly held hearings.  

Appalled by the apparent socialist stench of this state intervention in private enterprise, the late Congressman McKinney (R-CT) uttered the now famous phrase:

"Mr. Chairman, We have a new kind of bank.  It is called,
"too big to fail," TBTF, and it is a wonderful bank."

You have to admit, the idea of Congress holding hearings to learn why a federal agency bailed out a private business like that is -- to borrow a phrase from Attorney General Gonzales -- quaint.  If a billion dollars of questionable spending was all it took to trigger hearings today, they would be having at least two hearings a week just on Iraq.

Right now the latest installment in an apparently never-ending series of off-budget-down-payment-without-oversight-emergency-appropriation bills is heading for the Senate floor.  The total bill is $106 Billion.  This omnibus bill is for Iraq and Katrina relief.  

In case you missed it, "emergency" was one of the adjectives.    We have been at war in Iraq for 3 years and no one has ever submitted a budget for the effort.    In fact, I don't think anyone has submitted an honest accounting for any of the money spent either.    I could understand the need for one "emergency" appropriation, but three years into a campaign that is slated to last indefinitely?   Some might consider that poor planning.    Others might consider it a great opportunity too good to pass up.    Consider this example from a recent Washington Post article:

Mississippi's two U.S.   senators included $700 million in an emergency war spending bill to relocate a Gulf Coast rail line that has already been rebuilt after Hurricane Katrina at a cost of at least $250 million.

Today, a meeting between President Bush and Chinese President Hu Jintao was interrupted by a protester who pleaded, "President Bush: Stop him from killing".

In other news, Bush's disingenuous invasion of Iraq has killed 2,378 American soldiers and an estimated 100,000 Iraqis -- women and children included. But no worries, Saddam Hussein is still alive and Bush is currently having tea with yet another dictator who more closely adheres to the economic interests of the United States.

In fact, in an ironic display of the freedom, liberty, and democracy frequently enjoyed by Americans pre-Bush Administration, White House security allowed a Chinese Protester the freedom to deliver her impassioned message to Chinese President Hu Jintao unabated -- a democratic luxury rarely afforded to protestors directing their concerns toward President Bush.

It was a strange sight as the woman 'heckler' at today's Hu-Bush pomp-o-rama continued her 'rant' with White House security conspicuously slow to the scene.

According to the subscription only US News Bulletin, Bush's staunch defense of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is being buttressed by information being released by the Pentagon. In particular, the information is intended to support the point made by Rumsfeld in a recent interview that the 'criticisms of a few retired generals should not dictate policy or personnel decisions'. According to the data released:

There are currently 881 active duty general officers

There are more than 1,400 general officers if one includes the reserve and the National Guard

There are 8,000 if retired ones are included

Also, the Department of Defense released statistics showing that Rumsfeld 'frequently consults the active-duty brass'. By this count:

He met with the chiefs of the military services 29 times year-to-date

He met with the chiefs of the military services 110 times last year

He held meetings with the combat commanders 45 times this year and 163 times last year

They did not mention whether or not the Defense Secretary actually listened to what these officers had to say.

Nevertheless, the intended point is that the percent of generals calling for Rumsfeld to step down out of the entire population of generals, retired or active, reserve or guard, totals only 0.0875%.

That said, you would think it would be a simple task to bring a larger group from the remaining 99.9125% of generals that would act as equally passionate defenders of Rumsfeld.

Such is not the case.

Why?

Whenever you see a service man or woman struggling, adjusting to a prosthetic device to replace their lost arms of legs, that is your legacy.

No matter how many limos or planes transport you to your lovely homes or fine offices, this represents but one outcome of your fateful Iraq war vote.  This is your legacy.  You and your children and grandchildren must live with this forever.

I can almost hear your quick explanation, "I voted for the Iraq War when Bush and his entire Administration insisted the U.S.A. was dangerously threatened by Saddam's weapons of mass destruction."

The reality is this.  You were duped by a series of liars using forged documents.  The Bush propaganda war machine resorted to distortion while running the flag up the pole and using patriotism in the most shameful way, to generate a conflict against an adversary that posed no discernible immediate threat to America's security.  

Two more generals added to the top-level calls for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to resign. As has been standard practice in the past, the White House met the criticism of their cabinet member by dismissing it and praising the member... just before that member stepped down. Is it Rumsfeld's turn? The Washington Post reports that the White House came to Rumsfeld's aid yesterday, "rebuffing calls from several retired generals for his resignation and crediting him with leading the Pentagon through two wars and a transformation of the military."

Retired Major General Charles Swannack Jr. is the "fifth retired general now is coming forward to call for Rumsfeld's resignation -- the second one who actually served on the ground in Iraq." The general told CNN's The Situation Room that 'Rumsfeld should make way for new leadership'.

Retired Army Major General John Riggs said Rumsfeld "created an 'atmosphere of arrogance' at the Pentagon in which military advice on Afghanistan and Iraq was ignored or discounted."

And, according to the CBS Evening News, "What makes this all particularly stinging is that all these generals served in high-ranking positions under Secretary Rumsfeld and many were intimately involved in the fighting or planning of the war in Iraq."

In the meantime, Republicans are fed up. CNN's The Situation Room reported, "One source...said we need to -- Republicans -- we need to turn the page on Iraq. ... It's hurting Republicans as they look toward the fall and the elections. So one in a top leadership position said, look, we really need to turn the page. We can't do it while Don Rumsfeld is there."

"President Bush is denying that he's planning an air strike on Iran. So you know what that means, they're planning an air strike on Iran."

-- David Letterman 4/11/06

War geeks will be quick to point to Iran's recent milestone of uranium enrichment as 'proof' that Iran is planning for nukes, "Why on Earth would the nation (Iran) with the 3rd largest proven reserve of oil care about developing nuclear power?"

They'll race to answer their own question, "They don't care! They're just doing this so they can terrorize us with their nuclear weapons. President Bush is completely justified in preparing military strikes on Iran."

As logic's advocate, you should at this time pose your own question, "Why would Canada, the nation with the 2nd largest proven reserve of oil care about developing nuclear power?"

They'll inevitably respond, "What? You really think Canada is going to try to Nuke the U.S.?"

And you retort, "Of course not, you idiot. Do you?"

Failing to catch the point, this dizzying display of incapacity will continue untill you finally concede that they're incapable of admitting why they really think Iran's motives are defined by violence -- that 'Islamic, America-hating, Middle-East, terrorist-loving' countries could have no other motive for their actions other than offensive militaristic objectives.

Announcement from the Crawford Peace House about next weeks events with Cindy Sheehan and friends. The co-founder (with MLK) of SCLC will be attending, rallies, concerts, teach-ins, performances, films, good food, lots of strategizing and networking. Don't miss it! See www.crawfordpeacehouse.org

Dean of the civil rights movement to participate in Crawford peace encampment

Rev. Dr. Joseph Lowery will deliver sermon at Camp Casey during Easter sunrise service, lead worship ceremony at Crawford Peace House

"I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors."

-- President Bush's father, George Herbert Walker Bush, 1999

The most insidious of traitors!!

I wonder what H. W. Bush thinks of his son after these latest revelations.

At first, it seemed that George Junior was toeing his family's line on the Plame-leak issue -- assuming a staunchly intolerant stance, publicly proclaiming that he would fire anyone involved in the leaking of intelligence related to the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame.

But, after some consideration, and perhaps a bit of Rovial prodding, Bush jacked up the firing threshold from 'involved' to 'committed a crime' -- offering a significant buffer for those involved in the leak. President Bush on July 15, 2005, "If somebody committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration."

At that point it was clear that Bush knew something that we did not. Little did anyone fathom that Bush's original statement would have likely required him to fire... himself.

It is a given that Bush very likely will go down in U.S. history as the worst president the nation ever had.  His Iraq War debacle with the likes of Wolfowitz and Perle beating the war drums, along with Cheney and war profiteering allies Halliburton, Bush and his team of destroyers, have demonstrated worthiness for the dubious honor of America's worst ever administration.

But it took a robot Congress to follow the pied piper of destruction, George W. Bush.  While we are at it, let's not forget the Republican right wing fanatics who fantasize they've got God on their side.  Where in their allegedly holy Bible they found validation for killing individuals or warring against nations that have not threatened us remains a mystery.

To hear them singing their hymns in church, praying for God to guide them in this nightmare killing spree that they have been backing is the height of hypocrisy.  Those prayers don't reach any higher than their warped heads.

To generate a civil war in Iraq and dare to claim you have brought democracy and freedom, which might spread across the entire Middle East, is one for the shrinks.  

Lest we forget the Vietnam War.  Richard Nixon continued this tragic war with its staggering cost in lives, destruction and death.  The bombing of Cambodia without justifiable cause, the entire debacle, represents a new low in U.S. history.  Nixon's dreadful contribution this war overshadows the Watergate Scandal.  

We can credit Robert McNamara for finally displaying the courage to let the public know what a horrifying conflict the Vietnam War was.  Yet some die-hard Republicans can only heap perpetual praise on this failed, impeached Republican president who ultimately resigned his office.  The question must be asked, "Why?"

And now, another Republican hero, President Ronald Reagan, has been eulogized as a great leader.  Ronald Reagan spoke of balancing the budget.  In the end Reagan tripled the national debt, never balancing one budget.  

Yet die-hard Republicans speak lovingly and longingly of Reaganomics.  What?  The Iran Contra Scandal!  Reagan violated international law he had helped establish.  The Reagan Administration was caught sending arms to the declared enemy.  

Russian authorities still deny pre-war connections to Saddam Hussein


Washington, DC (Washington Prost) - An anonymous White House/Pentagon source today revealed further photographic and documentary evidence suggesting that Russian intelligence sources inside America were able to feed information to Saddam Hussein prior to the US invasion. The information was reputedly confiscated by US troops from various Hussein command posts after the invasion.

Wheeling, W.VA (Rotters) - With his job satisfaction level falling even farther to 36% via a Newsweek magazine poll last week, President Bush appeared publicly for the fifth straight day, this time in Wheeling West Virginia, to plead for faith in his policies. Bush yesterday sought to answer critics complaints of a lack of clear leadership and plans in the war in Iraq by outlining his administration's official policies. He spoke to a hand picked assembly of believers in a manner almost resembling an evangelical crusade.

No amount of dashing about the world in Air Force One is going to change the reality of what has happened since the Iraq War began.

To hear Bush rant on in Cleveland that the "media" is giving a false impression of what success the U.S. is enjoying in Iraq is absurd propaganda.  The very same day the former head of Iraq announced on TV for the world to see and hear, "If this isn't Civil War going on in Iraq, what is it?"

Can't these Republican robots that back the failed President no matter what he says or does wake up at long last?  Probably not!  They know they are winners of big pensions with high-paying jobs waiting for them in the challenging world of lobby activity.  

Then there are those lucrative tax cuts as well.  If they are the winners then who are the losers?  The U.S. taxpayers and military personnel in the danger zone, who else?

The headline story in the Seattle Times on Sunday, March 19, 2006 read, "3 years in, hopes fade for Iraq, neighbors".  The Washington report stated the grim Iraq War reality:  "officials and analysts in the United States, Arab countries, Israel and Europe" are saying, "The invasion had produced a vortex of unintended consequences."  

The outcome reported is, "Militancy is on the rise.  Terrorists are using Iraq as a training base and potential launch pad for attacks elsewhere, according to U.S. officials and documents.  Democratic reform remains largely stymied."

It is glaringly apparent that public support for the Iraq War is sharply declining in the U.S. and is almost non-existent elsewhere.

It has taken the American public a long time to recognize what a dangerous Republican Administration has led the public into.  Congress voted to provide the President with war authority and we know the rest.  Is that something to be proud of?  When anyone dared defy this Republican Administration's rush to war they found their patriotism attacked.