Unholy madness and evil. No Cthulu jokes here.

[elfs]

Oh, Gods. Think about this. Think about this very hard:

The Bush administration will delay major assaults on rebel-held cities in Iraq until after U.S. elections in November, say administration officials, mindful that large-scale military offensives could affect the U.S. presidential race."

Although American commanders in Iraq have been buoyed by recent successes in insurgent-held towns such as Samarra and Tall Afar, administration and Pentagon officials say they will not try to retake cities such as Fallujah and Ramadi -- where insurgents' grip is strongest and U.S. military casualties could be the greatest -- until after Americans vote in what is likely to be a close election.

"When this election's over, you'll see us move very vigorously," said one senior administration official involved in strategic planning, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"Once you're past the election, it changes the political ramifications" of a large-scale offensive, the official said. "We're not on hold right now. We're just not as aggressive."

Oh, Gods. George W. Bush belongs in Hell if he believes that his re-election is more important than the lives of the young men and women under his command. But that's exactly what has happened. The insurgents are being given time to regroup, retrench, and rearm, because Bush doesn't want more casualty numbers coming out of Iraq.

From LA Times, registration required (user: ranger, passwd: lone, via BugMeNot).

Reuters reprints the story.

---

A lot of people were scratching their heads over Bush's sudden citing of the Dred Scott case during Kerry's debate. Why would a man with such a reputation for being ill-read in history be so specific? Well, now we know why: The Dred Scott case is a very common citation in anti-abortion circles. What Bush really said was, to those who know the terminology, "I will nominate Supreme Court justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade."

An interesting point, however. Most of the anti-abortion types are reading Dred Scott wrong. As one website puts it, "Dred Scott shows us two things: The mischief that 'activist' judges always do, and the fact that people are sometimes willing to resort to a Constitutional amendment to overturn a Supreme Court ruling." The funny thing is that Dred Scott is one of the most strict Constitutional rulings ever made: the 19th century Supremes ignored "popular sentiment" and went with a straight-from-the-text ruling on property rights.

---

Typical. Apparently, a WHO report on how much of our diet should be carbohydrates was modified prior to release to claim that there was no "upper limit" to the ratio between carbs and other components such as fat or protein. It now turns out that after the report was submitted to the WHO, the whole affair-- the summoning of scientists to a nutrition conference in Rome, the assemblage of the report, and everything else, was a sham paid for by the sugar industry.

Comments

[chgowiz.livejournal.com]

History repeats itself over and over.

Unfortunately, most of the people reading you probably have already made their minds up and such news will not move them one way or the other. This will be a down to the wire race, I think.

[elfs.livejournal.com]

Yeah, probably. But we all encounter one or more people in our lives who are voting for Bush. Every tool we have to convince them otherwise, or at least, please, stay home on election day, is useful. The mendacity, malevolence, incompetence, and disconnection from reality of George W. Bush and his administration is now in full metastatic display. Show it to others.

[chgowiz.livejournal.com]

It seems like, from my experience, that this election is so polarized that the Bush-ites are just as emphatic on why the Kerry-ites should switch and vote for Bush. I've not seen it so bad as this year - unfortunately. Common sense has gone out the window for most of the political debate and we are left with a big mess.

I keep thinking about history and how Rome fell to internal hubris, so did Great Britain - I just wonder how fast the US fall from the pedestal will happen. I think in about another 100 years, we will be the Great Britain to China.

[rapier.livejournal.com]

Worse than that, it's going to be like 2000, but multiplied over several states. Recounts and more recounts in three or four hotly contested states, and it'll be up to the Supreme Court to select our president again.

Alas, alas.

[chgowiz.livejournal.com]

Welcome to the Brave New World where the average voter has been made all the more irrelevant.

BTW, this piece about the "new media" was very enlightening:

http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/11/news/newsmakers/sinclair_kerry/index.htm

Anti-Kerry film to air in prime-time
Nation's largest TV chain orders all 62 stations to show movie without commercials next week.
October 11, 2004: 12:40 PM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Sinclair Broadcast Group, owner of the largest chain of television stations in the nation, plans to air a documentary that accuses Sen. John Kerry of betraying American prisoners during the Vietnam War, a newspaper reported Monday.

The network has ordered all 62 of its stations to air "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal" without commercials in prime-time next week, the Washington Post said, just two weeks before the Nov. 2 election.

Sinclair's television group, which includes affiliates of all the major networks, reaches nearly a quarter of all U.S. television households, according to the company's Web site. But the affiliates owned by the major television networks reach a larger percentage of U.S. homes because they are in the largest markets.

[rapier.livejournal.com]

No. No no no no. Dammit! Part of me wants to scream: "But what about equal access!" And then the rest of me realizes that it's useless.

Despite the uselessness of it, I'll vote on November 2. They say my state is a "battleground state," and so it should make it interesting in any case.

[chgowiz.livejournal.com]

Yup, so will I - even though IL is supposedly a "no-brainer" for Kerry.

I read about how in the past, when you would submit your ballot, the election judge would say "Mr./Mrs. SoAndSo has voted." I wish something like that was done today. We've failed to recall how public pride and public shame can be powerful tools.

[rapier.livejournal.com]

Well, they do have the stickers now. "I Voted!" or whatever. But yes, a formal intonation of your name and the fact that you voted, that would be a good tradition to bring back.

[wendor.livejournal.com]

They still do it in Idaho (or did as of about three years ago when I moved) and they do here in Nevada. (or at least some parts...with Nevada leading the nation in early voting, electronic voting, etc. it's becoming less and less common for people to vote in person at their regular polling place on election day. For example I'll probably be voting electronically right here at work sometime next week and they won't be doing the voice declarations for that)

[abostick59.livejournal.com]

Have you heard about the bit where Sinclair Broadcast Group's president and CEO was arrested in 1996 for participating in an unnatural act with a prostitute? In a company car, no less.

[http://users.livejournal.com/dominic-m-/]

:-\

::sees great wisdom im your words:: And it scares me. And Im 18 and in my prime too, plus a liberal so Ill definatly be first drafted.

[sierra-nevada.livejournal.com]

A little more detail on the Dred Scott decision and Bush's misinterpretation of it can be found in this article on morons.org written by a friend of mine who is a lawyer by training and follows the Supreme Court quite closely.

It wasn't entirely a question of property rights - it was also how the Constitution, as written, dealt with slaves (non-free persons) as 3/5ths of a person in representative apportionment. The majority strictly interpreted the Constitution, and that was later fixed with an amendment.