Topic Header
We hate to brag, except when we’re discussing our readers. Thanks to you, October 2006 was the best month ever for us at Pensito Review. Last month, 209,075 “unique visitors” accessed this website, which breaks our previous monthly record of 199,000 readers in June. October’s visitors viewed 458,724 pages on the site — an increase of nearly 100,000 pages in September — bringing our 12-month tally of page views up to 3.6 million.
John Kerry hit back today after President Bush accused Kerry of dissing the military yesterday when he mangled a sentence and saying, “You know education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. And if you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.” He meant “you get [us] stuck in Iraq,” apparently. (Imagine if people got upset when Bush mangled a phrase!)
Kerry was forceful in his reply:
“If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they’re crazy. This is the classic G.O.P. playbook. I’m sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did.
I’m not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq . It disgusts me that these Republican hacks, who have never worn the uniform of our country lie and distort so blatantly and carelessly about those who have.
The people who owe our troops an apology are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who misled America into war and have given us a Katrina foreign policy that has betrayed our ideals, killed and maimed our soldiers, and widened the terrorist threat instead of defeating it. These Republicans are afraid to debate veterans who live and breathe the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor.
Bottom line, these Republicans want to debate straw men because they’re afraid to debate real men. And this time it won’t work because we’re going to stay in their face with the truth and deny them even a sliver of light for their distortions. No Democrat will be bullied by an administration that has a cut and run policy in Afghanistan and a stand still and lose strategy in Iraq .”
Gen. William E. Odom:
The United States upset the regional balance in the Middle East when it invaded Iraq. Restoring it requires bold initiatives, but “cutting and running” must precede them all. Only a complete withdrawal of all U.S. troops — within six months and with no preconditions — can break the paralysis that now enfeebles our diplomacy. And the greatest obstacles to cutting and running are the psychological inhibitions of our leaders and the public.
Our leaders do not act because their reputations are at stake. The public does not force them to act because it is blinded by the president’s conjured set of illusions: that we are reducing terrorism by fighting in Iraq; creating democracy there; preventing the spread of nuclear weapons; making Israel more secure; not allowing our fallen soldiers to have died in vain; and others.
But reality can no longer be avoided. It is beyond U.S. power to prevent bloody sectarian violence in Iraq, the growing influence of Iran throughout the region, the probable spread of Sunni-Shiite strife to neighboring Arab states, the eventual rise to power of the anti-American cleric Muqtada Sadr or some other anti-American leader in Baghdad, and the spread of instability beyond Iraq. All of these things and more became unavoidable the day that U.S. forces invaded.
These realities get worse every day that our forces remain in Iraq. They can’t be wished away by clever diplomacy or by leaving our forces in Iraq for several more years.
The administration could recognize that a rapid withdrawal is the only way to overcome our strategic paralysis, though that appears unlikely, notwithstanding election-eve changes in White House rhetoric. Congress could force a stock-taking. Failing this, the public will sooner or later see through all of the White House’s double talk and compel a radical policy change. The price for delay, however, will be more lives lost in vain — the only thing worse than the lives already lost in vain.
Why does this make it seem like even more fun?
It’s not something that gets a good deal of attention at this time of year, or ever, but a new Gallup poll reveals that a little more than 1 in 10 Americans object to Halloween “on religious grounds.”
That number, 11%, climbs to 27% among those who attend religious services weekly.
Additionally, better than 1 in 4 evangelicals object to Halloween.
Screw ’em. More candy corn for us!
Brian Moore is running against Bill Nelson and Katherine Harris for U.S. Senate, but most people in Florida don’t know that. I heard of him when he received some media coverage by going to Cuba the night of the first Nelson-Harris debate.
I was intrigued by a guy who, like me, is a political independent, and who was savvy enough to figure out a way to garner some media coverage for his campaign while the Republican and Democratic candidates traded platitudes before a public television audience.
I contacted Moore’s campaign to see if he would agree to an e-mail interview. He was amenable, and what follows is the exchange between Brian Moore and me from Monday, Oct. 30.
Moore is 63, lives in Spring Hill, Fla., and has run for mayor and city council of Washington, D.C., and has mounted a campaign for the House of Representatives in 2002 and 2004. He has never won an election, though he has served in a variety of civic and activist organizations for 34 years.
PENSITO REVIEW: What gave you the idea to go to Cuba when the debate between Bill Nelson and Katherine Harris was broadcast?
BRIAN MOORE: I had to do something that could top them, and show up the hypocrisy of our so-called “Democratic system.” Cuba seemed a natural, because supposedly that is where there are no freedoms and Democratic rights. Plus, I could speak their language, the embargo was a contrast to my opponents, and the relevancy of Cuba to Florida was very high. In addition, I am an advocate for a national health care system, and their system is universal, comprehensive, accessible, portable and preventive.
That’s Michael Doonesbury’s daughter Alex who is watching a congressional debate on her tummy TV in her dorm at M.I.T. The content of the debate, however, is pure fantasy because it is the Democrat who uses President Bush’s undebatable technique of casting his opponent’s position in the most radical terms.
The fantasy Democratic candidate says:
Well, as my Republican friend here well knows, there are some people who accept the brutal torture and execution of 100 Iraqi civilians a day. Well, I don’t. I’m against it. That’s a key difference between me and some people.
Later, he says:
There’s also a view out there that we don’t need a Bill of Rights anymore, that we should just let teh president decide what rights we have. Well, I like our Constitution, even if he hates it. I think its a pretty good document.
Last frame:
KARL ROVE: They’re learning sir.
PRES. BUSH: Too late, though. Right, Karl?
Military intelligence: At a press conference last week, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine Gen. Peter Pace said winning the war on terrorism will be determined by conditions, not a signature on a treaty. Well, duh!
“Winning is having security in the countries we’re trying to help that allows for those governments to function and for their people to function,” he said. “Washington, D.C., has crime, but it has a police force that is able to keep that crime below a level at which the normal citizens can go about their daily jobs and the government can function. That’s what you’re looking for on the war on terrorism, whether it be Iraq, Afghanistan or anyplace else.”
So, the goal here, if I understand it correctly General, is to make Baghdad and Kabul as safe as our nation’s capital?
In 1960, there were about 27 crimes per thousand residents in Washington, D.C. In 2005, there were 62 per thousand. Of course, over that period of time, the population of D.C. actually fell from 764,000 to 551,000 — a reduction of 214,000, or 28 percent — while the crime rate increased by 57 percent. So Washington is actually a more dangerous place than it was 45 years ago. And Baghdad and Kabul are both more dangerous now than they were before we started the war on terror.
So maybe Washington is an appropriate benchmark for what constitutes a win in the war on terror, after all.
Sometimes I see fellow editor Buck’s point about the emails from the Florida Democratic campaigns. This just in from governor’s candidate Jim Davis in regard to his debate tonight with Republican Charlie Crist:
Try playing this game, whether you’re attending a debate watch party, sitting around with your friends and family, or watching the debate by yourself at home. Grab a piece of paper and make a checkmark every time Charlie does one of the following:
* Each time Charlie calls for “more of the same,” “stay the course,” or any other reference to continuing the way things are going now
* Each time Charlie says “double the homestead exemption” – because it means Florida will have to wait four years for tax relief
* Each time Charlie mentions Jeb Bush
* Each time Charlie doesn’t answer the question (double it if Chris Matthews calls him on it)
* Each time Charlie gets visibly flustered or angry
* Each time Charlie expresses his love for Ronald Reagan
* Each time Charlie refers to himself as “the happy warrior”At the end of the night, count all checkmarks and ask everyone to go online and contribute at least a dollar for each checkmark.
I think the chances of Charlie doing any of these things, now that he’s seen this email, are slim. If Davis really wanted to see Crist get “flustered or angry” he would have Matthews ask him why, as a gay man, he would be a Republican.
How Swede it is: A poll of Swedish citizens released Oct. 29 found that a majority in that Scandinavian country think the United States — not North Korea — is the single greatest threat to world peace:
Some 29 percent of those surveyed said the U.S. posed the biggest danger to peace, compared to 28 percent who considered North Korea the top menace, according to the Temo poll broadcast Sunday by Swedish television station Axess.
Among Swedes aged 16-29, a striking 40 percent believed the U.S. presented the greatest risk.
Iran placed third with 18 percent, followed by Israel (6 per cent), China (4 per cent) and Russia (3 per cent).
Some 1,000 people were surveyed.
The Swedes should know — they bestow the Nobel Peace Prize, after all. Of course, Alfred Nobel made his millions on dynamite ….
From Trump’s “stolen election” lies, we can’t get no relief,
He carps on about stolen votes, but he never names the thief.
Somebody needs to tell this guy
Americans aren’t buying his lies,
And that he’s turned us into the United States of Disbelief.
