thoughtcrimes and misdemeanors

This is an open letter to any friends of Hillary Clinton out there.

It may be time to stage an intervention.

Clearly, the woman needs help to overcome her denial and see that her obsession with winning the presidency has become a problem not only for her, but also for her friends and family. And by “friends and family” I mostly mean the Democratic party – though I would imagine that Chelsea, at least, is getting rather tired of the whole dog and pony show by now, as well.

Yes, okay, fine, she had a strong showing in West Virginia last night. So what? West Virginia has, what, 28 delegates at the national convention later this summer? That’s not enough to change the race.

And she didn’t even win all of those delegates. Obama got 8. At this point, she would need to win, like, 90 percent of all remaining pledged delegates just to pull even with Obama. And that’s not even counting all the superdelegates who are now jumping onto the Obama bandwagon because they want to be seen as backing the winner while their vote still matters. Or the Edwards pledged delegates, who are likely to switch to the Obama column given the Edwards endorsement today.

At this point, all Hillary can hope to accomplish is to weaken the Democratic Party at a time when the party can least afford it.

And that’s why Hillary’s friends need to come together and gently, lovingly tell her to knock it the fuck off before she causes even more harm to her friends and family.

-jane doe

Okay, this is not exactly a movie review, I guess, since I haven’t seen it yet.

Please. Like I have those kinds of contacts.

Still, it’s a movie that I’m really looking forward to, assuming it ever makes it here to Redstatesville. Which it may not. It is opening May 23rd in a few theaters in New York and L.A. Wider release presumably (hopefully) to follow.

The movie, War, Inc., is by all accounts a mish-mash of genres and a wicked satire of the highest order. John Cusack (who also co-wrote and produced the picture) stars as hitman Brand Hauser (NB: not the same character as the hitman Cusack plays in Grosse Pointe Blank, another wonderful movie he co-wrote, produced and starred in), who is hired by the management of a Halliburton/Blackwater-style corporation called Tamerlane to assassinate the head of a rival company. The story involves the first ever entirely corporate-managed foreign war in a country called Turaqistan, and is clearly based on the Iraq war fiasco, while exploring themes similar to those found in the documentary Iraq for Sale and Naomi Klein’s wonderful book on disaster capitalism, The Shock Doctrine.

[Side note: if you haven't read Klein's book yet, you ought to pick up a copy at your earliest opportunity. Like now. Really. It's that good (and disturbing), and it will change the way you look at a lot of major events you see reported in the news. Seriously, head over to Amazon.com or (better yet) your favorite independent bookstore and pick up a copy NOW. This blog will still be here when you get back, I promise.]

I’ve always thought that Grosse Pointe Blank – Cusack’s 1997 movie about a hitman in existential crisis who attends his ten-year high school reunion – ought to be required viewing for anyone thinking about becoming a corporate attorney (they call them hired guns for a reason, folks!). Martin Blank’s recurring assertion that “It’s not me” in that movie goes to the heart of a lot of business dealings that are too easily rationalized as “It’s just business, nothing personal.”

War, Inc., looks even better in that regard, from what I’ve heard, and the early buzz I’ve heard is very positive.

So why am I writing about a movie that I haven’t seen yet? A movie that, in fact, may not open here in Redstatesville where I live?

Because this thing really looks brilliant. Don’t believe me? Check out the clips and blurbs on Cusack’s MySpace page.

Also, because I am hoping that one of you, my dear nonexistent readers, has seen it (it was apparently showing in Toronto last week) or will see it soon (as noted, it opens in NY and LA on May 23rd). So I’m putting out a call here: if anyone reading this little blog sees it (either opening weekend or before then) and wants to post a proper review (or even an improper review) here, please contact me directly at janedoe [at] inbox.com.

Worst case scenario, I will post a review myself if/when it opens here in Redstatesville (or somewhere within relatively easy driving distance of here).

In the mean time, of course, I still think Bush and Cheney ought to be impeached.

-jane doe

Follow-up: minor formatting corrections. Sorry for the multiple posts, RSS subscribers.

It was probably inevitable. Blame it on peer pressure, temporary insanity, or late-night caffeine-induced hallucinations, if you want.

I have set up a MySpace page.

But I have a good reason for it – honestly. It’s so I can keep up with certain political groups and musical artists that interest me.

Don’t believe me? Check out my rather anemic “friends” list. Am I actually friends with John Cusack, Billy Bragg, or Elvis Costello? Hah! I wish I were that cool. The sad reality is, I’m not even that cool in my dreams.

Anyway, I figured that as long as I was signing up for the free internet real estate, I would start posting a mirror of my blog there, as well. I haven’t figured out a good way to link directly to my real blog, so for now I’ll just post copies of my posts here over there.

So why am I mentioning this at all? Because there may be a few of you, my dear nonexistent readers, who are into the whole MySpace scene, and would prefer to get updates from my blog on your MySpace home page instead of via a bookmark or RSS aggregator. For whatever reason. So feel free to stop on by and add me as a friend, or, like, whatever. You can also check out what I’m reading at the moment, and see my countdown clock that is marking the days, hours, and minutes (still too many) until George Bush is out of office.

And you can also not post comments and messages to me there, just like most of you don’t post them here.

So feel free to check out my place over there. Of course, I’m dealing with the same anonymity issues there as I am here – specifically, the fact that I can’t have anything there or here that directly links my readers to my real life identity. Because I like my day job and would like to keep it for now. Thus there will be no entertaining pictures of your faithful blogger to make fun of, beyond a somewhat smaller version of the banner from this blog.

Anyway, stop on by and be sure to not leave a message for me!

-jane doe

P.S. As always, I still believe that Bush and Cheney ought to be impeached.

Okay, maybe I’m being a bit extreme when I say that. I honestly hope it won’t come down to it. But if Hillary and her minions do exercise the nuclear option, I’m not sure I’ll have a major party candidate I can in good conscience vote for come November. I am quite certain many other Democrats and independents feel the same way. Which means what seemed impossible just a year ago – a Republican victory in this year’s presidential election – may be looming on the horizon.

Perhaps I should back up a bit, and explain what I mean by all this.

The Huffington Post is reporting today that Clinton’s supporters may exercise what is known as the nuclear option - forcing a rules change through the Democratic Party’s rules and bylaws committee to retroactively allow delegates from Florida and Michigan to be seated at the national convention in Denver.

Those states held their primaries early – in violation of Democratic party rules – and current rules prevent the seating of any delegates selected in those primaries.

The candidates knew and agreed in advance that the primaries for those states wouldn’t count – Barack Obama’s name didn’t even appear on the Michigan ballots. Yet the Clinton people are now trying to force their delegates to be seated at the convention because that’s the only shot she has at winning the delegate count at this point.

I understand the frustration that voters in those states must be feeling that their primary votes will not be counted in this year’s close race. But both states were given opportunities to remedy their actions to comply with national party rules, and neither state chose to do so.

I find the Clinton camp’s behavior in recent weeks extremely troubling. First, one cannot help but feel a bit dizzy with all the spinning that they’ve been trying to do lately – only swing states matter, or only big states matter, or only primary states (as opposed to caucus states) matter. They’ve done everything on that front but just come out and flatly say that only states that went for Hillary in the primary matter.

But it’s not just the spinning of primary results that is troubling – that’s part of the game, after all. Rather, it is the fact that she seems to be bent on doing the Republican’s work for them, when all reasonable strategies for victory would now no longer work for her, that I find most troubling. Suggesting that Obama hasn’t passed some sort of “commander in chief test”, making insinuations about his electability (um, sugar, he’s getting more votes than you — doesn’t that say enough about relative electability?), implying that McCain would somehow be more qualified to lead than Obama…this is not the way to make sure the party can move forward once the convention in Denver is over.

If Hillary is so bent on winning that she is willing to risk the destruction of her own political party, how can we hope that she can build the kinds of coalitions necessary to heal this country after eight years of the Decider-in-Chief?

My own state’s primaries are long over. And, in fact, my state is one of the states that, in Hillary’s mind, doesn’t really count. Barring an incident with John McCain eating an aborted fetus during a televised debate in October, my state will most likely end up in the red come election night this year. So what I say may not matter to Hillary and her supporters.

Nevertheless, I feel I must say it.

If Hillary is somehow successful in her efforts to derail the Obama train, and she becomes the Democratic Party’s nominee, I’m not sure I can in good conscience vote for her.

I didn’t always feel that way. Back when we were voting here in Redstatesville, I was actually happy to have two candidates I felt I could support. Yes, I voted for Obama, but I would have accepted and backed Hillary at that point if she had been the winner.

Now, I don’t trust her further than I could comfortably throw her pantsuited ass.

I realize that politics at the national level require certain levels of nerve, chutzpah, and narcissism. A certain amount of making nice with people whose views are appalling to you is a real necessity. But anyone who is willing to go to the lengths she has been lately in order to achieve power is in no way to be trusted with that power.

So if it comes down to a race between her and McCain, I may be writing in Obama. Or – worse yet – not voting in at all in the presidential race.

I don’t really see any other choice for me. I can’t vote for McCain, of course. But at some point, my loyalty to the Democratic Party will stretch no further. I will not vote for a candidate whose tactics I find repugnant.

I don’t think I am alone in feeling this way, either.

Which means that McCain is looking more and more likely to win this sucker come November.

Thus, the Canada option.

-jane doe

P.S. Of course, none of this changes the fact that I really think that Bush and Cheney ought to be impeached. And tried for crimes against humanity and for violating the laws of this nation, the constitution, and their oaths of office.

Sorry, folks. I am wrapping up a semester from hell. This blog’s normal operations should be starting up again in the next day or so.

Of course, normal is a relative term.

-jane doe

Yup, it’s another Keith Olbermann Special Comment.

This one is largely a rehash of his January 31st Special Comment, updated in light of the House of Representatives’ refusal (despite Bush’s efforts to scare them into submission) to pass the FISA extension today in a form that Bush would be willing to sign — that is, one that includes immunity for the telecoms who have helped the White House illegally spy on Americans.

The key point of the comment: assuming Bush is correct that extending the FISA statute as soon as possible is critical for our nation’s counterterrorism efforts, Bush’s repeated threats to veto any bill that doesn’t include telecom immunity is putting the financial status of the telecom companies above the lives and safety of American citizens.

Oh, there is one significant amendment from the previous special comment. Keith Olbermann calls George Bush a fascist, subject-verb-object. He even suggests that Bush have a t-shirt made up with the word fascist emblazoned on it.

About time someone in the mainstream media had the guts to say it.

As usual, I’m sure Crooks and Liars will get the video up quickly. Go watch it, especially if you missed the earlier Special Comment on this subject.

It all points out, once again, why Bush and Cheney really ought to be impeached.

- jane doe

10:51 pm: Well, we are ten minutes away from the polls closing in California. At this point, Clinton and Obama are pretty much in a dead heat as far as the state count goes — how that will translate into convention delegates remains to be seen. On the Republican side, Romney appears to be picking up a few more states (Colorado, Minnesota, Montana, and North Dakota), though those states haven’t been decisively called yet and I don’t know what kind of margins we are looking at in the states. At any rate, it means Romney is still in the game, as are both Huckabee and McCain on the Republican side. And hey, did you know that Ron Paul is still in the race? You sure can’t tell from MSNBC’s coverage, but CNN at least includes him in the results reporting at the bottom of the screen.

Meanwhile, Hillary is currently on TV giving a speech, which I have muted. I may agree with her on a lot of issues, and if she’s the Democratic Party nominee at the end of the day I’ll vote for her, but I still don’t like listening to her give speeches.

11:00 pm: Polls in California and a few other states are now closed. But Hillary is still speaking. On and on.

11:01 pm: The Republican race in California is currently too close to call. Minnesota and Idaho have gone to Obama, and according to Keith Olbermann, I was too quick to assume that Clinton and Obama are currently tied in state counts: apparently, some of the states I was putting in Hillary’s column haven’t actually been called in her favor yet.

11:04 pm: Chris Matthews, whom I find annoying, is interviewing Mike Huckabee, whom I find worrying. But I didn’t unmute the TV soon enough after Hillary’s speech, so I missed whether there is a clear leader in California for the Democratic Party. Therefore, I am suffering through the interview so I don’t miss anything important.

11:10 pm: Unsurprisingly, California is too close to call at this point (addendum: and probably will continue to be too close to call for several hours). I see no reason to subject myself to more of this coverage for now. And according to my blog stats, no one is reading this tonight anyway (not that I have any readers on this blog), so I might as well stop talking to myself and crash for the night.

- jane doe

P.S. And since I haven’t mentioned it in this post, let me just remind my non-existent readers that I really think Bush and Cheney ought to be impeached.

Well, the snow is bad enough here in Redstateville that my evening classes were canceled, leaving me free to camp out in front of my TV to watch the results of the various primaries across the country. I won’t be live blogging, precisely, but I will be posting occasionally here as the evening progresses. I am watching MSNBC primarily, though I may duck over to CNN at times. Or maybe even Faux News, if I’m in need of a good laugh.

Let the good times roll, my dear non-existent readers!

- jane doe

NB: All times given below are EST.

6:18 pm: Chris Matthews just welcomed southern Africa to the MSNBC audience, which raises an interesting point: the outcome of our presidential election is of interest not just here, but throughout the world. Remember: it’s not just us liberals who are counting down the days until Bush leaves office!

6:25 pm: Why is it that the pundits insist on talking about Clinton in terms of female voters and Obama in terms of African-American voters? Last time I checked, there are still a few white males in the Democratic Party: Clinton and Obama can’t possibly be getting by just on votes by people who are demographically similar to them.

Random thought: Do you think the Bush administration is loving the primaries, since all the news coverage is focusing on the election instead of to the latest misdeeds of the White House?

6:40 pm: Several of the talking heads seem to take it as a foregone conclusion that McCain has sewn up the Republican nomination. I’m not entirely certain whether that’s appropriate at this hour — so far the only state that’s announced its results is West Virginia, which went to Huckabee.

6:42 pm: On MSNBC, Pat Buchanan’s sister, Bay, who is apparently with the Romney camp, is raging about abortion, illegal immigrants, and whether McCain is really a true conservative. What prompted them to put her on? She’s practically frothing at the mouth. I really hope they’re not going to keep going back to her all night!

6:51 pm: They just reported on a poll of Republican voters which found that 71% of Republicans still support Bush’s handling of the Iraq war. What I missed (if you saw this, please reply in the comments) was whether this was among actual primary voters (which would suggest that these are the hard-core Republican supporters) or among the larger group of people who are registered as Republicans. Is it possible that the Republican voters are that far out of alignment with the rest of the country? Or are these just the die-hard Republicans who won’t admit that Bush has royally screwed things up in the Middle East?

7:00 pm: The polls just closed in Georgia, and within seconds MSNBC called it for Obama. No word on what the margin of victory was — one of the pundits (sorry, can’t remember which one) said if he doesn’t beat Hillary by at least 10%, Obama is toast. Seems a bit excessive, but I suppose the pundits feel like they have to make pronouncements like this…

7:03 pm: Sorry, I really should also be mentioning the Republican results in Georgia…except that they are apparently still too close to call, with Huckabee a strong candidate along with Romney and McCain.

7:15 pm: Okay, apparently they are going to spend this entire hour riffing on Georgia because it’s the only state where the polls have closed. I’m tuning out for a while, and will tune back in when the next batch of polls close.

8:00 pm: More results:

• Obama takes Illinois, and Clinton takes Oklahoma among the Dems
• McCain takes Illinois, New Jersey, and Connecticut for the Repubs; Romney is forecast to win Massachusetts

None of these are real surprises. The big surprise seems to be Huckabee bringing in far more votes than anyone expected, due to those infamous conservative “values voters” (a total misnomer: liberals vote their values, too — we just have different values).

8:06 pm: Currently, Huckabee is actually in the lead in Georgia (that’s in terms of actual votes, not poll projections). The Republican candidates are still running very close in Georgia, though, so the leader may change several times over the evening as more results come in.

8:09 pm: Apparently, Romney and Huckabee are having a big old catfight. Romney is pissed because they think Huckabee is taking away more votes from Romney than from McCain.

8:15 pm: MSNBC just called Tennessee for Clinton, by a narrow margin…narrow enough that I would have thought they would hold off forecasting a winner. But what do I know?

Okay, time to check out what the other major news channels are saying:

8:19 pm: Holy crap! Faux News has Karl Rove commenting on the primaries. I don’t know what he’s saying, though, because as soon as I switched to that station, they cut to a commercial break. But it’s Karl Rove, and it’s Faux News, so it’s probably safe to assume that whatever he was saying would annoy me.

8:22 pm: CNN is actually giving results for Ron Paul, unlike MSNBC, which hasn’t mentioned him so far. His results are laughable, but they are actually getting coverage, so I guess that will make his fanatics happy.

8:26 pm: Apparently, Arkansas — unlike every single other state — closes polls on the half hour instead of the hour. Results to be reported shortly.

8:31 pm: Surprising absolutely no one, Clinton and Huckabee are the projected winners for the two parties in Arkansas.

8:36 pm: Interesting polling numbers on Evangelical voters: they are apparently dividing almost evenly among the three major Republican candidates. The other interesting thing: I don’t think anyone is asking the Democratic voters about their religious affiliation. No one is reporting on the religious affiliation of Democratic voters, at least that I’ve seen so far. It seems like they should at least be asking, instead of just assuming that the Democrats don’t get any Evangelical voters. Yeah, I’m sure most of them go to the Republicans, but I can’t help thinking there are at least a few Evangelical Democrats.

8:56 pm: NBC has apparently called Massachusetts for Hillary, by a fairly healthy margin. I was switching between stations, so I don’t know what the Republican result was for that state. Wait, are there any Republicans in Massachusetts?

9:00 pm: New York was just projected for Hillary within seconds of the polls closing. A bunch of other states just had their polls close, too, but Keith is going back over the states they’ve already called again, instead.

9:02 pm: Okay, Keith just rattled off a bunch of Republican results, but he was going too fast for me to keep track. Plus, it’s the Republicans, so I have no emotional investment in any of the candidates. Obama is apparently winning Delaware, though.

9:20 pm: Hillary wins New Jersey, apparently. And apparently McCain is winning everywhere. Except where he’s not.

9:33 pm: How the Tucker has fallen. Didn’t he have his own show on MSNBC for a while there? Does he still? I can’t stand the guy, so I’ve never really paid much attention. But they’ve got him stuck at one of the Republican candidate’s headquarters like a regular reporter/guest pundit type. He’s not looking real happy, either.

9:37 pm: Romney cannot be happy right now. He won Massachusetts, but everywhere else so far is going to either McCain or Huckabee. The Romney people are talking about Colorado, and I would imagine he’ll do pretty well in Utah as well, but he was probably not figuring on falling behind Huckabee in so many states.

10:00 pm: As predicted, Romney won Utah. Yawn.

10:12 pm: Huckabee is on TV at the moment, giving a speech to his minions supporters, but I am done for now. I may check in again after the polls close in California, but I’m sick of listening to pundits and politicians. G’night everyone!

That’s right, my dear non-existent readers, it’s Sooper Dooper Tuesday.

Oh, yeah, and it’s also Mardi Gras…because nothing says “presidential politics” quite like massive numbers of people getting drunk on hurricanes and showing their private parts to anyone willing to throw a few beads in their direction.

And it’s not just New Orleans that is throwing a killer party today. (NB: New Orleans can throw the biggest, rowdiest party ever and it won’t make a lick of difference as far as presidential politics are concerned. Louisiana isn’t having primaries today, so it doesn’t matter if all the voters are drunk enough to seriously consider voting for Ron Paul.) No, New York – which actually is having primaries for both parties today – is apparently having a parade/drunken blowout/riot in honor of some football-related event. So, if any of my non-existent readers live in New York, keep this handy tip in mind: alcohol and defective voting machines don’t mix. Vote first, then party.

I will not be live blogging the election coverage tonight, unless enough snow falls today for evening classes to be canceled (which is a distinct possibility). Or unless class is really dull (also a distinct possibility). Still, I’m very excited about today’s primaries, because by the time they’re over – or by Thursday at the latest – we won’t have to listen to the talking heads natter on about what the impact of Super Tuesday is going to be anymore.

And lest there be any doubt about the matter, I still believe that Bush and Cheney ought to be impeached.

-jane doe

P.S. Once upon a time, it was illegal to sell alcohol on election day before the polls closed. Apparently they were worried about political party hacks influencing voters with alcohol. Does anyone know if this is still the case anywhere (other than Utah, where they’ll seize on any excuse to restrict the sale of alcohol)? I assume it’s now legal in most places, because there is simply no other rational explanation for Bush’s victory in 2004.

Just got done watching Keith Olbermann’s latest Special Comment. (The video is already up on Crooks and Liars, as is the transcript.) Once again, Keith showed what a strong voice he has been against the many outrages of this administration.

This Special Comment was about Bush’s insistence that any extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) include immunity for the major telecom companies “believed to have assisted” the administration in its illegal spying on American citizens (though of course, that’s not how Bush described it).

He raised a number of excellent points in the course of his commentary. Chief among these: if, as Bush claims, the extension of FISA is critical to our national security, then why is the alleged president threatening to veto any such extension that doesn’t include telecom immunity?

Here’s how he opened tonight’s Special Comment (excerpt courtesy of The News Hole):

In a Presidency of hypocrisy, an Administration of exploitation, a labyrinth of leadership, in which every vital fact is a puzzle inside a riddle wrapped in an enigma hidden under a claim of executive privilege supervised by an idiot, this one is surprisingly easy.

President Bush has put protecting the Telecom giants from the laws…ahead of protecting you from the terrorists.

He has demanded an extension of the FISA law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, but only an extension that includes retroactive immunity for the Telecoms who helped him spy on you.

Another quote, this one focusing on some equivocating language from Bush’s SOTU speech earlier this week:

If you, sir, are asking Congress and us to join you in this shameless, breathless, literally textbook example of fascism - the merged actions of government and corporations who answer to no government - you still don’t have the guts to even say that the telecom companies did assist you in your efforts? Will you and the equivocators who surround you like a cocoon never go on the record about anything? Even the stuff you claim to believe in?

I could go on and on here, quoting gems from his diatribe, but since the entire text is already posted elsewhere, that seems like unnecessary effort on my part.

On the whole, I would say that this Special Comment was very good, though probably not his best one to date. Nevertheless, it is well worth checking out online if you missed Countdown this evening (or don’t get MSNBC).

And it points up one more reason why Bush and Cheney really ought to be impeached.

- jane doe

I guess the ever-dwindling slate of Republican presidential candidates is having another debate tonight, which is being trumpeted as the “last Republican debate before Super Tuesday.” And if I were a good political blogger, I would be watching it. But frankly, I’m already feeling less than healthy, so I see no reason to subject myself to any upchuck-inducing displays of political…umm…well, not sure what the word I want here is. Acumen? Prowess? Oh, no, I remember, I mean bullshit. Yeah, that’s the term. Plus, I just sat through most of a Republican debate six days ago, and see no reason to repeat the experience. It’s not like any of the Republican candidates has a hope in hell of getting my vote.

Can we please just go ahead and impeach Bush and Cheney? Do we really have to wait until 1/20/09 to get rid of these constitution-destroying, power-hungry, warmongering bastards?

- jane doe

I was going to try to put together a post that really fact-checked Bush’s speech from last night. Fortunately, Think Progress has already done the work there, putting together an excellent, well-referenced piece that debunks some of the major…well, let’s be charitable and call them distortions, shall we?

It all adds up to just another reason why Bush and Cheney ought to be impeached.

-jane doe

Okay, listening to the MSNBC coverage of the speech. And Olbermann starts out with calling Bush on distortions and outright lies about terrorist plots the government has allegedly stopped. Also compares Bush’s words about Iran with the stuff he was saying in the run-up to the war with Iraq — which, as we know, turned out to be almost entirely false or inaccurate. Thank you, Keith!

- jane doe