"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - George Santayana

There's a persistent rumor that George W. Bush, and congress' response to him, is no worse than what's gone before him, and that "Democrats are just as bad as Republicans". Perhaps it's time for some recent historical perspective.

First, a bit of background.

If Richard Nixon had not resigned, he would have been impeached for committing or ordering criminal acts. Articles of impeachment had been drawn up, the House Judiciary Committee voted to recommend articles of impeachment against the President: obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress. A group of GOP congressmen informed Mr. Nixon that if he didn't resign the papers would be served.

I know, no short diaries, but I'll be at work so I want to make sure someone else knows about this:

Winter Soldier congressional testimony will be broadcast live beginning at 8 a.m. ET on Thursday.

Congress will finally hear from "the average boots on the ground soldier" about how things are actually going in Iraq. I'm hoping they aren't hand-picking a small group of GOP/Fundamentalist loyalists who have a hard-on to attack Iran.

Edit to add link to C-Span.

Nothing below the fold, for now.

If Iran makes the right choice, America will encourage a peaceful relationship between Iran and Iraq. Iran makes the wrong choice, America will act to protect our interests, and our troops, and our Iraqi partners. - Bush speech to the nation following the latest Petraeus / Crocker dog and pony show.

Petraeus Points to War With Iran

The article continues below the fold:

(If this topic has been posted, please tell me and I'll delete it. Since only pro-Obama / I-hate-Hillary diaries have been making the rec list for months, now, I haven't been reading this blog as much, lately. If it was posted, it probably slid quickly off the front page into oblivion, anyway, since it's something negative about McCain, the Republican, instead of one of the Democrats.)

I was watching the idiot box over the noon hour and I heard Monica (Novotny?) talking to something like the 18th person about Rev. Wright. When she asked, "What has Obama got to do to put this behind him?" what was left of my brains spattered against the wall as my head exploded.

After I gathered what gray matter I could scrape off the walls and scooped it back into my now-empty skull, I screamed at the teevee, "You could start by talking about that asshole John Haggee's endorsement that McSame is so F%#$#ing proud of for a change!!!"

(Original title: If I can get you cork-soakers to quit...)

...reccing every "Obama walks on water" and "I hate Hillary" post for a few minutes to read this lowly non-candidate diary, maybe someone can help me make some sense of this.

The SCOTUS has ruled that "Treaties No Longer Supreme Law of the Land"

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court dealt President Bush a defeat today and ruled that he does not have the "unilateral authority" to force state officials to comply with international treaties.

Or at least, that seems to be the case. But then I looked into it a little further...

In 2000 I was a post-doctoral fellow in the neuroscience department of a major university. I'm not always so good with dates, but I specifically remember where I was in November of that year. I was in New Orleans, attending the annual neuroscientist's convention. The convention was held at the Morial convention center, next to the RIverwalk, right on the Mississippi river. I stayed at the Prince Conti hotel, a half block off Bourbon. I didn't have much money, so I'd usually go to the casino and drink cheap for a while before going to Bourbon street and wandering around. There was a guitar player at one of the bars, there, named Charlie. The bouncer recognized me (even though I hadn't been there for a year), told me what night Charlie was playing, and I made sure to come back that night. I picked up an autographed CD, even though I was still broke after years in school, and I still have it. It reminds me of New Orleans, and how good the people there treated me.

I was going to post this in 8ackgr0und N015e's diary today, but thought it might be too late/get lost. BTW, I will always be indebted to 8ackgr0und N015e for sharing such an apt name for warmonger John. 0/ Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran o/

So, if it's fair to ask Obama if he "rejects" unsolicited support, is it also fair to ask Sarge if he regrets being "proud" and "honored" by the support of John Hagee? (Hint to Sarge. This could cost you some votes, "my friend".)

Does anyone see the similarity and differences between the two men?

Both are all but eliminated mathematically. One stepped away from the race. The other insists on sticking around "to give the voters a choice".

On the Democratic side there is bitter disappointment from some, including myself, at our remaining choices, but very few who say they won't vote for the nominee in November.

On the Republican-American side the talking heads are outspokenly opposed to the presumptive nominee, and the Beagle-Eyes supporters say they just might stay home or vote for the Democrat. (Side note: this statement is usually accompanied by the presumption that Hillary will be the nominee. I suspect this is indicative of the racism that's rampant in the GOP.)

All of the delegate counts, explanation of pledged vs "super" delegates, etc, are from: http://www.cnn.com/...

One HUGE assumption, that the approximate split in votes between the 3 Democratic candidates will remain constant, is made. This is a reasonable assumption at this point in time (even though it's likely it won't hold true to the end) because Edwards percentages have remained consistent. This is an unreasonable assumption because, while Clinton and Obama are favored in different states, the polls so far have been TERRIBLE at predicting which way the independents will break. (They seem to "all" break the same way in any given state.) But follow the logic and you'll see that it will take a pretty big change to make any difference in the final results.

Still interested?

Well, I did it. I phoned all 3 campaigns, told them what I was doing, and asked for the best route to get these questions into the right hands. It came as no surprise that the staff of a Presidential candidate was friendly, cordial, and helpful but, well, they were ALL friendly, cordial, and helpful.

The letter has been sent. Let's see what happens.

Here's the letter:

Dear Senator _______________ (or staff),

I have some questions for the Democratic candidates for POTUS.

All of them. Even "mine".

If any of the various candidate's supporters can help me find the answers to these questions it would be much appreciated.

You may have already made up your mind. Some people haven't. Respect their right to decide for themselves.

Questions are below the fold.

I'm tired of being spit on.

From now on, I'm going to sit in the front seat on the bus.

I've had far too many Bushies tell me I don't matter, get off the bus and walk, to not be in the mood to fight, now.

While most of the "lefty" blogosphere is either ecstatic or sobbing over how 27 of the 4049 primary delegates are going to be split up, I'm "ecstatic" that my vote in February might actually count for something. The "inevitable" candidacies of the other two front-runners are less "inevitable", now.

The iron fists of Iowa and New Hampshire are losing their grips on who will lead America.

But, things slip through the news on nights like this.

More, below the fold.

With the election of 2008 approaching, it was good to remind myself how I felt after the election of 2004. So, when a friend posted a link on my small (I like it that way) blog to a Think Progress story on Billo's ongoing hypocrisy in urging his dwindling "fans" to boycott business that don't say "Merry Christmas", except Barnes & Noble (note, this is not a slam on B&N on my part) because he makes a lot of money on the books he sells there, I was reminded of some organizing I tried (unsuccessfully) to do.

Heck, I might as well try it again, below the fold.

I've seen this thrown around a lot, lately. DailyKos is "a Democratic blog, a partisan blog."

I can live with that.

But does that mean I have to support every Democratic candidate in the primaries?

I don't think so, and I'll explain why below the fold. (Hint: Think "Joementum".)

1. When will you put an end to President Bush's first executive order sealing Ronald Reagan's Presidential records?

2. Will you restore the Fairness in media doctrine?

3. What will you do when the Bush tax cuts sunset in 2010?

4. Where will you get the money to pay for an Apollo-scale program to end our dependence on fossil fuels?

Subtitled: "The ballad of Chuck and Di"
With apologies to the Beach Boys

If everybody had an ocean
Across the u.s.a.
Then everybody'd be waterboarding
Like californi-a
You'd seem em wearing their badges
Abu Graibh sandals too
A bushy bushy blonde hairdo
Waterboarding u.s.a.

(Yeah, unfortunately there's more.)

"Radical Islam" didn't attack us on 911, "conservative religious fanatics" attacked us.

It's not "the national debt", it's "the conservative debt".

Christians don't bomb medical clinics and picket soldier's funerals, "conservative christians" do.

Everyone didn't vote against health care for children, only conservatives voted against health care for children.

And so on...