After the Applause, They're Still There

The time of the year when food banks most need your help providing food to hungry families is not Thanksgiving or even Christmas.  It's January through October, when the poor aren't making the front page and people think the bag of canned goods they donated at Kroger in November is enough.

So, too, with wounded and disabled veterans after Veterans Day. Rachel Maddow has stayed on this beat for years and shows no sign of letting up.   From her Friday night show:

Two Years After the End of Combat in Iraq

Too bad we're still more than two years away from the end of the clusterfuck in Afghanistan/Pakistan.



Full transcript here.

War Pollution Means We Never Really Leave Iraq

Once it was just rotting bodies and the scourge of cholera in the immediate aftermath of battle. Now it's toxic chemicals and radioactivity that will sicken and kill for generations.

Erik Loomis at Lawyers, Guns and Money:

We are now out of Iraq, at least sort of. So now everyone can start putting their bad memories of the American occupation behind them, right? Of course, Americans forgot this yesterday, after all Real Housewives of Lubbock is on. But the Iraqis have a lot of reminders. Among them – massive and unmitigated pollution.

“Open-air burn pits have operated widely at military sites in Iraq and Afghanistan,” the Department of Veterans Affairs notes on its website. On hundreds of camps and bases across the two countries, the U.S. military and its contractors incinerated toxic waste, including unexploded ordnance, plastics and Styrofoam, asbestos, formaldehyde, arsenic, pesticides and neurotoxins, medical waste (even amputated limbs), heavy metals and what the military refers to as “radioactive commodities.” The burns have released mutagens and carcinogens, including uranium and other isotopes, volatile organic compounds, hexachlorobenzene, and, that old favorite, dioxin (aka Agent Orange).

The military pooh-poohs the problem, despite a 2009 Pentagon document noting “an estimated 11 million pounds [5,000 tonnes] of hazardous waste” produced by American troops, the Times of London reported. In any case, it says, the waste isn’t all that toxic, and there is no hard evidence troops were harmed. Of course, one reason for that lack of evidence, reports the Institute of Medicine (which found 53 toxins in the air above the Balad air base alone), is that the Pentagon won’t or can’t document what it burned and buried, or where it did so.

The little media attention that has been paid to this massive pollution has dimly illuminated its potential impact on U.S. troops. Left in mephitic darkness are the contractors, often impoverished South Asians, who did the dirty work at the bases, as well as Iraqi civilians who live and farm nearby. The Times of London reported that “open acid canisters sit within easy reach of children, and discarded batteries lie close to irrigated farmland,” causing people to sicken and rats to die “next to soiled containers.”

The environmental issue is a hearts-and-minds thing. When Iraqis babies are dying of cancer, they will remember why this is happening. I realize that environmental considerations are never going to be a top priority during wartime, proper mitigation of pollution is a very important issue, both for the ecosystem and for the people who live in it.

Maybe minimizing this American Legacy should be on our list of things to do before we leave Afghanistan in similar straits.

From Protection to Protest: An Iraq Veteran Occupies

You may have seen this young man interviewed on Countdown; here is the original article that led to that interview.

Derek McGee in The Nation:

In late September 2001, I was living in a tent in Lower Manhattan with the 2nd Battalion, 25th Marines, a reserve unit just outside the city. We were occupying Battery Park, which at the time served as the National Guard's headquarters. "Guarding the guard," we called it.

The two weeks I spent there were profoundly affecting. There I was, at the center of the world, watching America at its finest, showing at once nearly impossible perseverance and limitless compassion. Generosity sprouted everywhere throughout New York City; people gave out food, shoe inserts, massages, coffee, flowers, hugs, kind words and anything you needed.

SNIP

From where I stood, the whole world seemed to feel empathy. It was one of the only times in my life that I felt like I was exactly where I needed to be.

Another time was when I was living under a bridge along the Euphrates River. A nearly ceaseless convoy rolled overhead. I wasn't particularly keen on the invasion of Iraq, but if we had to have one, I knew I needed to be there with my fellow marines. A Subaru filled with reporters pulled up and offered us cigarettes to hasten our search of their car. "They're just outside Baghdad," they told us. The whole world is watching, I thought.

But the last time I knew without a doubt that I was where I should be was on November 17, standing in the center of Zuccotti Park. We were corralled and outnumbered, with helicopters overhead and riot cops, tourists, media and disdainful bankers looking on. Yet for all the chaos, it felt like the whole world was suddenly awake—not just watching but thinking.

In the decade between my occupation of Battery Park and Occupy Wall Street, I saw the country descend into fear and apathy. We became so afraid of Osama bin Laden and Muslims that we borrowed a trillion dollars to wage an unneeded war in Iraq (then forgot about it halfway through). I returned from Falluja in 2006 haunted by the sense that our country had made things worse, not better, for Iraqis. Meanwhile, at home, we'd let an invasive domestic intelligence apparatus go silently to work all around us. And as money dominated politics and bipartisanship degenerated into an impotent ruckus, we let our banks more or less start regulating themselves.

It was this last bit that brought me back to Lower Manhattan. After Iraq I'd gone to work at Merrill Lynch, then worked doing corporate security for a firm on Wall Street. I knew enough to be critical of the financial industry. Yet when the first Occupiers converged downtown, I was dismissive. I didn't have anything in common with those people, I thought. Then I saw a newspaper photo of someone holding a sign that read, Reinstate Glass-Steagall. Thank you, I thought. I'd been saying that since taking my stockbroker's certification exam in 2007. Nobody had ever listened. I went down to Zuccotti Park.

SNIP

Between work and school I didn't have much time for Occupy, but when I could I marched, and when something was on my mind I made a sign. I was late to the protest on November 17, a "day of action," arriving shortly after the opening bell. I was immediately underwhelmed. A few signs were held aloft and what looked like thousands of police officers milled about smartly; I squinted to make sure the ones in the distance weren't just blue streaks painted on backdrops like the buffalo herds in old westerns. Toward Wall Street a line of people waited to get past some barriers, where police were checking people's identification. I ducked into the subway, whose network of tunnels was familiar from my corporate security days, and emerged inside what I'd dubbed the Green Zone. (The Green Zone in Baghdad is a large, heavily secured area, too.)

At the intersection of Wall Street and Broadway were two young women holding signs above their heads, mostly topless, totally harmless, obstructing neither sidewalk nor street. Yet they were forcibly removed by a swarm of police officers. A melee broke out; people shoved and hollered, the media tried to get pictures, passers-by were caught in the middle, protesters ended up cuffed on the ground and a policeman had an unknown substance thrown at his face. No one asked why the women should be denied the right to free speech.

Further down the street, a line of cops fidgeted in riot gear. They looked uncomfortable, tugging at straps and twisting about. I knew how they felt. I was trained in nonlethal riot control. It's dreadful. Hours of choreography, getting the steps right—you have to move as one to keep gaps from opening. I learned to throw stun grenades, how to restrain and zip-tie troublemakers. I practiced using fire extinguisher–sized canisters of pepper spray—and was pepper-sprayed myself. (It's important to appreciate the effects of such weapons, lest one be tempted to deploy them casually. I ran a good way through an obstacle course thinking pepper spray isn't so bad, then pow!: a dozen elves were ripping the freckles off my face with belt sanders.)

SNIP

But when you're part of a unit sent to "restore order," whether you're facing former soldiers throwing bricks or university students publicly expressing an opinion, you go in with one mentality: crush the other side. At no point are you considering whether you are on the right side. Empathy has no place. If your boss ordered you to clear pregnant diabetic women from outside the grand opening of a new InsulinMart, for reasons that are hard to explain, you go in angry. That's why putting people in riot gear where there is no riot is reckless and provocative.

Of course, if my goal was to crush free speech, I might use a little misdirection too. As in any war, I would dehumanize the enemy: make sure the protesters aren't perceived as ordinary people with legitimate concerns but rather as hippies and anarchists who force police to work overtime on the taxpayer dime. Then I would send far more police than necessary, pre-emptively ordering some troops into riot gear, to stir tension and make escalation inevitable. The singular focus thus becomes the "clashes": police and protesters absorb one another's frustrations, and I've successfully contained the problem by pitting the 99 percent against itself, while eclipsing the issues that led to the protests in the first place.

SNIP

How did I get here? Ten years ago I was standing in military fatigues checking IDs, and now I was walking around with a legion of malcontents carrying signs with messages like Police—I Forgive You. I had gone down to Zuccotti to call for Wall Street to be reformed and held accountable, but the more I listened to protesters discussing other issues, the more my skepticism gave way to an impulse to go home and do my own research. I realized that much of what they said was true. Corporations are legally people? Does anybody know about this? I thought naïvely. We imprison people at twelve times the rate of Japan? And none of the people who defrauded the country and caused this crisis are in prison? Why isn't anybody saying anything?

Everyone in the Occupy movement has a different set of grievances. I personally believe that we must spend less on offensive wars and more on education—I'm going back to school on the GI Bill, and its value is immeasurable.

But more fundamentally, if Occupy has taught me anything it is that we must live up to our own values. There is nothing you could write on a sign that could offend me more than seeing police take away someone's right to free speech. What we do as soldiers is meaningless if our government takes away those freedoms while we are sent to supposedly defend them. Americans applaud protest throughout the world as a legitimate way for people to express their thirst for democracy. Is it really possible that everyone has a point except those who protest here?

Read the whole thing.

Happy Christmas; War is Over

Shamlessly stolen from Blue Girl:

I have been playing this song for close to 40 years, but it has never been more appropriate than it is today.



The last troops left Iraq last night, days before the deadline said they had to go. They left quickly and quietly under cover of night in a successful effort to prevent any last-minute attacks.

I can't tell you how glad I am that the worst strategic blunder in foreign policy in, well, forever, is over.

Read the whole thing.

"It is time to enlist our veterans and all our people in the work of rebuilding America."

Full transcript here.

We'll Have Some of Those

Via Rumproast:

The Crime Wikileaks Publicized

No, not exposed or revealed, because it was already public knowledge.

Greg Mitchell at The Nation:

Today (April 5) marks the first anniversary of the day WikiLeaks started to become a household name in the U.S. -- when Julian Assange released the video he had titled Collateral Murder. It showed a 2007 incident in Baghdad when a U.S. Apache copter crew gunned down more than a dozen Iraqis, most likely civilians, on the streets below, including two Reuters staffers. After a flurry of publicity, the episode soon faded from the media, although three major WikiLeaks releases followed last year, all allegedly coming via Private Bradley Manning, now sitting in near-solitary confinement in the brig at Quantico.

But largely thanks to one soldier who was in the thick of things on that day in 2007, the incident is far from over.

He is Ethan McCord, who spoke out after the release of the video to testify that he was on the scene that day and helped rescue two badly injured children (who were riding in a van driven by their father who had tried to helped the wounded only to be killed himself) and carry them to a vehicle that took them to a hospital.

Now he is featured in a film short that will debut in three weeks at the Tribeca Film Festival. Here is a link to the film's site which includes background, a trailer, and a director's statement in which he reveals he is now working on a feature length film and hopes to talk with the triggerman.

My colleague Kevin Gosztola talked to McCord last week. McCord says that he has turned over all photos from that day and they will air soon. Here is the audio and transcript. One key quote from McCord: The video was released on April 5th of 2010. However, the entire incident was written about in a book by David Finkel called The Good Soldiers. So, they’re stating that this was classified, but it was already released back in 2009 through a book so how is it classified if it’s already for released? I mean, word for word this video is described in the book The Good Soldiers so yet we’re going to charge Bradley Manning for releasing classified information. Shouldn’t we also be charging David Finkel for writing this book detailing the entire engagement in his book in 2009?

Finally, below, here is an excerpt from my The Age of WikiLeaks book—recounting a remarkable interview McCord gave nearly one year ago.

One of the most remarkable interviews relating to this whole episode came to light on April 20, 2010, when Kim Zetter at Wired revealed that she had located and interviewed one of the soldiers in the video.

SNIP

(McCord) “Personally, I believe the first attack on the group standing by the wall was appropriate, was warranted by the rules of engagement. They did have weapons there. However, I don’t feel that the attack on the van was necessary…. And where the soldier said [in the video], ‘Well, you shouldn’t take your kids to battle.’ Well, in all actuality, we brought the battle to your kids.

“I think that the bigger picture is what are we doing there? We’ve been there for so long now and it seems like nothing is being accomplished whatsoever, except for we’re making more people hate us.

“I don’t say that Wikileaks did a bad thing, because they didn’t…. I think it is good that they’re putting this stuff out there. I don’t think that people really want to see this, though, because this is war.… It’s very disturbing.”

Read the whole thing.

"Today, I Weep for My Country"

As we pass into the sixth year of the catastrophe that is still the odds-on favorite to reduce this nation to utter chaos, let's remember that yes, many people did foresee this five long years ago.

One of them is the venerable Senator from West Virgina, Robert Byrd. And on March 19, 2003, he stood in the well of the United States Senate and spoke what today sounds like Prophecy, but which even then was only the simple and obvious truth. This is what he said:

I believe in this beautiful country. I have studied its roots and gloried in the wisdom of its magnificent Constitution. I have marveled at the wisdom of its founders and framers. Generation after generation of Americans has understood the lofty ideals that underlie our great Republic. I have been inspired by the story of their sacrifice and their strength.

But, today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned.

Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination. Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves. We proclaim a new doctrine of preemption which is understood by few and feared by many. We say that the United States has the right to turn its firepower on any corner of the globe which might be suspect in the war on terrorism. We assert that right without the sanction of any international body. As a result, the world has become a much more dangerous place.

We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance. We treat U.N. Security Council members like ingrates who offend our princely dignity by lifting their heads from the carpet. Valuable alliances are split. After war has ended, the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America's image around the globe.

The case this Administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence. We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice.

There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11. The twin towers fell because a world-wide terrorist group, al-Qaida, with cells in over 60 nations, struck at our wealth and our influence by turning our own planes into missiles, one of which would likely have slammed into the dome of this beautiful Capitol except for the brave sacrifice of the passengers on board.

The brutality seen on September 11th and in other terrorist attacks we have witnessed around the globe are the violent and desperate efforts by extremists to stop the daily encroachment of western values upon their cultures. That is what we fight. It is a force not confined to borders. It is a shadowy entity with many faces, many names, and many addresses.

But, this Administration has directed all of the anger, fear, and grief which emerged from the ashes of the twin towers and the twisted metal of the Pentagon towards a tangible villain, one we can see and hate and attack. And villain he is. But, he is the wrong villain. And this is the wrong war. If we attack Saddam Hussein, we will probably drive him from power. But, the zeal of our friends to assist our global war on terrorism may have already taken flight.

The general unease surrounding this war is not just due to "orange alert." There is a pervasive sense of rush and risk and too many questions unanswered. How long will we be in Iraq? What will be the cost? What is the ultimate mission? How great is the danger at home? A pall has fallen over the Senate Chamber. We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq.

What is happening to this country? When did we become a nation which ignores and berates our friends? When did we decide to risk undermining international order by adopting a radical and doctrinaire approach to using our awesome military might? How can we abandon diplomatic efforts when the turmoil in the world cries out for diplomacy?

Why can this President not seem to see that America's true power lies not in its will to intimidate, but in its ability to inspire?

War appears inevitable. But, I continue to hope that the cloud will lift. Perhaps Saddam will yet turn tail and run. Perhaps reason will somehow still prevail. I along with millions of Americans will pray for the safety of our troops, for the innocent civilians in Iraq, and for the security of our homeland. May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us.

Salon commenter angeldog reminds us that in April 2005 Senator Byrd - "A Great Man Amongst Fools" - published a collection of his many speeches pleading with his colleagues to stop Cheney and Bush from destroying our country. The book is "Losing America: Confronting a Reckless and Arrogant President." Angeldog recommends "We should all carry this book around, and quote it to those who say "Who could have known?"

Cross-posted at Watching Those We Chose.

62 of Our Best Youth, $4 Billion

That's what five years of the Iraq Catastrophe has cost Kentuckians.

The National Priorities Project has analyzed the cost of the Iraq War to each state, in terms of both actual expenditures and the trade-offs - what that money would have bought if not flushed down the Iraq crapper.

Taxpayers in Kentucky have paid $4 billion for the Iraq War thus far. For the same amount of money, the following could have been provided:

1,105,865 People with Health Care OR
3,228,992 Homes with Renewable Electricity OR
106,274 Public Safety Officers OR
68,725 Music and Arts Teachers OR
616,259 Scholarships for University Students OR
309 New Elementary Schools OR
46,711 Affordable Housing Units OR
1,574,557 Children with Health Care OR
604,467 Head Start Places for Children OR
77,692 Elementary School Teachers OR
58,322 Port Container Inspectors

Use their calculator to see the cost to your state or Congressional District of the Iraq War and Smirky-Darth's lethal budget in general, and the trade-offs in other programs.

The Nation has a great cover story on The Wages of Peace.

And the Lexington Herald-Leader profiles Kentucky's Iraq casualties.

Cross-posted at Watching Those We Chose.

"Aux enfants, je leur dis et je leur répète : ne faites pas la guerre."

"To the children, I told them and I repeated to them, do not make war."

--Lazare Ponticelli, the last surviving French veteran of World War I.

In comments on Glenn Greenwald's blog on Salon, frequent and cherished commenter sysprog wrote:

Le Monde reported, yesterday, the death of Lazare Ponticelli, age 110, the last French veteran of "World War One" (previously known as "The war to end all wars" and "The Great War").

For the past 90 years, Mr. Ponticelli had been speaking for those he left behind, including a story about how he crawled into "no man's land" to retrieve a wounded comrade, but first dragged a wounded German back to the German trenches.

For the past 90 years, Mr. Ponticelli had been going to war memorials, and complaining about the long, bombastic speeches.

And for the past 90 years, he had been visiting schools and hammering always at his never-ending plea:
"To the children, I told them and I repeated to them, do not make war."

Lazare Ponticelli, le dernier poilu français, est mort
LE MONDE | 12.03.08 | 17h08
[...] Chaque 11 novembre, Lazare allait à pied au monument aux morts du Kremlin-Bicêtre, râlait contre les discours ampoulés, emphatiques, "toujours trop longs". Il se rendait aussi dans les écoles à 100 ans passés et martelait la même supplique.

"Aux enfants, je leur dis et je leur répète : ne faites pas la guerre."

When will we ever learn?
-- sysprog
Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:26 AM

Cross-posted at Watching Those We Chose.

If You Support the Troops, You Can't Oppose the War

For 35 years, we’ve had the lesson beaten into us: Support the Troops, or else! You can’t be anti-war unless you Support the Troops! You’ll lose credibility unless you Support the Troops! You’ll lose elections unless you Support the Troops!

We got hosed.

Turns out you can’t oppose the war – or the occupation, or the clusterfuck, or however you want to describe the catastrophe that is Iraq today – and support the troops at the same time.

Turns out if you support the troops, you have to support the war.

No, I’m not making fun of the latest wingnut talking points. I’m trying to make sense of a conversation I had recently with a veteran.

I wasn’t looking for an argument; coward that I am, I avoid discussing Iraq, Smirky, repugs, etc. with anyone I suspect harbors wingnut views, and I knew this veteran to be a conservative republican and christianist.

But somehow the subject of “negative press coverage of the war hurts the troops” came up and before I could stop it the question had spilled out: “How does criticizing the war hurt the troops? Just because the war is wrong doesn’t mean anything bad against the troops.”

At first, he tried to explain it calmly. Essentially, he claimed that every military person internalizes and identifies with whatever conflict he or she is fighting. Criticism of the conflict translates into criticism of the military itself and every person serving in it.

I tried to explain that was not what criticism of a conflict means, and he exploded. This very intelligent, educated, polite, generally soft-spoken and easy-going guy suddenly turned into Rush Limbaugh. Red-faced and infuriated, he yelled:

“When you say the war is stupid you’re saying that I’m stupid for fighting it! When you attack the war you attack me personally!”

No, Rush Limbaugh is the wrong analogy. Raw Limp Balls is a clown performing for the mob.

This veteran was releasing decades of pent-up resentment, of passionate fury and yes, self-pity, against a peace-loving society that he perceived as anti-military.

I was stunned. It’s not news that most military types conflate war criticism and anti-militarism, but I had never before witnessed the irrational anger behind it.

Later he apologized for his outburst, but undermined the apology with yet more justification of his belief. It was particularly despicable, he said, to criticize a war for which members of the military volunteered to join. They knew they were going to a combat zone, he emphasized; saying the war is wrong is calling them stupid for volunteering.

I asked if drafted soldiers felt differently, and he said no, draftees identify with their war the same way enlistees do. It’s just much worse to criticize a war being fought by volunteers.

I’m sure you’ve already jumped down to fill the comments section with the countless ways his argument is specious, and you’re right.

But let’s not forget that there are more than a few anti-war types out there who are, indeed, saying in so many words of one syllable that everyone in today’s volunteer military, especially the Army, is a stupid git who deserves whatever he gets.

As, of course, there are also many Iraq and Afghanistan combat veterans, not to mention many active-duty soldiers and Marines, who strongly oppose the war as ill-advised, mismanaged and counter-productive.

This is not about whether the service members fighting and dying in Iraq are heroes, victims, or idiots.

This is about how difficult it is to discuss the relative merits of a particular armed conflict when even the slightest criticism is dismissed because it undermines the troops.

We will never come to any national consensus on rational use of military force as long as Supporting the Troops trumps all.

Cross-posted at BluegrassRoots

If You Need More Reasons To Hate Congressional Democrats

I have never been one of those liberals who claim “there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats.” I think the Bush Terror Interregnum has thoroughly disproved that proposition.

However, if you suspect that Congressional Democrats are doing less than their utmost to distinguish themselves from the freakazoid nutjobs who populate this maladministration, you’ll find plenty of evidence in Gary Kamiya’s Salon piece How the Democrats Blew It.

One of many head-banging sentences:

By allowing themselves to be intimidated into supporting Bush's war of choice, and by failing to offer a clear alternative to his moralistic, ahistorical, thuggish approach to the Middle East, the Democrats have once again embraced their time-honored strategy of presenting themselves as kinder, gentler Republicans.

Warning: Do not read while in proximity to sharp objects, loaded weapons or an open flame.

Cross-posted at BluegrassRoots

Sixty-Seven and Counting

Private First Class Sammie E. Phillips, 19, of Vine Grove, Kentucky, was killed on Monday, September 10, when his vehicle overturned while conducting a traffic control mission on a highway near Rustamiyah, Iraq. Phillips was assigned to Battery B, 2nd Battalion, 138th Field Artillery, Kentucky Army National Guard, based in Carlisle, Ky.

PFC Sammie Phillips is the third Kentucky National Guard member to die in Iraq or Afghanistan in the last two weeks.

PFC Sammie Phillips is the 67th Kentuckian to die while serving in the U.S. Armed Forces in Iraq or Afghanistan.

PFC Sammie Phillips is a homicide victim
.
The perpetrator of this cold-blooded, pre-meditated murder is George Walker Bush, a 61-year-old Caucasian male with a long history of using family money and influence to skate on felony charges.

Impeachment, my ass.

Nothing short of indictment on 3,759 charges of first-degree murder will do.

The Road Out of Iraq Leads Through David Vitter

The Rude Pundit gets way too much attention for his Triple-X-rated rants, and nowhere near enough for his dead-on and usually unique political insights.

On Tuesday, he revealed the possible way out for Democrats on Iraq by forcing David Vitter out of office before November.

Read the whole thing, but Rude starts from the premise that the only thing keeping Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats from telling Smirky and Darth to fuck off and die is the threat of Joe Lieberman throwing the Senate to the Republicans (Cheney tie-breaker.) So far, so conventional wisdom. But then Rude makes the leap that could save the dems' ass - and as a bonus, the nation and the planet.

(Excerpt edited from XXX to merely X-rated.)

So Senate Democrats have gotta get rid of the Lieberman factor. With one more Democratic Senator, Lieberman will no longer control which way the wind blows until 2009.

And that's where David Vitter comes back into the equation. The oughta-be-disgraced, whoremongering Republican Senator from Louisiana has been embraced back into the Republican fold, as if he's a big goddamn hero for having kept his crimes hidden until after the statute of limitations had run out on him being arrested for soliciting hookers. Of course it's the basest sexual hypocrisy that Republicans went after Larry Craig because the Idaho Senator's case involved gay fucking and because Idaho's got a Republican governor and Louisiana's got a Democrat.

But here's the deal on Vitter: Republicans only have to stand by him until the end of the year. Louisiana elects a new governor this year, in 2007, with an open primary in October and a general election, if needed, in November. And you can sure as s**t bet a Republican's gonna win post-Katrina and Rita, probably Bobby Jindal. So, in as much as the Rude Pundit does the prognosticatin', Vitter's gone in January, so that no Republican running for President has to deal with questions of Republican sexual hypocrisy (at least as relates to current scandals). And, barring any other surprises, the same Lieberman-centric Senate until 2009.

So here's the deal: Democrats have to go Rove on Vitter. They have only a few months to get him out of there, so it's time to bring out the political demons in a savage way that pussies like Bob Shrum have nightmares about. Get the prostitutes out in front of the cameras, talking to Larry King about how Vitter likes to s**t himself in diapers and then get spanked while getting wiped by big-titted sluts. Get front groups to make ads about what a sleazy motherf***er Vitter is. Get outraged Senators talking to the pumpkinhead of Tim Russert about how it's just impossible to work with a man like Vitter. Take different angles: Barbara Boxer can talk about his exploitation of women, Mark Pryor or Ken Salazar can talk about how Vitter demeans the Senate by his presence and how can they be expected to hold their vomit in while working with a man like that.

Chase that motherf***er out of town and do it for a good cause: to end the war. You get rid of Vitter, you save American lives. Surely Democrats can wallow in the mud for a little while for such a noble end.

Yeah, I know, what makes me think that this time the dems will actually show some spine.

But this time there's no downside, no risk, no way to lose. Attacking Vitter is win-win-win: acquire a real majority in the Senate, marginalize Lieberman, and grow a gigantic set of brass ones.

Hell, get Rahm Emmanuel out of the House to lead the charge - I hate him for a DLC stooge, but that Chicago boy knows how to play dirty.

C'mon, Harry: you have nothing to lose, and literally the entire world to gain.

Finding Yet More Ways to Fuck Vets Over

I work with a number of military combat veterans, their experience ranging from early Vietnam through peak Vietnam, to Grenada, Lebanon, Panama, Columbia, Gulf War I, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq.

They are good men and women all: hard-working, dedicated, organized, responsible - exceptional employees and citizens. Despite experiences that would strain the sanity and peace of mind of the best and strongest of us, they have survived, prevailed, and thrived.

But if you read yesterday's lead story on Salon, you wouldn't believe that.

Thirty years ago, television shows were heavy on cops and PIs, and you could hardly get through one evening without seeing an episode that featured a "crazy" Vietnam vet going berserk and killing people.

The crazed vet plot accurately reflected the public perception of the time, but it also magnified that perception, making the job of advocates for veterans' mental health care nearly impossible.

In that atmosphere, even healthy veterans could not get a job, turned away by employers terrified by the popular stereotype of the drug-addled, violence-prone crazed vet. Denied work, the stereotype became a self-fulfilling prophecy, and no one was surprised to see homeless, substance-abusing, mentally disturbed vets wandering the streets. Although everyone should have been ashamed.

It's taken three decades of hard work to turn that perception around, to accomplish desperately needed changes in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, to regain by inches public respect for military veterans and understanding of their mental health needs.

But the current treatment of soldiers, marines, guardsmen, reserves and veterans by the Pentagon, the VA, and Smirky's maladministration is about to plunge us back into those bad old days of abandonment of veterans by the government and fear and hatred toward veterans by the public.

Salon's story is as much as indictment of SWAT-enamored local police forces as it is of a military that sends PTSD-disabled vets back to Iraq.

But to me it also presages a new era of the "crazed vet" stereotype.

And that will be yet another crime to lay at the feet of Smirky's maladministration and his repug and democratic enablers in Congress and in the media:

Yet another generation of veterans crippled not just by their experience in combat, not just by their mistreatment by the Pentagon and VA, but by a society conditioned to fear, reject and hate them.

Don't get me wrong: the LAST thing I want is to censor stories like Salon's. What happened to Jamie Dean is horrible and needs to be read by every American.

But the potential his tragedy - and the tragedy of too many others like him - has to re-create the crazed vet era adds even more urgency to calls to end the Iraq clusterfuck YESTERDAY. Bring our soldiers, marines, guardsmen and reserves home NOW. Double, triple, quadruple the military health care and VA health care budgets IMMEDIATELY.

Raise taxes, confiscate Halliburton, take it out of Smirky's hide - do whatever it takes to ensure that not one more veteran dies in a hail of police gunfire because no one would listen when he said he was hurting.

Mitch McConnell: Adding ChickenHawk Insult to Iraq Injury

To all you soldiers, Marines and National Guardsmen on your fourth and fifth deployments to Iraq, Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has these words of comfort:

Suck it up, chumps, you're not coming home anytime soon.

On Sunday, the Lexington Herald-Leader had an article about McConnell's utter contempt for the hardship the Iraq quagmire is causing the soldiers and families of the Army's Fort Campbell in Western Kentucky, home of the storied 101st Airborne.

A few days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Bo Ward put these words on the sign at his 12-chair barbershop near the main gate at Fort Campbell: "President Bush, show no mercy. Kick their ass!"

But almost six years later, and after more than four years of war in Iraq, Ward's no longer so sure.

"Soldiers are tired; wives are tired; families are getting worn down," Ward said. "I know these boys can't just pick up and come home from Iraq, but we need some kind of exit plan."

U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell's recent visit to Fort Campbell highlighted the emotional strain and frustration this southwestern Kentucky military town is feeling as the 101st Airborne Division prepares for its third deployment since the Iraq war began.

"We're sorry that the effort in Iraq has been as difficult as it has been," McConnell said Friday on CNN, "but giving up and letting the terrorists come into this country isn't a good plan."

And Mitch would know, given his extensive experience supporting the troops from a bar stool in Louisville during the Vietnam War.

Read the whole thing, but don't eat for a good 90 minutes before or after reading.

DitchMitch (scroll down) also has some choice words on the subject.

Can you imagine Mitch McConnell having to debate a tough Marine veteran like this in his Senate race next year? Someone that actually has a DISTINGUISHED military record and can speak for the veterans and their families that have paid such a heavy price for their sacrifice to their country in Iraq?

Perhaps we can make that happen, eh?

They're talking about retired Marine combat veteran Lt. Col Andrew Horne, who lost the Democratic Congressional seat Primary to John Yarmuth last year, but is still the darling of progressives in Louisville and throughout the state.