God-awful!

Great article from the UK by Movie Critic Joe Queenan who tries to pick the worst movies of all time. So many to choose from. But he defines the standards and narrows the list to the movie that destroyed a studio and many Hollywood careers ... Heaven's Gate.

Blood on their hands.

Artist Nico Pitney created a photo mosaic using photos of the soldiers who have died in Iraq.

In remembrance of the 4,000 brave men and women who sacrificed everything for us -- and the two men who would continue this great tragedy, despite the cost to our soldiers, our military, and our nation.

Click on the image to see the larger version.

More Dick-speak

Devilstower over at DailyKos blogs:

Deaths. Injuries. Long tense days never knowing what might happen next. The Iraq Invasion sure is hard... on George W. Bush.

In an exclusive interview with ABC News, Vice President Dick Cheney was asked what effect the grim milestone of at least 4,000 U.S. deaths in the five-year Iraq war might have on the nation. Noting the burden placed on military families, the vice president said the biggest burden is carried by President George W. Bush, who made the decision to commit US troops to war, and reminded the public that U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan volunteered for duty.

If any one sentence could hold all the contempt that the Republicans feel for the military and for military families, this is the one. Who is this war hardest on? Poor ol' George. What about the 4,000+ who have died? Hey, they volunteered.

"The president carries the biggest burden, obviously," Cheney said. "He's
the one who has to make the decision to commit young Americans, but we are fortunate to have a group of men and women, the all-volunteer force, who voluntarily put on the uniform and go in harm's way for the rest of
us."

So?

Dan Froomkin at the Washington Post writes about Vice President Cheney's recent response to a reporter's observation that most Americans oppose the war in Iraq. "So?", was his smug retort.

Former Republican congressman Mickey Edwards writes in a Washington Post op-ed that he's finally had it with Cheney: "Cheney told Raddatz that American war policy should not be affected by the views of the people. But that is precisely whose views should matter: It is the people who should decide whether the nation shall go to war. That is not a radical, or liberal, or unpatriotic idea. It is the very heart of America's constitutional system. . . .

"If Dick Cheney believes, as he obviously does, that the war in Iraq is vital to American interests, it is his job, and that of President Bush, to make the case with
sufficient proof to win the necessary public support.

"That is the difference between a strong president (one who leads) and a strong presidency (one in which ultimate power resides in the hands of a single person). Bush is officially America's 'head of state,' but he is not the head of government; he
is the head of one branch of our government, and it's not the branch that decides on war and peace.

"When the vice president dismisses public opposition to war with a simple 'So?' he violates the single most important element in the American system of government: Here, the people rule."

Playing Catch Up

OMG! Way too busy to blog lately. I empathize with the bloggers who do this professionally and crank out stuff hour after hour, day after day. There is too much to write about now, but here are some interesting links, go check them out!

• "Stuck in the Iraq Loop" A Newsweek article by Fareed Zakaria
  We have achieved some security in Iraq. But we have not built a sustainable security architecture.
• "Bearing Witness: Five Years of the Iraq War" A photo essay by Reuters. Warning: some graphic images.
• "A Responsible Plan to End the War"
• Various reactions to Obama's speech on Tuesday from TPM Cafe.
• From DailyKos, author David Brin (Earth, Startide Rising) pays tribute to his colleague Arthur C. Clarke (2001: A Space Odyssey) who died this week.
• Coming soon! Photos of our incredibly cute new puppy and kitten!!!!

Fear of a black planet ...

Well, the Obama/Clinton campaign is getting uglier by the minute.

The sludge includes the 3 a.m. phone call ad, her hedging when asked if she believed Obama was a Muslim, her praise of McCain and disparaging of Obama, and now ... the O.J. treatment.

Remember the Time magazine cover of O.J. Simpson that made him darker and more sinister looking?

It looks like the Clinton camp has done the same thing to Obama. They took debate footage and altered it to make him look darker, and they stretched the width of the image to make him look ... what ... bigger? heavier? You can make up your own mind.

But what is written here is correct, this was not an accident. This doesn't just happen in production, someone made it happen.

What do you think? Is this fair play?

I have to admit that I'm a fool, because I didn't really think that the Clinton camp would go so deep into the gutter. I should have known that they would do anything to win, even if they lose by winning (how many voters are they turning away from voting?). And if you didn't know already, it is very unlikely that Clinton can overtake Obama in the delegate count, even if she wins every one of the remaining contests. But they play to win. And they don't seem to care about the damage they will do to the Democratic nominee along the way.