Roxanne's Blog

McBush-Even His Supporters Can't Tell The Difference Between Them!

Roxanne Walker — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 21:54:49 +0000

Governor Sanford might want to bone up on those GOP talking points the next time he goes on TV to defend McCain. You have to see this clip to believe it. I’ve never seen Sanford look this tongue tied. Sad…

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/07/13/governor-mark-sanford-rsc-goes-blank-trying-to-find-differences-between-mccain-and-bushs-economic-policies/

Bush Administration Guilty of War Crimes

Roxanne Walker — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:32:15 +0000

TORTURE — SECRET RED CROSS REPORT SAYS THE CIA TORTURED AL QAEDA DETAINEES: “Red Cross investigators concluded last year in a secret report that the Central Intelligence Agency’s interrogation methods for high-level al Qaeda prisoners constituted torture,” according to a new book by investigative reporter Jane Mayer set to be released next week. The report found that the Bush administration “may have committed ‘grave breaches’ of the Geneva Conventions” and that the officials who approved the methods could be “guilty of war crimes.” The report, which Mayer cited in less detail last year in the New Yorker, says that al Qaeda member Abu Zubaydah told the Red Cross “that he had been waterboarded at least 10 times in a single week and as many as three times in a day.” Abu Zubaydah also was confined in a box “so small he said he had to double up his limbs in the fetal position” and was “one of several prisoners to be ‘slammed against the walls.’” The Red Cross concluded that the methods used on Zubaydah were “categorically” torture. In August 2007, after Mayer’s initial New Yorker article on the report was published, President Bush replied, ”[I] haven’t seen it; we don’t torture” when asked about the report. But according to Mayer’s book, the CIA showed the report to both Bush and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice.

www.americanprogressaction.org

Waterboarding=Torture Watch This!

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/video/2008/hitchens_video200808

Bush Administration Hides the Cost of War

Roxanne Walker — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:54:10 +0000

ETHICS — MILITARY OFFICIALS INCREASE MEDIA RESTRICTIONS AT SOLDIERS’ FUNERALS: Today, Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank reports that Gina Gray, the newly appointed public affairs director at the Arlington National Cemetery, appears to have been fired for her efforts to restore media access to military interments. In April, Milbank wrote an article about how Pentagon officials had obstructed reporters from viewing the burial ceremony of Lt. Col. Billy Hall, who had been killed while serving in Iraq, even though Hall’s family had granted permission to the media to cover the funeral. After Milbank’s initial column, which noted that Gray was shot down by her superiors for attempting to allow reporters to access the ceremony, Gray says she was demoted, that her BlackBerry had been disconnected, and that she received various forms of pressure before eventually being fired. Milbank notes the strict rules at Arlington Cemetery are a continuation of policies started under Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who rigorously censored images of American dead and even flag-draped caskets returning home from the war. CBS News Chief Foreign Correspondent Lara Logan also recently raised the issue of the Pentagon concealing the death of American soldiers, asking on the Daily Show, “Tell me the last time you saw the body of a dead American soldier?”

www.americanprogressaction.org

Roxanne in Skirt! Dreams Come True!

Roxanne Walker — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:56:06 +0000

When you love to read and you revere the written word as much as I do, you never forget the first time you see your name in print. I had never aspired to be a writer, never realized I could write anything but radio news when I was presented with the opportunity to write my own opinion column. Since I had lots of opinions, I figured I would take a swing at being a columnist and it turned out really well. I’ve actually won awards from Women in Communications for my writing in Metro Beat and I was honored to have had the opportunity to write on a regular basis and hone my skills. When the last incarnation of Metro Beat-The Beat folded I bade good-bye to my brief foray into writing for print.

Gold Star Mom Speaks Out on the Pain of Endless War

Roxanne Walker — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 17:15:29 +0000

Beth, a mother and grandmother, is a Military Families Speak Out member, www.mfso.org delivered a speech a week ago at a conference. It’s powerful…please take the time to read it. Thanks to Wade Fulmer of Columbia, SC a veteran for sharing this. “Good evening. I have four scary words for you: we need to talk. I need to share with you some of my experiences with Military Families Speak Out, a national organization with 4,000 members whose loved ones have served or are serving in the military. And here’s the problem — unless you have skin in the game — and members of MFSO do, you may not understand what’s really at stake here, or even care. But we need each other. Some of you may think that anyone who goes into the military is either stupid, blood-thirsty or deserving of what they get for fighting in an illegal and immoral war. But we know them as kids needing a job, health care or educational benefits. Good men and women just like your brothers and sisters — sons and daughters. We, as a nation, have been sheltered from the reality of this war, but I’d like to share some of our experiences with you. Share what it is like to see the young Marine with his face burned beyond recognition, just eyes and a mouth, his ears and an arm missing — looking lost in a hospital cafeteria. To share with you what it’s like to spend Mother’s Day at Arlington Cemetery, accompanying Mothers who go to visit their only children, who lie buried among sea of other parents’ children who will never again know the embrace of their mother. Each is someone’s beloved child. We need you to listen to us. We need you to HEAR us.

Dobson and Obama: Who is 'Deliberately Distorting' by Jim Wallis

Roxanne Walker — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:53:33 +0000

James Dobson, of Focus on the Family Action, and his senior vice president of government and public policy, Tom Minnery, used their “Focus on the Family” radio show Tuesday to criticize Barack Obama’s understanding of Christian faith. In the show, they describe Obama as “deliberately distorting the Bible,” “dragging biblical understanding through the gutter,” “willfully trying to confuse people,” and having a “fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution.” The clear purpose of the show was to attack Barack Obama. On the show, Dobson says of himself, “I’m not a reverend. I’m not a minister. I’m not a theologian. I’m not an evangelist. I’m a psychologist. I have a Ph.D. in child development.” Child psychologists don’t insert themselves into partisan politics in the regular way that James Dobson does and has over many years as one of the premier leaders of the Religious Right. He has spoken about how often he talked to Republican leaders — Karl Rove, administration strategists, and even President Bush himself. This year he tried to influence the outcome of the Republican primary by saying he would never vote for John McCain or the Republicans if they nominated him, then reversed himself and said he would vote after all but didn’t say for whom. But why should America care about how a child psychologist votes?

George Carlin-Heaven or Hell?

Roxanne Walker — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:43:27 +0000

This morning I accidentally strayed over to 106.6FM and caught Russ Cassell expounding on the evils of the late George Carlin. Cassell said he knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that Carlin went to hell after he died. First of all I can’t believe God is speaking to Russ about who’s getting into heaven these days and secondly I wondered what Carlin had ever done to deserve burning in hell for all eternity?

I admired his way with words, the longevity and vitality of his career in comedy and his evolution as a writer and a man. Comedian Jerry Seinfeld wrote an editorial in today’s NY Times in which he said, “You could certainly say that George downright invented modern American stand-up comedy in many ways. Every comedian does a little George.” Seinfeld paid tribute to Carlin’s work ethic, “He worked over an idea like a diamond cutter with facets and angles and refractions of light. He made you sorry you ever thought you wanted to be a comedian. He was like a train hobo with a chicken bone. When he was done there was nothing left for anybody.” Ironically in light of Cassell’s comments, Seinfeld even reflected on the matters of heaven or hell, “I know George didn’t believe in heaven or hell. Like death, they were just more comedy premises. And it just makes me even sadder to think that when I reach my own end, whatever tumbling cataclysmic vortex of existence I’m spinning through, in that moment I will still have to think, “Carlin already did it.”

For further reflection on a truly original character, check out this interview with George Carlin by Mother Jones http://www.motherjones.com/arts/qa/1997/03/outspoken.html

George Carlin on the 10 Commandments

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyWEBbFwU1o&feature=related

Mean People

Roxanne Walker — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:09:09 +0000

I recently began blocking comments on my website because some hateful woman was repeatedly leaving comments which called me a cunt. That’s my least favorite word and in my opinion about the most hateful thing you can call another woman. I tried repeatedly to reason with the woman via e-mail and get her to back off but she grew increasingly more vitriolic so I put up a blocker allowing me to screen, then approve comments before they could be publicly posted on my website. I welcome comments and feedback but there’s something especially nasty about people who not only disagree with you but feel free to insult you and call you names on your own website. Kind of like going to someone’s home as a guest, eating their food, then picking a fight with them. As I approach 50, I grow increasingly certain of what I am willing to put up with and what I won’t tolerate and I will not tolerate being abused on my own site. If you choose to post hate filled messages go elsewhere.

This week, I’m dealing with Larry. Larry has been spending lots of time in the last week or so leaving lengthy and at times repetitive comments on my blog. At first I found him engaging, then just tedious. I work a full time sales job, tend to my family and my home and have a limited amount of time to maintain the website and blog. It was taking up an increasing amount of time responding to Larry and I just grew tired of it. He’s apparently pissed by my blocking him and posted some nasty comments about me elsewhere as a result. Some others piled on with their nasty comments about my career and my lawsuit most of which was just plain mean but I digress.

I’m fascinated by the amount of time and effort some people can devote to petty disagreements. I post information and blog to vent about my political opinions and also to share information I have gleaned with others. I also post on SC Hotline in an effort to enlighten some of our conservative friends. I don’t hold myself up as an expert in politics or having never made a mis-statement. The website is something I use to promote my personal business and as a means of staying active politically. Larry purports to be concerned about truth in media; hopefully he will take up a different course and focus his attention on some other medium or opinion maker besides myself. I can’t convince Larry to change his mind and I refuse to turn over my comment section to his endless objections. Comments are simply that comments to posts or blogs, they aren’t meant to serve as a forum for your personal edification.

Negotiating A Neverending War

Roxanne Walker — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:22:36 +0000

On Friday, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki told reporters in Amman, Jordan that negotiations over initial U.S. proposals for bilateral political and military agreements between the United States and Iraq had “reached a dead end” after U.S. negotiators demanded “control of Iraqi airspace and immunity from prosecution for U.S. troops and private contractors.” BBC reports the disagreement between Maliki and U.S. negotiators “goes to the heart of the immensely sensitive issue of who is actually in charge in the country: the Americans or the Iraqis.” “The Iraqi demands are unacceptable to the Americans, and the American demands are unacceptable to the Iraqis,” Maliki said. “Iraqis will not consent to an agreement that infringes their sovereignty.” The disposition of the negotiations will determine the future of the U.S. involvement in Iraq. Last week, members of the two ruling Shia parties leaked details of the U.S. proposal, telling McClatchy News that the United States is “demanding 58 bases as part of [an] agreement that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely.”

THE FUTURE U.S.-IRAQ RELATIONSHIP: A new agreement is necessary to legalize the U.S. presence in Iraq after the United Nations mandate expires at the end of 2008. In November 2007, President Bush and Maliki signed a non-binding “Declaration of Principles for a Long-Term Relationship of Cooperation and Friendship” that set out parameters for negotiating an “enduring” political, economic, cultural, and security relationship between the United States and Iraq. The Bush administration said that the proposed agreement would not be submitted to Congress for approval, with one analyst noting that this was “purely an executive agreement.” However, critics have pointed out that status of forces agreements have not traditionally committed the United States to guarantee the security of other countries. In testimony to Congress in March, the Center for American Progress’s Lawrence Korb stated that the agreement was “substantially broader in scope than standard Status of Forces Agreements. The fact that the administration does not intend to submit the agreement for congressional approval is a testament to their own recognition of how the broad the implications of this agreement are.” The United States has similar agreements with numerous countries where American soldiers are stationed on foreign soil, like South Korea, Japan, and Germany, but “none involve soldiers carrying out active combat operations.”

IRAQI POLITICIANS UNITED AGAINST: The proposed agreement has met with vocal political opposition in Iraq. Ironically, while genuine movement toward Iraqi political reconciliation has been elusive, a diverse coalition has formed in opposition to the agreement. In Washington, D.C. two weeks ago, Sunni parliamentarian Sheik Khalef al-Ulayyan said, “When we look at this treaty, we don’t just think it’s a treaty that affirms the occupation of Iraq. … It looks like a treaty that will be the annexation of Iraq to the United States.” In a letter to Congress, more than 30 members of Iraq’s Parliament rejected any agreement that is not “linked to clear mechanisms that obligate the occupying America military forces to fully withdraw from Iraq, in accordance with a declared timetable and without leaving behind any military bases, soldiers or hired fighters.” A representative of Iraq’s Grand Ayatollah Sistani reported that Sistani had told Maliki that “everything should be done to get back total [Iraqi] sovereignty on all levels.” Supporters of Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr have held regular protests against the agreement, and Sadr has called for the agreement to be put to a popular referendum. Iran has also registered displeasure with the proposed agreement, with Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, telling Maliki that the presence of U.S. troops was “the main obstacle on the way to progress and prosperity in Iraq.” Iranian leaders have expressed concern that U.S. troops stationed in Iraq could be used in an eventual attack on Iran. Underscoring the careful line that Maliki must tread between his Iranian neighbor and American sponsor, Iraqi and Iranian defense ministers recently “signed a memorandum of understanding to boost defense cooperation” between the two countries.

THE FUTURE OF THE US IN THE MIDDLE EAST: The conclusion of the proposed agreement with the Iraqi government will have broad implications for the future U.S. military posture in the Middle East. Establishing bases in Iraq from which to project American power through the region has been one of the underlying goals of the war from its inception, and partially explains why the United States has been willing to accommodate parties such as Maliki’s Da’wa and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (who are close to Iran but also support U.S. goals), at least in the short term. Conservative pundit Dick Morris spoke for much of the pro-war community when he told Fox News that, after 4,000 American casualties in Iraq, “I want bases out of that.” If the administration gets its way, American troops would be stationed in the heart of the Middle East for the foreseeable future — likely fueling continued extremist anti-American sentiment and political unrest. This highlights the tension between the U.S. goals of a democratic Iraq and a continued U.S. military presence in Iraq. For that presence to be legal and legitimate, it must be subject to agreement by the Iraqi government. But it is extremely unlikely that any Iraqi government that agrees to an extended U.S. presence — especially on the terms the U.S. is currently demanding — will be viewed as legitimate by the Iraqi people.

www.americanprogessaction.org

Wilkins Breaks the Law To Raise Funds for McBush

Roxanne Walker — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:44:57 +0000

Bush Appointee Breaks the Law While Helping McCain Fundraise

Posted: 22 Jun 2008 06:50 PM CDT

Looks like McCain’s maverick ways are rubbing off on others and causing them to do some crazy things… like, say, break the law.

WaPo:

A Canadian newspaper reported Thursday that Friday’s scheduled $100-a-plate luncheon speech by Sen. John McCain in Ottawa was organized in part by U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins, a former South Carolina lawmaker whom President Bush appointed in 2005.
Democrats pointed out the article late Thursday night, and alleged that Wilkins’s actions could be construed as a violation of the Hatch Act, which prohibits many kinds of political activities by government employees.

This ties in nicely with Scott McClellan’s testimony today. The main theme of his book is that this White House operates in a “permanent campaign mode,” where every action they take is politically calculated to help GOP electoral prospects. We saw it with the clueless Lurita Doan and we see it now with David Wilkins: It doesn’t matter if there are laws on the books prohibiting certain conduct; if it helps get Republicans elected, do it. And it appears that if it helps fill McCain’s empty coffers, he doesn’t have much of a problem with it either.