Josh Marshall's --

Deep Thought

Why is Dick Cheney's daughter the only person he can find to go on TV to defend him?

Here's My Deep Thought!

Shouldn't the question really be ---- Exactly what does Dick Cheney's daughter know?  WHAT does she know about what actually happened during the past 8 years and HOW does she know it?

Exactly what makes Liz Cheney an expert on what the CIA and her dad -- did or didn't do? 

She was a Bush State Department aide, so what?  Her husband was General Counsel of the United States Department of Homeland Security.  Did these positions give her access to top secret and classified information?  Some how I doubt it.

Perhaps Dick Cheney, former Vice President of United States LEAKED classified information to his daughter.  After all, the man is well known for LEAKING classified information to the media (CIA agent's name for example).

After what he did to a fellow CIA officer, I would think the CIA would be investigating exactly what Lis Cheney knows and why she knows it.  Payback Time!

Erich "Mancow" Muller, a Chicago-based conservative radio host, recently decided to silence critics of waterboarding once and for all. He would undergo the procedure himself, and then he would be able to confidently convince others that it is not, in fact, torture.

Or so he thought. Instead, Muller came out convinced.

"It is way worse than I thought it would be, and that's no joke," Mancow said. "It is such an odd feeling to have water poured down your nose with your head back... It was instantaneous... and I don't want to say this: absolutely torture."

"I wanted to prove it wasn't torture," Mancow said. "They cut off our heads, we put water on their face... I got voted to do this but I really thought 'I'm going to laugh this off.' "

Now it's Sean Hannity's turn to prove it's -- not torture!

Hannity a Fox News anchor, promised to subject himself  to waterboarding to benefit a charity for the families of U.S. soldiers back on April 22nd.  This was over a month ago.

Keith Olbermann of MSNBC's Countdown, even offered to donate $1000 per second Hannity undergoes waterboarding torture.

Hannity has yet to do it.

Goes to show you exactly how much he really cares about our soldiers and their families --zilch!

What's really odd is -- the mainstream media isn't reporting this story about Mancow undergoing TORTURE!

The GOP are using scare tactics once again to stop President Obama from bringing terrorists from Guantanamo Bay to our U.S. prisons (prisons that currently hold over 300 other terrorists that the GOP have ignored for the decades). 

The GOP has brought back the famous Daisy commercial once used to scare Americans  by LBJ to defeat Barry Goldwater.

The advertisement begins with a little girl (Birgitte Olsen) standing in a meadow with chirping birds, picking the petals of what appears to be a daisy (according to Olsen it was a Black-eyed Susan[1]) while counting each petal slowly. (Because she does not know her numbers perfectly, she repeats some and says others in the wrong order, all of which adds to her childlike appeal.) When she reaches "nine", an ominous-sounding male voice is then heard counting down a missile launch, and as the girl's eyes turn toward something she sees in the sky, the camera zooms in until her pupil fills the screen, blacking it out. When the countdown reaches zero, the blackness is replaced by the flash and mushroom cloud from a nuclear explosion.

The Democratic Party should immediately create a video of their own depicting the famous Abu Ghraib prison abuse.  They should show some of the worse photos of abuse and then show segments of all the reports that say these actions by President Bush, Vice President Cheney's Administration and the GOP put today's little girls and boys -- and the rest of us -- at even greater risk than we were in --before 9/11.

Where were the GOP when we held trials against those terrorists that are either currently serving out their prison sentences in the U.S. or those we've put to death, like.....Show photos of these terrorists (Timothy McVeigh, Abouhalima, Ajaj, Ayyad and Salameh, etc..)?

Where were people currently complaining about the closing of Guantanamo Bay like Newt Gingrich, back when Abouhalima, Ajaj, Ayyad and Salameh were being convicted and sent to our prisons back in 1993?  Did they warn Americans that these prisoners would be housed in their back yards?  NOPE - not a peep came from them!

Don't you just love hearing how our Congressional members will be examining the treatment of detainees?  The very same people that are currently arguing and making accusations against one another as to who knew what and when.  The fox stands guard over the hens.

The Senate Intelligence Committee is already pursuing an investigation into interrogation of detainees, having examined the treatment of two "high value" detainees. "We have adopted a scope of work; we have hired independent staff. They are intelligence professionals and we will be doing this look back, which will probably take 6, 8 months," Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said.

Do you know what "scope of work" means?  It means, "this is how deep you can look, go further and you risk your new job!"

President Barack Obama announced again today his feelings about investigating the past 8 years:
 

That is what I mean when I say that we need to focus on the future. I recognize that many still have a strong desire to focus on the past. When it comes to the actions of the last eight years, some Americans are angry; others want to re-fight debates that have been settled, most clearly at the ballot box in November. And I know that these debates lead directly to a call for a fuller accounting, perhaps through an Independent Commission.

I have opposed the creation of such a Commission because I believe that our existing democratic institutions are strong enough to deliver accountability. The Congress can review abuses of our values, and there are ongoing inquiries by the Congress into matters like enhanced interrogation techniques. The Department of Justice and our courts can work through and punish any violations of our laws.

"Congress can review abuses of our values.."?  Come on Mr. President, you can do better than this.  Exactly what kind of Constitutional professor were you at that college you taught at?   You know darn well these people won't 'do' anything, they all want to keep their jobs.

"The Department of Justice and our courts can work through and punish any violations of our laws." Attorney General won't do anything, not after you shot down any ability for him to go after those that committed the war crimes in the first place.

Now you are hiding the additional photos proving once again that the prisoner abuse was more wide spread than first thought.

"When it comes to the actions of the last eight years, some Americans are angry; others want to re-fight debates that have been settled, most clearly at the ballot box in November."  As far as the issue of 'war crimes' go sir, other than saying you won't 'torture' --- this is the only CORRECT statement you made since taking office.

Sir, would you "look forward" if one of you girls or your wife were raped and tortured?  Would you tell them to forget the past and 'move on'?  Some how I doubt it.

Your speech today was as usual very well prepared.  I realize you think that you were 'taking on' people like Dick Cheney; but sir, what you consistently do is --- you give into him and others like him by refusing to "Look Back" and correct our errors while at the same time declaring that Torture is illegal and a war crime and that we are a nation of laws.  You are contradicting yourself sir.

That's like a judge telling a dependent, "You are guilty of murder; but because I think we should look forward instead of looking back at your crime -- I won't punish you."

Wake up Mr President before it's too late.  You may be honorable in what you say about torturing and the rule of law; but the next president of United States, may not be.

One question to former VP Cheney.  If enhanced interrogations work so well at saving lives, and if they were legal in your view, why then-- did you STOP them?

The answer is obvious.

The Republican Party has released their health care plan - see the whole thing here:

My thoughts on specific parts of the Patients' Choice Act:

"Prioritizing the needs of patients and doctors must be fundamental."

 

Isn't that everybody's goal; Democrats and Republicans?  What's new here?

.

   

"Creating a market that plays by the rules is the most powerful force to increase quality and make health care more affordable."

 

A market that plays by the RULES; I thought the Republican Party was against REGULATIONS and that's one big reason we are currently in this economic mess.

. 

   

"And increasing the association between patient responsibility for payment and quality of outcomes would vastly improve accountability."

 

No mention of how those patients that can't afford it will accomplish paying for any insurance.  Exactly what is meant by, "increasing the association" between payments and quality of care?  Are they saying that if you don't pay you can't have input on the quality of the care you receive?

 

"Universal access to affordable health care for all Americans should be guaranteed.   Congress should enact a comprehensive solution that will make our healthcare system work for every American every time."

 

How many patients do you know that don't already have universal access to health care? 

 

"The Patients' Choice Act would give every American the opportunity to choose the health care plan that best meets their individual needs"

 

How many patients do you know that don't already have a choice of which health care plan they need?

 

"It will utilize state - driven exchanges to facilitate real competition between private plans and give Americans--for the first time--a choice of health care plans."

 

"In solving our health care crisis, Americans already know that government will not work."

 

How is allowing the STATE government the ability to make exchanges with insurance companies different then giving the FEDERAL government that ability?  Exactly what kind of "exchanges" could they possibly have to create competition?

.

.

.

So folks - where is the BEEF?  What will Republicans do to lower costs and get every American access to health insurance?

The Patients' Choice Act of 2009 effectively ends to tax breaks for employers who provide health coverage to their workers, choosing instead to give a $5,710 tax cut to families and a $2,290 cut to individuals to help them pay for health insurance coverage. Critics insist that this system would end up costing both business and consumers more over the long term. And some objective analysts have agreed. After all, families are currently paying approximately $12,300 a year for health care today.

This ACT appears to be more of the same --- Help businesses and employers save money.  By removing the tax incentive, employers will end up dropping health insurance benefits for their employees claiming they are losing money thereby forcing workers to find a new policy out in the market.

It appears there was more opposition to President Bush's interrogation policies and it came from within his own administration; Karen Hughes, counselor to the president and long time advocate.

She acknowledged the current uproar over interrogation tactics and allegations of prisoner torture during the Bush years.

"I was very vocal in the internal debate," she said. "I worried about how that would make us look in the eyes of the world. But I had left the White House when a lot of that was taking place."

Then she paused, worried for the first time in 90 minutes that she'd made a gaffe. Whatever Sen. John McCain says about interrogation techniques, she added quickly, she has similar views.

 

Zubaydah underwent waterboarding at least 83 times in AUGUST 2002.

 

Karen Hughes left the Bush administration in July 2002 - perfect timing or what?  Maybe now we know the real reason she left.

Bristol Palin and now Meghan McCain; Perhaps Chelsea Clinton should make the cable news circuit as well?  Call it the A Politician's Kid Revolution!

 

I'd love to hear Chelsea take on Bristol and Meghan in a debate.  Hey, why not?  Why not organize a Politician's Kid Debate?  Have the issues be specifically about today's problems and any possible future ones.  Now that's something I'd watch.

 

We keep hearing how we are involving our children's lives and their children's lives by what we do today; well, let's hear what they have to say about it.  What are their ideas and plans for the future?  Are they willing to take on their own parents?

 

Can anybody think of any other another Democrat that has a daughter or son that knows what they are talking about with respects to politics?  Perhaps we should have at least three from each side or two from Republicans and Democrats and two from Independents if there are any.

 

Let's see these kids take on the other's parents and themselves. 

Anybody willing to sponsor such an event?  It could look something like the college kids taking on one another for scholastic abilities.

Jesse Venture gives the TRUTH to Sean Hannity of Fox: Watch this video

I don't usually like Jesse but this time around he's right on the mark!  He's finally seen the LIGHT! 

Too bad other Republicans and Conservatives can't.

GOP Backing Away from Pelosi's Challenge?

It appears the Republicans are backing away from challenges made by Speaker of the House Pelosi to release any and all memos of earlier briefings she was involved in with the CIA about interrogation policies of war prisoners:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) tells "Fox News Sunday" there's no point in continuing the dispute between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and the CIA over whether she was briefed truthfully on interrogation techniques.

"My own view is what is the point of going back and trying to figure out who knew what when," McConnell said.

When pressed, McConnell said any inquiry could be handled by pre-existing congressional panels. "I think the best way to resolve the dispute, if it's to be resolved, is through the intelligence committees," he said.

They want to leave it up the to Intelligence committees.  That's like letting the fox guard the hen house.

This whole story needs to be investigated by outsiders -- not by those that were involved with the decision making.