When I say crazy, I really mean completely totally fucking batshit insane.  Times ten.  And I apologize in advance for subjecting you to this.  

You know what?

Just click the back button on your browser.  

You don't want to see this.

Okay, hopefully I've now weeded out the people without masochist/sadist tendencies.

Someone forwarded the following email to members of the local Democratic Executive Committee of which I am a member.  I dismissed it as stupidity, which it is.  However, the chair of the committee is looking for a "debunking" of this.  I think she's wondering if it's "true".  The fact that it comes from the bat-guano crazy LaRouche campaign doesn't matter to her, because she likes LaRouche.

I know that this is stupid, but I do not know how to go about debunking this tripe, other than to say, "It's from Lyndon LaRouche."

Have you ever told a lie?  Even for a good purpose?

What does that make you?

If someone lied to you, what would you call them?

Have you ever taken anything that did not belong to you?  Even something small?

Have you ever looked at another person with lust or desire?

Have you ever been angry with another person?

Jesus said, that makes you a murderer.  Jesus said in Matthew 5 that whoever is angry with his brother without cause is guilty of murder.

Have you ever taken God's name in vain? Have you ever used God's name as a curse word or to express disgust?

Jesus said. Jesus said, Jesus said....

Link for test:

http://www.goodpersontest.com/

If you carefully compare photos of Scott McClellen while press secretary at the Bush White House and photos of Scott today, the evidence is overwhelming!

One of the violent frames pushed by right-wing pundits describes the dire consequences for the American public should Democrat be elected president.  Once in office, according to this right-wing rhetoric, the new Democratic president will rework U.S. foreign policy in such a way that Americans will no longer be protected from enemy attacks.   A vote for a Democratic President, in other words, is a vote to help the enemies who seek to destroy America.  

This week, Bill O’Reilly invoked this violent logic to suggest that a Barack Obama Presidency could have dire consequences for American citizens.  

The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy™ is revving up its media machine in response to news that Democrats intend to run a campaign for president against Republican John McCain. What gall! Unable to tolerate such impudence, Republicans, and their patrons in the press, are brewing a full-scale whine with a pungent aroma of fear and a nose for hypocrisy.

Brought to you by...
News Corpse
The Internet's Chronicle Of Media Decay.

I have a proposal for a surefire solution to the Democratic primary stalemate.  

Summary: I'd like to give you a little essay on the nature of obsession, using Bill O'Reilly's crusade against George Soros as a demonstration of my point.

I think the far-right wingers are having real bad times these days.  It is obvious that they dont like McCain.  But, as I was reading a right-wing blog (for fun of course), I noticed  this about a McCain-Soros connection!!.  And then, it is clear that other right-wing blogs, including Michelle Malkin's have "exposed" the fact that McCain "got money" from Soros.  

This is the "intro" section of the diary.   What you'll find below is of no importance to your life or of any interest to KDos'ers!  With that out of the way let me continue into the "body" of this diary.

I have pondered recently what I think the economy is doing and will do. The Pundit Review tries to link the most recent economic information to an "all is well" argument for the US Economy. However, the arguments do not hold for a variety of reasons not the least of which is common sense - you cannot have a housing collapse, a banking crisis, and huge debt and have a great economy. You have to be able to look at the signals being sent and bring them together. Unfortunately, I cannot see anyway that this economy is not going to slide into a recession. I believe this for four main reasons:

For those who don't know, I have a job that keeps me in my car for a lot of the day. When I'm not on DKos, I'm driving around town.

When I'm driving, I listen to a lot of AM talk radio. Where I'm from, it's Glenn Beck in the morning, Rush and Billo around lunchtime, Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity around quitting time, and John Gibson and Michael Weiner Savage if I'm working late.

When I admit to listening to these hosts, Kossacks ask me why I'd subject myself to them. Well, I was a conservative for the early part of my adult life, and my experience with that give me what you might call an immunity.

Secondly, I listen because I want to stay up-to-date on what our conservative friends are thinking about being told and doing talking about.

But sometimes I run into something that makes me wonder where the hell they're coming from. Even from my perspective as an ex-conservative who even had his own subscription to the Limbaugh Letter, I still don't get it.

This is one of those times.

OK, I find this a little disturbing. There was a diary on the Rec List for most of the day concerning another Dem Capitulation in their denunciation of the fact-based MoveOn Betray Us ad. It had to do with funding and message control. The diary was well referenced IMHO. Lots of links, it seemed to me the general standard that larger claims be backed with more referenced evidence. Everything I will say about it will have to be from memory, as it was yanked from the TOP of the Rec List.

Update: the diarist notimportant, deleted the diary due to vitriolic discourse in the comments. Damn sad. Please Rec this diary so we can continue the discussion here, if anyone is interested.

Also, does anyone recall why people/which people got upset over a diary?

John Edwards has a very long article in Foreign Affairs, a magazine published by the Council on Foreign Affairs, in which he lays out his foreign policy philosphy.  There is a lot there, but in this diary I want to focus on his critique of the so-called Global War on Terror.  
 

We must move beyond the wreckage created by one of the greatest strategic failures in U.S. history: the war in Iraq. Rather than alienating the rest of the world through assertions of infallibility and demands of obedience, as the current administration has done, U.S. foreign policy must be driven by a strategy of reengagement.

Foreign Affairs

It is a long and detailed article and I will only focus on a few key points.  I suggest that those interested read the entire article.  More after the fold

Within hours of Newsweek's revelation that the FBI had raided the home of former DOJ official Thomas M. Tamm in connection with the 2005 NSA domestic surveillance leak, both ends of the blogosphere have begun a feverish search to learn more about man at the center of the story.

At a well-attended panel at YearlyKos on the "Arc of Crisis" in the Middle East, there was a spirited discussion about what, if anything, to do about U.S. policy towards Israel and the Palestinians. No dissent was expressed about the nature of the problem: John Mearshimer laid out a convincing case that Israel is becoming an apartheid state, and no-one disagreed. But there was a spirited debate about what could be done about it.

It was acknowledged that there are indeed groups in Washington working to counter the influence of AIPAC on U.S. policy towards Israel and the Palestinians, the most influential being Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, Israel Policy Forum, and Americans for Peace Now. But, it was argued, these groups are underfunded and not as effective as they could be.

Not so long ago, it seemed these groups had a practical plan to address these shortcomings. In October, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported:

So, something that was quietly said on some program I was listening to this week, caught my attention.  I prefer not to live in a world of paranoia (i.e. even 'irritated' that in the first stories on the MN bridge collapse, it had to even be said that it wasn't terrorism), but precedents are clearly numerous and easily found, that indicate this would not be beyond BushCorrosion, Inc.

More...

From the left, George Soros, 76 years of age, born in Budapest, Hungary.  He is a very wealthy financial speculator, stock investor, philanthropist, and political activist.

and

From the right, Rupert Murdoch, 76 years of age, born in Melbourne, Australia.  He is a very wealthy global media executive and is the controlling shareholder, chairman and managing director of News Corporation.

My fiance keeps complaining to me about this book.  Not that i'm reading it, but the fact that i'm scribbling notes on pieces of paper, mumbling and laughing to myself as i turn each page.  She tells me that it's almost like i'm obsessed.  

Truth-be-told, i'm takin my time with this book.  I'll read a chapter and then have to put it down. I can feel the brain-cells evaporating each time i open the book.  And i'm also tryin to read Children of Hurin ( by J.R.R. Tolkien ), so you can probably guess which book is gettin the most mileage.

Before i started typing out this section ( just for a laugh ) i thought i'd take a look at some of the tags associated with the book at AMAZON.