Frankly, I am getting tired of the never ending game of musical kittens.  Mommy started this morning, but I grabbed the little red and put them back in the guest room nursery and just closed the door on her.  Then this evening she decided to move them again.  Rums scared her so she dropped the little calico on the steps.  The  do nothing birth father then edged the little thing off the steps, where she tumbled down about six steps, she just rolled.  I picked her up and carried her to the living room.  She wandered off up under some book shelves.  Mommy brought two others up and left the third sleeping under the bed.  I brought him  up, then had to move chairs and furniture to get little calico out from under the shelves.  I did that.  Put her  up on the chair while I put everything back in place.  She rolled off the chair.  I finally pushed her little tushie up under the chair where the family is now having a late dinner.  Rumsfeld is being a little monster.  I have him penned up

 

I had some very good news about two of my books today.  They are being very well received and have gone into the permanent collections at both Harvard and Yale!  I have a new column over at Blog Critics on great movie endings. Don’t forget the weekend’s Subway Canaries expose. 

 

Did anyone catch Hannity's interview with Dimwit Sheehan?  That woman is not bright. 

 

Democrat speaks with forked tongue.  Biden says one thing and Dirty Harry another.  Strata on the Dems and Iraq.

 

“…"I think we've got to tell the president what he's doing as wrong. We've got to start bringing our folks home," said Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, in remarks that portend a struggle if, as expected, Bush announces plans later this week for an increase in troop strength of 20,000. Meanwhile, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy said one option under consideration would be for Congress to vote on denying the use of funds for such an increase in the U.S. deployment. Several officials said the Massachusetts Democrat was hoping lawmakers could register their views before any increase in troops was implemented….”

 

 MR. RUSSERT:  ... Why not cut off funding for the war?

SEN. BIDEN:  I’ve been there, Tim.  You can’t do it.

MR. RUSSERT:  Why?

SEN. BIDEN:  You can’t do it.  It’s—what—because it made sense in the Constitution when you said you could cut off funding when you had no standing army.  We have a standing army with a budget of hundreds of billions of dollars.  You can’t go in and, like a tinker toy, and play around and say, “You can’t spend the money on this piece and this piece and”—he—able—he’ll be able to keep those troops there forever constitutionally if he wants to.

MR. RUSSERT:  Why not have legislation then that would cap the number of troops in Iraq?

SEN. BIDEN:  Because it’s very difficult to—it’s constitutionally questionable whether or not you can do that.  I think it is unconstitutional to say, “We’re going to tell you you can go, but we’re going to micromanage the war.” When we wrote the Constitution, the intention was to give the commander in chief the authority how to use the forces, when you authorize them, to be able to use the forces…”  Makes you wonder if HRM Nancy I has bothered to read the Constitution, doesn’t it?

 

The volcano on Montserrat is miss-behaving, again.   The Right Wing Nuthouse has a posting today that is about a subject near and dear to my heart, astronomy.  A very good read.

 

Scooter Libby  must go to trial for a leak he did not leak – and lose everything he has so Joe Wilson and Valarie Plame can become celebs.  Somehow it is just plain wrong for Plame to make money on her life story while Libby goes to trial for something he did not do. 

  

Ah yes, the usual suspects. …why am I surprised?  Instead of coming up with a compromise, they just go even more extreme. Sometimes I wonder if they actually want reform.  If they did, reason would prevail.  Now they want to strip the citizenship birthright from immigrants.  When did we hang a ‘no vacancy’ sign on the Statue of Liberty?  Harold Hutchison on the proposal.  Now the values voter religious conservatives want to end birthright citizenship.  Have they no shame? As yes, the usual suspects…”Among others who have joined the coalition are longtime conservative direct-mail guru Richard A. Viguerie, the Rev. Donald Wildmon of American Family Association, the Rev. Louis Sheldon of Traditional Values Coalition and Rabbi Aryeh Spero of Caucus for America. The group hopes to draw support from fellow religious conservatives in Congress such as Sen. Sam Brownback, Kansas Republican…”  Then read Ankle Biting Pundits. 

 

Yesterday day, over at the Pink Flamingo I did a commentary on why we are NEVER going to be able to control illegal immigration out of Mexico.  If I weren’t living where I am, I would not even be able to grasp the lifestyle of the plutocracy in Mexico.  I think it is one of the few places remaining in the world where there is such a rich, arrogant, privileged upper class literally living off the backs of the under-classes who are little more than serfs.  The ‘serf’ class, in turn, is so poorly paid family members must sneak into the US to get decently paying jobs so they can support their families back in Mexico, many of whom are working for this plutocracy.  We are literally subsidizing the lifestyles of the Mexican rich and famous!  Until these people are forced to pay their workers a living minimum wage – and this is enforced through Mexico, illegal immigration is never going to end.  It doesn’t matter what we do here – a fence, more BP agents, strict enforcement, these people are going to find a way to come into the US.  We are their only hope.

 

BTW – If the plutocracy in Mexico don’t’ mend their ways – quickly, Mexico will end up going to way of Venezuela, and then we will really have problems.   

 

Tancredo’s little border fence will cost a minimum of $49 BILLION.  Yep forty-nine billion dollars. 

 

 “…When the House of Representatives first approved a border security bill last winter, Hunter estimated it would cost $2.2 billion. The Congressional Budget Office echoed that figure in May with an estimate of $3 million per mile -- $2.1 billion for 700 miles. But the Congressional Research Service noted that the 14-mile San Diego fence is expected to cost $9 million per mile once it is finished. The research service also used a larger figure -- 850 miles -- for the length of the fence. Recent fences along the border have been constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for Customs and Border Protection. The Corps has obtained the land, drafted the environmental protection plan, designed the project and overseen construction. Labor has been provided by National Guard and military units on loan from the Department of Defense. The Dec. 12, 2006, nonpartisan congressional report said the corps predicted that the combined cost of building and maintaining the fence over a 25-year life cycle would range from $16.4 million to $70 million per mile, sepending on how heavily and how often the fence is damaged by would-be border jumpers. At $70 million per mile, a 700-mile fence would cost $49 billion….”

Other estimates go as high as $60 billion. 

“…But the bigger problem is this: What the officials didn’t say, and what not many others asked about, was what it would cost to maintain whatever structure was eventually built. Then, there is the inconvenient fact that some of the parcels on which the fence is supposed to be built are still in private hands, and those negotiations could go on for years. Add it up, says the Congressional Research Service, and the proposed border wall could cost $60 billion to build and maintain over the next quarter-century. No wonder congressional Democrats are backing away from the project..."

 My friend Katherine sent this to me.  I think we all need a laugh.

"I was in Wal-Mart buying a large bag of Purina dog chow and was in line to check out. A woman behind me asked if I had a dog........

 
Duh!
 
I was feeling a bit crabby so on impulse, I told her no, I was starting “The Purina Diet” again, although I probably shouldn't because I ended up in the hospital last time, but that I'd lost 50 pounds before I awakened in an intensive care unit with tubes coming out of most of my orifices and IV's in both arms. Her eyes about bugged out of her head.
 
I went on and on with the bogus diet story and she was totally buying it. I told her that it was an easy, inexpensive diet and that the way it works is to load your pockets or purse with Purina nuggets and simply eat one or two every time you feel hungry. The package said the food is nutritionally complete so I was going to try it again.
 
I have to mention here that practically everyone in the line was by now enthralled with my story, particularly a tall guy behind her. Horrified, she asked if something in the dog food had poisoned me and was that why I ended up in the hospital.
 
I said no.....I'd been sitting in the street licking my butt when a car hit me.
 
I thought the tall guy was going to have to be carried out the door "
The Captain's Quarters on the growing taxi cab war in my father's home town of Minneapolis.  Embarassing.  And then there is the Somalia issue and what is next.  Interesting new info from the Countterror Blog about the theft of airport vehicles.   Mary Katherine Ham is filling in for Malkin.  Her posting today does NOT fill me with glee considering I have a 21 year old niece on the Sudan-Kenya border interviewing victims of genocide and crimes against humanity.  She is due to be home on Sat, so please keep Rachel in your prayers.  And Powerline on Somalia.  And on the 'end of days' Islamic theology.  Scary stuff.  And Fullosseous Flap on the attack in Somalia.

 

Evidently curry is the new health food.  Works for me.  I love the stuff. 

 

“…Preliminary research suggests Jayne may be right. A study in the November issue of Arthritis & Rheumatism suggests turmeric, one component of curry spice, almost completely prevented joint swelling in rats with arthritis. Other studies have suggested that the spice could protect against diseases such as heart disease, cancer and Alzheimer's, a degenerative brain disease that afflicts nearly 5 million people in the USA. Rates of Alzheimer's in India are about four times lower than in the USA, says Gregory Cole, a researcher at the University of California-Los Angeles. His studies suggest that curry contains a powerful substance that might protect the brain from damage that leads to Alzheimer's. Surprising findings in mice - Can scientists prove curry wards off such diseases as Alzheimer's or cancer? Not yet, says Bharat Aggarwal at the University of Texas-Houston. But he says the growing file on curry includes compelling evidence gleaned from animal and human studies…”

 

 

Reason #what-ever for legitimizing the splitting of the Episcopal Church. Now they are saying it is the theology, stupid.  I think they are protesting too much!

 

 PRIMARIES 2008:  Political insider says Edwards is courting the Dean voter.  Makes sense to me.  Ruffini likes algore's pre-positioning.  Mass Pro-lifers have endorsed Brownback, oh my, and on Romney's big day!  Eyeon2008 says much of the Dem positioning on Iraq trip build-up is more to do about thwarding McCain than anything else.   Jim Gilmore is filing papers for an exploratory tomorrow.  Evidently none of the front-runners are conservative enough for him.  DeMint has endorsed Romney.  No surprise here.  From where I sit, it looks l ike DeMint is one of those hot-headed conservatives who is RIGHT all the time.  It also appears to me that he would do anything to pull the rug out from under Lindsey.  Very hard hitting commentary from Race42008 about Romney invoking Reagan but did not support Reagan. More flipping and flopping.  More polls.

 

Lindsey on Meet the Press:

 

 

MR. RUSSERT:  Senator Graham, Robert Novak, the conservative columnist, who’s a pretty good head counter when it comes to the Republicans, he wrote this on Monday.  “President Bush ...  will have trouble finding support from more than 12 out of 49 Republican senators.  ‘It’s Alice in Wonderland,’ Sen.  Chuck Hagel, second-ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, told me in describing the proposed surge.  ‘I’m absolutely opposed to sending more troops to Iraq.  It is folly.’” How politically uphill is this for the president?

SEN. GRAHAM:  Well, all I ask of my Republican colleagues, Democratic colleagues, and the nation is just to hear the president out.  I think there’ll be a lot of support by Republican members.  And I hope some Democrats will understand the following:  Where do we agree as a nation that a failed stay in Iraq is a disaster for this country?  If Iraq fails and you have open civil war and it creates a regional conflict that would follow us for decades, that’s something every American should hope never happens and work together to prevent.  I hope we can agree with this, that the current strategy is not working, hasn’t been working for quite a while.  I think the president has looked at it from that point of view, “I cannot let Iraq fail because our national security interests are very tied to what happens in Iraq.” And when you talk about withdrawal, somebody needs to answer the question, what happens when we leave?  And he’s also very much focused on the idea that we’ve got to give the Iraqi people the ability to find a political solution.  A surge of troops is a result of the current strategy not working, and it, by itself, will not lead to a successful outcome.  But a precondition to political stability and economic recovery is security.  So I will support the idea of putting more American troops on the ground in Iraq with a purpose, to join up with Iraqi forces to bring about security in Baghdad that is missing, try to stop the sectarian fighting in Baghdad to give the political leadership in Iraq a chance to do the things they need to do to bring about a stable government.  To me, it is a strategy that is based on the needs of the moment.  Even though it may not be politically popular for the moment, I think it is in our best interests long term.

….MR. RUSSERT:  So General Casey said, as recently as Friday, “We don’t need more American troops.” So General Abizaid and General Casey are removed.  So if you give advice to the president and he doesn’t like it, rather than listen to the generals on troop levels, you remove the generals?

SEN. GRAHAM:  Well, I hope we will hold the generals accountable for their work product.  I respect General Casey and Abizaid, but the strategy they’ve come up with for the last two years has not worked.  Iraq is not more stable than it was when they took over two years ago.  Sectarian violence in Baghdad has gotten worse.  I’ve been there five times.  The first time I went there we went rug shopping.  The last time I went we were in a tank.  It is clear to me, I think Joe Biden and every other American including the president, now is a time for change.  If we don’t change now, we’re going to lose Iraq.  And if you come up with a new policy, do you let the same people who implemented the old policy come up with a new idea?  I don’t think so.  Petraeus, to me, I hope is Bush’s Grant.  It is now time for a change.  The old strategy is...

MR. RUSSERT:  General David Petraeus, who will now be in charge.

SEN. GRAHAM:  Absolutely.  He did a great job in Mosul, counterinsurgency doctrine worked in Mosul.  We’ve had a clear hold-and-build strategy.  We could clear but we could never hold.  We never had enough troops to begin with.  For two years I’ve asked these generals, “Do we have enough troops?” “Yeah, we’re fine.” “Is the Army OK?” “The Army is fine.” A month or two ago, we found out the Army is broken, and they agreed that General Shinseki was right.

Now’s the time to start over.  If we don’t start over and do what we should’ve done in the beginning—have enough people to win this war, have the Powell Doctrine implemented—we will pay a heavy price.  So I support a surge in troops with a purpose, co-joining with the Iraqi military and political leadership to control this country.  You can not have a democracy where you got militias stronger than the central government.  You can not, not have a democracy where the people don’t have faith in their central government to take care of them.  American forces going into Baghdad co-joined with Iraqi forces and a new political model is our best chance for victory.  It may not work.

But this idea that nobody has called for withdrawal is folly on the Democratic side.  John Edwards says pull out 40,000 troops now.  Reid and Pelosi sent a letter to the president:  “End this war, start redeploying in four to six months.” These Democratic proposals are, to me, a formula for defeat.  They’re nothing more than just a political way to get out of Iraq, and it will come back to haunt us for years, and they never talked one minute in that letter what happens to Iraq when we leave.  Is our national interest—security interest compromised with a failed state in Iraq, and does withdrawing lead to a failed state?  Somebody needs to talk about that.

…SEN. GRAHAM:  In all honesty, we are not winning.  And if you’re not winning, you’re losing.  And now’s the time to come up with a strategy to win.  The reason President Bush is going to do this, because he understands that we have to win in Iraq.  The reason Senator McCain and Lindsey Graham and a few others are supporting this when 14 percent of the public supports us and 80-something percent is against us is we’re thinking about the consequences of a failed state in Iraq.  That’s more important than 2008.  We cannot let this country go into the abyss.  Now is the last chance and the only chance we have left to get this right.

…..MR. RUSSERT:  If the surge doesn’t work, will Republicans senators then go to the president and say, “Enough”?

SEN. GRAHAM:  Well let’s talk a little bit about the—why he’s doing the surge.  Again, he’s trying to come up with a strategy for victory, and our Democratic friends have written the president a letter days before he makes a speech explaining what he’s going to do and why.  Every Democratic proposal that I’ve been privy to has one common denominator to it:  withdrawal.  He received a letter from the speaker of the House, from the majority leader of the Senate saying, “Bring this war to an end.  Redeploy in four to six months.” We...

MR. RUSSERT:  No, but my question, Senator—Senator, my question was, if the surge does not work...

SEN. GRAHAM:  Right.

MR. RUSSERT:  ...will Republicans then say, “We tried everything.  We gave it our last best hope.  Mr.  President, the war has been lost”?

SEN. GRAHAM:  I don’ think any Republican or Democrat should do anything right now to say the war is lost.  We should try to win this war.  And the day you say we’re going to withdraw—three months, six months, a year from now—the effect will be that the militants will be emboldened, the moderates will be frozen, and we will have sent the message to the wrong people.  Who started this...

MR. RUSSERT:  So we’re stuck there forever.

SEN. GRAHAM:  Well, you stay there with a purpose to win.  If we never had enough troops in the beginning, when did we start having enough troops?  We have paid a heavy price for the mistakes we’ve made in the past.  The biggest mistake we could make as a nation is to listen to Pelosi and Reid doctrine of withdrawing without wondering what happens when we leave.  My biggest fear, as a United States senator, as an American, is that we will make a political decision to leave Iraq without thinking about what’s left when we leave.  Nobody wants to talk about what happens when we leave.  I understand it’s not popular, but this war is not about the moment, it’s about the next decade and the decade to follow.  It’s about our national security interests.  It’s about the war on terror.  Moderates vs.  extremists.  If we leave the moderates and leave it to the extremists, if we tell the extremists through our behavior and our actions, “We’re leaving Iraq in a year.  It’s yours,” we will never know peace.  I hope we can rally around the president’s idea of putting enough troops in to make a difference.  I hope we can do what Joe says, push the Iraqi people to come up with the political model that will work.  But no politician in Iraq can possibly reconcile that nation with this level of violence.  A pre-condition—a pre-condition to political solution is security.  Security is absent.  We got to regain the capital.

…MR. RUSSERT:  What did the Saddam hanging do to the potential for reconciliation in Iraq?

SEN. GRAHAM:  It gave people the idea that Saddam Hussein will never come

back, and I can’t tell you how many people lived in fear of this man

re-emerging as a political leader in Iraq.  That fear is lost.  The way the

hanging occurred was a setback, but whatever taunt he received on the day of his death pales in comparison to the way he treated his own people.  This will pass.  We have a chance to start over.  Gates has replaced Rumsfeld; it was long overdue.  Petraeus is replacing Casey, long overdue.  We’ve got a new team on the ground.  We’re going to come up with a new strategy.  The strategy is going to be designed to win.  The current strategy is not working.  Withdrawal as a strategy, I think, is a disaster for this country.  It sends the wrong signal to the insurgents.  It, it, it hurts the moderate effort, and no one talks about what happens when we leave from the idea of withdrawing.  So we’re going to...

MR. RUSSERT:  If a year from now the situation on the ground is similar to what it is today in terms of violence, in sectarian violence, what will you—what do you say then?

SEN. GRAHAM:  What I say is, a year from now or five years from now, what would be the consequences to an Iraq in open civil war with sectarian killing where Iran tries to take over the southern part of Iraq, the north—northern, northern part the Kurds break away and Turkey gets involved, what would we do if we left a year from now and there’s open civil war and Iran tries to occupy, through a puppet government, the south of Iraq.  What will we do if Turkey threatens to go to war with the Kurds?  We got to think about these things now, and we need to adjust now.  We’ve made mighty mistakes.  We’ve never had enough troops in the past.  Let’s don’t repeat the mistakes of the past, I agree with Senator Biden.  The biggest mistake we’ve made is we’ve never put enough troops on the ground to secure this country.  We’ve never had a strategy for economic political power to be successful because security was never there to make it successful.  The biggest mistake we could make is to repeat the mistakes of the past and not have enough people on the ground to make a difference.  The Iraqi people have to step up.  Listen to the president Wednesday.  He is not blind to the fact that eventually the Iraqi people have to solve their political problems.  But until we put the right combat power in place with the Iraqis, we will never have a political solution.  And I ask my friend Joe Biden, the letter from Pelosi and Reid of leaving in four to six months, do you agree with that?

…..SEN. GRAHAM:  ...Sunnis and Shias who are dying for their freedom.  To be a policeman or a politician or a judge in Iraq, you risk everything.  There’re plenty of people there that want their freedom, and power of the moderates to stand up against extremists win this war.

 

 

MY COMMENTARY OF THE DAY -  Social Security

 

I am going to get in, say what I think and then duck and cover.

 

Why not means test Social Security?

 

I know it sounds terribly liberal, but why do my parents need social security?  Yes, they paid into it.  They deserve a break, but I think my father would much rather get a tax break and be able to deduct the amount he does not receive back from that social security.  Let’s face the fact that the pittance he gets goes directly to my mother’s checking account, and she uses it to buy Stuart Weitzman shoes and jewelry.  The amount that comes in is way to small to do any serious Louis Vuitton shopping. 

 

She has a sister and a brother who are in the same economic condition.  They don’t need the money.  One other sister, though, does need it.  If there comes a time when the income isn’t there, then just do a little paper-work and reapply for it.

 

Anyone who has at least $500,000 is going to see no difference in actual income with their Social Security check, but could benefit from a tax exemption if they don’t take it.  Why does Warren Buffet need his?  Or why would Bill Gates need to collect a check? 

 

Why can’t a little reason prevail here?

 

Now, if my mother reads this I’m in deep dodo, she likes the extra ‘found money’ for shoes.  If this is the case, then she doesn’t need it.  How many other seniors out there are in the same Cadillac as my parents?

 

Why Do Financially Well Off Seniors Need that Social Security Check?