Remember back in May of this year when the tender and delicate feelings of some Republicans were bruised when Speaker Nancy Pelosi said this….

Pelosi said that she was explicitly told in her September 2002 briefing that waterboarding was not used. We've since learned that Abu Zubaydah had been waterboarded 83 times by then.

She accused the agency of "misleading the Congress of the United States."

“We were told explicitly that waterboarding was not being used,” she said at the May press conference. “They [the CIA] misled us all the time.”

Ignoring, or forgetting, their own previous derogatory statements about the CIA, some Republican leaders bashed away at Pelosi for daring to speak the truth in public.

Senator Kit Bond (R-MO)….

“Speaker Pelosi should apologize to the CIA for calling them liars to protect her own hide,” Bond told CNSNews.com in a written statement Tuesday. “It’s up to Speaker Pelosi to come clean and set the record straight.”

Ohio's own embarassment, John Boehner (R-OH)…..

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner said that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi "ought to either present the evidence or apologize" in the wake of her comments that CIA officials misled her about the use of controversial interrogation techniques on terrorist suspects.

The Mighty Newton, currently in open opposition to wingnut darling Sarah Palin over an upstate New York congressional race, went further in his criticism of the House Speaker's CIA comments….

"She really disqualified herself to be the speaker," Gingrich said on "Good Morning America" today. "She has a unique responsibility for national security. … She made this allegation that smears everyone who's trying to defend her."
Leaving her in her place would be "very dangerous for the country," Gingrich added.

I know that Gingrich has occasions when he loses total control of his freak. That May outburst of freak over Pelosi's words about a lying CIA, I think, should be placed in Gingrich's top five "losing my freak" moments….you know, right up there with closing down the federal government in 1995.

Weren't those great wingnutty times back in May? Back in May it was steroid-enhanced faux-shock and sanctimony over Nancy Pelosi stating the obvious about the CIA.

There are now preliminary findings in a congressional investigation into the CIA's practice of giving misleading intelligence briefings to congressional members.

Intelligence subcommittee Chairwomen Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) are leading an ongoing investigation into what they described as a practice of incomplete and often misleading intelligence briefings, which arose in the wake of CIA Director Leon Panetta’s June 24 admission that intelligence officials failed to notify Congress about a top-secret program to assassinate al Qaeda leaders.

..[..]..

In June, CIA Director Leon Panetta alerted the House Intelligence Committee about a top-secret program to assassinate top al Qaeda operatives that previously had not been disclosed to Congress. Later reports indicated that former Vice President Dick Cheney had ordered the CIA not to notify Congress of the program.

Panetta’s revelation appeared to bolster Pelosi’s statement from May, and Schakowsky and Eshoo identified “Director Panetta’s June 24 notification” as one of the…. instances linked to a complete communication breakdown between the intelligence community and Congress.

What are the other "instances" where the CIA misled Congress?

…the September 2002 briefing on enhanced interrogation techniques that became the basis for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) claim that the CIA lied to her.

A 2008 CIA Inspector General’s report determined that the agency withheld information from Congress relating to the shooting down of a plane carrying missionaries over Peru in 2001.

…the CIA may have failed to properly notify Congress about the 2005 destruction of videotapes recording the interrogation of al Qaeda operatives by intelligence officials…

So, what do we have here? Nancy Pelosi said that the CIA misleads Congress. Above are four prime examples from preliminary investigation findings that show the CIA….umm….misleading Congress. Pelosi spoke the truth back in May.

What of the over the top and obviously phony reaction of Republicans back in May to the true words of Pelosi? Those silly GOP'ers were just trying to protect The Dick from having his Willy-Wonka Torture Factory fully exposed. Those GOP torture defenders, faced with the existential threat that their former leaders, George and The Dick, could be charged with war crimes, immediately tried to change the subject, blur the story lines, "create reality", by manufacturing a faux-outrage narrative directing the Village attention away from Cheney and Bush, focusing on House Speaker Pelosi instead.

The Villagers, predictably, followed the lead of the "reality creators", the conventional wisdom, GOP narrative-builders,….helping GOP freaks smear a truth-telling Speaker Pelosi. GOP'ers raise freaky hell over some off-the-wall topic….and Knee Pad wearing Villagers instantly drop to their knees to replicate the freakdom, vicariously taking on the faux-outrage visage of the GOP freaks themselves.

And then we learn, also predictably, it was all a staged hoax.

Just as it's obvious that FOX "news" is not a news outlet, so too, the CIA routinely misleads Congress.

My blog buddy King last week….

What our media hasn't bothered to tell you is that the early interrogation and Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EIT's) used against terrorist monsters like al-Nashiri, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and Abu Zubaydah worked, just like former VP Dick Cheney said they did. Cheney was ridiculed endlessly for saying that, but the CIA IG report leaves no doubt.

Defenders of America's use of cruel and illegal torture tactics cling to the thread of their own devisings that "torture worked". Led by The Dick, many conservatives have desperately sought justifications for the obvious illegalities of torture. It could be that conservative watchers of "24" have been convinced by Kiefer that torture is good and just…or it could be that conservatives don't want to admit that their Super-Patriotic Heroes committed war crimes, because then, THEY, would be shown to be mistaken.

Whatever the motivation might be, these torture defenders are anxious, even frenzied at times, to find something, anything, to defend their indefensible gibberish……they'll grasp for virtually anything that even remotely, on first glance, can be construed to support their position.

That's what King from All Da King's Men does in the above block quote. Look at his words. Torture, or the name given to torture by the easily-queasied, "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques", according to King's reading of the recent CIA report on interrogations, "worked." Here's King in his own words….

The EIT's worked, whether we like them or not.

It's odd that King is so cock-sure that the CIA's interrogation report leaves "no doubt" that torture "worked" to save American lives. Why? Because even Fran Townsend, George W. Bush's Terrorism Advisor said of the CIA's report….."the report doesn't say that."

The truth in 32 seconds….

Transcript of Fran Townsend's comment…

It’s very difficult to draw a cause and effect, because it’s not clear when techniques were applied vs. when that information was received. It’s implicit. It seems, when you read the report, that we got the — the — the most critical information after techniques had been applied. But the report doesn’t say that.

How it is that King sees words in the CIA report leaving "no doubt" that torture "worked" to save U.S lives….when the Bushie insider Townsend doesn't……will have to be taken up with King.

I realize that many conservative supporters of torture could give a sh*t whether torture "worked" or whether the CIA report leaves "no doubt" about the wonder-working salvation power of acting like savages……it just doesn't matter, according to some conservatives. Their defense of institutionalized American savagery is simply….'if America is doing it, it is the right, just, necessary and proper thing to do, because America, of all world countries, is singularly exceptional.'

So, there's that.

However, in King's case, I'm beginning to think a reading and comprehension dysfunction is at work. I can't be 100% sure, you understand…but it kinda, sorta, looks that way…..

Now, don't forget…..King said of the CIA report that there is "no doubt" that torture "worked."

From King's Fox News link included in All Da King's Men's August 25th posting….

It is not possible to say definitively that the waterboard is the reason for Abu Zubaydah's increased production, or if another factor, such as the length of detention, was the catalyst. Since the use of the waterboard, however, Abu Zubaydah has appeared to be cooperative.

With respect to A-Nashiri, [redacted] reported two waterboard sessions in November 2002, after which the psychologist/interrogators determined that Al-Nashiri was compliant….Because of the litany of techniques used by different interrogators over a relatively short period of time, it is difficult to identify exactly why Al-Nashiri became more willing to provide information.

King has "no doubt" that the CIA report proves that torture "worked." The report from which King quoted, however, actually says, "…it's not possible to say definitively…", and, "….it is difficult to identify exactly…."

So…is it a reading and comprehension problem? Is it a wishful thinking problem? What is it that motivates some conservatives and libertarians to not be able to read and comprehend relatively clear language?

This CIA report reading and comprehension discussion can serve as a case study for the larger information wars that have blanketed America for a number of years.

It also helps in understanding how it was that America could so easily be talked into attacking Iraq, a non-threatening country that had done absolutely nothing to warrant being attacked and occupied by U.S forces for going on 7 years now.

It's all about deception……self-imposed because of comprehension in reading problems and wishful thinking, partisan blindness…..or gullibility. I'll leave it to others to determine which form of deception applies here.

Postscript: I just remembered another oddity. Ms. Condi Rice told the 9-11 Commission that Junior Leader didn't want to "swat at flies" in the months leading up to 9-11. Now we know why. The deviants of the Bush administration preferred catching anything that could be characterized as a "fly", and as many youthful deviants would prefer, torturing those flies by tearing wings and legs off one at a time. So there's that.

And there's also this….

Cheney thinks it was a sterling success when it came to national security and counter-terrorism. Perhaps there's something to this. After all, except for the catastrophic events of 9/11, and the anthrax attacks against Americans, and terrorist attacks against U.S. allies, and the terrorist attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Bush's inability to capture those responsible for 9/11, and waging an unnecessary war that inspired more terrorists, and the success terrorists had in exploiting Bush's international unpopularity, the Bush/Cheney record on counter-terrorism was awesome.

As the Obama administration continues to do everything it can to cover-up for Bush/Cheney-era crimes against the American people, we now learn that Eric Holder, Obama's Attorney General, has appointed Republican, John Durham, as a "special prosecutor" to investigate "alleged detainee mistreatment"….

Holder has named longtime prosecutor John H. Durham, who has parachuted into crisis situations for both political parties over three decades, to open an early review of nearly a dozen cases of alleged detainee mistreatment at the hands of CIA interrogators and contractors.

Durham has already been "investigating" the destruction of CIA interrogation videotapes…..

The tapes allegedly depicted brutal scenes of waterboarding involving high-value al-Qaeda suspects. That investigation is in its 19th month, though lawyers following the case have cast doubt on whether criminal charges will be filed.

The videotapes investigation, reluctantly begun under the Bush administration, is the key to understanding Holder's goals in appointing Durham to investigate detainee abuse. No indictment recommendations will ever be made in the already 19-month-old videotapes investigation, but that long investigation gives the perception that federal leaders are serious about the rule of law. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Consider…

The White House reiterated in a statement that Obama doesn't believe in prosecuting CIA personnel who used "enhanced" techniques "in good faith and within the scope of legal guidance" that was provided by Bush administration officials.

All a thinking person has to ask themselves is this: Does the executive branch have the power, the legal right under the Constitution, to order actions to be carried out which specifically violate American law and international treaties and conventions? And does the executive branch have the legal right under the Constitution to order new laws to be written by obedient lawyers, ala John Yoo, the architect of the "legalization" of American propagated torture?

Bush and Cheney have already given their answers…..now "looking forward, not backward" Obama is giving his. Neither have anything to do with fidelity to law or the Constitution…..but both answers have to do with perception of fidelity to law and the Constitution. Because as Karl Rove and the Townhall Buster Uppers have already proven…..perception is all that matters.

Holder, (if you can even fathom this), isn't setting up an "investigation" to determine if people ordered the open violation of existing law or treaties. He's setting up an "investigation" to determine if people exceeded the "new laws" written by John Yoo and Jay Bybee.

It would be similar to only investigating whether a getaway man in a bank robbery had exceeded the orders he was given by the architect of the bank robbery.

But that's where we're at in America today. And so, just as with Abu Ghraib, perhaps a low level, no-name, CIA employee or private contractor will be reprimanded after John Durham concludes his report in 4 or 5 years….perhaps not.

All that really matters is that Obama, like Bush before him, creates a perception of taking egregious violations of law seriously. He really doesn't.

Others working for Obama don't take violations of the law seriously, either. Consider Obama's CIA chief, Leon Panetta…..

In a message to CIA employees, agency director Leon Panetta declined to enter the debate over whether waterboarding and other "enhanced" questioning techniques were legal or crossed the line into torture. But he vowed to defend employees who were acting under the legal guidance they were given at the time and noted that any review must consider the pressures that agency personnel were facing.

"This much is clear," Panetta said: "The CIA obtained intelligence from high-value detainees when inside information on al-Qaeda was in short supply."

Panetta's defense of CIA personnel used to be called the Nazi defense. But no more. Now the Nazi defense……we were only obeying orders, and hey, we were under a lot of pressure….is the American defense. It is the defense of the lawless.

The only thing in "short supply" from 2001 onward was loyalty to American law and the Constitution. Perception of terror, fearmongering, was all that mattered during Bush/Cheney….and they were successful in selling their lawless coup through that perception of terror.

Now, Obama is creating the perceptions. The perception of getting to the bottom of numerous Bush White House-ordered crimes by appointing an investigator who will start his investigation with the understanding that the Bush White House had the perfect right to order crimes to be committed.

Over the past number of years, whenever I suggested that George W. Bush was actually an American terrorist leader, I was quickly reprimanded by those Serious and Grown-up Conservatives who immediately sought to describe the former president as "protecting us from Islamofascists."

Now, former Bush Homeland Security head, Tom Ridge, in a new book, follows in the footsteps of The Reverend, and tells his readers that, yes, George W. Bush terrorized the American people for political gain.

From the news release…

Former US homeland security chief Tom Ridge charges in a new book that top aides to then-president George W. Bush pressured him to raise the "terror alert" level to sway the November 2004 US election.

Then defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and attorney general John Ashcroft pushed him to elevate the color-coded threat level, but Ridge refused, according to a summary from his publisher, Thomas Dunne Books.

……

He also says that Bush's homeland security adviser at the White House, Fran Townsend, called his department ahead of an August 1, 2004 speech to ask Ridge to include a reference to "defensive measures … away from home" — language that he read as being a reference to the Iraq war.

In those remarks, Ridge said he was raising the threat alert level for the financial services sector in New York City, northern New Jersey, and Washington DC, and went on to praise Bush's leadership against extremism.

……

He later publicly acknowledged that much of the information underpinning the new alert was three years old, stoking Bush critics' charges of political manipulation.

I wrote many times during the Bush-Cheney overthrow of the United States that Karl Rove's obsession with a permanent Republican majority led him and Bush to politicize everything emanating from the White House. Early critics of the Bush administration called the Bushies "Mayberry Machiavellis" for a reason. "Everything was political," is the answer.

When a high government leader seeks to frighten the population he is responsible to protect, and he does so for the purpose of gaining a political edge……that person is a terrorist. Osama Bin Laden's political philosophy and George W Bush's were the same. Bin Laden's philosophy states that if people are scared, terrorized by events, political leanings can be altered, changed.

George W. Bush thought the same as Bin Laden. The Bushies actively sought to terrorize the American voting population just prior to the 2004 election, without any credible evidence to justify the terrorizing, in order to alter the outcome of what looked to be a very tight presidential race with John Kerry.

None of this is new. I've known about Ridge raising the terror chart levels for political purposes for years. But as Glenn Greenwald blogs, whenever someone, you know, from the loony left, suggested that's what was going on…..well, we were just loony…..and not Serious, like corporate-whore media members.

And it wasn't just terror color charts. The Iraq crime was sold to America using terror. "Mushroom clouds", "chemical and biological weapons", "WMD", "no doubt that Saddam has reconstituted his weapons program"…..etc. Spying on Americans without benefit of warrants, torturing detainees, Gitmo, extrordinary kidnappings…..all of this was sold to us with terror. All of this, as we have witnessed with The Dick since Obama's inauguration, was meant to scare, to terrorize the American people for conservative political purposes.

It's not simply George W. Bush who is guilty of terrorizing the American people during his administration, though he definitely is guilty. The Republican Party has become the Party of Terror. Constantly seeking to frighten and terrorize Americans through the use of imminent danger fear. That's the purpose of the townhall bust-ups, the carrying of semi-automatic weapons, the shouts, the visible hatred…..it's to scare, to terrorize other Americans for a political objective, in this case, to defeat health care reform.

All of this is transparently obvious, just as it was transparently obvious when the Bushies were leading the nation around using terror tactics in order to complete their wet dream of attacking and occupying Iraq.

It's a good thing that a moderate Republican, like Tom Ridge, is setting the record straight.

UPDATE: Here's a prime example of what I'm getting at today, from Idaho.

Also this.

The Washington Post's David Ignatius is a personal case study in what's wrong down in the Village. Again the AB Journal gives Ignatius top billing on it's op-ed page….and again, Ignatius lays down the isolated and rotted Village mindset.

If the U.S. federal government, according to Ignatius, holds it's agencies, like the CIA, accountable for it's actions…..then "other countries" who might otherwise "admire America's committment to democracy and the rule of law" would simply "conclude that we are all plain nuts."

That's what Mr. Village says. If the powerful people in our federal agencies are held accountable for their actions, then America has lost it's collective mind.

Ignatius, admittedly, has a hard time understanding what could be wrong with a vice-president ordering CIA officials to withhold super-secret intelligence programs from Congress, in defiance of existing law. It's just too, too difficult for elected officials to obey the law these days, and naturally with Ignatius, any considerations of investigating or prosecuting high-level conservatives in the Village would only be a cause for group fainting.

Right off the Village bat, Ignatius has it all pegged….

"The latest ''scandals" involving the Central Intelligence Agency are genuinely hard to understand, other than in terms of political payback."

Yep, David….it's all just too "hard to understand". Too hard to understand for anyone. If Villager Dave doesn't understand those "scandals" because they're just too hard to follow, how could a judge or jury or commission understand…let alone those poor ignorant Americans out there.

It''s just gotta' be "political payback." Big Village Dave, like Fox's Bill O'Reilly, is just looking out for the little guy who finds all this stuff "hard to understand", and in the case of Dick Cheney's capture and control of the CIA during the Terror years…….

It would be impossible to prove "criminal intent" for CIA interrogators who operated within the framework of the Justice Department's guidance.

There you have it. The Village has spoken.

Ignatius flaunts his Village citizenry. In Village thinking, the Bush Justice Department COULDN'T have done anything illegal or wrong. If Bush and Cheney cherry-picked John Yoo out of the Justice Department, didn't tell his superiors, and ordered him to write torture memoes in direct violation of existing American law….to Ignatius, that's standard conservative operating procedure.

Why has Ignatius gone all Peak-Village right now?

Attorney General Eric Holder is considering appointing a prosecutor to investigate criminal actions by CIA officers involved in the harsh interrogation of al-Qaida prisoners. But the internal CIA report on which he's said to be basing this decision was referred five years ago to the Justice Department, where attorneys concluded that no prosecution was warranted.

Obama doesn't want an investigation, and Bush/Cheney sure as hell don't want one….and the Village doesn't want one. But Holder, confronted by the egregious nature of recent evidence pointing to numerous national and international war crimes ordered by the Bush administration, is "considering appointing a prosecutor." The nerve of the Attorney General, huh?

Notice Village Dave's thinking. Holder is considering appointing an investigator to look into how the torture memos the Bush Justice Department "legalized" were implemented…..but Ignatius concludes that the Bush Justice Department already looked into those complaints and concluded that no wrongdoing happened. Well, that settles it then, right?

Today in Villageland, holding any conservatives in power to account is simply "gotcha" politics….

President Obama has tried to end this "gotcha" culture….

Try that one out on a local judge or law enforcement representative….."Judge, don't you want to look forward and not backward? Any attempt by you, Judge, to hold me accountable for breaking the law would just be some vindictive payback on your part, Judge. Just more silly "gotcha" politics."

Summarizing…..I often blog about today's corporate "journalists", labeling them the Knee Pad Media, or the Village. David Ignatius' piece today encapsulates the ethos of that Village. If conservatives are in power, according to Villager David Ignatius, those conservatives are above the law and can never be prosecuted, or even investigated, for anything they did while in office. That's the given. Any attempts to go against this given are only and always "political payback" and "gotcha" politics by non-conservatives.

If Democrats are in power, then the Village rules are entirely different. If Democrats are in power, then fibbing about fellatio is a horrendous national threat that demands a $50 million, multiple-year investigation and a teevee sham spectacle of a prosecution.

Here'a an excellent takedown of the Village on this same topic.

Update:
Village regular, Roger Cressey, tells the new and obnoxious MSNBC dumbass anchor, Dylan Ratigan, that those Democrats who want to investigate law breaking are "stupid and foolish…."

Wall Street Journal online…..

Central Intelligence Agency Director Leon E. Panetta has told lawmakers that the agency "concealed significant actions" from Congress, according to a letter released Wednesday from seven Democratic lawmakers.

The letter also contends that Mr. Panetta said CIA officials have misled Congress since 2001.
……

CIA spokesman George Little said, "It is not the policy or practice of the CIA to mislead Congress." Mr. Little said the CIA itself "took the initiative to notify the oversight committees" about the lapses. Mr. Panetta brought the issue to lawmakers' attention on June 24.

It may not be the "policy or practice"….but it happens, the "misleading" of Congress, that is……you know, the "lapses."

House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi was pilloried by Republicans and their lapdogs in media when she stated unequivocally that the CIA lies to, and misleads Congress on a regular basis.

The Bush/Cheney torture regime had been coming under heavy criticism after Obama's release of Bush's Office of Legal Counsel's "Torture memos" which "legalized" the illegal practice of torture. Eyewitnesses started talking about Guantanamo. More evidence emerged about Cheney's purpose in torturing detainees….to coerce false confessions linking Iraq with al-Qaeda, thus producing a "justification" to start an unjustifable war.

Cheney and his daughter Liz began appearing every other day on teevee to spout their lies of cover-up. It was during that time that Pelosi challenged the truthfulness of Bush's CIA in briefing Congressional figures about "enhanced interrogations." It was then that Pelosi, not Cheney, as planned, became the focus of the media's attack.

The media narrative switched from the clear evidence pointing to Cheney as the mastermind and main figure in the push for the illegal torturing of detainees, a war crime and felony,…..to some unintelligible attack on Nancy Pelosi. During a brief press conference, Pelosi had said that the CIA misleads Congress on a regular basis and stated that she was never told during 2002 briefings that the CIA had already used "enhanced interrogations" methods, such as waterboarding.

Republicans attacked using their access to the media's sh*tstorm button. Pelosi was targeted as an evil-doer. She had the audacity to say that the Divine and Immaculately Conceived CIA "lies to Congress on a regular basis." Calls for investigations into Pelosi ensued. What did she know and when did she know it? It was all high-bullsh*t at it's finest….but it took the focus off of Cheney and Bush….and that was it's purpose.

Now, as we can see from Leon Panetta's private meeting with Congressional representatives,…yes, the CIA has not been completely honest with Congress, having "concealed significant actions" from them. Exactly what Pelosi had said earlier.

I'm sure that as I type this, new and improved media sh*tstorm ammunition (with 50% more mendacity) is being created and smeared around to suggest that Panetta didn't say what he said, if he ever said it in the first place. I watched Andrea Greenspan Mitchell last night tell Olbermann that this was all about 7 Democrats and their blind loyalty to Nancy Pelosi.

Naturally, Andrea had on some new, colorful and chic Knee Pads.

I had almost forgotten about those bizarro Tea Parties held around tax day in April……when I came across schedules for even more Tea Parties to be held this weekend. Yep, no joke.

Parties in northeast Ohio are scheduled for Cleveland, Canton and Ravenna.

Here's a message from the Canton Tea Party organizers……

Declare and Defend your Independence from the Tax and Spenders! It's time to turn up the heat on elected officials who want to impose more taxes, create more government waste, and throw the Constitution out the window. In keeping with the tone of the Tax Day Tea Parties, We the People are gathering to celebrate our independence. Let’s declare and defend the values and principles that have made our nation the greatest in the world! Limited Government Fiscal Responsibility Free Market System Holding our elected officials accountable Ladies and Gentlemen Let Freedom Ring! The Tea Party Patriots of Canton, OH are hosting a rally on the Kresge Lot located in downtown Canton on July 5th 2009. The event will run from 3:00pm to 7:00pm. Be sure to tell everyone you can and suggest this event to all your Facebook friends. The larger the crowd, the bigger the message!

The Reverend believes in liberty and justice for all. I, therefore, applaud anyone who wants to organize peacefully for political reasons. However, I also believe in literacy and empirical reality….in fact, I highly recommend both.

It seems to me…..and you can feel free to call me nutty….that being intelligently informed and recognizing objective truth, rather than just accepting what Rush and FOX are saying and living in some fifth dimension, fiction-bubble reality…..would be the more appropriate path to follow in the 21st century. Opinions vary, I guess.

Anyway….to my conservative friends who might be Tea Partying this weekend…..this is my "come to Jesus" altar call moment.

"impose more taxes"

President Obama's short 6 month leadership has resulted in a payroll tax CUT for all employees who pay the payroll tax. That was a CUT, not an INCREASE. And while it's true that Obama and the Democrats increased taxes on those nasty, nasty, cancer causing cigarettes….many more American children are now covered by health insurance with those taxes. Conservatives don't hate children, do they? Of course not.

Yes, eventually, Obama will allow those Depression contributing Bush tax cuts to expire on the richest amongst us. Those who only make the paltry sum of $200,000 and up will see their share of federal income tax increase by the astronomical figure of 3%, and only on money made above $200K. I'm not sure…..but I'm guessing that Tea Party attendees won't include too many fatcats, you know, protesting this weekend by holding a sign that reads, "Where's the Birth Certificate." Could be wrong.

So…."impose more taxes"…..is a fictitious construct not based on reality.

"create more government waste"

At first, I asked myself…..is Obama's government creating more sewage? Then, I calculated that this phrase must be referring to Obama's stimulus plan. It's still a bit early to judge the effectiveness of the stimulus, but anecdotally, I've heard many state officials state that many more layoffs would have happened without the stimulus. Is saving jobs considered "creating more governmental waste?"

Even though our national economy is far from being out of the woods, in reality world, the immediate threat of a cataclysmic disaster has been avoided through direct governmental actions, actions actually begun under a Republican president and carried forward under Obama.

"throw the Constitution out the window"

Once again, it's not clear what part of the Constitution these Tea Party organizers are referring to….but just as a kind of remedial exercise, are torture, wars of aggression, defrauding Congress, outing CIA agents, doubling the national debt, denying habeas to American citizens, secret gulags, the vice-presidency as a 4th governmental branch, the unitary executive theory, and politicizing of the Justice Department…..all in the Constitution?

I can just feel the tears welling up when this emotional cheer goes up at this weekend's Tea Parties….

Limited Government Fiscal Responsibility Free Market System Holding our elected officials accountable Ladies and Gentlemen Let Freedom Ring!

Under every conservative president in my lifetime, the federal government has expanded. Under every conservative president in my lifetime, budget deficits have been the rule and the national debt has increased. The "Free Market System", left unchecked as it has been, created the financial depression we are now experiencing. The call….."Holding our elected officials accountable"…..is simply incredulous after those who instituted lawless torture policies and transparently defrauded Congress and the American people into a war of aggression in Iraq……were and never will be, "held accountable" for their many crimes.

But hey….Party On Dudes…but a word of warning….don't let any tea bags, you know, hit you in the face.

America has been involved in imperialistic-minded interference in other nation's governments and elections for as long as I can remember. It's what we do. And I suppose that helps in understanding why America's leading neo-conservatives, senators like Lindsey "Huckleberry" Graham (R-SC), John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (ASSH*LE-CT) have been calling for U.S. interference in the Iranian election dispute. Old habits are difficult to break.

Watch Graham and McCain explain how it's our duty to interfere with other countries. First 2 minutes….

McCain…"America's position in the world is one of moral leadership. And that's what America's all about."

America's "moral leadership" in Iran, over oil, in the 1950's led directly to the dysfunctional Islamic government in Iran today. America's "moral leadership" in Iraq during the 1980's led directly to the rise of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, which led to more American "moral leadership" in the crime and quagmire of today's occupation of Iraq. America's "moral leadership" in Afghanistan during the 1980's led directly to the establishment and strengthening of Bin Laden's extremist group, al-Qaida.

If that's "moral leadership"…..what the hell would immoral leadership look like?

Set aside the 50's and the 80's "moral leadership" for a moment. How has that leadership been on display the last 8 years? America now admits to having savagely tortured detainees held in secret gulags around the world….and reserves the right to continue doing so. THAT'S what America is all about.

America attacked the nation of Iraq, without just cause, and still occupies it today with U.S. military troops and bases. Hundreds of thousands were killed, millions displaced. THAT'S what John McCain calls "moral leadership."

And don't forget that the shameless neo-conservative, John McCain, wanted to spread that American "moral leadership" to the country of Georgia when it was in a dispute with Russia. "We're all Georgians, now", McCain ridiculously insisted.

America's "moral leadership" has been on display in Latin and South America and southeast Asia, and many other places, as the U.S. attempted to mold the world in it's image against the wishes of the people being molded. It's what we do. Meddle in other countries affairs. THAT'S what America is all about.

This messianic mentality, this triumphalistic attitude, is hated by the people of other countries. This "moral leadership" is seen by others for what it actually is…..the mindset and actions of a bully always seeking to get it's own way.

There's an undercurrent throughout American political thought which sees the U.S. as the nation that god, himself, has raised up to do his bidding. Because of such thinking, many Americans deceive themselves into believing that all this "moral leadership" that McCain talks about, no matter how abhorrent, no matter how bloody, is god's will…..that no matter how we interfere or who we interfere with….it is always the right thing to do, because we are America, god's new chosen people….and as McCain said, "moral leadership is what America is all about."

Many of today's Republicans are just itching to spread that "moral leadership" to the streets of Iran.

The modern Republican Party's plight can be compared, I think, to the experience of American Protestantism in the last half of the 19th century. I'll explain in a minute.

Today, many moderates, Democrats, Independents, as well as liberals, have difficulty comprehending what looks like an obvious and ongoing denial of reality by the modern Republican Party. The creation of faux-narratives about virtually any event by movement conservatives, and the insistence that those faux-narratives actually define truth, a kind of twisted political post-modernism, has been the leading source of frustration for those who insist on empirical and scientific data.

This dynamic has led to even more division in the country where namecalling, mockery, and demonizing the other side has, so far, prevailed. The Reverend confesses that he has participated in this dynamic, often with vigor.

That being said…..The Renaissance, from the 14th through the 17th centuries, with it's emphasis on a humanist method of study rather than a spiritual one, presented challenges for religion. The Enlightenment period of history in the 18th century carried this challenge to religion even further with it's focus on reason, rather than faith, as the basis for establishing truth. Our American Founding Fathers, it can be said, were motivated by Enlightenment principles. The Industrial Revolution was a welcome byproduct of these two preceding "ages."

Although organized Christianity had what were called "Great Awakening" periods throughout these previously mentioned "ages", periods in which religious thinking experienced reform and change…..it is also true that many fringe Christian groups also came into existence during this time.

The Jehovah's Witnesses group was founded in the late 19th century in America. So too, the Seventh-Day Adventists and Christian Scientists. The Latter Day Saints (Mormons) sprouted during the early 19th century.

My purpose here is not to disparage any particular denomination or sect of Christianity, or any adherents to the dogma those denominations set forth. My point is that when traditional religious systems are challenged by science, education in general, and secular reasoning…..adherents to the "old way" often respond to those challenges with their own "new" interpretations.

Rather than considering or embracing new, emerging scientific and rational explanations for reality, made possible by Renaissance and Enlightenment progress, the aforementioned sects resorted to their own newfangled, and often bizarre, interpretations of reality.

Which sets up a segway to the Republican Party in America today.

I don't think there is any question, especially in light of the last 10-15 years, that modern Republican doctrine is experiencing serious challenges. While the traditional conservative values of self-determination and financial responsibility will always maintain their rightful place in our political discourse……recent conservative "values" are being rejected by mainstream Americans as misguided, contradictory, hypocritical, or in some cases, like the new Christian cults of the 19th century, radical and even bizarre.

The Republican Party's deal with the devil in hitching it's wagon to modern evangelical Christianity has given birth to today's active denial, or censoring, of scientific evidence. This odd-bedfellows combination produced the bizarre frenzy of GOP politicians and religious "right to lifers" that America witnessed in the Terri Schiavo ordeal. Newt Gingrich, in his most recent speech, said that college professors and high school teachers needed "removed." Modern conservatives want college professors actively "challenged", "alternative" religion-based concepts offered up equally with science-based ones, "secularists removed."

The GOP's embrace of discrimination in the gay rights issue, using as it's basis, "traditional moral values", or "defense of traditional marriage" is belied by a steady parade of Republican politicians (Gingrich, Livingston, Foley, Craig, Giuliani, Ensign) acting immorally and destructively in their own marriages. Pragmatic immigration reform has often been replaced with hateful screeds directed towards Hispanics, a stiff-necked approach to realism, a demonization of those who are considered in favor of "amnesty", a senseless and warped attack on a highly qualified Supreme Court nominee.

The recent blowup in the financial world, a direct result of the conservative doctrine of deregulation which relies on almost divine powers of an alleged "free market, combined with an almost crazed focus on tax cutting and benefit-giving to the most wealthy, has left conservatives reeling…..yet there is no admission by Republicans that their traditional doctrines have proven to be a total failure.

A political party once proud of their allegiance to liberty, freedom, and the rule of law….has now morphed into a party defending just the opposite. Torture, gulags, the denial of rights, the retraction of American freedoms, the promotion of lawlessness, the justification of government secrecy, pre-emptive wars, unaccountability…..are all now defended by the Republican Party.

In other words…..in the face of modern challenges to what conservatives have traditionally believed in……the Republican Party has responded with self-radicalization, a response so extreme and radical that facts and empirical evidence are now replaced daily with the most bizarre narratives imaginable. Moderate conservatives who insist on pragmatism and scientific fact are purged and demonized much like any religious cult would do.

If you are like me, and think that the Republican Party has gotten even more extreme over the last 6 months, to the point of bizarro….I suggest that the reason is that the GOP is afraid of the modern challenges which they have no answer for. The GOP either has no rational alternatives to offer to the voters who have rejected them or those new ideas can't be offered for fear they will be an acknowledgment of past errors. The GOP has been in the process of establishing a new political cult, cocooning itself as it were, in self-defense mode against a changing world it's members cannot face up to.

It's sad to witness.

I've been frustrated with President Obama's resistance to investigate and prosecute the numerous war crimes and disgraceful violations of national and international law by the Bush/Cheney administration. Obama's "looking forward" justification for this resistance, however, is akin to looking straight ahead after running over a person in the street. Wouldn't want to "look back"…..simply too messy.

There's no question now that Obama is pro-actively working to protect the Bush/Cheney criminal syndicate from any and all accountability. If Obama's administration continues down this path, and there's no reason to think otherwise, then Obama, himself, will be complicit in the obstruction of justice coverup of the Bush/Cheney crimewave.

Even though it doesn't matter……I understand why Obama is willing to be a co-conspirator with the criminal Bushies. If Obama didn't actively block the release of all the devastating evidence of Bush/Cheney crimes….the public outrage over the sum total of the Bush administration's illegal behavior would undoubtedly lead to a national call for a thorough investigation, and eventual prosecution, of all the co-conspirators.

If you think I'm overstating the case…..spend some time over at Glenn Greenwald's blog site to grasp the full depravity of a lawless American regime.
The evidence against Bush and Cheney is simply overwhelming.

A Watergate-style investigation of the Bushies' blatantly illegal actions would, as they say, suck all the national oxygen out of the Obama agenda. If the rule of law were followed and a full investigation initiated, without doubt, the nation would be riveted by the mountain of criminal evidence revealed daily on our teevee screens and in our newpapers. Obama's first term would be eclipsed and defined by the shocking revelations of criminality by the past administration.

I'm sympathetic to Obama….to a point. Movement conservatism, with the assistance of corporate Democrats, over the past 30 years has led to national catastrophies everywhere we turn. Health care, banking, jobs, energy, climate change, our international stature…..all of the "can't wait to be addressed" issues would have to take a backseat, if the rule of law concerning Bush/Cheney was respected and honored.

In other words….justice is being sacrificed for the sake of a president's political agenda. That isn't change. That's exactly what our country experienced over the last 8 years.

The more that Obama's team covers-up for Bush/Cheney….the more that Obama obstructs and ignores the rule of law pertaining to the Bush/Cheney administration…..the more Obama's administration will become just like the lawless one that preceded him.

It's already beginning to happen.

Take for one example this testimony yesterday by Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder…..

Holder is so frightened by the implications of calling something that was so obviously illegal what it was…..the widespread, illegal, Bush-era wiretapping of American citizens without judicial warrants or FISA Court approval…..he can't even muster enough courage to use the word, illegal….even though he did so before he became the AG.

Obama's Justice Department, much like Bush's Justice Department, is dishonoring the rule of law and eroding it's own credibility, all for the sake of a political agenda that would be delayed, or diminished by doing what is right.

Take yet another example of the rot that is starting to form on the Obama administration. Rather than expose the crimes done in secret by the previous administration, and there are many…..Obama's administration is expanding executive branch secrecy.

Yes, Obama released the OLC torture memos, but not because he wanted to be transparent. He was compelled by a judge to release them. On every other transparency situation, from detainee abuse to warrantless wiretapping, Obama has sought to block the release of incriminating-to-Bush information.

The release of detainee abuse photographs was blocked by Obama with the excuse that military commanders told him it would endanger our troops. Sounds identical to Bush. Not to be confused with openness or transparency, something touted loudly and repeatedly while Obama campaigned.

If basic principles are compromised, in this case government transparency, it leads directly and quickly to stuff like this…

Pentagon wavers on release of report on Afghan attack

WASHINGTON — Defense Department officials are debating whether to ignore an earlier promise and squelch the release of an investigation into a U.S. airstrike last month, out of fear that its findings would further enrage the Afghan public, Pentagon officials told McClatchy Monday.
……

Pentagon leaders are divided about whether releasing the report would reflect a renewed push for openness and transparency about civilian casualties or whether it would only fan Afghan outrage and become a Taliban recruiting tool just as Army Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal takes command of U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

Never mind that the existence of a couple hundred thousand U.S. military personnel and dozens of U.S military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan are an ongoing recruitment tool for the Taliban and are daily fanning Afghan outrage…..never mind all that….now, even releasing a Pentagon report of military wrongdoing must be kept secret.

Maybe every American media source should be restricted from reporting on the fact that we even have troops inside Iraq and Afghanistan….you know, that revealed fact might fan the flames of Muslim and Arab outrage and be used as a recruitment tool by al-Qaida and the Taliban. I mean, is our military really inside those countries if no one knows about it?

America voted for change. Sadly, what we are getting is more of the same.