…… the Main Rebel here is keeping a low profile (in an undisclosed location) for five days. If you have any political tips, send them to the address on the left.

Democracy Now had a great interview this morning with Cynthia McKinney. If you don’t listen to Democracy Now’s radio show or podcast, you should! This interview was in the first half of the show, so you can listen here:
Democracy Now 07-21-08

You can read the interview in written form below. McKinney is right when she says the two major parties leave us without a real choice. There are some difference, but you could say that about any two things that are very similar. Both Democrats and Republicans are owned by the corporations and by not accepting public campaign financing, Obama just made that point even more clear. His donors are not “mostly” small donors — he gets most of his money from the wealthy and from corporations, just like John McCain. The argument against taking PAC and registered lobbyist money by Obama is mainly a technicality, since every corporation and industry that donates to the two major candidates or their parties get some eventual influence over decision making, just like a lobbyist does. A registered lobbyist is just one profession of many in Washington that buys bias from the president.

Here is McKinney’s interview from Monday on Democracy Now. Also in the interview was her running mate, Rosa Clemente.

“First All-Women-of-Color Presidential Ticket in US History: Green Party Nominee Cynthia McKinney and Running Mate Rosa Clemente on War, Democracy and Hip Hop

The Green Party made history last week when it nominated the first all-women-of-color presidential ticket in US history. Former Democratic Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who was the first African American woman elected to Congress in Georgia, won the Green Party’s nomination last Monday. She named longtime community organizer, journalist and former director of the Hip Hop Caucus, Rosa Clemente, as her running mate earlier this month. They both join us for a wide-ranging discussion on the 2008 race, the media, the impact of the hip hop generation and more.”

GUESTS: Cynthia McKinney, Green Party presidential nominee. Former Democratic Congresswoman from Georgia.

Rosa Clemente, Green Party vice-presidential nominee. Former director of Hip Hop Caucus and longtime activist and journalist.
Rush Transcript

CYNTHIA McKINNEY: Because the corporate lobbyists can come and go at will, our values get overridden and our representatives give us something else. That’s how we end up with everyone saying they’re against the war and occupation, but war and occupation still gets funding. That’s how we end up with everyone saying they’re against illegal spying on innocent people, yet end up with a telecom immunity bill being signed into law.

AMY GOODMAN: The Green Party made history last week when it nominated the first all-women-of-color presidential ticket in US history. Former Democratic Congress member Cynthia McKinney, the first African American woman elected to Congress in Georgia, won the Green Party’s nomination last Monday. She named longtime community organizer, journalist and former director of the Hip Hop Caucus, Rosa Clemente, as her running mate.

McKinney is among the most outspoken critics of the Bush administration, and one of her last measures as a Democratic Congress member was to introduce a bill calling for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. But McKinney left the Democratic Party late last year, after serving six terms in Congress under both the Clinton and present Bush administrations. She said the Democrats had become “no different than their Republican counterparts.” She announced her bid for the presidency as a Green candidate earlier this year.

We’re joined now by Green Party presidential and vice-presidential candidates. Cynthia McKinney joins us from Washington, D.C. Rosa Clemente joins us from Charlotte, North Carolina. We welcome you both to Democracy Now!

Cynthia McKinney, let’s begin with you in Washington, D.C. If you were elected president, what would be your first act?

CYNTHIA McKINNEY: Of course, the first act would be to assemble a team in the Pentagon that believed in peace and the efficacy of diplomacy. And therefore, we would make sure that we put together an orderly withdrawal, but immediate withdrawal, of all of our young men and women, not just from Iraq and Afghanistan, but from the more than 100 countries around the world in which our soldiers are stationed.

AMY GOODMAN: And what do you make of Senator Obama’s trip right now to Iraq and to Afghanistan, where he said the real war on terror was diverted?

CYNTHIA McKINNEY: I think it’s important that any presidential candidate have the opportunity to do these kinds of fact-finding missions. But, of course, one’s lifelong activities ought to be preparation for running the most powerful country on the planet.

I would just like to say something about your headlines, your opening headlines. Amy, I came into this room this morning full of hope and enthusiasm for the fact that the Green Party have provided an opportunity for Rosa and me to kickstart the kind of movement that this country needs. And yet, these headlines from this morning—torture, war, violence, murder, hate crimes—I think it’s clear that not only does our country need a new set of values at the helm, our country needs an opposition party like the Green Party, that has the values of the Green Party, so that we can finally see the values that I believe are the majority values of the American people implemented in our public policy.

AMY GOODMAN: Cynthia McKinney, right now there’s a lot of talk about who the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates will choose as their vice-presidential candidates. Can you talk about your criteria on why you chose Rosa Clemente?

CYNTHIA McKINNEY: I’ve known Rosa for a very long time. Rosa has participated in many of the congressional briefings and brain trusts that we held with respect to the counterintelligence program COINTELPRO. And the impact of the kind of disclosures that we saw from the ACLU with respect to Maryland’s surveillance of people who dared to dissent, she has done that really as a lifelong activist with the hip hop generation and understands the potentialities associated with being active and dissenting from the status quo powers and the policies of them.

(more…)

To any Democrats who may be reading this and are planning on going to a Dem. platform meeting, here is something to help with that. This was posted on Daily Kos by someone involved in the Get FISA Right movement, though this is not an official part of that campaign.

The Constitutional rights platform statement flier [pdf].

The FISA-only platform statement flier [pdf]

Note: The flyer was made as a two-sided half sheet to save some trees. Print copies of the first page, then put those pages back into the printer drawer, and print the second page onto the back side..

Use whichever flier you feel more comfortable using.

Here is the text of the documents so you can see them before you download and print them off.
(more…)

(cross-posted at Citizen Against Lies)
AT&T was the telecom company that most helped the Bush administration spy on Americans, data mine and otherwise do illegal activities from 2001 until the latest FISA capitulation was passed. One of those voters for the FISA capitulation, which gave Bush everything he wanted to spy on Americans, and then some, was Barack Obama.

AT&T donated to Obama’s campaigns in 2001-2004, as have lobbyists for many big businesses. It’s all right here in Sourcewatch, with links and quotes. “Listed among the top 50 contributors to Barack Obama 2003-2004 are found the following political action committees:

* AT&T PAC IL” (top of the list)

While you are there, look at some of the other donors to his campaign and Democrats.
And now the official Democratic Convention bag has been revealed.

Today, Glen Greenwald writes of the “AT&T Convention in Denver”. This bag is prominently displayed on his website today, and he got it from here. He writes:

“What’s most striking about the Convention bag — aside, of course, from its stunning design — is how the parties no longer bother even trying to hide who it is who funds and sponsors them. But — an earnest citizen might object — just because AT&T is helping to pay for the Democrats’ convention and having its logo plastered all over it the way a ranch owner brands his cattle doesn’t mean that they will receive any special consideration when it comes time for Congress to debate and pass our nation’s laws.”

Why should anyone believe that AT&T is considered differently by the Democrats than other companies, like, say Qwest, which refused to do the government’s spying for them because it was unconstitutional? Because AT&T throws a lot of money at Democrats.

“Even more, corporations can give unlimited amounts of money to host committees, in contrast to individuals who are restricted in the size of their political donations. Corporations can also take a tax deduction on their donations to the host committee, but individuals are barred from deducting political contributions.”

Even I didn’t know it was quite this bad . .
AT&T (and other telecoms) have shamelessly trying to influence American politics, and they have completely succeeded. What makes this frightening (almost as frightening as data mining and having all of our communications gathered and monitored by our government) is that they will eventually get their way on net neutrality too. Congress gave them immunity from prosecution and the ability to spy on us easily enough, so it’s not much of a leap after that to give them everything else they want.

For now, AT&T not only got complete immunity for themselves for committing spying crimes on Americans for George Bush and Dick Cheney (two war criminals, even according to the FBI) but they also somehow got Congress and the Senate, including Obama, to determine that warrantless surveillance of Americans isn’t even illegal to begin with, despite what our laws say. In other words, AT&T has changed the meaning of the Bill of Rights, something other giant corporations have not been able to do, and Democrats let them do it.

Meanwhile, America yawns. Our rights are slipping away and it will barely be noticed by the sleep-deprived public.

Corporations such as Halliburton and KBR, and Exxon and other major oil companies, have helped write legislation, but only AT&T has managed to completely eviscerate and reverse the 4th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. It’s quite an accomplishment. I believe it’s the first time in history that one industry has managed to change our constitution so quickly via our own legislators. And since that was such a bold move, the Democrats have decided that putting AT&T’s logo on the side of the official convention bag is another one of those in-your-face eff-you’s to the American people that George Bush himself perfected and to which we have all become so accustomed. What is the merging of government and corporations called again . . . oh yeah, fascism. See the list of what defines fascism here. It includes the idea of displaying your nationalism that’s behind wearing those stupid flag pins.

If accepting corporate money is wrong, it’s wrong. It should not matter that Democrats do it a little bit less than Republicans. (The same corporatism applies to John McCain, of course.) All corporate donations add up to influence, and we see that with Democrats as much as with Republicans. Democrats have sent out a strong message in the last 2 years: We can be bought.

You might as well send your future political donations intended for Obama and the Democrats directly to AT&T or Verizon or the other telecoms. Or, you could send your money to the ACLU, an organization that actually protects our civil rights.

Technorati Tags: Democrats, corporate influence, corporations in government, Obama, fascism, definition of fascism, AT&T, FISA, Senate FISA vote

Finally, some mainstream media coverage for Cynthia McKinney that is respectful and informative. (But why “web-only”?) In fact, any coverage of the Green Party and McKinney is good at this point. Far too much media coverage of McKinney, even from the “left” media online, is too disrespectful and dismissive of what should be and is a very important campaign.

“Controversy has always been Cynthia McKinney’s trademark. This election season, she may have finally found her perfect political home. Last weekend, the 53-year-old former Georgia congresswoman clinched the Green Party’s presidential nomination; 35-year-old hip-hop activist and activist Rosa Clemente will be her running mate.

A firebrand politician best known for her impolitic statements during her more than 20 years in public life, McKinney has had a mixed electoral record as a Democrat in her district in recent years. After 10 years in office, she was upset in 2002 by fellow Democrat Denise Majette, re-elected in 2004, and ousted again in 2006 by the 4th District’s current Democratic congressman, Rep. Hank Johnson. Most commentators point to her altercation with a U.S. Capitol police officer and her accusations that the Bush administration covered up its role in the 9/11 attacks to explain the losses, but McKinney cites voting irregularities like those highlighted in “American Blackout,” a 2006 documentary that focuses on her career.

McKinney’s nomination brings some name recognition to the Green Party, but it’s unclear how far that will take them this election cycle. The Green Party barely made a dent in the 2004 election, picking up only 119,859 votes, or 0.1 percent of the total. The specter of Ralph Nader’s more successful 2.8 million vote bid in 2000 looms large for Democrats determined to prevent another third party spoiler. McKinney is joined as a non-major-party contender this year by both Nader, running as an independent, and another former U.S. House member from Georgia, Bob Barr, the Libertarian nominee. The troika may increase the number of votes that go to “spoiler” candidates–or merely splinter it.

McKinney’s goal: a full 5 percent of the vote. Checking in with her just before she won the nomination, NEWSWEEK’s Katie Paul spoke with McKinney about her reasons for running and how her campaign might affect the election season. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: Is there a story behind your campaign website’s name, RunCynthiaRun?
Cynthia McKinney: It came from California supporters who really, really wanted me to run. I was inclined not to. I had delayed my personal aspirations for so long, but the RunCynthiaRun group just wouldn’t take no for an answer. There’s been a long-standing relationship between me and individual members of the Green Party. They were interested in me in 2000 and again in 2004. I have been requested several times to run as a member of the Green Party. The Greens have never been on the ballot in Georgia because of restrictive ballot access laws. So while I understood that their ideals were in the places that public policy ought to be, people in Georgia just didn’t really know who they were.

NEWSWEEK: You stayed with the Democratic Party until last year. Why the decision to go with the Green Party route now?
Cynthia McKinney: The Greens have always been supportive of my political aspirations. My very first political friend was a member of the Green Party. If you view the Youtube clip [of my announcement that I was leaving the Democratic Party], it’s really clear. . . . . “

Read more here.
Digg the original Newsweek Article here.

Technorati Tags: Cynthia McKinney, Green Party, Newsweek, Mainstream media political coverage

Things in Pelosiworld must be nearly as confusing as things in Bushworld. From Netroots Nation this morning, where Al Gore had a talk with the attendees (DNC-cheerleading bloggers, apparently. Definitely Dem. party types). Where to begin with Pelosi’s behavior? She posed and postured, tried to act like she was relevant, and generally did not succeed. The audience was there to see and hear Al Gore, not her, but she tried to hog the spotlight, even standing up to speak as though she were the star of the show, tugging on her badly-fitting jacket, (has she recently been “enhanced”?) and smiling that big fake smile all the while. When she was done boring everyone and gushing over Obama, ending with the declaration that Obama will win the presidency, the audience cheered and clapped. Pelosi then sat down and said to Gore in a voice she didn’t mean to be public but just loud enough to hear, “I think that’s a good note to end on”. Totally forgetting people were there to hear him and probably wanted more from Gore. I did, till Nancy-Pants ruined it.

So now Pelosi thinks that because al-Malaki has spoken about getting our troops out of his country for like the hundredth time, she acts like this is a triumphant revelation. He wants us out, so it must really be time to go!! What a wart Ms. Pelosi must have for a brain. Did she forget that this is old news, that she had the power to both impeach Bush and end the war in Iraq and refused to do anything of the kind? Yet she talks about these things like they are new concepts. Pelosi is truly a puzzle. She seems to love her power but is loathe to use any of it when it would really count.

Now, somehow, it’s the Iraq government’s fault that we have not left the country, according to Ms. Pelosi. This is from Politico:

“Pelosi calls for high-level meeting with Iraqis

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama now has a major ally in his push for a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki tells a German outlet that he’d like to see troops leave “as soon as possible, as far as we are concerned.” He then added: “U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama is right when he talks about 16 months.”

Amanda Terkel with Think Progress is down in Austin live-blogging former Vice President Al Gore’s address to the lefty blogosphere. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) introduced Gore and also took questions, one of which was about Maliki’s declaration.

“So with the prime minister saying it’s time for you to go,” she told the crowd, “I think it’s time for our country to sit down with the Iraqis and work that plan out. [We need to be] respectful of what the prime minister says, and respectful of the will of the American people, who have been against this war for a long time…[We should] have a high-level meeting with the Iraqis to work out the terms of our deployment out of Iraq…So, the end could be in sight.”

WHEN HAS NANCY PELOSI EVER BEEN RESPECTFUL OF THE WILL OF THE  AMERICAN PEOPLE ? ? ? ?

Damn, she can make things up.   How much you want to bet that Pelosi wants to be at those “high-level meetings” so she can get in a few more important photo ops with important people and take as much credit for herself as she can? (none of which she deserves) A girl can’t get too much of power publicity, ’specially with those Iraq leaders she has mostly ignored until now. As for the will of the American people — she apparently holds us in such high esteem she has ignored us for the last two years.

As for al-Malaki’s “timetable” request — he has been saying the American soldiers and contractors need to leave ASAP/immediately for a long time now. He even totally kicked out Blackwater, but they refused to leave. Now that he has said something that seems to agree with Obama, though, Nancy-Pants is all for it. What great ideas Obama has!

Technorati Tags: Nancy Pelosi, Nancy-Pants, taking credit for peace, ending the Iraq war, c, ending the occupation, Obama, Al Gore, climate speech

Gore Calls for Carbon-Free Electric Power

Source: Copyright 2008, New York Times
Date: July 18, 2008
Byline: David Stout
Original URL

Published: July 18, 2008

WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Al Gore said on Thursday that Americans must abandon electricity generated by fossil fuels within a decade and rely on the sun, the winds and other environmentally friendly sources of power, or risk losing their national security as well as their creature comforts.

Brendan Smialowski for The New York Times


“The survival of the United States of America as we know it is at risk,” Mr. Gore said in a speech to an energy conference here. “The future of human civilization is at stake.” . . . .

Although Mr. Gore has made global warming and energy conservation his signature issues, winning a Nobel Prize for his efforts, his speech on Thursday argued that the reasons for renouncing fossil fuels go far beyond concern for the climate.

In it, he cited military-intelligence studies warning of “dangerous national security implications” tied to climate change, including the possibility of “hundreds of millions of climate refugees” causing instability around the world, and said the United States is dangerously vulnerable because of its reliance on foreign oil.

Doubtless aware that his remarks would be met with skepticism, or even ridicule, in some quarters, Mr. Gore insisted in his speech that the goal of carbon-free power is not only achievable but practical, and that businesses would embrace it once they saw that it made fundamental economic sense.

Mr. Gore said the most important policy change in the transformation would be taxes on carbon dioxide production, with an accompanying reduction in payroll taxes. “We should tax what we burn, not what we earn,” he said.

The former vice president said in his speech that he could not recall a worse confluence of problems facing the country: higher gasoline prices, jobs being “outsourced,” the home mortgage industry in turmoil. “Meanwhile, the war in Iraq continues, and now the war in Afghanistan appears to be getting worse,” he said.

By calling for new political leadership and speaking disdainfully of “defenders of the status quo,” Mr. Gore was hurling a dart at the man who defeated him for the presidency in 2000, George W. Bush. Critics of Mr. Bush say that his policies are too often colored by his background in the oil business.

A crucial shortcoming in the country’s political leadership is a failure to view interlocking problems as basically one problem that is “deeply ironic in its simplicity,” Mr. Gore said, namely “our dangerous over-reliance on carbon-based fuels.”

“We’re borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet,” Mr. Gore said. “Every bit of that’s got to change.”

And it can change, he said, citing some scientists’ estimates that enough solar energy falls on the surface of the earth in 40 minutes to meet the world’s energy needs for a year, and that the winds that blow across the Midwest every day could meet the country’s daily electricity needs.

Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, the presumptive Democratic candidate for president, immediately praised Mr. Gore’s speech. “For decades, Al Gore has challenged the skeptics in Washington on climate change and awakened the conscience of a nation to the urgency of this threat,” Mr. Obama said.

A shift away from fossil fuels would make the United States a leader instead of a sometime rebel on energy and conservation issues worldwide, Mr. Gore said. Nor, he said, would the hard work of people who toil on oil rigs and deep in the earth be for naught. “We should guarantee good jobs in the fresh air and sunshine for any coal miner displaced by impacts on the coal industry,” he said by way of example. “Every single one of them.”

“Of course, there are those who will tell us that this can’t be done,” he conceded. “But even those who reap the profits of the carbon age have to recognize the inevitability of its demise. As one OPEC oil minister observed, ‘The Stone Age didn’t end because of a shortage of stones.’ ”

The Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens said in a statement that Mr. Gore’s plan would still not address “the stranglehold that foreign oil has on our country.” Mr. Pickens has called for a blend of government leadership and private enterprise to harness the full potential of wind power to help break what he calls “our deadly addiction to foreign oil.”

First of all, why would anyone ridicule a speech that tells the truth?

Second, T. Boone Pickens is an interesting person who is interested in climate change, but I’m not sure why he’s interested in it. I know he probably sees it as a money-making opportunity for people, and that’s fine to appeal to people that way, as long as something changes drastically. But I have watched his video on his website, and he is still a big advocate of fossil fuels and natural gas, — just not using them quite so much. I have news for Mr. Pickens — we have to stop using fossil fuels. If he criticizes Gore for not solving a political problem of lowering our dependency on foreign oil he’s not listening to what Gore is saying — we have to get off oil completely for our transportation and business needs. Fossil fuels are done with as an idea, and that includes natural gas. We need to stop burning things that emit C02 beyond a certain level and all fossil fuels emit too much C02, including natural gas. If sequestering ever becomes something that works, we could use that, but for now the atmosphere and the oceans can’t handle any more C02 and we are past the point of safe Carbon in the atmosphere already. It should be at a maximum of about 350ppm and go down from there, and our atmophere is already at 385ppm. (See James Hansen’s website)

Gore’s message is that we need to stop using fossil fuels completely in a certain period of time, well before Mr. Pickens is still burning natural gas. That is why Gore is not completely opposed to nuclear power, and why should he be? Nuclear power uses a lot of water, but after that problem is solved (if it ever is) it’s a form of energy that emits no C02. That’s why we have to keep it open as an option. It doesn’t mean we need to use a lot of it, but we could. France does.

Pickens acts like he thinks he invented wind power. We have been using wind power in my state for years, and Gore has been advocating wind power for years. Gore has also been advocating solar power for years, which is where most of our power should be coming from. SOLAR. Pickens didn’t invent that either. I have a big feeling that Pickens just wants to take credit for and cash in on some basic forms of energy that people have been using for decades. He should stick to funding these projects, since he’s so rich, and leave the science and planning to people who know more about the subject.

Dot Earth: The (Annotated) Gore Climate Speech

YOU CAN LISTEN TO GORE’S ENTIRE CLIMATE SPEECH HERE

(mp3)

Technorati Tags: Gore, climate change, T. Boone Pickens, natural gas, wind power, solar power, Al Gore speech

This is amazing news! Finally, Americans want even the “good” wars to end. (Even though, uh, there is no such thing).

The bloodlust has finally been satisfied — or, the usually militaristic Americans are bored and broke. Probably all of the above. This poll comes just after Obama’s long “thoughtful” speech on foreign policy that talked about escalating the war with Afghanistan and said we must move the battle there because of 9/11, and because it’s the ‘real war on terror’. (That phrase always makes me laugh while I cry).

ABC News just did a poll and it seems that Americans are SICK OF WAR. Who would have thought we’d ever reach this point? This is the first time in my memory that a poll indicated that Americans are actually just frackin’ tired of these stupid, useless wars.

Hallelujah! Here’s the story:

Americans’ Faith in Afghan War Fades

Fifty-one percent of Americans now say that the U.S. military effort in Afghanistan has been unsuccessful, up from 24 percent in fall 2002.

War Fatigue, Frustration Play Into Americans’ Decreasing Interest in War
July 18, 2008

The Pentagon and presidential rivals Barack Obama and John McCain all seem to agree on the need to send more troops to Afghanistan, but they are at odds with much of the country these days on the need to send more Americans into the lawless Afghan mountains.

The latest ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 45 percent of Americans said they do not think the war in Afghanistan is worth fighting.

The latest ABC News/Washington Post poll found that a startling 45 percent of Americans said they do not think the war in Afghanistan is worth fighting, despite the 9/11 terrorist attacks, which provoked the war in the first place.

The growing disenchantment with the Afghan deployment hasn’t reached the level of national frustration with the Iraq war, but after more than six years with U.S. troops stationed in Afghanistan and violence on the rise, Americans are becoming increasingly wary about the country’s involvement.”

It’s time to celebrate. This is the best damn news I’ve heard all week. Now, maybe our foreign policy will actually begin to change.

Uh-oh, Obama will have to refine his war message. Shouldn’t be too hard, since his foreign policy speech covered every possible base, from war to diplomacy and everything in between. He can just pick a war policy at random and he’s covered it. Blow ‘em up? Got it! Deep introspection as to why we fight wars in the first place while pursuing every avenue of peace? Got it!

Technorati Tags: War on Terror, Afghanistan war, Obama foreign policy, Americans are sick of war, Americans don’t like Afghanistan war, ABC News

McCain is so funny! Here are some of his jokes as reported by Huffington Post. (paraphrased)

• Back in 1998, he odiously declared before a GOP crowd: “Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno.”
• . . . . his ‘Seizure World’ joke, in which he referred to the [retirement community] Leisure World as Seizure World… .
• …”the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die?” The punch line: “When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, “Where is that marvelous ape?”

Hilarious! Jokes about old people (his main voter base), rape, and a Democrat’s daughter’s appearance.

McCain would be quite a diplomat, just like George. He seems to share George Bush’s sense of humor, so I can’t wait to see his dancing skills next.

Technorati Tags: McCain, jokes about rape, jokes about apes, jokes about old people

Here’s some change we can believe in: changing history. Obama has wiped his website clean of any criticisms of the failed “surge”, according to the NY Daily News.

“Barack Obama purges Web site critique of surge in Iraq
July 14th 2008, 8:10 PM

WASHINGTON - Barack Obama’s campaign scrubbed his presidential Web site over the weekend to remove criticism of the U.S. troop “surge” in Iraq, the Daily News has learned.

The presumed Democratic nominee replaced his Iraq issue Web page, which had described the surge as a “problem” that had barely reduced violence.

“The surge is not working,” Obama’s old plan stated, citing a lack of Iraqi political cooperation but crediting Sunni sheiks - not U.S. military muscle - for quelling violence in Anbar Province.

The News reported Sunday that insurgent attacks have fallen to the fewest since March 2004.

Obama’s campaign posted a new Iraq plan Sunday night, which cites an “improved security situation” paid for with the blood of U.S. troops since the surge began in February 2007.

It praises G.I.s’ “hard work, improved counterinsurgency tactics and enormous sacrifice.”

Campaign aide Wendy Morigi said Obama is “not softening his criticism of the surge. . . . . “

Really? Then why delete it? The surge might have coincided with superficial results, but that’s all they are. The main reasons the “surge” appears to have succeeded at all was because we were paying off one militia to not wipe out another, ethnic cleansing cleaned up the neighborhoods, and there are just fewer people wiling to go out and get killed.

Changing history is something Republicans do regularly. This has always been a reason to criticize them, not copy it.

Technorati Tags: changing history, purging the surge, The Surge, McCain, Obama