Coulda got him...
All the wowsers in the world love to repeat: Clinton could have had Bin Laden; he just chose not to. Let's see how they react to this one from NBC News:

"With Tuesday's attacks, Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant with ties to al-Qaida, is now blamed for more than 700 terrorist killings in Iraq.

But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself -- but never pulled the trigger.

In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.

The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S. government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security Council.

`People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president's policy of pre-emption against terrorists.'


-- Roger Cressey
Terrorism expert


"Here we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didn't do it," said Michael O'Hanlon, military analyst with the Brookings Institution.

Four months later, intelligence showed Zarqawi was planning to use ricin in terrorist attacks in Europe.

The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq.

"People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president's policy of preemption against terrorists," according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.

In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in Iraq.

The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.

Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi's operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.

The United States did attack the camp at Kirma at the beginning of the war, but it was too late -- Zarqawi and many of his followers were gone. "Here's a case where they waited, they waited too long and now we're suffering as a result inside Iraq," Cressey added.

Listen up!
I've told you this a few times, but here goes again: Listen to Randi Rhodes over the internet on weekdays from 3-7 EST. Go to www.therandirhodesshow.com and click on listen live. Then, spread the word.

Excited about Kerry?
I'm still going to cast my vote for Wes Clark today, even though he's no longer officially running. Screw it... I figure I put in all that time, I might as well get some satisfaction.

In November, I'll pull the lever for Kerry, even though it's hard to get too excited about it. The closest correlation I can come up with is the 1996 race. Clinton was still very popular with his base (as is GW Bush) while Dole did very little to excite anyone. People were motivated to vote for him simply because they didn't like Clinton.

A lot of people will pull the lever for Kerry for the same reason. I don't see people getting very excited about him, but they figure anyone is better than Bush. So far, Kerry has shown a strong inclination to fight back when attacked. Believe me, he's going to need it.

The Passion of Bill O'Reilly
I saw Sean Hannity screaming last night that the Democrats were evil for politicizing the war on terror. Of course, Alan Colmes whimpered something about extremists on both sides of the aisle before wetting himself and them leaving to wash Hannity's car.

I almost fell out of my chair when I heard old Luggage Head Hannity. Politicizing the war on terror? Who would do that? Why, that's downright sleazy and un-American. That would be like a political party holding its nominating convention in New York and moving the date as close to 9/11 as possible to capitalize on that national tragedy. Whoops. That's what the Republicans did. Hmmm.

I was thinking that last night, then this morning I read www.democraticunderground.com. Every Monday, they have their top ten conservative idiots of the week. In today's list, they make reference to the 9-11 hypocrisy. This week's list is especially good, although it might make you a little sick to your stomach.

Bill O'Reilly is on the list, but it's not for the reason I anticipated. O'Reilly, who uses the word "secular" in every sentence he spits out, is acting as point man for Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion." He was on a bunch of shows last week, including "The View", and he was slamming anyone who dared question "The Passion."

On some of those appearances, he did mention the minor fact that Gibson's production company has optioned a fictional book that O'Reilly once wrote. That disclaimer isn't enough; it should run as a crawl underneath O'Reilly's image everytime he goes nuts defending Gibson.

This isn't about Mel Gibson. He has the right to make whatever kind of movie he wants. It's about O'Reilly's righteousness, which appears to be driven only by his desire to see his book end up on the big screen.

Next thing you know they'll make a movie called "Who's Looking Out For You?" Who could they get to play O'Reilly? Maybe Joe Don Baker or Fred Thompson. I can only imagine the Dirty Harry fantasies O'Reilly has when he puts on his jammies at night.

Fold
So Dennis Hastert relented and allowed the 9-11 commission two more months to complete their report. I'd love to know the inside scoop on this one. My guess is the Administration plans to stonewall so hard that it doesn't matter if they have two more years to put a report together. Josh Marshall has an insightful piece on this topic at www.talkingpointsmemo.com.

Party of Responsibility
I love how Republicans never, ever take responsibility for anything. What's funny is that they paint themselves as the party of responsibility, while shucking the blame for everything. The recession is Clinton's fault; 9/11 is Clinton's fault; Janet Jackson's boob is Clinton's fault.

The first World Trade Center bombing took place in February 1993, less than two months after Clinton took office. When the bombs went off, he didn't rush to the microphones blaming the first President Bush.

The right loved to vilify for the Black Hawk Down incident that took place 10 months into his term. You know who sent those troops to Somalia? The first George Bush. So Clinton may have been to blame for Black Hawk Down, but following that logic, GW Bush is responsible for 9-11. And again, Clinton didn't blame the first Bush for something that happened partway through the first year of his first term.

But to right wing crazies, GW's not responsible for anything. Listen up folks: he's been in for over three years, he has both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court in his pocket. The deck is stacked in his favor. And still, we've had a record loss of jobs and a record deficit that is only getting worse.

So who's fault is it? And has GW ever done anything that was his fault?

Shameful
It's too bad the general population is in such a coma because what is happening with the 9/11 commission is one of the most shameful episodes in modern history. Here's how it breaks down: the Administration has been stonewalling the commission, giving them tons of useless interviews while resisting any efforts to turn over relevant material or allowing officials like Condi Rice to testify under oath.

The President himself is going to "visit" (his word) with the Chair and Vice Chair of the commission, but here's the catch -- it's only for one hour. So basically, Bush will do the same thing he did on Tim Russert, which is talk ad nauseum, glance at his watch, and then bolt from the room when the hand hits the magic hour.

Here's the most dishonest part: the President says he'd grant the commission a two month extension to finish their work, which has in essence been stifled by the administration's refusal to cooperate. And now Rep. Dennis Hastert says Congress will not allow the extension. The story is Bush asked him personally, but Hastert said no. What a load of horseshit. Just imagine Hastert telling Bush no under these sircumstances. So what it basically boils down to is the fact that Bush agreed to the extension, knowing Hastert would deny the extension.

Their behavior is so shameful, it's hard to fathom.

Thou shalt not...
I know some religious types are very upset about gay marriage because the number of "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" signs I see on TV are going through the roof. (By the way, can't you folks come up with a new slogan? That one is so Anita Bryant.)

OK, let's make the Bible the basis for this constitutional amendment. Here are a few guidelines from the Good Book:

I. Marriage shall consist of a union between one man and one or more women. (Gen. 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)

II. Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take
concubines, in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam
5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)

III. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the
wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she
shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)

IV. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh
10:30)

V. Since marriage is for life, no law shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

VI. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law. (Gen. 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)

There's also some great stuff in there about adultery but I'm guessing the politicians won't be rushing to include that in this amendment.

A constitutional amendment banning "Survivor"?
From ABC News:

"President Bush backed a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage Tuesday, saying he wants to stop activist judges from changing the definition of the "most enduring human institution." Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural and moral roots, Bush said, urging Congress to approve such an amendment."

Enough with the Constitutional amendments, already. First, Orrin Hatch wants an amendment allowing foreign-born citizens to run for President and now this. Like Bill Maher said last night on television, "Why no constitutional amendments about birthdays?"

Remember when Republicans used to be for state's rights? Now, it's "No Child Left Behind" and constitutional amendments against gay marriage.

And someone please tell GW to stop railing about the Democrats lack of fiscal discipline. Like I said before, give a former cokehead the country's credit card and you get what you deserve.

Thanks for making me look good
Of course, we are all less than perfect and most of us, if we go back to examine our relationships, did things we are ashamed of. This guy, however, makes everyone else combined look like a sweetheart.

"Betsy Valentin says her husband committed the ultimate betrayal when he told their children and the world that she was killed in Iraq.

"I was in shock and disbelief. I couldn't believe it was going on," U.S. Army Reserve Sgt. Betsy Valentin said on ABCNEWS' Good Morning America.

Meanwhile, her husband, Eddie Valentin, says he fabricated his wife's death because he desperately wanted her to come home from the Iraq war zone, and he hoped that it would prompt military officials to release her early.

"It's something I did wrong but I can't help it," the 43-year-old Waterbury, Conn., man told reporters. "I love my wife. I went crazy."

But Army Reserve Sgt. Betsy Valentin says that her husband is lying, and she believes the police, who say he allegedly made up the cruel lie in order to woo another woman.

"He [Eddie Valentin] said he had received a phone call. He just screamed and said he couldn't believe someone would do this," she said. "They [police] said he did this to lure another woman."

There's really nothing else to add to that. "Uuuh, it's OK for us to go out now and stuff, because my wife is, like, dead from being in Iraq and stuff. Mmmm, want to get a pizza?"