dead president see

* "Others described the (lynching) resolution as an act of expediency for Mr. Allen, who is a likely presidential candidate and who has been criticized for displaying a Confederate flag at his home and a noose in his law office. Mr. Allen said that they were part of collections of flags and Western paraphernalia and that he was motivated not by politics, but by a plea by Dick Gregory, the civil rights advocate, who wrote him a letter urging him not to "choose to do nothing."" LINK
this man will soon be running for president.

* coingate: " The suburban Denver home of a former employee of Tom Noe was burglarized over the weekend, with thieves making off with artwork, guns, jewelry, cars, and $300,000 in wine — possibly purchased with money from the state of Ohio." LINK
its fun to see people panicking. let the unravelling begin.

* "A series of recent polls found that a majority of Americans believe the Iraq war isn't worth its rising cost. So far, 1,704 U.S. troops have been killed, according to the Defense Department, and Congress has approved $208 billion for the war, according to the Congressional Research Service." LINK
if we take a literal interpretation of that, and assume that there is a direct connection between support for the war and the ambodybags (lets leave out the $ cost for the minute), then it'd be interesting to map the polls over time versus the body bag count, and then project that into the future.
obviously, different constituencies will have differing marginal propensities and all that, and there will be a bunch of war folk who dont care what the number of dead amgrunts is, but itd be interesting to try to look forward and see when the war will only have 35% popularity, or 25%, or 15%. (its currently at 40%). if the slope of the curve suggests that, for example, 100 dead amgrunts equates to 1% point, then by xmas dinner, those who dont think the war was worth it will outnumber those who do by a factor of 2 to 1. if 100 dead amgrunts equates to 2% points, then its 3-1. and then youve also got the 2000 milestone in that period as well, which will probably speed the decline.

anyway, the war is still gonna be going on at xmas time next year as well, still with no end in sight, and the war is gonna get really really unpopular. and itll provide some serious color to the 06 elections...

actually, here are the numbers:
"According to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll, 52 percent disapprove of how Bush is handling the presidency; 55 percent consider him divisive; 58 percent say the Iraq War was not worth fighting; 65 percent see the U.S. as bogged down in the war; and 73 percent believe the numbers of U.S. casualties are “unacceptable.” [Washington Post, June 8, 2005]" LINK

* digby on schiavo: "Every time a Christian right lunatic starts sanctimoniously pontificating about a "culture of life" we should talk about Terri. She is the symbol, in every way you can think of, of where this nation is headed if these radicals get what they are after." LINK
indeed. you might remember therudepundit wanted to call them all 'schiavo republicans' at every possible opportunity.

* digby on arnie: "He has managed to radicalize the middle class." LINK

* digby on why are we in iraq: "The official rationale is clearly false and there is no consensus on the real rationale. This is absurd." LINK
the great mystery.

* atrios on why are we in iraq (everyone is playing this game): "Maybe it's oil. Maybe it's Israel. Maybe it's just the "Ledeen Doctrine." Maybe it was about being a war president. Maybe it's about a permanent strategic military presence. Maybe it's freeance and peeance. Maybe it's 'cause he tried to kill George's dad. Maybe (and quite likely) it was different combinations of these things to different people in the administration. This last one, which is probably correct, is the scariest. If everyone in the administration thinks their pet war happened for a different reason, then the people in charge truly have no idea what the fuck they're trying to accomplish." LINK

* wotisitgood4 on why are we in iraq: i really dont have a clue. one possibility that i havent seen discussed much is the fact that the bushies and the saudis seem pretty close, and the saudis sure benefit a lot by having high oil prices. the other thing i'll note again, is the simple fact that none of us really has a clue why we are at war suggests to me that iraq is simply the first step, and trying to understand the strategy is like trying to understand a chess game after the first pawn gets moved. which brings us back to pnac, i guess.

* montopoli methodically, deliciously, destroys nancygrace LINK

* " ABC corporate executives at the network's highest levels ordered three interviews with Robert Kennedy Jr. pulled from ABC News programming.
The interviews all centered around Mr. Kennedy's investigation of thimerosal, a mercury based preservative, used in vaccines given to children and believed to be responsible for increasing cases of neurological diseases including autism." LINK

* wow - abc/jennings is leading with a long exit strategery story and talking about tipping points in public support. cbs is also leading with "bad news bling for blinky"

* wapo hosts a chat with michael smith, memo journo LINK

* reporter to ari2: " Is there any idea how long a last throe lasts for?" LINK

* rangel talks about impeachment...

* everyone is talking about impeachment. the egadmin is fucked. all the Mission Accomplices will soon be in orange. unless they start another war. this is getting serious.