Blog For Arizona

The problematic disintegration of Syria

By Karl Reiner

In 1970, Gen. Hafiz al-Assad, a member of the minority Alawite sect, took power in Syria following a long period of political instability. Assad's secular Bath Party portrayed itself as an upholder of Arab nationalism willing to defend the nation and its minorities against foreign threats and Islamic fundamentalism. Remarkably, he was able to hold on to the presidency for 30 years and then transfer power to his son, Bashar.

Under Hafiz al-Assad, the Alawites got an opportunity to overcome their second-class status but not necessarily to become wealthy. Repression was always one of Assad's tools. In February 1982, he was faced with an armed Islamist uprising. The general/president decided to make an example of the city of Hama where the rebellion was based. Estimates put the death toll resulting from the devastating attack on the city at between 10,000 and 30,000.

Sen. John McCain and his fawning media base

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Grampy McCrankypants, Sen. John McCain, has a sad that the U.S. has not gone to war lately with  (insert country name here)  , because the man has never met a war he did not like. McCain knows nothing about foreign affairs, yet the media villagers hang on his every word as though his thoughts are worth listening to. Paul Waldman at The American Prospect dispels the media myth of John McCain in John McCain Says Ignorant, Belligerent Things; Press Swoons:

I'll admit that I know next to nothing about Ukrainian politics. And when it comes to the current crisis there, I don't have any brilliant ideas about how the United States could solve this problem, but that's partly because the United States probably can't solve this problem. My limited knowledge and lack of transformative ideas puts me on equal footing with John McCain. Yet for some reason, McCain is once again all over the news, now that the situation in Kiev[.]

What does McCain actually think we should do about Ukraine? We'll get to that in a moment. But if you had to sum up John McCain's foreign policy beliefs in a single word, that word would probably be "Grrrr!" Whatever the situation is, McCain's view is always that we should be tougher than whatever the White House is doing. This applies to both Republican and Democratic presidents. If we're already bombing somebody, McCain's answer to any challenge is that we should bomb harder. If we haven't yet commenced action but are seriously thinking about it, he thinks we should start bombing. If we're engaging in diplomacy, McCain thinks we should ditch all that talk, which is for pussies anyhow, and get "tough" with whoever it is that needs getting tough with.

That is, I promise you, the extent of the sophistication of McCain's foreign policy thinking. Despite the fact that he is regularly lauded by the reporters who have worshipped him for so long as an "expert" in foreign policy with deep "knowledge" and "experience," I have never heard him say a single thing that demonstrated any kind of understanding of any foreign country or foreign crisis beyond what you could have gleaned from watching a three-minute report on the Today show.

Corporate 'lamestream' media fail on CBO reports

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Tea-Publicans in Congress were tripping all over themselves to get to a microphone on Tuesday to trumpet a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report that the conservative media entertainment complex, and its enablers in the corporate "lamestream" media either did not read or purposefully misrepresented with headlines like this in the Washington Post: CBO: Health law to mean 2 million fewer workers.

After initially blowing the story, the Washington Post at least did an admirable job of walking it back. It's media critic Eric Wemple wrote, The media’s massive revisions on CBO-Obamacare story:

The [Washington Post’s "Fact Checker"] Glenn Kessler today published a fact-checking post breaking some news: No, he wrote, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) never, ever reported that Obamacare would somehow or other kill more than 2 million U.S. jobs.

Okay, to say that Kessler broke this news is a rhetorical exaggeration to highlight the point that many-o-many media outlets misconstrued the CBO findings. For a while this morning, the Internet was hopping with job-killing hype, when in fact the truth was vastly different. Obamacare’s impact, the CBO concluded, would lessen the supply of labor by encouraging certain folks not to work: “The estimated reduction stems almost entirely from a net decline in the amount of labor that workers choose to supply, rather than from a net drop in businesses’ demand for labor, so it will appear almost entirely as a reduction in labor force participation and in hours worked. . . .”

For someone approaching retirement, notes Kessler, Obamacare could well mean that they needn’t hold onto a bad job just to keep health insurance. That’s a far different dynamic from job-killing.

Benghazi is spelled IOKIYAR

Crossposted from DemocraticDiva.com

 

To be a liberal in America is to be acutely aware of the gaping double standard that exists with regard to the expectations placed on you versus those put on conservatives. The disparity is so enormous that I doubt even the most dimwitted “both sides do it!” centrist pundits can deny it to themselves. Liberals are expected to argue politely and rationally, have our facts perfectly in order, and maintain a calm and pleasant demeanor at all times no matter what mendacious, hateful nonsense the other side is flinging at us. No concomitant expectation exists for conservatives. They are free to behave as poorly as they want and take whatever liberties with the truth they’d like, knowing that “both sides” will be blamed, which lets conservatives escape accountability and encourages them to see how much farther they can push the envelope.

New Tea-Publican challenger To Martha McSally in CD 2

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

After one Teabagger stumbles out of the gate, out of the race, another Tea-Publican "dark horse" has entered the starting gate.

The Tucson Weekly reports that, New GOP Dark Horse at the Starting Gate in CD2:

A new Republican candidate wants to see if he can outmaneuver GOP favorite Martha McSally for the chance to take on U.S. Rep. Ron Barber in Congressional District 2 this year. Meet Chuck Wooten:

Chief Master Sergeant, U.S. Air Force (Retired) Chuck Wooten is announcing his candidacy for the Arizona Congressional District 2 (CD2) on the Republican ticket.

Chuck Wooten is seeking the Republican nomination to challenge Democratic Congressman Ron Barber.

Wooten has achieved certain notoriety with his Open Letter to Congressman Paul Ryan regarding the reduction of military retirement payments in the Ryan-Murray Budget that was passed into law in late December 2013. [More about that Open Letter below.]

Wooten is running on a platform that includes steadfast, conservative positions on issues regarding border security, jobs for southeastern Arizonans, healthcare reform and reducing the federal deficit. Wooten offers a clear, common-sense alternative in his approach as compared to the other Republican candidates.

“I deliberately chose a campaign slogan that echoes loud and clear the message that southern Arizona conservatives have identified as the top qualities they demand in their representatives, “Trust. Leadership. Guts.” These qualities are my hallmark and my commitment to deliver to them when I earn their votes,” said Wooten.

Wooten will be making a formal announcement for his candidacy for Arizona Congressional District 2 on Monday, February 3, 2014, at 12:00 Noon on the steps of El Presidio Park, 160 W. Alameda Street in down town Tucson.

The troubling trend in Afghanistan

By Karl Reiner

Since 2002, the U.S. has spent $100 billion on nonmilitary aid in Afghanistan, a country considered by many analysts to be the most corrupt nation on earth. Despite the massive amount of aid, Afghan state institutions remain fragile and ineffectual, they do not provide good governance, deliver basic services or provide security. The country ranks near the bottom for GDP per capita income, life expectancy and electricity usage. Although more roads and schools have been built, the Taliban destroys around 100 schools per year. With a population of approximately 30 million, Afghanistan has an unemployment rate of 35%, it is the world's largest producer of opium.

Because Afghan government services are mostly imperceptible in the countryside, Afghanistan is becoming a defining study on how not to give aid. A sizeable part of the aid appears to have been wasted or siphoned off. Planning is said to be poor. The dangerous security situation makes contract oversight difficult allowing cunning contractors and their benefactors to take advantage of the chancy situation. Although the U.S. has spent an additional $51 billion to train the Afghan military since 2002, the local military and police forces are still having difficulty operating on their own. The literacy rate in the Afghan military is around 14%. This impediment makes it tough to perform tasks such as maintaining equipment, reading maps, providing logistics, communications, medical and intelligence support.

As Income Disparity Grows, Tucsonans Protest Low Wages at Walmart & McDonalds

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Protests against the low wages paid by multinational corporate giants have been sweeping the country, since the Occupy Movement raised the consciousness of the 99%. On Black Friday, Nov. 29, at Walmart stores nationwide and again Thursday, Dec. 5 at McDonald's restaurants nationwide, workers, unionists, progressives, and other liberal activists protested unfairly low wages and barriers to unionization for millions of US workers.

With profits, CEO pay, and wage disparity at all time highs, isn't it time to raise the minimum wage to a living wage?

Here in Tucson, protesters chanted and waved signs in front of the Walmart on Valencia and the McDonald's in midtown. (For more on the Walmart protest, check out the video here.)

At McDonald's, approximately 80-100 citizens braved chilly temperatures and intermittent rain to protest low wages. In the days before the local protest, right wing radio host Jon Justice shared PDA Tucson's Facebook announcement about the event and urged his Facebook followers to come to the midtown McDonald's, show their support for the fast food chain, and eat some good food. (Excuse me, but McDonald's hasn't served "good food" in decades-- if ever.) This resulted in a flurry of comments on the PDA page and Justice's page about the "entitlement mentality", people being "paid what they're worth", and the fast food industry being "one key stroke away from 80% automation"-- justifying Arizona's $7.80/hour minimum wage and offering support to McDonald's franchisees who make millions on the backs of workers.

Jennifer Longdon interview on Canadian TV

I've had the good fortune of knowing a fair number of Canadians in my time. When I was stationed in Japan in the Navy twenty years ago (!) I hung out with a pack of expats in Tokyo most weekends, several of whom were Canucks. From 1995 to 1997, I was stationed at Keyport, Washington where I was part of a unit that did weapons training ops, mostly off the coast of Vancouver Island. We spent most of our off duty time in a town called Nanaimo, hanging out with locals. I developed a fondness for Tim Horton's that I still have to this day. 

Based on my experience, there are a couple of generalizations about Canadians I can safely make: 1. they think our for-profit health care system is insane and 2. they think we are completely batshit crazy with the all guns and the shootings down here, eh.

National Guard units now compliant with DoD regulations for same-sex partner benefits

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Back in early November, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel ordered National Guard units in nine mostly Southern GOP governor controlled states to comply with the new Department of Defense same-sex marriage benefits regulations for military spouses and veterans. Secretary Hagel orders national guard units to comply with DoD regulations re: same-sex partner benefits.

After some resistance, particularly from the governors of Oklahoma and Texas, Secretary Hagel announced on Friday that Holdout states now compliant with Pentagon’s same-sex benefits policy:

All states are now processing benefits for same-sex National Guard spouses after several holdouts found ways to implement the policy without violating their constitutional bans on the recognition of gay marriage.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said in an announcement Friday that same-sex spouses in every state can now obtain the military ID cards required to receive benefits for wives and husbands of service members.

“All of [the Department of Defense] is committed to pursuing equal opportunities for all who serve this nation, and I will continue to work to ensure our men and women in uniform as well as their families have full and equal access to the benefits they deserve,” Hagel said.

A handful of states, including Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Georgia, refused to process ID applications for gay spouses after the Pentagon issued a directive requiring the military to treat all legally married couples equally for purposes of federal benefits. The states told same-sex couples they could only apply at federal installations, though heterosexual spouses could submit their paperwork at state facilities.

Hagel directed the chief of the National Guard Bureau in late October to work with state officials to reach compliance with the Defense Department’s new policy. The policy came in response to a landmark Supreme Court decision in June overturning a key provision in the Defense of Marriage Act.

Slowly, the holdout states and the National Guard Bureau found workarounds to ensure equal treatment of service members without allowing their employees to process same-sex benefits.

Balancing the Budget on the Backs of Soldiers

Posted by Bob Lord

Will the effort to trim the military budget devolve into another screwing of the many to benefit the few?

Sunday's NY Times lead editorial, Putting Military Pay on the Table, opened with this: 

Big-ticket weapons like aircraft carriers and the F-35 fighter jet have to be part of any conversation about cutting Pentagon spending to satisfy the mandatory budget reductions known as the sequester. But compensation for military personnel has to be on the table, too — even though no other defense issue is more politically volatile or emotionally fraught.

Somehow, I doubt the brass will see their pay cut. We're talking soldiers and sailors here. The ones who make the real sacrifice. The ones who lose limbs and lives. The ones whose PTSD precludes them from leading productive lives when they return. 

Those overpaid grunts whose compensation starts in the high teens upon enlistment. 

How convenient that the"liberal" New York Times is beating the drum for these cuts:

... many Washington-based think tanks, spanning all ideologies, are also pushing reform. In June, a group of them — including the conservative American Enterprise Institute and the liberal Center for American Progress — called for a comprehensive review and modernization of the military compensation system, which has been largely unchanged for 40 years.

Get that? The "liberal" Center for American Progress? Actually, CAP is the least progressive of the left of center DC think tanks. Heck, it's arguably not even left of center. It's the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party. But CAP was the best the Times could find on the left.

How will our Reps, who are always "thinking of the troops," handle this if forced to choose between the troops they purport to love and bacon for their districts in the form of contracts for local military contractors to build armaments we'll never need? 

I'm bettin' on the bacon.

This is how wars get started

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

You would never know it from watching the news on the tee-vee in the United States, but there is an international conflict that has been building for over a year in the Pacific between an increasingly aggressive China and its neighbors over who controls the Sea of Japan, the East China Sea and the South China Sea, and the natural resources under the seas.

In November 2012, China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, a "first generation multi-purpose carrier-borne fighter jet" classified as the J-15, landed the first jet on the aircraft carrier. Since then, China's navy has been testing the territorial claims of its neighbors in Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea and even Vietnam. These are the kinds of incidents that can easily escalate into a military confrontation where a "miscalculation" occurs.

This past weekend, China established an "air defense identification zone" in the East China Sea. On Tuesday, the U.S. Sent Two B-52 Bombers Into Air Zone Claimed by China (There was no immediate Chinese response to the flights conducted without prior notification as demanded under the new declaration from Beijing). On Thursday, Japan and South Korea defied Chinese air defence zone (again without prior notification as demanded under the new declaration from Beijing).

On Friday, things started getting hairier when China scrambled fighter jets in response. China sends jets as U.S., Japan fly in defense zone:

China said it launched two fighter planes Friday to investigate flights by a dozen U.S. and Japanese reconnaissance and military planes in its new maritime air defense zone over the East China Sea.

It was the first time since proclaiming the zone on Nov. 23 that China said it sent planes there on the same day as foreign military flights, although it said it merely identified the foreign planes and took no further action.

The military-industrial complex and the establishment media reject diplomacy with Iran

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The military-industrial complex that President Dwight D. Eisienhower warned Americans against in Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation, needs an enemy -- real or imagined -- to justify the trillions of dollars spent on national security and defense.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) prepares an annual series of reports on international defense spending, The Military Balance 2013 (subscriber-only). In its press release, Military Balance 2013 Press Statement | IISS, the IISS notes that while "the Pentagon was already implementing cuts of $487 billion over ten years, and as a result of sequestration will now need to make additional reductions of $600bn over ten years," . . . "It needs to be remembered, however, that the defense budget of the United States still equals that of the next 14 nations combined (Bar Chart) and the United States still intends to remain engaged globally."

Then there is the establishment media, led by the Washington Post, which is home to Neocons who believe in a Pax Americana empire through military superiority and global domination. The establishment media serves to create the narratives for crises and conflicts and enemies of the United States to maintain taxpayer funding to the military-industrial complex, as well as U.S. interventions abroad. War and the threats of war are big business, and has made a lot of people extremely wealthy.

The military-industrial complex and the establishment media have a vested financial interest in maintaining wars and the threats of wars. If peace were to break out, they could no longer justify the trillions of dollars spent on national security and defense ans marketing war.

Which brings me to the breakthrough deal brokered by Secretary of State John Kerry and our allies with Iran late Saturday. After 34 years of a "cold war" between the U.S. and Iran, this rapprochement of diplomatic relations was long overdue. Iran, six world powers reach historic deal on nuclear program.

Questions for Martha McSally: Do you support the automatic GOP Sequester budget cuts?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

In this new series, "Questions for Martha McSally," we pose questions to the McSally campaign about her positions on current hot topics -- I am not going to give her a free pass until after the GOP primary like our local media did in 2012.

Patrick McNamara of the Arizona Daily Star reported this week on Congressman Ron Barber signing "a letter along with 32 other members of Congress imploring Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel to preserve the A-10 program, which has a large presence at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base." Barber backs A-10 retention at D-M. "The letter was written in an effort to head off any threat from impending federal budget cuts in the coming fiscal year, which almost certainly will include defense-spending reductions."

This would be the automatic GOP Sequester budget cuts in the event a budget agreement is not reached before January.

McNamara got himself a quote from Martha McSally, who is running for Barber's seat, presumably because she used to fly the A-10 (hopefully not because he is treating McSally as the GOP "presumptive nominee;" she has two primary opponents, Ed Martin and Shelley Kais).

Naturally, McSally went for snark over substance, suggesting that it seems the congressman has only now realized the threat of impending elimination of the A-10 program. This is in reference to her own reckless and irresponsible fear mongering over Davis-Monthan AFB possibly being closed if the A-10 is phased out. Questions for Martha McSally: On what basis do you assert that Davis-Monthan AFB will close?

Let's be clear: The only immediate threat to the A-10 at Davis-Monthan AFB is the automatic GOP Sequester budget cuts. While McNamara's report in regards to Congressman Ron Barber was about the federal budget and defense cuts, oddly enough he does not report whether he asked Martha McSally about her support for the automatic GOP Sequester budget cuts to the defense department budget (if he did, he failed to report any response). Instead, he framed McSally's responses based upon her previous reckless and irresponsbile fear mongering over the A-10.

Neo-Confederate 'states' rights' opposition to Defense Dept. order re: benefits to same-sex partners

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Less than 0.5 percent of the U.S. population serves in its armed forces. Americans and Their Military, Drifting Apart - NYTimes.com (Karl Eikenberry, Army Lt. General, retired).

President Obama stated on the ending of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy:

Today, the discriminatory law known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is finally and formally repealed.  As of today, patriotic Americans in uniform will no longer have to lie about who they are in order to serve the country they love.  As of today, our armed forces will no longer lose the extraordinary skills and combat experience of so many gay and lesbian service members. And today, as Commander in Chief, I want those who were discharged under this law to know that your country deeply values your service.

It took the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Windsor, striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that denies federal benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married to end Defense Department regulations that discriminated against gay and lesbian service members. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel had the Armed Forces review their rules and regulations and bring them into compliance with the Supreme Court ruling by September of this year.

But several Southern states with anti-gay benefits state laws have chosen to defy the Department of Defense orders with respect to their National Guard units asserting the tired old Neo-Confederate "states' rights" defense. These states continue to discriminate against patriotic Americans -- the few who volunteer to proudly serve in their country's Armed Forces to defend your feeedoms -- simply because they are legally wed gay and lesbian service members. These states clearly do not respect nor value their proud military service.

General Giap’s fearsome legacy

By Karl Reiner

North Vietnamese Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap died last month at the age of 102. The news stories reporting the general's demise brought back memories of the distant rumble of artillery, illumination flares hanging in the night sky, helicopter rides and the clatter of small arms fire. And the chilly remembrance that the situation in Vietnam was far more convoluted than we had been led to believe. Gen. Giap's strategic decisions affected America's 8.2 million Vietnam era veterans in one way or another, especially the nearly 2.6 million that served in the country. By the time U.S. troops departed in 1973, American losses in Vietnam totaled over 58,000 killed and more than 153,000 seriously wounded.

Giap became active in politics in the 1920s, studied law and political economy. At one time, he taught history. He worked as a journalist in the 1930s. A ferocious nationalist, he joined the Communist Party of Vietnam in 1931. Although lacking formal training, Giap began his military exploits resisting the Japanese occupiers in the latter stages of WW II. In a landmark campaign during the First Indochina War in 1954, Gen. Giap overwhelmed the French forces at Dien Bien Phu. His 55,000 troops occupied the surrounding mountains, dismantled artillery pieces were hauled up the steep slopes by hand. The astonishing and complex effort was supported by the toil of 260,000 laborers.

Oh, Snap! Food stamp cuts hit service member families and veterans

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

If Tea-Publicans do not care about taking food out of the mouths of children, the elderly and disabled, then how about a group of Americans they profess to care about: active duty military service members and veterans?

The Tea-Publican House action that stripped food stamp funding from a massive farm bill threatens vital assistance for about 5,000 military families, mostly from the junior enlisted ranks. DoD: 5,000 Military Families Losing Food Stamps:

A Department of Agriculture report last year showed that more than 5,000 of the 48 million Americans receiving Supplementary Nutritional Assistance Program (food stamps) listed their employment status as "active duty military," the Pentagon officials said.

"Military members who receive SNAP tend to be made up of members in junior pay grades with larger than average household sizes," said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a Defense Department spokesman.

* * *

"It's a small population but it's a vulnerable population," Joye Raezer, executive director of the National Military Families Association, said of the active duty military families receiving food stamps.

* * *

Last year, $99 million in food stamps were cashed in at bases by military families, disabled vets and others with military identification, and more than $53 million in food stamps were cashed in this year through June, according to Defense Commissary Agency data provided to the Huffington Post.

And then there are the veterans for whom Tea-Publicans seem to think it is sufficient to say "Thank you for your service." You owe them more than an insincere "thank you."  Nearly 1 Million Vets Face Food Stamps Cut:

About 900,000 veterans and 5,000 active duty troops face cuts in their food stamp benefits beginning Thursday as $5 billion is automatically trimmed from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program for low-income families.

Secretary Hagel orders national guard units to comply with DoD regulations re: same-sex partner benefits

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Several "Red States" have had their national guard units refuse to process requests for same-sex partner benefits, despite the Department of Defense (DoD) having brought its rules and regulations into compliance in September with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in U.S. v. Windsor, striking down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Apparently these "Red State" Neo-Confederates have decided to engage in massive resistance to the Supreme Court's decision, much the way some of these same states did in response to the Supreme Court decision ending segregation in public schools in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. It took Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson nationalizing state guard units to enforce Supreme Court decisions for the desegregation of public schools. There is no reason to believe that President Obama will not faithfully execute the laws of the United States in the same manner if necessary.

Last night, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel gave a speech to the Anti-Defamation League in which he addressed this "Red State" refusal to comply with DoD rules and regulations regarding same-sex partner benefits. Secretary Hagel's address to the ADL (excerpt):

The balance between security and civil rights sends an important message to the world. At the Department of Defense, we work to preserve America’s individual liberties as well as defend our freedom.

When the Supreme Court issued its decision on the Defense of Marriage Act this summer, the Department of Defense immediately began working on providing the same benefits to all eligible spouses, regardless of sexual orientation. We did it because everyone who serves our country in uniform should receive the full benefits they earned, fairly and in accordance with the law. Everyone’s rights must be protected.

This means that all spouses of service members are entitled to DoD ID cards, and the benefits that come with them. But several states are refusing to issue these IDs to same-sex spouses at National Guard facilities. Not only does this violate the states’ obligations under federal law, their actions have created hardship and inequality by forcing couples to travel long distances to federal military bases to obtain the ID cards they’re entitled to.

This is wrong. It causes division among the ranks, and it furthers prejudice, which DoD has fought to extinguish.

Mr. President, order federal employees back to work

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

So let me get this right. The Tea-Publican anti-government insurgency that wants to destroy the federal government is suddenly concerned about federal government employees? The very same federal employees they despise and villify as blood-sucking parasites every chance they get? One has to have been living in a cave for the past 30 years to fall for this bullshit.

The Tea-Publican economic terrorists may have just thrown President Obama the card he needs to play to end this government shutdown. On Saturday, in a unanimous vote, the House passes bill to give federal workers back pay:

[M]embers of the House came together in a moment of rare bipartisanship to pass a bill, by a vote of 407 to 0, approving back pay for furloughed government workers.

One has to assume that the Tea-Publican anti-government insurgents clearly did not intend to give blood-sucking parasite federal employees a vacation for not working, right?

GOP sequestration hits counties with military installations the hardest

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

As I pointed ou in a recent "Questions for Martha McSally," the "current threat to Davis-Monthan AFB is the GOP sequester, which Tea-Publicans insist on retaining in both the Continuing Resolution fight that has shut down the federal government, and in future budget negotiations." It is not the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) commission in 2015.

The Washington Post reports today, Federal cuts cost $312.4 per person in military counties:

The federal spending cuts that went into effect earlier this year under sequestration are taking nearly twice the toll on counties with military installations than on those without, according to a new analysis.

The analysis, conducted by the Financial Times and the nonprofit Center for Public Integrity, found that in the 388 U.S. counties with at least one military installation, sequestration has had a per-capita impact of $312 dollars. In the more than 2,700 counties without an installation, the impact was $171 per capita.

Financial Times/Center for Public Integrity map of sequestration’s impact.

The region with the highest per-capita hit was Los Alamos, New Mexico, where nearly a fifth of the workforce is federally employed. The per-capita impact of the cuts there is $6,359.

The hardest-hit counties are all over the country. In Alaska, the Valdez-Cordova Census Area saw a per-capita impact of $6,336. In Bryan, Georgia, it was $5,553. The per-capita effect of sequestration was $4,581 in Geary, Kansas.

You can play around with the data on the Financial Times site.

See, The Center for Public Integrity, Sequestration nation: military communities feel nation's budget stress, by James Politi.

Questions for Martha McSally: On what basis do you assert that Davis-Monthan AFB will close?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Martha McSally told The Arizona Republic that her "top priority will be keeping the A-10 aircraft, which she flew as the first female airman in combat, from from being phased out at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base."

McSally also told the Sierra Vista Herald:

Noting the district includes two important military installations — the Air Force’s Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson and the Army’s Fort Huachuca in Serra Vista — she said both are in danger of being closed if actions are not taken to strengthen them with additional missions.

As for the air base, McSally, who served at Davis-Monthan, said the Air Force is on the verge of making a bad operational decision to eliminate the A-10, a close air support aircraft, a plane she flew over Afghanistan.

There is no other aircraft which can provide the close air support ground forces need, McSally said.

Back in January of 2012, the Air Force announced that it would begin phasing out the 40 year old A-10 aircraft -- in 2028. This has led to fear mongering by local talk radio, see James T. Harris Flake drops A-10 bomb on constituents - Arizona Daily Independent (Flake confirmed for listeners of the James T. Harris radio show that one of their worst fears was true: the A-10 has been marked for elimination in the next 1 to 2 years), and by Martha McSally that Pentagon budget cuts (i.e., the GOP sequester) could lead to the retirement of the A-10 in the next couple of years, or with the next round of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) commission in 2015. See this KGUN 9 Tucson report (sourced entirely to Martha McSally).

All this gloom and doom Armageddon talk is entirely speculation at this point. I've lived in Tucson long enough to remember the previous half-dozen times or so that Chicken Littles predicted "the sky is falling" with the imminent closure of Davis-Monthan, and the base is still operational. Davis-Monthan is a fair weather air force base for flight training in unrestricted air space with access to the Goldwater Bombing Range, and its "boneyard" for spare parts is a vital resource. Davis-Monthan has other critical missions assigned to it besides the aging A-10, so it is not closing any time soon.

Same-sex couples to receive veterans benefits

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

A ruling by a federal court judge in California last week has convinced the U.S. Department of Justice to no longer enforce the sections of U.S. Code Title 38 that prohibit same-sex couples from receiving veterans benefits. DOJ Won’t Enforce Law Banning Same-Sex Couples From Receiving Veterans Benefits:

The Department of Justice announced Wednesday that it would no longer enforce the sections of U.S. Code Title 38 that prohibit same-sex couples from receiving veterans benefits. The law exists separately from the Defense of Marriage Act and was thus continuing to block veterans from accessing benefits for their partners, although a federal court overturned the law last week.

In a letter sent to House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and first obtained by the Washington Blade, Attorney General Eric Holder explained that even though “Decisions by the Executive not to enforce federal laws are appropriately rare,” the DOMA ruling and subsequent decision last week provide ample justification for no longer enforcing this restriction. This is especially true, he pointed out, since the House Republicans are no longer defending Title 38 through the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG):

In light of these developments, continued enforcement of the Title 38 provisions pending further judicial review is unwarranted. The decision of the Supreme Court in Windsor reinforces the Executive’s conclusion that the Title 38 provisions are unconstitutional, and another Article III court now has so determined. Moreover, as I explained in my earlier letter, one of the primary interests underlying the earlier decision to continue enforcement of the Title 38 provisions was to allow representatives of Congress to present a defense of those provisions to the judicial branch. BLAG’s decision to withdraw from the Title 38 litigation in light of Windsor, and therefore to cease its defense of the provisions at issue, means that continued enforcement would no longer serve that interest. In the meantime, continued enforcement would likely have a tangible adverse effect on the families of veterans and, in some circumstances, active-duty service members and reservists, with respect to survival, health care, home loan, and other benefits.

Struggling On Syria

Posted by Bob Lord

I'm glad it's not my decision how to handle the Syrian situation. I'd make a bad decider on this one. 

I have friends in the Syrian-American community here and have discussed the situation with them. They have family in Syria. They've lost loved ones to Assad. Make no mistake about it, Assad's pure concentrated evil. My Syrian friends are certain that the U.S. must act to avoid mass bloodshed. They may be right.

But when the drums of war start beating, I get a sick feeling. I'm about halfway through Jeremy Scahill's Dirty Wars and I just read a piece about Hans Blix's view of the situation. Political and military leaders love war, and Obama is no exception. We're now hearing it's a certainty that Assad used chemical weapons. He's clearly evil enough to do so, but why would he? Militarily, his situation is not desperate enough to call for chemical weapons and politically his use of them would be suicidal. Would he intentionally provoke U.S. involvement on the side of the rebels? 

And why is this more an Obama decision than a UN decision?

Ultimately, I don't believe we can engage on a limited basis. So American kids likely would die. I then have to ask myself if I'd be willing to risk losing one of my kids to a war in Syria, because if I'm not willing to go there, I can't expect any other parent to either. 

I guess I'm not there yet. 

It's Hard Out There For An Empire

Posted by Bob Lord

Maintaining an empire becomes damn complicated. 

A case in point: The dilemma over the American Empire's aid to Egypt. 

When Obama danced around describing the Egyptian military's actions as a coup, the effect of which would to cut off the flow of aid, I figured his motivation was to preserve the profits of military contractors whose weapons would be purchased with Egypt's aid dollars. But the contractors may just be incidental beneficiaries. Egypt's military actually has real leverage here. Egypt is one of the few countries that grants the US fly over permission immediately upon request for military aircraft and also allows us access to the Suez Canal. 

Fly over rights and access to strategic waterways are invaluable tools when you're minding an empire. 

So Obama faces a Hobson's choice. If he identifies the actions of the Egyptian military as the coup that it is, thereby cutting off aid, he could lose critical empire maintenance tools. But if he continues the aid, he creates both long-term and short-term problems. In the short-term, he makes enemies in the Muslim world, who don't appreciate much him continuing to support the murderous Egyptian military. In the long-term, if a group opposed to the Egyptian military rises to power, the current continuation of aid will prove to be a disaster.  

The thing about Hobson's choices is that you're guaranteed a bad result. With empires, that just comes with the territory, so to speak.

Our Crumbling African Empire

Posted by Bob Lord

There's a bunch of stuff out today on inequality, but the most eye-opening piece I've seen in awhile is Nick Turse's piece, Blowback Central, at Tom Dispatch. 

AFRICOM is the Pentagon's most recently established global command. Established just six short years ago, it has imposed our military presence all over Africa, with stunningly depressing results. I was vaguely aware of this situation, but didn't appreciate fully the extent of our imperialistic action. Here are a few of the highlights from Turse:

The conflict between security needs and the media is timeless

By Karl Reiner

Some things never seem to change.  Government and the media exist in an uneasy relationship, especially in time of war.  The unhappy association is replete with competing and conflicting interests.  The rights of the media often conflict with the government's need for secrecy.  During the Civil War, generals such as Lee, Johnston and Sherman believed newspapers were a hindrance to them because they published information that was useful to the enemy.

Commanders on both sides avidly read newspapers published in enemy territory because they were good sources of information. Since the governments of the United States and Confederate States maintained the tradition of allowing the press to function relatively freely, the complaining generals may have had a point.

Misplaced Congressional Priorities: Pork for the Pentagon but Not for Children

by Pamela Powers Hannley

During the Bush II Era, excessive deficit spending was no big deal for Republicans. Congressional Republicans like Mitch McConnell, Jon Kyl, John McCain, Jeff Flake, Lindsay Graham, and even current “budget hawk” Paul Ryan “spent money like drunken sailors”– particularly when the spending benefited the 1% (remember the tax cuts we couldn’t afford?) or corporations (two wars, Medicare Advantage, off-shoring jobs, more tax cuts, privatization, etc.)

But as soon as a Democratic President occupied the White House, the siren song became: We must tighten our belts and live within our means! Cut government jobs…er… spending! Cut Social Security… er… “entitlements”! 

This austerity screed intensified after the Democratic “shellacking” in 2010 when Teapublicans took control of the House of Representatives and the budget, and Senate Teapublicans began playing games with people’s lives by filibustering everything. (No wonder Congress has a 16% approval rating.)

For the past few months, Congress has been weighing the pros and cons of budget cuts and pork barrel projects. Food stamps and schools lunches are on the chopping block, while the Congress considers passing the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014, which authorizes $640 billion more in defense spending than the Pentagon asked for. (This action was passed by the House Armed Services committee last week; the full vote in the House of Representatives is scheduled for today– Wednesday, June 12.) More details about Pentegon pork after the jump.

Follow Up On Obama Torture (Yes, It Sucks Even Worse)

Posted by Bob Lord

I posted a few days back on the Obama administration's use of torture at Guantanamo. This a follow-up.

I'm part way through Jeremy Scahill's, Dirty Wars, and came upon this quote from Lawrence Wilkerson, describing the reliance by Special Ops forces on faulty intelligence:

You go in and you get some intelligence, and usually your intelligence comes through this apparatus too, and so you say, 'Oh, this is really good actionable intelligence. Here's "Operation Blue Thuder." Go do it.' And they go do it, and they kill 27, 30, 40 people, whatever, and they capture seven or eight. Then you find out that the intelligence was bad and you killed a bunch of innocent people and you have a bunch of innocent people on your hands, so you stuff 'em in Guantanamo. No one knows anything about that. (emphasis mine)

When you put that next to what's happened with the Guantanamo detainees, it's ugly. Ugly as in "this is what the history books will say about America 50 years from now."

Iran's authoritarian streak has deep roots

By Karl Reiner

Authoritarian rulers are not uncommon to Iran.  As Iran's June presidential election nears, the Guardian Council has yet to announce the list of approved candidates.  Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, wants to see a suitable conservative elected as president.  In a country facing a faltering economy, sanctions and entanglement in Syria, the Supreme Leader may face some difficulty in getting his way.

In the 1960s, the Shah of Iran wanted to turn Iran into a new Persian Empire.  He aspired to make it a major force in the Persian Gulf area.  As the British withdrew their military presence east of Suez, the Shah was ready to step in and put his plan into action.

Oil revenues allowed the Shah to make large arms purchases.  Using the Cold War to his advantage, he knew if he couldn't buy military equipment from the U.S., the Soviet Union would sell him all the arms he wanted.  Within a few short years, Iran's military was turned into one of the most technologically advanced forces in the world.

Down with Drones: Protest at Ft. Huachuca Today

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Southern Arizona peace activists have organized a anti-drone protest outside of Fort Huachuca today, Monday, April 29.

Drones are a big deal in Southern Arizona. Ft. Huachuca, Davis-Monthan, Raytheon, the University of Arizona, and Cochise College-- all have a piece of the military industrial complex's drone pie, and if our esteemed US Senators have there way, more money for drones along the Arizona-Mexico border, more money for militarization of the border overall, and more money (and customers) for private prisons will be attached to "imigration reform" legislation.

Sorry for the late notice about this action, but here's the information from the organizers:

We invite you to participate in a day of peaceful  demonstration on Monday April 29^th, 2:30-4:00 PM at the Fort Huachuca Main Gate, Sierra Vista AZ   Since 2004 over 4,700 deaths are attributed to Dronestrikes, civilian deaths remain unconfirmed though unfortunately post-strike photos show many children are among the lost. We’re encouraging a coalition of community voices, faith based, political, sectarian, to express concern regarding the ethical, moral, spiritual implications of the use of drone technology in warfare and the equally problematic domestic privacy concerns.  Literature will be available but we encourage you to bring signs, share information, prayers, let your voice be heard.  Participation could make all the difference in bringing attention to this critical issue.

Help Us Make a Difference!! Thank You!  JOIN US!

Is Team America headed for a Korean Barbeque?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone may want to reassemble Team America: World Police (2004), because it is increasingly apparent that new North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is even crazier than his old man, Kim Jong-il -- this man-child is threatening a Korean Barbeque (nuclear war) to "settle accounts with the U.S. imperialists."

Reuters News Service reported on Wednesday, North Korea to cut all channels with South:

Reclusive North Korea is to cut the last channel of communications with the South because war could break out at "any moment", it said on Wednesday, days of after warning the United States and South Korea of nuclear attack.

The move is the latest in a series of bellicose threats from North Korea in response to new U.N. sanctions imposed after its third nuclear test in February and to "hostile" military drills under way joining the United States and South Korea.

The North has already stopped responding to calls on the hotline to the U.S. military that supervises the heavily armed Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) and the Red Cross line that has been used by the governments of both sides.

"Under the situation where a war may break out at any moment, there is no need to keep north-south military communications which were laid between the militaries of both sides," the North's KCNA news agency quoted a military spokesman as saying.

"There do not exist any dialogue channel and communications means between the DPRK and the U.S. and between the north and the south."

Can an American-Iranian optimist become president of Iran?

By Karl Reiner

The Iran-Iraq war has been forgotten.  The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and the campaign to drive them out is old history.  The 10th anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq is quietly observed as the military effort in Afghanistan slowly winds down.  At the same time, tensions grow between the West and Iran over Iran's nuclear program.  To deter Iran from developing nuclear weapons, UN, U.S. and European Union sanctions have been imposed.

Israel has threatened to take military action unless Iran abandons the program suspected of developing nuclear weapons.  Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, states that the Islamic Republic will retaliate if its nuclear facilities are attacked. Iran will strike Israeli cities. Although negotiations between the West and Iran continue, there is a drift toward war.

Ten Years After the Iraq Invasion, Lessons Remain Unlearned

By Michael Bryan

Now that the Iraq war has been "ended" by Obama's draw down of active combat troops (I scare quote here because of the thousands of embassy personnel and private defense contractors still in country), and the ten year anniversary of the invasion is upon us, it is perhaps time to try for a little perspective on this passage in American political history.

I continue to view the invasion and occupation of Iraq as a massive crime of control fraud perpetrated by the Bush junta to extract hundreds of billions from the public fisc to line the pockets of the corporate welfare state wards known collectively as the defense industry. But the historical treatment of that fraud and its long-term impact on American government and politics is what I think deserves more discussion.

As I write, a concerted effort at historical revision by many of the key players in the Iraq fraud is underway throughout the media. People who perpetrated and participated in the Bush Administration's national security follies now seek to cast the Iraq fraud as a successful, if costly, mission to free the Iraqi people from tyranny.

 

That effort is a subtle poison undermining American security.

Senate breaks the new 'Three Stooges' filibuster of Chuck Hagel

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The U.S. Senate today broke the filibuster by the new "Three Stooges," John McCain, his puppet boy Little Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte ("Shemp"). The Washington Post reports, Hagel clears filibuster hurdle, is poised for confirmation:

Chuck Hagel’s bid to become the next defense secretary cleared a major hurdle Tuesday, beating back a Republican effort to block his nomination almost two weeks after GOP senators launched a filibuster.

On a 71 to 27 vote, easily clearing the 60-vote threshold, the former Republican senator is poised for confirmation later Tuesday afternoon, overcoming Republican objections to his views on Middle East security.

Eighteen Republicans supported moving to a final vote, joining 53 Democrats. Some of the Republicans who supported ending the Hagel filibuster — including his chief opponents, Sens. John S. McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — are expected to oppose him on the final vote, which will only require a simple majority for his confirmation.

John McCain's partisan rage

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Senator McNasty, John McCain, is only relevant to his political base -- the Beltway media. No one else gives a damn what Arizona's angry old man has to say.

This is why i despise the Beltway media: "If it's Sunday, it's John McCain." This Sunday was Meet The Press Gregory, where McCain has his own green room. The Neocon war monger Senator McNasty was engaging in "Benghazi Fever" to give political cover to his puppet boy, Little Lindsey Graham, from a Tea Party challenge for reelection. Politico’s David Rogers reports today why John McCain has so decisively turned against Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense, and confirms that it’s all about Lindsey!

Steve Benen adds, McCain lost in a fog of partisan rage:

Looking back at the tragic and deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi last fall, we know quite a bit about what happened. We also know, thanks to an independent investigation, that "Republican charges of a cover-up" were "pure fiction."

But as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) argued yesterday, he can't be bothered with facts -- he has a partisan vendetta to pursue.

Sen. John McCain debases the U.S. Senate, embarrasses Arizona

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

You will recall that during the Senate Armed Services Committee confirmation hearing for Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense, Sen. John McCain made a complete ass-hat of himself:

[Iit was disconcerting to watch this Neocon war monger demand that his former senate colleague Chuck Hagel genuflect before him and to praise "Senator Surge" as a demigod (his media sycophants were unavailable?) Chuck Hagel refused, insisting that Iraq was "the most dangerous foreign policy decision since Vietnam." Good for him. Chuck Hagel is right, and John McCain is wrong.

Sen. "McNasty" is still embittered that his old friend, Chuck Hagel, who endorsed him for president in 2000, later endorsed Barack Obama for president in 2008. Hagel was also highly critical of the Iraq war and the "surge" for which McCain was a principal cheerleader. This is a personal vendetta by Sen. McNasty against Hagel.

The New McCarthyism of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Calgary)

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I suppose we are to be grateful that this Canadian-American Tea Party tool from Texas is ineligible to run for president.

During his few short weeks in the U.S. Senate, chickenhawk Ted Cruz (R-Calgary) has been channeling the ghost of Joe McCarthy in over-the-top fashion during the confirmation hearings of former Senator Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense, who is a decorated Vietnam war veteran and advocate for veterans.

Brent Budowski at The Hill lets Joe McCarthy Ted Cruz have it for crossing over the line. Sen. Ted Cruz slanders war hero, embarrasses Texas and violates Armed Services Committee tradition:

The hearings to consider the nomination of former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) began with two great statesmen endorsing Hagel and ended with a freshman Republican senator embarrassing his state and the Armed Services Committee with a performance that illustrates why Republicans have lost three of the last four national elections and why Texas Democrats have good odds of a historic revival.

The support for Hagel was offered by former Sens. John Warner (R-Va.) and Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), both onetime Armed Services Committee chairmen. The cheap shot slander of war hero Hagel was offered by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), whose service in the Senate is measured in days, not decades, and who was properly reprimanded directly by Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and indirectly by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who vouched for the intense patriotism of Hagel.

Building a Sustainable Economy in Tucson: Public Forum Tonight

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Tonight-- February 11-- Sustainable Tucson will host a panel discussion and public forum focusing on creative ideas for building a sustainable economy in Tucson.

Tucson is one of the poorest cities in the southwest, has a fragile desert ecosystem, and relies far too heavily on defense, the University of Arizona, and tourism for its vitality. We need diversification and creativity in our economic development efforts.

Tonight's speakers represent wide-ranging ideas from public banking and time trading to TREO's efforts in building Tucson's economy. The meeting will be held in the downtown library's lower level meeting room. Doors open at 5:30 p.m.; program begins at 6 p.m. Details after the jump.

Pictures for peaceniks: Why the US military budget should be cut

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Remember the Super Congress? It was a gimmick that Congressional Republicans came up with after the huge debt ceiling and budget battle in August 2011.

The Super Congress was supposed to balance the US budget during the fall of 2011, but they failed to do so. As a result, the country is now facing "sequestration"-- a fancy name for automatic budget cuts and tax increases that were trigger by the Super Congress' failure and the regular Congress' failure to negotiate and agree on humane budget cuts coupled with revenue-generating and economy-growing measures.

Thanks to Congressional foot-dragging, sequestration is upon us. The biggest budget that is up for trimming is the military budget. Although hawks are wringing their hands over potential cuts, the US military budget is by far the largest in the world. In fact, in 2011, the US spent more on the military than the next 13 countries combined! Wonkblog has provided great charts and background information on military spending-- perfect ammunition for anyone who in more invested in peace than war. Check out it out after the jump.

PDA at the Inaugural Peace Ball (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

No, this is not a picture of the Peace Ball. I was just trying to get your attention. That's Barack and Michelle, of course. After the jump, check out Loneprotestor's video of the Peace Ball.

The Dilemma of Afghanistan

By Karl Reiner

The Afghan government is engaged in a tough balancing act, trying to foster national identity while at the same time dodging ethnic and religious pitfalls.  It faces an intimidating task in trying to unite the Afghan people while avoiding a repeat of past mistakes.  Many observers have concluded that the Afghan government is not up to the task.

It is hard to foster literacy and civic education in a traditional multiethnic society hostile to outside influence.  Attempts to change the old ways can meet with resistance.  The people promoting rights for women and education for girls are being shot dead.

The Haunting Legacy of Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini

By Karl Reiner

Iran, formerly known as Persia, has been a regional power since the time of the Greeks and the Roman Empire.  Slightly smaller than Alaska, the proud (some say arrogant) country plainly states that it is Persian not Arab.  An oil producer, with a population of 75 million, Iran has been under the sway of a theocratic system of government since 1979. 

The relationship between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic of Iran began badly. When Islamic revolutionaries seized power in February 1979, the leader of the revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini,appointed the moderate Bazargan provisional government to oversee the country until a new constitution was drafted and national elections held.

Although the provisional government attempted to restore order and reestablish government services, it had little support. The country was awash in heavily armed groups determined to implement their own radical ideological agendas.

Immigration reform: What role will Ron Barber play?

by Pamela Powers Hannley

The Republican vs Republican-lite Congressional District 2 race has finally been called. Congressman Ron Barber defeated Colonel Marthy McSally in a very tight contest.

With the special election primary, the special election, and the general election, Barber has been running for office for 10 months of this year. Now, he can finally relax into his new Capitol Hill seat.

But, wait, there's more... now, he has to stand up and be our Congressman.

And immigration reform-- a hot-button Southern Arizona issue, for sure-- is at the top of President Barack Obama's priority list, after his rainbow-hued election win. With his delayed deportation for Dreamers and his focus on deporting undocumented criminals (and not your housekeeper), Obama has been inching forward on immigration reform. 

What will the role of Baja Arizona's new Congressman be? Find out after the jump.

Martha McSally: Warrior woman hides from questions, constituents, inconsistencies

 by Pamela Powers Hannley

If there were a race between Senator Jon Kyl and former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who would you vote for?

The CD2 race is just that. Former Kyl employee Martha McSally is running against former Giffords employee Ron Barber.

Whose legacy would better serve Southern Arizona? That of a right-wing, anti-woman, every-man-for-himself, war-monger who never ventured south of his Tucson Foothills office or that of a reasoned, pro-choice, pro-public health Blue Dog who wasn't afraid to meet constituents?

As a long-time resident of Giffords' district, my experiences yesterday made up my mind. Yesterday, I thought I was going to meet the Warrior Woman who hopes to take the CD2 seat-- you know, the one who says she "resemble[s] Gabby Giffords more than the man who worked for her”-- but she was a no show.

McSally is no Gabby Giffords

Giffords was not afraid to face constituents and answer tough questions. McSally apparently doesn't have the nerve to answer questions that are not softballs from right-wing commentators. (Sounds like something Jon Kyl would do, huh?)

I had a scheduled interview with McSally to discuss women's issues (since she now claims to fight for women's rights, while being anti-choice); the multiple inconsistencies in her platform (believing in the "sanctity of life", while flying 325+ hours as a bomber) pilot; and rumors circulating about her two-year marriage to Donald Henry in 1997 (what's up with that annulment in Santa Cruz County, when you were married and lived in Pima County).

When I showed up at her office, video gear in tow, I was given mush-mouth excuses from her press secretary and campaign manager. "Gosh, she's so busy." (My guess is they Googled me and said, Yikes-- we're not talking with her!)

Not surprised that McSally bailed on a video interview with a feminist who wanted to ask about women's issues, I went to her constituent event at Nimbus, down the street. I waited with about 30 old white folks on the Nimbus patio for 45 minutes. Eventually, McSally staffers said, "Gosh... she's so busy. She doesn't have time to come and talk with you all today. Scheduling conflicts, you know... blah, blah, blah." Since when does a politician in a tight race not have time for a meeting with rich, old white folks?   (Was it something I tweeted?)

More unanswered questions about Martha McSally after the jump.

Code Pink To Dems: Stop Drone Warfare, Bust Up Big Banks

by Pamela Powers Hannley

I knew when I saw that hot pink bra on the sidewalk, I knew that Code Pink must be nearby. 

Code Pink, the women-initiated peace and social justice group, protested the War on Women at the Republican National Convention. Their message for President Barack Obama and Democrats targets the military-industrial complex.

At the People's Convention, sponsored by Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin spoke against war-- particularly drone warfare-- and called for Congress and the President to make dramatic cuts to the military budget.

Benjamin, author of Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control, is a highly vocal peace activist.

At the PDA event, she said that there are strong, powerful men like Arizona Senator John McCain, who are standing up against cuts to the military budget, which are scheduled to go into effect due to sequestration.

But where is the movement to protect Pel Grants, Medicaid, and other social programs? she asked. According to Benjamin, the US could cut the military budget by 80% and still have the largest military in the world.

"Slash the Pentagon and put that money into life-affirming activitieis, which is what the people on the planet need," Benjamin demanded.

Attacking the other sector of the military-industrial complex, Benjamin and other Code Pink protesters wore pink bras on the outside of their clothes and shouted "Bust up the banks" in front of Bank of America, which is headquartered in Charlotte, host city of the Democratic National Convention.

Video after the jump.

Romney speech ignores our service men and women, veterans, and the war in Afghanistan

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Here is a transcript of the RNC Convention acceptance speech by Willard "Mittens" Romney. Transcript: Mitt Romney's Acceptance Speech.

Go ahead, word search his speech for "troops," "service," "veterans," "Afghanistan." I'll wait.

In his acceptance speech, Willard "Mittens" Romney never mentioned the war in Afghanistan, never acknowledged the service of men and women serving their country in the U.S. Armed Forces, nor our veterans. Not once. Romney mentioned the "military" only once, but in reference to sequestration budget cuts.

If a Democrat did this, there would have been an instantaneous firestorm of howling criticism from the mighty Wurlitzer of the right-wing noise machine. This slight to our Armed Forces and veterans went largely unnoticed by the media villagers and Beltway bloviators in their post-speech commentary.

As Steve Benen notes today in An invisible war:

I think we know what would happen under such a scenario. McCain, Kristol, Krauthammer, Limbaugh, Cheney, et al, would reach an unavoidable conclusion: there's simply no way this Democrat has a credible claim to be Commander in Chief during a time of war.

* * *

When was the last time there was a major-party nominating convention held during a war in which the presidential candidate decided not to mention the conflict or those fighting on our behalf? Has this ever happened?

For that matter, can anyone say with confidence what Romney's position on the war is? Or how he intends to execute this war if he's president in five months?

Are McCain, Kristol, Krauthammer, Limbaugh, Cheney, et al, on board with this?

[Note: Bloody Bill Kristol was not pleased with Romney's failure to mention the troops, veterans, or Afghanistan.]

* * *

If Romney takes the oath of office in January, he'll have tens of thousands of American troops on the ground in Afghanistan. Does anyone have the foggiest idea what he intends to do with those troops and/or how long he intends to keep them there? Does he?

Saturday... Well... Weekend? Editorial August 11th, 2012

By Michael Bryan

I'd like to let you all know that Drinking Liberally will be meeting this week at the regular time and place (Wednesday, 6pm at The Shanty). This week our guest is... Me! I will be presenting the Propositions that will appear on this November's ballot (and a few that might not be...). We'll discuss the pros and cons (where such exists) and a have a few beers. For a preview, or if you can't make it, you can take a look at my 2012 Ballot Prop Guide.

I personally read almost every news source in Arizona - and keep up with national reaction to our politics, as well. I do it to bring you readers of BlogForArizona the Arizona Donkey Feed, which appears on our right-hand sidebar every day (you may also have the Feed emailed to you daily). Sometimes the avalanche of information available in our 24/7 news cycle can be overwhelming. I do generally succeed in keeping the Feed topically restricted to Arizona politics. But it is a lot of noise to sort through, so, I decided I might like to sit down once a week and take some time to look around, and try to get some perspective on the news.

This week, I chose to present an extended rumination on the Jared Loughner plea and the Arpaio trial. I sense some connections that might not be entirely obvious.

Read more after the click...

Tucson Welcomes Veterans Home With a Parade

By Michael Bryan

Today Tucson did something very commendable. And it was not the city government that did it - it was the people of Tucson. They came together to throw a welcome home parade for the men and women who served their nation in war over the last dozen years in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also in prior conflicts.

Rachel Maddow gave the all-volunteer effort a shout-out as one of the best new things in the world - I heartily agree.

See footage of the parade taken by yours truly after the flip...

Hard Questions and Hard Truths

Posted by Bob Lord

So, I’m treating myself to a Sunday morning of reading the Times and my first read was about a blog kept by Sergeant Bales’ wife of all their trials and tribulations. I remarked to Tammy about how it seemed that Bales’ horrific acts may simply have been the product of war injuries, separation from his family, financial struggles, and the horrors of war. In other words, this may be the case of a completely decent human being reaching his breaking point and committing a horrific act.

Then, I saw these pieces: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/us/suspects-deployments-put-focus-on-war-strains.html?_r=1&hp 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/opinion/sunday/war-is-brain-damaging.html?ref=opinion

So, can we continue to deny that in order to accomplish its military objectives, the American empire, run by self-centered plutocrats entirely devoid of social conscience, is recklessly and callously destroying the bodies and brains of its poor and lower middle class “volunteers?”

A Worn Out Welcome

Posted by Bob Lord

Why is Hamid Karzai lashing out at Americans? Because he’s insulted over the Koran burnings? Because he’s angry at the loss of Afghani lives? Hardly. We’re talking about one of the most corrupt rulers ever to grace the planet. He could care less about such things. So, why is he lashing out? Because he has to.

Most occupations reach a tipping point when the occupied population stops tolerating the occupation. That’s certainly true when the occupation begins as a hostile occupation. But it’s even true when the occupier is at first welcomed, as the American forces who helped depose the Taliban presumably were. At some point, continued occupation becomes intolerable.

To say we’ve reached the tipping point in Afghanistan would be to say beer consumption today will be above average. The Afghan people can’t tolerate our presence anymore. They will rise up more and more forcefully to end the occupation. They will seize on any excuse to act, with increasing violence, against their occupiers. And we will continue to give them all the excuses they need, and then some. Any military operation will have unintended incidents, and, as is evident from events over the last 10 years, this one is no exception. In fact, this operation is more of a cluster fuck than most. How could it not be? This is Afghanistan, where empires die.

Karzai’s corrupt, but he’s not stupid. He knows that if he has any chance of hanging onto power, he must be anti-American at this point. The population is becoming more and more anti-American. Karzai knows that if he doesn’t show that he feels their pain (or, more accurately, act like he feels their pain), they’ll turn to the Taliban. And that will end life for him as he knows it, which is an extraordinarily good life by Afghani standards.

And there absolutely, positively is no way to reverse this process, anymore than Assad can reverse the uprising in Syria. That’s what tipping points are all about. Once you’ve reached one, there’s no turning back. We’ve worn out our welcome, and it’s time to leave. In fact, it was time to leave years ago.

We’re not going to salvage anything good at this point. All we can hope for is a minimum of ugliness going forward. Unfortunately, there could be trade off between minimizing the ugliness and saving face. In the year of a Presidential election, saving face could be paramount, so that doesn’t bode well. But Obama has been a master at sailing between Scylla and Charybdis, so maybe he can accomplish both objectives.

Oh well. Another casualty of Bush-Cheney hubris. Had we not diverted our attention to Iraq in 2003, the outcome in Afghanistan may have been vastly different. But the ADD American public won’t remember that. This one will go down as Obama’s failure.

Mitt's Dream Act is a Nightmare

Posted by Bob Lord

If I could wave a magic wand over all immigrant kids and confer legal status with a clear path to citizenship on them, I would. In a heartbeat. But I’m really not comfortable with the DREAM Act.

There are some positions I took during my campaign that I’m less than proud of. Not my stance on the DREAM Act. When asked, I would explain that I supported the goal of the DREAM Act, but I thought it was too narrow in scope. In my opinion, it needed other avenues for young immigrants to achieve legal status. I didn’t want the only avenue besides college to be the military. The reality is that most kids, including immigrant kids, are not college material. The idea that a non-college bound kid could achieve legal status and ultimately citizenship only by serving in the military bothered me. So my position was that additional avenues -- Americorps, infrastructure building, community service -- had to be added as means for attaining legal status.

A few years later, I saw Rep. Gutierrez, for whom I generally have a lot of respect, on television trumpeting the DREAM Act and how it would provide the military with nearly a million new recruits. Really? Is that a good thing? A million new recruits? In what war are these new recruits going to be used as cannon fodder? I’m guessing Iran, but I suppose it could be a different one that’s too early in the planning stage for us to know about.

So, for the past year or so, I’ve had this debate with several of my progressive friends. They think I’m being paternalistic, and they’re probably right. But the road to hell really can be paved with good intentions, and the thought of half a million immigrant kids dying in yet another imperialistic American military adventure sure seems like hell to me. And unlike poor American kids, these immigrant kids would have nobody to rise up on their behalf to challenge the war. After all, if you’re in the country illegally, as most parents of DREAM Act kids are, you’re not in much of a position to speak truth to power.

Now, enter Mitt. If this son of a bitch gets his way, the DREAM Act will have military service as the exclusive means of attaining legal status for young immigrants. So, he’s taking the opposite of the approach I advocated. No, surprise there, but what a cold-hearted prick. He wants to tell bright, young, college bound immigrants to forget about college and go fight in wars, with the clear message: “We don’t want you becoming doctors or engineers or scientists. You’re immigrants. You’re not worthy of college. We need you to be military grunts. Not officers, mind you. Grunts. College is for white kids, don’t you know?” I guess Mitt is where elitism and racism intersect.

Sorry to say, I’m concerned my fears regarding the DREAM Act are becoming reality. The Republicans no doubt will adopt Mitt’s position. Will the Democrats treat this as a “compromise” and accept it, explaining that the original DREAM Act couldn‘t pass the House? Don’t’ answer that one. Then, could war with Iran to break out. Don’t answer that one either.

This is not boding well.