Knowing all about Bowe.

Bowe Bergdhal. The name alone is fit for a movie.


Anyway, the sound of that name, like Benghazi, will be sure to bring out right-wing rage in the coming months.


There are lots of questions about Sgt. Bergdhal, so I will do this blog post in a simple Q&A form for you.


Field, the more I hear the story of this guy, the more I think about Nicholas Brody, am I wrong for that?


Nope. There are certainly a lot of parallels so far. Wait....I think I hear a helicopter. Do you hear it?


Field, this guy was a deserter, why should we care what happens to him?


Because it hasn't been actually proven that he was a deserter, and when he was captured by the Taliban he was still an American soldier.


Field, why did we have to let all those high level Taliban members go to free just one guy?


Because one American is worth hundreds of everyone else. Besides, they are Taliban, not Al Qaeda.  


Aren't they going back home to kill more Americans?


Nope. They won't make it home. It's a drone thing.


Field,  what Obama did was illegal, he should have notified congress of what he planned to do.


Well, not exactly. I know that congress passed a bill [that is now a federal statute] saying that the Sect of Defense must notify congress 30 days before the transfer of any prisoners from Gitmo, but.... whoops.


Anyway, O put a little thingy at the end of that bill when he signed it called a "signing statement", which basically says that I will sign the bill but I am still the HNIC. And in this case he claimed that executive authority (it's in the Constitution, look it up) gave him the right to "override the law".


My man W used these very same "signing statements" to torture folks. 


Field won't this give terrorists more incentive to capture American soldiers in the future?


They don't need anymore incentives to capture American soldiers. Just being American is incentive enough.


Field, what's up with Bergdhal's daddy's hair? He looks like a Taliban member his damn self.


Maybe dude is a Deadhead, or, maybe he wanted his son's captors to feel a kinship with him and not send his son's head home to him in a FedEx box.


Daddy Bergdhal did a lot of strange things.


Field, this swapping for our soldiers will make us look weak. Why are we negotiating with terrorist?


Do you think that Israel has a strong army? Well, been there done that. Besides, they aren't terrorists, they are enemy combatants. Isn't that what we were told? "We are at war".


Field, isn't this unprecedented for an American president to negotiate with terrorists enemy combatants?


Actually, no. One Saint Ronnie of Reagan comes to mind.    


Field, I wish I could rejoice in an American coming home after five years, but I just don't trust this Obama fellow, seems to me like he planned the whole thing.


The good news is that if you can say Benghazi it shouldn't be too hard to say, Bergdhal.



























  
 

Tales from the far right, and more about the B word.

*

The right wing in this country has become absolutely unhinged.

I mean I understand anger and speaking truth to power, in fact, I encourage it; but we really have to be careful how we go about acting out our displeasure with our government.

 "A right wing nitwit by the name of Chris Crockett, a resident of Pennsylvania, really does not like President Obama. This NRA acolyte and Phil Robertson supporter took to the interwebs to vent his frustrations with the President in an intelligent and well-informed discussion of the issues–just kidding! He wants that “Muslim” dead.

Apparently, Mr. Crockett is lonely and enjoys visits from men in suits, because he chose to join the ranks of Everest Wilhelmsen in his open expressions that President Obama (and his entire family) should cease to exist. Like Hank the Handyman, Crockett asked for someone in the world to “plz shoot that f**king n*gger president…”

Like all racists, Crockett preceded his use of the n-word with an explanation that he is “not racist.” If that’s not enough, he extends his wonderful suggestion that “he should be killed” to include President Obama’s children and “the rest of him (sic) Muslim Family.”


[Source]

Oh my! No love for his O ness I see. Hey, dude is entitled to question his government and the policies of the guy calling the shots, he and his fellow travelers can even do disgusting things like this , but my man has to be smart enough to keep the guys in the black suits off of his doorstep. This is not how you do it.

Finally, speaking of "right wing nitwits", I have another story that you will not be seeing on FOX News, Drudge, Breitbart, or any of their news outlets anytime soon.

This one has to do with the dreaded Benghaaaazi, and all the right wing talking points surrounding the tragedy that took place there.

Apparently they had a lot if it wrong.

"There are a lot of interesting details in the article, but two points are important to note:

• Islamist groups did indeed use that anti-Muslim video as a rallying point to launch the initial attack.
• There's no evidence that Al Qaeda or any other international terrorist organization was involved, and no evidence of meticulous planning.

Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.
A fuller accounting of the attacks suggests lessons for the United States that go well beyond Libya. It shows the risks of expecting American aid in a time of desperation to buy durable loyalty, and the difficulty of discerning friends from allies of convenience in a culture shaped by decades of anti-Western sentiment. Both are challenges now hanging over the American involvement in Syria’s civil conflict.

There’s much more to this multi-part article, and you should, as always, read the whole thing. But it shows unequivocally that the reality in Libya is far more complex and murky than the simplistic anti-Obama talking points pushed relentlessly by the right."

That's an outline of the article. Read the actual New York Times investigative report, here.

*Top pic from thewire.com

Is she or isn't she? Only her doctor (and wingnuts) knows for sure.

It's nice to be back on the plantation. Although I have mad love for Acadiana. They have great food, beautiful people (l married one) and life, for the most part, is one big party. But unfortunately it's still in a red state, so the kid must bid adieu.

The folks over at FAKE NEWS and their wingnut pals are still crying conspiracy when it comes to Hillary Clinton's health issues. They don't believe a word of it. They think that it's some type of elaborate hoax to get out of testifying about what she knew about Benghazi.

Man those Clintons sure are good. First Vince Foster and now this.

"During the Foster death investigations, like Benghazi, investigators were also thwarted, stonewalled, and unable to perform their jobs.."

Riiiight.

That sound you hear in your head is not really a black helicopter, wingnut.

Anyway, the folks over at FOX are supposed to be real journalist. SUPPOSED TO BE.

"Fox News producer/correspondent Justin Fishel asked about it during a press briefing — and, per a Washington Post report, later received a less-than-thrilled response from a State Department spokesman.

Fishel asked State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland:

Toria, can you expand on why Secretary Clinton can’t testify on Thursday about this? It seems that she has not been available to testify on the Benghazi situation on some very key dates, including the Sunday after 9/11 and now this Thursday.

Nuland offered a straightforward response:

Well, first of all, Justin, let me say again, the Secretary had anticipated testifying; she had committed to do so with the two committee chairs. As we put out on Saturday, she is still under the weather. She was diagnosed as having suffered a concussion, and her doctors have urged her to stay home this week. So it’s on that basis that she’s asked for the committees’ understanding, and the two committees have been very understanding to have her two deputies come up this week to testify in open session as they will on Thursday. But it was her intention to be there. If she had not been ill, she would be there. And she’s also committed, including in a letter today to the committee chairmen, that she looks forward to having an ongoing conversation with them herself.

Apparently, this type of questioning did not sit well with State Department spokesman Philipe Reines, who, according to the Post, sent Fishel (and Fox News’ Bryan Boughton) the following sharply worded email:

Justin –
We owe you an apology. And I’m adding Bryan so he’s aware of how badly we erred. I’m almost embarrassed to even admit this – but somehow your question at today’s Daily Press Briefing was somehow completely mauled and transcribed in the release below this way:
“Toria, can you expand on why Secretary Clinton can’t testify on Thursday about this? It seems that she has not been available to testify on the Benghazi situation on some very key dates, including the Sunday after 9/11 and now this Thursday.”

I just called them and read them the riot act for putting such misleading, accusatory, and absolutely asinine words in your mouth. Because after what we and her doctors explained over the weekend regarding her health, you couldn’t possibly have been insinuating the ulterior motives that question implies. No way. No credible journalist would do that without any basis whatsoever. But even more so, I really went to bat for you with folks here and told them that while I know the media can often be incredibly self-involved, there is no way you, an informed reporter, would equate one’s testifying before the United States Congress – made up of duly elected Senators and Representatives empowered by Article I of our Constitution – with going on tv. I don’t know Chris Wallace all that well, but I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t place his television show on par with one of the three branches of our government. And therefore, saying that this has happened on multiple ‘key dates’ is simply a blatant lie and grossly misleading to the public.

Anyway, our sincere apologies. If you send us what you really said, I’ll make sure it’s properly reflected.

Best,
Philippe" [Source] 
 

Now to be fair to FOX, one of their own condemned them for downplaying Clinton's health issues and implying that she was jaking it. Still, a few words from the botched face lift lady is not enough to give FOX NEWS and their lemmings any credibility on this subject. If you want to be a serious player in  the ideological battle for America, you have to stay away from these types of idiotic and laughable declarations.    


    

"White on Rice."

“You’ve got grumpy old (white) men going after a young accomplished woman of color,” Milbank wrote in a piece this week. “It’s arguable this is not the path to convincing the American people that the GOP is truly a big tent where all races, religions and classes are welcome.”

That was Dana Milbank of the Washington Post writing about the GOP's latest attempt to find skeletons in O's presidential closet. This time they are hoping that Susan Rice will be the crack in O's armor that will lead to his ultimate downfall. (Good luck with that. They will find that Troy was a cake walk compared to getting to O.) Poor "grumpy old (white) men", they tried to make Eric Holder their Trojan Horse but to no avail. Now, unfortunately for her, Susan Rice will have to face the wrath of the "grumpy old (white) men".

Some have attributed nefarious motives to the GOP's actions, and some, while not excusing their actions, have seemed to have read their minds.

“The GOP letter is wrong. It is partisan. It is angry. It is sour grapes. It is inaccurate. It is unfair. It is grossly misdirected against Susan Rice, who did absolutely nothing wrong. But in my humble opinion the letter has nothing to do with race.” [Source] 

Your humble opinion sir, not mine.

Of course, as is to be expected, the "grumpy" ones have declared that their actions are not racist but in the best interest of the country. They claim that they are simply trying to get to the bottom of what happened in Libya.

"Republicans, Graham foremost among them, made a patriotically tinged denial of the charges:

“Well, when you can’t answer the question, you attack the questioner,” he said on Fox News’s “Fox and Friends.” “The only color I’m worried about when it comes to Benghazi is red—blood red, the death of four Americans.” [Source]

 

But....but..., I thought they answered the question.

Sorry men, no matter how hard you try, you cannot make Benghazi into Watergate. And, sadly for you, this is not the Trojan Horse you were looking for.



















 

Mr. Gaddafi, assez c'est assez!

Somewhere in Libya there is a dude with some f*&^%* up shades and a botched plastic surgery job humming the words to that Gap Band song from back in the day. Yes, "You Dropped A Bomb on Me", would be apropos for my man Muammar right about now.

Europe and the folks in the Arab League are saying enough. Gaddafi's people have risen up against him, and damn near everyone in the Arab world has agreed that he has to go.

There is now a 600 -plus- square mile no fly zone over Libya, and the French are showing that they can do more than just cook.

Of course, over on the right, the wingnuts are in an apoplectic state, because their hatred of O is so great and they cannot find enough missteps on his part to make political hay over this crisis. Over on Radio Rwanda it's comical to see how hard they are trying to come up with different ways that O has botched the Libyan crisis. Of course, to us sane folks watching all of this play out; there is none.

O has played this just right. American troops are not on the ground in Libya (not that we know of) and the A-merry-cans are off the coast of Libya offering logistical support as the French fly sorties over Libya. Gaddafi has reneged on his cease fire promise, declared a UN Security Council resolution invalid, and now it's Gap Band time.

To his credit, unlike another president who can be identified with just a letter, O did not go in unilaterally, he went to the UN and made sure that coalition forces acted together. Unlike the wingnuts who have been calling for the bombing of Libya by US forces from day one, (shocking)he has acted with restraint and has done a masterful dance on a diplomatic tightrope. So far. This, of course, comes with political risks for O. The left is not pleased, and who knows where this conflict will be a few months down the line? What if Gadaffi hangs on and drags this thing out? What if there is a civil war raging in Libya a year from now? What then?

But could the US have stood by and watch the slaughter of a half a million people take place in Benghazi , while the French, British, and others act? I don't think so.

The truth is, no one really knows the political end- game in Libya. And, if they say that they do, they are lying. Who will take over once Gaddafi is gone? There are a lot of tribes in Libya; who will keep the peace? As is often the case in the Middle East, these answers will not come easy.

So, as I write this, there are American troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan. And, like all of you reading this, I am hoping that wars don't come in threes.