The passing of Molly Ivins was a horrific loss to American journalism, and she will be missed by many people around the world. Below is a small sampling of outstanding contributions during her career as one of America's foremost journalists. For a comprehensive look at her writings please visit the writer's syndicate at http://www.creators.com

 

See also the Motherjones page at http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2007/02/ivins_collected.html

 

Molly Ivins, 1944-2007

 

American journalist

 

 

 

 

 

___________

 

___________

 

Stand Up Against the Surge

 

 

http://www.creators.com/opinion/molly-ivins/stand-up-against-the-surge.html

 

Originally Published on Thursday January 11, 2007

 

By Molly Ivins

 

The purpose of this old-fashioned newspaper crusade to stop the war is not to make George W. Bush look like the dumbest president ever. People have done dumber things. What were they thinking when they bought into the Bay of Pigs fiasco? How dumb was the Egypt-Suez war? How massively stupid was the entire war in Vietnam? Even at that, the challenge with this misbegotten adventure is that WE simply cannot let it continue.

 

It is not a matter of whether we will lose or we are losing. We have lost. Gen. John P. Abizaid, until recently the senior commander in the Middle East, insists that the answer to our problems there is not military. "You have to internationalize the problem. You have to attack it diplomatically, geo-strategically," he said.

 

His assessment is supported by Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the senior American commander in Iraq, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who only recommend releasing forces with a clear definition of the goals for the additional troops.

 

Bush's call for a "surge" or "escalation" also goes against the Iraq Study Group. Talk is that the White House has planned to do anything but what the group suggested after months of investigation and proposals based on much broader strategic implications.

 

About the only politician out there besides Bush actively calling for a surge is Sen. John Mccain. In a recent opinion piece, he wrote: "The presence of additional coalition forces would allow the Iraqi government to do what it cannot accomplish today on its own - impose its rule throughout the country. ... By surging troops and bringing security to Baghdad and other areas, we will give the Iraqis the best possible chance to succeed." But with all due respect to the senator from Arizona, that ship has long since sailed.

 

A surge is not acceptable to the people in this country - we have voted overwhelmingly against this war in polls (about 80 percent of the public is against escalation, and a recent Military Times poll shows only 38 percent of active military want more troops sent) and at the polls. We know this is wrong. The people understand, the people have the right to make this decision, and the people have the obligation to make sure our will is implemented.

 

Congress must work for the people in the resolution of this fiasco. Ted Kennedy's proposal to control the money and tighten oversight is a welcome first step. And if Republicans want to continue to rubber-stamp this administration's idiotic "plans" and go against the will of the people, they should be thrown out as soon as possible, to join their recent colleagues.

 

Anyone who wants to talk knowledgably about our Iraq misadventure should pick up Rajiv Chandrasekaran's "Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green Zone." It's like reading a horror novel. You just want to put your face down and moan: How could we have let this happen? How could we have been so stupid?

 

As The Washington Post's review notes, Chandrasekaran's book "methodically documents the baffling ineptitude that dominated U.S. attempts to influence Iraq's fiendish politics, rebuild the electrical grid, privatize the economy, run the oil industry, recruit expert staff or instill a modicum of normalcy to the lives of Iraqis."

 

We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war. Raise hell. Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous. Make our troops know we're for them and trying to get them out of there. Hit the streets to protest Bush's proposed surge. If you can, go to the peace march in Washington on Jan. 27. We need people in the streets, banging pots and pans and demanding, "Stop it, now!"

___________

 

 

 

 

Iraq Exit is Up to Us

 

 

http://www.creators.com/opinion/molly-ivins/iraq-exit-is-up-to-us.html

 

 

Originally Published on Monday, January 08, 2007

 

By Molly Ivins

 

The president of the United States does not have the sense God gave a duck -- so it's up to us. You and me, Bubba.

 

I don't know why Bush is just standing there like a frozen rabbit, but it's time we found out. The fact is WE have to do something about it. This country is being torn apart by an evil and unnecessary war, and it has to be stopped NOW.

 

This war is being prosecuted in our names, with our money, with our blood, against our will. Polls consistently show that less than 30 percent of the people want to maintain current troop levels. It is obscene and wrong for the president to go against the people in this fashion. And it's doubly wrong for him to send 20,0000 more soldiers into this hellhole, as he reportedly will announce next week.

 

What happened to the nation that never tortured? The nation that wasn't supposed to start wars of choice? The nation that respected human rights and life? A nation that from the beginning was against tyranny? Where have we gone? How did we let these people take us there? How did we let them fool us?

 

It's a monstrous idea to put people in prison and keep them there. Since 1215, civil authorities have been obligated to tell people with what they are charged if they're arrested. This administration has done away with rights first enshrined in the Magna Carta nearly 800 years ago, and we've let them do it.

 

This will be a regular feature of mine, like an old-fashioned newspaper campaign. Every column, I'll write about this war until we find some way to end it. STOP IT NOW. BAM! Every day, we will review some factor we should have gotten right.

 

So let's take a step back and note, for example, that before the war one of the architects of the entire policy, Paul Wolfowitz, testified to Congress that Iraq had no history of ethnic strife. of the region. And the region is full of examples of Western colonial powers trying to occupy countries, take their resources and take over the administration of their people -- and failing.

 

The sectarian bloodbath we see daily completely refutes Wolfowitz. And now Bush has given him the World Bank to run. Wonder what he'll do there.

 

And let's keep in mind that when the Army arrived in Baghdad, we, the television viewers, watched footage of a bunch of enraged and joyous Iraqis pulling down the statue of Saddam Hussein, their repulsive dictator, in Firdos Square. Only one thing was wrong. The event was staged. Taking down the statue was instigated by a Marine colonel, and a PSYOP (psychological operations) unit made it appear to be a spontaneous show of Iraqi joy.

 

When we later saw the whole square where the statue was located, only 30 to 40 people were there (U.S. soldiers, press and some Iraqis -- and one of several U.S. tanks present pulled the statue down with a cable). We, the television viewers, saw the square being presented as though the people of Iraq had gone into a frenzy, mobbed the square and spontaneously pulled down the statue. Fake images and claims have been a part of this fiasco from the beginning.

 

We need to cut through all this smoke and mirrors and come up with an exit strategy, forthwith. The Democrats have yet to offer a cohesive plan to get us out of this mess. Of course, it's not their fault -- but the fact is we need leaders who are grown-ups and who are willing to try to fix it. Bush has ignored the actual grown-ups from the Iraq Study Group and the generals and all other experts who are nearly unanimous in the opinion that more troops will not help.

 

So, like I said, it's up to you and me, Bubba. We need to make sure that the new Congress curbs executive power, which has been so misused, and asserts its own power to make this situation change. Now.

 

To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

___________

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks -- No, Seriously

 

 

http://www.creators.com/opinion/molly-ivins/molly-ivins-thanks-no-seriously.html

 

 

Originally Published on Thursday November 23, 2006

 

By Molly Ivins

 

AUSTIN, Texas -- It's time to give thanks, and I want to start off with a great, big thank you for the top American movement conservatives and all the fun we've had since Election Day. I know I promised not to gloat after this election was over, but I'm not talking unseemly gloating -- I'm talking about moments so brilliantly hilarious the only option is to put your head down on the desk and howl.

 

First in line is the wit of The National Review's Kate O'Beirne, who clearly teamed up with Borat to explain the great conservative win. Her explanation is that this is a win for conservatism because a great many of the D's elected are so conservative themselves. She says half of them are conservatives.

 

She is indeed right. If only twice as many Democrats had been elected, it would have proved that there are twice as many conservatives in the country, and this is clear to any thinking person. We might challenge Ms. O'Beirne to explain how the next Republican win is a victory for liberalism.

 

The reason that O'Beirne and others are able to accept such an absurdity is because they've been listening to George W. Bush for six years and are thus able to believe six impossible things before breakfast.

 

Speaking of "thinking," another great moment for conservatives this year was highlighted on the Nov. 16 edition of Comedy Central's "The Daily Show." Host Jon Stewart addressed a recent remark that CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck made to Representative-elect Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim ever elected to Congress.

 

Beck said, "I have been nervous about this interview with you because what I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.'" After airing Beck's comment, Stewart declared, "Finally, a guy who says what people who aren't thinking are thinking."

 

While the Washington press corps worried its pretty little head to a frazzle over Nancy Pelosi's Armani suits and terrible start as speaker of the House (except she hasn't started as speaker), they forgot to fret over Trent Lott, who had previously been bounced unceremoniously from the Senate leadership team to which the Republicans just re-elected him. They seem to have forgotten that he had expressed the wish that Strom Thurmond, the segregationist candidate for president, had won in 1948.

 

Thanks for the late Johnny Apple and the now retired Adam Clymer (who predicted a 28-seat sweep and the possibility of taking the Senate) for reminding us that The New York Times used to know how to cover politics. So, for that matter, did The Washington Post, now graced only by E.J. Dionne.

 

Thanks for Cokie Roberts, who was the only alert citizen on television on election night. The others were either stalwart Republicans or John McCain worshipers.

 

Thanks from a grateful nation for an obedient press corps that failed during Bush's six-hour, carefully orchestrated visit to Indonesia to register the fact that there were massive demonstrations against his administration and its policies toward Muslims. The demonstrators during his short visit forced him to stay behind the presidential palace wall all day and -- due to concerns for his safety -- not spend the night.

 

So many of our media mavens have been so wrong for so long that we may yet see a mere modicum of becoming self-doubt from our professional pontificators. And think how thankful we'd all be for that. Their sources, led by Karl Rove, have had them eating Pablum out of their hands for years now.

 

Nope. No hope.

___________

 

 

 

 

Populists! Who'd a-thunk it?

 

 

http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/columnists/molly_ivins/16026120.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

 

 

StarTelegram.com

 

Posted on Thu, Nov. 16, 2006

 

By Molly Ivins Creators Syndicate

 

AUSTIN - Having watched election coverage nonstop for days, I sometimes would wake screaming, "Bipartisanship!" and scare myself.

 

Of all the viral members of the media who have been suggesting that the Dems cooperate with their political opponents, the one who rendered me almost unconscious with surprise was Newt Gingrich. Newt Gingrich, the Boy Scout. Newt Gingrich, the man who sat there and watched Congress impeach and try Bill Clinton for lying about having an extramarital affair while he, Newt Gingrich, was lying about having an extramarital affair. (This all took place during his second marriage. The first one ended when he told his wife he was divorcing her while she was in the hospital undergoing cancer treatment.)

 

This is the level of Republican hypocrisy that reminds us all how far the Dems have to go. I tell you what -- let's all hold hands and sing, "Oh, the farmer and the cowman should be friends!" Just not, please, Newt Gingrich, the man whose contribution to civility was to recommend that all Democrats be referred to with such words as cowards, traitors, commies, godless, liars and other such bipartisanship-promoting terms.

 

Please, anyone but Newt.

 

Now, from my hours spent battered and half brain-dead listening to the fatuous, self-important commentators of our nation, I learn that the people did not elect liberals to Congress last week. Nope, they elected populists! Well, gosh all hemlock. Populist! I am one.

 

Who knew? I thought all said I was chopped liver. Populist. Like Tom Frank of What's the Matter With Kansas? fame. Jim Hightower. We can even draw our lines of political genealogy -- via Ralph Yarborough and Bob Elkhart.

 

A populist is pretty much for the people and generally in this case exactly the same as a liberal -- we just put the em-pha-sis on a different syl-la-ble. We also tend to be more fun. We do not vote to hurt average Americans, even if the corporate payoff is really big. Even if it's just a little bit -- like the bankruptcy bill.

 

We tend to focus less on social issues and more on who's gettin' taken and who's doin' the taking. In my opinion, Americans are not getting taken by the Republican Party. They are getting taken by Large Corporations that bought and own the Republican Party.

 

The word populist was misused, abused and co-opted by right-wingers for years, ever since we were all forced to read Richard Hofstadter's The Paranoid Style in American Politics. Bad history can do a powerful amount of damage. Most of us stopped at the painful news that Tom Watson, leader of the late-19th-century populism, went on to become a raging racist bigot. Populism itself took on the connotation of bile and nastiness.

 

If you read back to the beginning of the populist movement, however, you will find Andy Jackson and the West set against all those dreary Eastern snobs. When Andy opened up the White House and let in the people, the snobs had the fantods.

 

OK, it's not the 19th century anymore, but it is always the right time to point out that the emperor isn't wearing any clothes. Honest. There stands George W. Bush, buck nekkid. We want to help him out of this fix because he's dragging the whole Army, the country and the world down with him. But don't ask us to call those clothes.

___________

 

 

 

 

Where There's War, There's Kissinger

 

10/06/2006

 

AUSTIN, Texas — The Old War Criminal is back. I try not to hold grudges, but I must admit I have never lost one ounce of rancor toward Henry Kissinger, that cynical, slithery, self-absorbed pathological liar. He has all the loyalty and principle of Charles Talleyrand, whom Napoleon described as "a piece of dung in a silk stocking."

 

Come to think of it, Talleyrand looks pretty good compared to Kissinger, who always aspired to be Metternich (a 19th century Austrian diplomat). Just count the number of Americans and Vietnamese who died between 1969 and 1973, and see if you can find any indication he ever gave a damn.

 

As for Kissinger's getting the Nobel Peace Prize, it is a thing so wrong it has come to define wrongness — as in, "As weird as the time Henry Kissinger got the Nobel Peace Prize."

 

Tom Lehrer, who was a lovely political satirist, gave up satire after that blow.

 

The War Criminal's return is the only piece of news I have yet found in Bob Woodward's new book, and what amazes me is the reaction to the work. Gosh, gasp, imagine, Woodward says the war's a disaster!

 

People who know a lot more than Bob Woodward have been saying the war's a disaster for years — because war is self-evidently a disaster. Why this is greeted as an annunciation from on high just because Woodward, the world's most establishment reporter, now says so is a mystery to me.

 

I have read snippets here and there suggesting the self-important chattering class of Washington is massively resistant to admitting they were wrong about Iraq, and that you only have credibility as a critic of the war if you were for it in the first place. I missed a logical link there. I know how vain the chattering classes are, but the majority of the American people has since come to conclude they were wrong about the war — and they say so without feeling disgraced.

 

What's wrong with the Washington press corps? Speaking of people who have trouble with the truth, here's a recent George W. line from two weeks ago I particularly prize: "There's kind of an urban myth here in Washington about how this administration hasn't stayed focused on Osama bin Laden. Forget it. It's convenient throwaway lines when people say that."

 

How do these urban myths get started? Perhaps with GWB on March 13, 2002: "I don't know where bin Laden is. ... You know ... I just don't spend that much time on him. ... I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him."

 

Or as Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said on April 6, 2002: "The goal (in Afghanistan) has never been to get bin Laden. ... The goal there was never (to go) after specific individuals." Donald Rumsfeld: Bin Laden has been "neutralized." And Vice President Cheney: "Bin Laden himself is not that big a threat."

 

And etc., etc. We got two straight years of quotes from officials all across the Bush administration pushing the idea that Osama bin Laden is just a minor player, we're not hunting him, the war on terror is a much larger deal, and so on and so forth. You know, it's one thing to tell a whopper yourself — it's adding insult to injury to call the people who point this out liars themselves.

 

A half-hour documentary about Granny D (Doris Haddock) will be playing throughout October on various PBS channels around the country. Granny D, the crusader for campaign finance reform, who hiked across the country at age 90, is now 96, and the documentary of her work is inspiring.

 

She's such an adorably "sweet old lady" that one forgets how tough she has been and how consistent she has been. You want to know where to get the strength, courage and optimism to keep fighting for change? Listen to Granny D. More at www.grannyd.com.

 

To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

___________

 

 

 

 

A Tortured Debate

 

 

Truthdig September 21, 2006

 

 

by Molly Ivins

 

Austin, Texas - Some country is about to have a Senate debate on a bill to legalize torture. How weird is that?

 

I'd like to thank Sens. John Mccain, Lindsay Graham-a former military lawyer-and John Warner of Virginia. I will always think fondly of John Warner for this one reason: Forty years ago, this country was involved in an unprovoked and unnecessary war. It ended so badly the vets finally had to hold their own homecoming parade, years after they came home. The only member of Congress who attended was John Warner.

 

A debate on torture. I don't know-what do you think? I guess we have to define it, first. The White House has already specified "water boarding," making some guy think he's drowning for long periods, as a perfectly good interrogation technique. Maybe, but it was also a great favorite of the Gestapo and has been described and condemned in thousands of memoirs and novels in highly unpleasant terms.

 

I don't think we can give it a good name again, and I personally kind of don't like being identified with the Gestapo. How icky. (Somewhere inside me, a small voice is shrieking, "Are you insane?")

 

The safe position is, "Torture doesn't work."

 

Well, actually, it works to this extent-anybody can be tortured into telling anything that's true and anything that's not true. The more people are tortured, the more they make up to please the torturer. Then the torturer has to figure out when the vic started lying. Since our torturers are, in George Bush's immortal phrase, "professionals" and this whole legislative fight is over making torture legal so the "professionals" can't later be charged with breaking the Geneva Conventions, Bush has vowed to end "the program" completely if he doesn't get what he wants. (The same thin voice is shrieking, "Professional torturers trained with my tax money?")

 

Bush's problem is that despite repeated warnings, he went ahead with "the program" without waiting for Congress to provide a fig leaf of legality. Actually, we have been torturing prisoners at Gitmo, prisons in Eastern Europe and Afghanistan for years.

 

Since only seven of the several hundred prisoners at Gitmo have ever been charged with anything, we face the unhappy prospect that the rest of them are innocent. And will sue. That's going to be quite an expensive settlement. The Canadian upon whom we practiced "rendition," sending him to Syria for 10 months of torture, will doubtlessly be first on the legal docket. I wonder how high up the chain of command a civil suit can go? Any old war criminals wandering around?

 

I was interested to find that the Rev. Louis Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition is so in favor of torture he told Mccain that the senator either supports the torture bill or he can forget about the evangelical Christian vote. I'd like to see an evangelical vote on that one. I don't know how Sheldon defines traditional values, but deliberately inflicting terrible physical pain or stress on someone who is completely helpless strikes me as ... well, torture. And, um, wrong. And I've smoked dope! Boy, everything those conservatives tell us about the terrible moral values of us liberals must be true after all.

 

Now, in addition to the slightly surreal awakening to find we live in a country that's having a serious debate on a torture bill, can we do anything about it? The answer is: We better. We better do something about it. Now, right away. What do we do? The answer is: anything ... phone, fax, e-mail, mail, demonstrate-go stand outside their offices or the nearest federal building in the cold and sing hymns or shout rude slogans, chant or make a speech, or start attacking federal property, like a postal box, so they have to arrest you. Gather peacefully and make a lot of noise. Get publicity, too.

 

How will you feel if you didn't do something? "Well, honey, when the United States decided to adopt torture as an official policy, I was dipping the dog for ticks."

 

As Ann Richards used to say, "I don't want my tombstone to read: 'She kept a clean house.' "

___________

 

 

 

 

The New "Activist" Judges

 

 

http://www.creators.com/opinion/molly-ivins/the-new-activist-judges.html

 

08/24/2006

 

AUSTIN, Texas — Another bee-you-ti-ful example of the right-wing media getting it all wrong. Here they are having the nerve to mutter in public about "activist judges" because Judge Anna Diggs Taylor has pointed out that spying without a warrant is illegal in this country — so warrantless telephone tapping is illegal in this country.

 

Improbably enough, the first complaint of many of these soi-disant legal scholars is that Taylor's decision is not well written. No judicial masterpiece, they sneer. Nevertheless, warrantless spying is illegal. Did it ever occur to these literary critics that Taylor has a lay-down hand? The National Security Agency program is flat unconstitutional, and for those who insist this means Osama bin Laden wins, it's also ridiculously easy to fix so that it is constitutional.

 

Conservatives in this country have been yipping in chorus for years about "activist judges," and frankly, like fools, many of you bought into the phony political rhetoric about those terrible jurists.

 

Somehow, activist judges are held responsible for gay marriage, Roe v. Wade and everything else Americans disagree about, as though Americans would never disagree without their encouragement. Conservatives have been mad at the Supreme Court since it decided to desegregate the schools in 1954 and seen fit to blame the federal bench for everything that has happened since then that they don't like.

 

As any liberal could have told you, the conservatives didn't want a right-wing shift on the nation's courts because of "social issues" — that's just a handy political ploy. Honestly, people, haven't you figured out what this is all about yet? Money. The conservatives are in a snit about "liberal courts" because of money.

 

Corporations being prosecuted for breaking the law! Tobacco companies forced to pay huge fines! Oil and chemical companies made to pay for cleanup at Superfund sites! Oh, the horror, the horror. The Wall Street Journal's editorial page couldn't stop shivering over it for years.

 

"This is the richest business term in recent memory," Mark Levy, a Supreme Court litigator, told The Wall Street Journal, which has stopped quivering at last. Moving right along in the long-drawn-out battle to deny ordinary citizens access to their own courts, the justices closed down the right to allow class-action securities cases in state courts. The court also kept out of a lower-court decision preventing taxpayers from suing to stop tax breaks that states and municipalities use to lure big business, a notorious example of raging bad policy.

 

Meanwhile, what a nice gift from the federal bench to the insurance companies when a federal judge in Mississippi decided that hurricane insurance policies excluding water damage are "valid and enforceable." As many of our fellow citizens had an opportunity to learn during Katrina, it's a challenge to sit around in a class IV hurricane, trying to figure out which is wind and which is water damage. "Ooops, there goes the roof, probably wind, followed by a huge run of waves rolling over the house, could be water."

 

Insurance company stocks went up across the board after the decision, while the industry kindly advised its clients to "keep you eyes wide open when buying new homeowners' insurance."

 

Congratulations to the Katrina survivors who were hanging on by their fingernails.

 

Money, money, money is the motif of the "New Activist" federal judges, but they have also been busy, busy limiting congressional authority and individual rights. As People for the American Way notes, federal appellate courts — effectively the court of last resort for most Americans — are working on: questioning the constitutionality of the Endangered Species Act, overturning the National Labor Relations Board rulings against anti-union discrimination and other unfair labor practices by employers, allowing the Bush administration to keep secret the records of the Cheney energy task force and rewriting by court order a state law on First Amendment activity.

 

Other Bush appellate judges have ruled to deny protection to workers who file claims of race and disability discrimination, made it harder to protect the environment, and issued other decisions that will affect our lives and liberties for decades.

 

Activist judges, indeed.

 

To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

___________

 

 

 

 

No Shortage of Fear

 

 

http://www.creators.com/opinion/molly-ivins/no-shortage-of-fear.html

 

08/15/2006

 

AUSTIN, Texas — We have nothing to fear but fear itself, especially since fear is now being fomented and manipulated for political purposes by a bunch of shameless hacks. Who is trying to make you afraid and why? This Karl Rove tactic is getting quite threadbare, in fact, and so much so that it is getting dangerously close to comedy.

 

My favorite episode, of course, was the Miami terrorists, a fearsome horde of seven described by the FBI's deputy director as, "More inspirational than operational." That means wanna-bes. An FBI informant posing as a member of al-Qaida offered to supply the plotters with material for the jihad, so they asked for boots and uniforms. Every terrorist needs a uniform.

 

Of course, even a nincompoop can succeed occasionally — but the list of wanna-bes keeps growing. Seventeen people were arrested in Canada for intending to behead the prime minister. Has anyone in all of history ever cared that much about a Canadian prime minister?

 

Their national motto is, "Now, let's not get excited."

 

Of the hundreds of prisoners, alleged terrorists all, who have been held at Guantanamo on the grounds that they were the worst of the worst, only 10 have ever been charged with anything. In the latest episode, shortly after announcement of a British-based plot to blow up airliners, Britain and the United States were already airing their differences over when the perpetrators should have been arrested.

 

The administration has put itself in the position of the Boy Who Cried Wolf. If, God forbid, a serious terrorist conspiracy is uncovered, there will be a tendency to dismiss it as a backlash to these over-hyped "plots."

 

I personally have been sleeping more soundly at night knowing that Michael Chertoff is secretary of homeland security. Ever since Chertoff's agency brought us the stunning news that there are more terrorist targets in Indiana than in New York or Washington, I've realized this guy could find a terrorist plot anywhere. Watch out for the Amish — they'll run right over you with those buggies, and they all have pitchforks, too. I hear they're connected to al-Qaida through Saddam Hussein.

 

Should you be suffering a fear shortage despite the administration's best efforts, consider the paralyzing news of the defeat of Joe Lieberman. According to none other than our very own Veep Dick Cheney, Lieberman's defeat helps the terrorists. Yes! How can this be, you ask? Well, you know Joe Lieberman has been supporting Bush's war in Iraq, and we are at war with Iraq because Saddam Hussein was allied to al-Qaida and had weapons of mass destruction, see? He wasn't? He didn't? Gee, maybe that's why the Democrats were upset with Lieberman!

 

Lieberman's unhappy fall in electoral battle touched off a volcano of drivel in the media. Some of it should be written off as the incurable Establishment tendency to defend its own. People who have known Joe Lieberman for 18 years are naturally predisposed in his favor — always happens. On the other hand, what a bunch of codswallop from people who should know better. They're behaving as though no one had a right to challenge Lieberman, whereas given his record, I can't think of anyone who deserved challenge more.

 

The pusillanimous punditry announce that these fools in the Democratic Party may make the war in Iraq a major issue! Horrors! I hate to pull the old advantages-of-provincialism trick, but I do think the D.C. press corps and political establishment are painfully out of touch and need to get out into the country more. Indiana, anyone?

 

To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

 

COPYRIGHT 2006 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.

___________

 

 

 

 

No Guts, No Grace

 

 

http://www.creators.com/opinion/molly-ivins/no-guts-no-grace.html

 

08/03/2006

 

SAN FRANCISCO — Do you think the Bush administration is going after the press? The San Francisco Chronicle says on the front page this morning, "Cameraman Jailed for Not Yielding Tape," whereas The New York Times is reporting, "U.S. Wins Access to Reporter Phone Records." I'm feeling like a bunny trying to outrun a pack of wolfhounds.

 

Sometimes the press enjoys scaring itself or pretending it is about to be made into a bunch of martyrs. This is not one of those times. We are under full attack now, and it is time to fight. I am not infuriated by the performance of the press so far, but I am disgusted. Bob Novak is the most notable traitor, but others are leaping for political favors as they rush to insist The New York Times shouldn't print the news (and occasionally, quite old news at that). I fail to see how Fox News and other right-wing outlets have so little imagination they cannot picture themselves in the same corner come a Democratic administration. What goes around comes around and all that good stuff, but to set it up so that payback is hell for yourself is tragically, deeply dumb. I have watched the D.C. press corps play courtier to Bush since he openly insulted Helen Thomas, who is not only a first-rate journalist, but a lady as well. Shame on you all. No principle, no guts, no grace.

 

On another topic, I was talking to a guy named Andy the other night when he observed that unlike President Bush, he had learned first-hand that diplomacy works with skunks. He was speaking of skunks, the striped, tail-up-bad-sign kind, but they seem a perfect metaphor for the rest of what he laughingly calls Bush's diplomatic strategery — at which point the proper response is to ask, "What diplomatic strategery?" Has anyone seen a foreign policy lately? Does anyone still know what containment means? These are, after all, the people who were against arms control because Bill Clinton was for it.

 

One feels like Casey Stengel looking at the early Mets: "Doesn't anybody here know how to play this game?" In the most contemptible act of irresponsibility imaginable, the neo-cons who pulled together to start this war now reject any responsibility for it. Mr. Wolfowitz is busy running the World Bank; it's no longer his business.

 

The rest of this crew of moral pygmies are too frightened of Dick Cheney to point out that this entire war is a disaster, or a FIASCO as Thomas E. Ricks, author of the new book "Fiasco" puts it. I think the Bush foreign policy — when in doubt, send Condi Rice home — is a public relations ploy to keep the Israeli-Lebanese war going long enough so that Americans won't notice Iraq has completely collapsed in the meantime. And it has collapsed. I suggest our military figure out how to get out of there before they lose an entire effing army on the way.

 

In Washington, the sophomore wienies who now staff the administration are far too terrified of Cheney to speak up, even if they had enough sense to notice it's going rather badly. Oh, for heaven's sake — send Cheney back to south Texas so he can shoot at caged birds there. The Wizard of Oz had more credibility.

 

I think they're running around the Middle East looking for a red heifer. (For those of you who don't read your news straight from the Book of Revelations, a red heifer is needed to set off the Rapture. We're working on it.)

 

Well, if you can't get any global action from this outfit, how about some plain old legislation? Nope. The Republicans' latest effort was to pass a callous imitation of a minimum wage increase ($2.10 an hour over two years) after 10 years with no raise. They may fall over in gratitude. And, in the same bill mind you, this crew of crazed philanthropists insisted on another multibillion-dollar cut in the estate tax. For really, really rich people. Rep. Zach Wamp gloatingly told the Democrats, "We have outfoxed you." Outfoxed? A tiny increase in the minimum wage and a huge tax cut for multimillionaires. Does this make any sense? Does this even make politics?

 

In a splendid display of incompetence, the Republicans went on to make hay of pension reform plans.

 

Meanwhile, I have yet another complaint to lodge against George W. Bush. "The man is a moron!" is not political debate. Not helpful. Not even prudent, as his old man would say. But that is precisely what he leaves us saying: "But, he is a complete moron." Someone needs to pick up this discussion and point out that at least he's our moron and say something encouraging like someday maybe he'll learn to pronounce nuclear. We can count on him not to change his mind about stem cell research no matter what people learn. And, the only foreign leader he's necked with is female.

 

To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

 

COPYRIGHT 2006 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.

___________

 

 

 

 

More Immigrant-Bashing on the Way

 

 

http://www.creators.com/opinion/molly-ivins/more-immigrant-bashing-on-the-way.html

 

07/06/2006

 

While the rest of you were celebrating life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I was keeping an eye on Karl Rove — because someone has to.

 

A "Bush Signals Shift in Stance on Immigrants" headline is the early warning sign that we're about to get an all-out immigrant-bashing campaign for the fall, complete with xenophobia, racism and blaming the weakest, least powerful people in the country for everything that's wrong with it.

 

House Republicans, who know a good socially divisive issue when they see one, are perfectly happy to blame illegal workers for everything. Trade policy, repealing taxes for the rich, corruption in Congress — it's all done by illegal workers. Everywhere you look in this society, there's a bunch of people named Gomez and Ramirez, all of them making decisions from the top — in charge of the Pentagon, heading the military-industrial complex, deciding the rich need tax relief, in charge of this stupid war, making decisions on Wall Street.

 

What do you mean, the only people you know named Gomez and Ramirez push brooms and pick cantaloupes? Can't you see that everything that's wrong with this country is because of illegal aliens? It's all their fault. The people in charge have nothing to do with it.

 

Besides, immigrant-bashing is such an old American tradition. Back at the time of the Revolution, many Anglo-Americans worried about the terrible number of Germans engulfing the country (see, Karl?). Since then, we've managed to work up a snit over the Irish, the Jews, the Polish, the Swedes, Bolivians, Bavarians, Bosnians, Russians, Italians, Sicilians, a great variety of Africans, Indians, Pakistanis, Maltese (sorry you missed that one — the Maltese once overran New York City deli counters), Cubans, Puerto Ricans and so forth.

 

If you haven't been here long enough to get upset about at least one other group moving in, you must still owe the coyote (as immigrant-smugglers are called). Think of the rich verbal history of ethnic insults — Bohunks, Krauts, Polacks, Micks.

 

I don't see why we should stop blaming newcomers for our troubles just because they're not in charge of anything. You gotta admit, prejudice is as American as apple pie. I hear tell these Mexicans keep crossing the border so they can get on welfare and get health care and all these goodies. Funny, we don't have goodies in Texas, but they keep moving here to work anyway.

 

Bush was planning to take a stab at resolving the problem, particularly on the Mexican border, with a guest-worker program. But the House Republicans had a hissy fit, claimed it was an "amnesty program" and demanded harsher measures, militarization of the border, a big fence. Not gonna work, y'all. Build a 50-foot fence, and they'll build a 51-foot ladder. Hire Halliburton with a no-bid contract to build the fence, and it will hire illegal workers to do it.

 

The catch-and-release program currently run for Mexicans by the U.S. government is damn silly. So what will work? If you want to stop Mexicans from crossing the border to work here, put Americans who hire them in jail. Since the Americans who hire them are also often (not always) large donors to the Republican Party, you will have to take that up with them.

 

Fixing Mexico certainly does NOT involve interfering in their elections. I had to laugh at the number of American pundits who solemnly lectured the Mexicans on how their tied election was such a delicate situation for their democracy. Like it never happened to us?

 

Helping to fix Mexico involves, in my opinion, redoing NAFTA, so that labor and environmental standards can be included. I've always liked Lou Dobbs, who at least cares about middle- and working-class Americans. But to some extent, he's got the immigrant issue by the wrong end. If you don't want Mexicans walking into this country, make sure no on is offering them jobs. You could even pass a law about it. You could even enforce the law. Don't blame them.

 

To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

 

COPYRIGHT 2006 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.

___________