This won't be hugely substantive, or even vaguely, but the the fact that the Wenatchee World (not a notably liberal rag) would publish this is, perhaps, news; besides, it's my first ever published LTE.  See also, below the fold, Cathy McMorris' reaction... think she really read it?

Iran not the problem

With what little respect is due, the current drumbeat by the Bush/Cheney/Lieberman/Kyl axis of idiocy for military action against Iran has to be seen for what it is: a blind, desperate attempt to salvage a vestige of credibility after their complete and utter failure in Iraq. Only by fomenting further fear and attendant overreaction can they hope to retain power.

We need to say no to any and all such attempts to manufacture a casus belli against yet another Middle Eastern country that has more than enough problems of its own to prevent it from creating significant global conflict in anything like the near term. Iran is not the problem, not yet and perhaps never, if the West plays its cards intelligently. The problem is in the White House, and in the deviousness of the pro-war faction in Congress and the Senate. Shut them down, now.

you can fill in the blank.  In April I posted a request for information re: running for WA05 & received a rather remarkable response all around.  Thought it might be time for an up-date; I've been too freakin' busy trying to finish my house over there and sell the one in Seattle to do more than lurk and toss in the occasional comment. Pray follow me o'er the flip

This is probably as nuts as I think it is, but I'm vaguely considering a run at WA-05.  I've been unsuccessful in getting hold of Peter Goldmark to find out if he's considering another run, which I would support; if anyone knows how to do that, please let me know & I'll throw my full (if more or less negligible, at present) weight behind him.

fold

This may have been diaried at length before, but I'd suggest that reiteration may be in order.

I just encountered a comment wherein someone suggested that Hitchens was born in "alcholistan", by which I can only presume he meant "alcoholistan".  Mirth, of course, ensued.

I don't get it.  We are pretty overwhelmingly PC here, aside from revelling in a certain amount of language that is not altogether ready for prime time (more accurately, prime time isn't ready for it). This is arguably a good thing:  calling people "retards" and the like is puerile, at best, and generally counterproductive.

Isn't this sort of attitude to alcoholics similarly unfortunate?  Follow, if you wish, over the fold.

"Rule by decree passed for Chavez" according to the BBC.  Now I'm not much of a Chavez fan, not because of his policies to date, necessarily, but because I've seen this coming for some little time, and I'm allergic, both by nature and by training, to dictatorships (by any other name).  If you care, follow me over the hump....

Not expecting a lot of "take" for this subject, but I've been struck lately by the apparent failure by most folks (not so much here, but in general) to fully apprehend what's going on with our money.

Someone is going to tell me that this should be in an open thread, no doubt, but, well, let's see where it goes....

It seems that our George is remodeling the "Situation Room" at the White House.  Apparently this has been done quite a numuber of times since JFK first built it; it would be interesting to know at what junctures the remodels took place, for reasons to be divulged after the fold...

Don't know how many of my fellow NW-ians caught this business, but ol' Dave is truly living up to his mentors in DC.

Appears that he took credit, in a dog-bonks-pony before his base, for busting the single-mom bus-driver who flipped Masterbushster off last time he was courting the Megaginks of Medina, and presumes to believe that he got her shitcanned from the B-vue schools.  Fact is, she'd already been fired before he contacted the district, presumably reported by some other kind soul.  

Fella could get downright morose watching the US go in the tank, thanks to our buds on the Bushite bench.  Fella could start thinking real hard about emigration.  Or political mayhem.  Even the odd assassination.  

Fella needs to get a life, take a real look at this torture nonsense, and all the other bullshit GW and company have given us in the past almost six years.  Fact is, it's politics.  And politics is ugly, always has been, always will be. Let's not get all teary about the US' past:  we've been hip-deep in way bad shit over and over again, starting with the amazing level of mutual sliming that took place among our founding fathers --- read McCullough on John Adam --- continuing through the regimes of some very nasty pieces of work in the 19th and 20th centuries.  We're just starting the 21st extra bad, which maybe means it truly is renewal time.

Never done this before, really:  my tendency is to drop in comments here and there, with an occasional diary to call attention to something that seems to be getting ignored.  That I should actually contribute something that is more or less heartfelt would scandalize the majority of my friends and probably destroy my cred with anyone who has ever worked for me.
-flop-

Not much into diaries, not sure I have that much to say, but I seem to have hosed whatever it is that allows one to access comments on dkos & am getting pretty frustrated that I see little on the site with regard  to Peter Goldmark's run for WA-05 against McMorris.  I've submitted the odd comment, but, as I can't access replies or subsequent comments, I have to go this route

!dive!

I don't know how many Economist readers there are out there, but they recently did an amazingly lame echo of the US MSM re: the Lamont victory.  Made me downright ornery, both because they got so much wrong and because, damn it, it's a mag I have generally respected despite its pronounced rightward lean.

Much of the article was analytically decent, so it's worth a read if you can dig it up (12 August), but the following letter will give you some indication of where they crapped on themselves.

(leap)

Now Verizon and Bell South are denying the whole NSA thing.  Maybe....but part of the denial from Verizon is hogwash, pure and simple:  they contend that they don't make records of local phone calls, generally speaking, because they aren't billed for most folks.

I'm a phone guy of sorts, but not a switch guy, so I can't say for certain sure that the switch records every number dialed by a given phone.  I suspect it does, however:  how else could all these Law'nOrder people use phone records on the shows all the time (talk about a lousy argument:  "I saw it on TV!")

But let's look at it more rationally, after the jump

Haven't seen much on this subject at 'kos, wondering a bit why. McDermott (D-WA) got an amendment re: depleted uranium munitions passed today, voice vote.  See below for a start.