Not long ago Charlie Black caused a stir in Fortune magazine when he predicted that another terrorist attack would do a great deal to give a boost to McCain's presidential aspirations.  There was much a-do about this little 'mistake' and Charlie immediately apologized to 'the world at large' for saying such a horrible thing...out loud that is.

When nothing else works, its time to pull out the old 9/11 fear card and even though McCain made if clear that he did not agree with Charlie Black, guess who's got their crystal ball out and is predicting that there will more than likely be a huge horrible attack in Iraq very near election day this year.

How convenient.  How specific.  How amazing that among all of his other talents, John McCain can see into the future.  

It only gets worse below the fold.  Bring your helmets and wear garlic around you neck just in case.

I came upon this interesting comment made to an article from The Huffington Post:

It would have been a great parody of what some are trying to do to the Obamas, if the New Yorker had done that exact cover, but featuring the McCains. That would really make people face the question of, why is it acceptable or plausible to some to say these things about the Obamas?

As Congress prepares to vote tomorrow on the FISA Amendments, there's one thing you should know:  law or no law, your privacy is likely to be violated, and in ways the media haven't yet reported.

I say that because, as a federal employee and homeland security specialist, I attended "security" training that urged employees of my agency to spy on Americans.  I described my experience a few weeks ago at a conference in Washington, D.C., where I was on a domestic surveillance panel that included Babak Pasdar and Eric Lichtblau.

Should Obama advocate he abolition of nuclear weapons? Remember that both Gorbachev and Reagan advocated that back in the 1980s, to be fully accomplished by 2000.

In another astonishing report on the Huffington Post, find the full article here,untitled diary, I am astounded to hear that the Bush Administration has been funding a broadcasting nework that airs Anti-American and Anti-Israeli programs, as well as Pro-Iranian programs.

any person who sacrifices liberty for security deserves NEITHER!  

    According to published reports Pakistani nuclear scientists have been shopping around advanced nuclear technology to the highest bidders. Advanced blueprints have been found on computers that belonged to these scientists that were part of a nuclear smuggling network headed by Abdul Qadeer Khan. Our government has a knack of creating these madmen through a deliberate policy of benign neglect and a policy of supporting tyranny for the sake of political expediency. This is another example of how our unwillingness to gauge the world realistically and inability to access friends and foes has created a possible nightmare scenario in the near future.

We can't have it all. The benefits which accrue to Obama by being against the Iraq War are somewhat negated by the support he loses among suburban mom's votes.

This will not change in this cycle and in fact it won't change until the Iraq war is long behind us.

They have voted solidly for the GOP  since 9/11 on war issues. I don't agree with their inclinations but i long ago gave up trying to argue with them. I do not think we should waste our efforts and money on trying to change this demographic. They will not change.

Do not look for any links in this diary.  It is entirely speculative on my part.  However, if correct, it would explain a number of things.

Those who are enemies with the United States are no longer just "bad guys" or "enemies."  Even if they don't seem to quite fit they have a new, catchy, Military-Industrial-Complex dream name now:

terrorists!

But hey, if you vote against labelling almost everyone a terrorist you're weak on terror.  And these were the guys who were working with Hussein to bring forth the United State's "imminent peril," right?

When you are deciding whether to listen to a Republican when they talk about Democrats as "appeasers," consider this.  Crooks and Liars has the story of Oliver North on Fox News backing up Republican accusations that Democrats are "appeasers."

So who is Oliver North?  Oliver North is the guy that Republican President Ronald Reagan sent to provide weapons and missiles to Iran.

With all the talk about rallying behind Obama and uniting the Democratic party, I would like to offer some suggestions about what "unity" means and to suggest why Unity is very un-Democratic.

In this way, I hope to reaffirm some, persuade others, and refocus the idea that Republican political philosophy is, in its current mutation, dead wrong.

As much as I'd like to believe that a President Obama will move our country onto a new path, there's this lingering fear in me that our next leader will be challenged unlike any other in our recent history and some of those challenges might be more formidable than any mere mortal can handle.

We need to resolve right now that, assuming Barack Obama becomes our Commander In Chief and he doesn't morph into the Anti-Christ as the wackos predict, that we will not succumb to fear should things go terribly wrong.

Barack Obama has taken a lot of flak for suggesting that he'll talk to our enemies, such as Iran.

Let's look at our experiences talking, and not talking, to our enemies.

North Korea, Clinton Administration: After our spies told us that North Korea was working to get a bomb, the Clinton Administration engaged the North Korean government in intensive talks, basically threatening to attack if the North Koreans built a bomb. Result: The North Koreans sign a treaty agreeing not to enrich their uranium in exchange for Western help building a light water reactor, and massive grants of fuel oil. They later violated the spirit of the agreement, though possibly not the letter, after the South Koreans reneged on the light water reactor. Result: no North Korean bombs during the Clinton Administration.

North Korea, Bush Administration: After our spies told us that North Korea was violating the spirit, if not necessarily the letter of the Agreed Framework, Bush refused to talk to them any further, and made various threats that the US did not follow up on. Result: North Korea builds several nuclear weapons and tests at least one.

But this is only the most obvious example...

William Edgar Borah was known as "the Lion of Idaho." He served in the Senate from 1907 until 1940, winning by popular vote five times. He served as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for eight years. He became known for his pro-Soviet views and was a staunch isolationist.

Upon hearing that Hitler had invaded Poland, he said, "Lord, if I could only have talked with Hitler, all this might have been avoided."

Bush just used this quote to equate Democrats with Nazi appeasers.

Talk about hypocrisy and double-talk.  Dubya just jumped into the Presidential race with two feet. On MSNBC just now Bush was shown giving a speech commemorating Israel's 60th anniversary at the Knesset saying:

"Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals...We have an obligation to call this what it is. The false comfort of appeasement which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

The standard excuses for rising oil prices are all lies. They have been institutionalized on an unaware U.S. public as fact for years. The real explanations are enuf to piss off motorists everywhere.

One of the greatest fears people have about the last year of a Bush presidency is that military action will be taken against Iran. We know that the neo-conservatives want it and we know that Bush is even talking about how he signs vetoes to "stay relevant".

The prospect is a frightening one but it has been on the back burner now for some time. The 2008 election has diverted our attention to white grandmothers, pastors and poll results. But when the issue re-surfaces as it has over the past few days I can't help but get a chill up my spine that the propaganda campaign may once again be in full swing.

Calls have gotten louder amongst hawks calling for the U.S. to do something about the Quds forces in Iran. Just today Joe Lieberman was on TV talking about the "real possibility" of a bombing campaign against the Iranians and John Bolton has been calling for a bombing campaign consistently these days.

With a President who has nothing to lose (in his mind) and a GOP nominee who signs about bombing Iran to the tune of the beach boys... is it time to start freaking out about the Kyle-Lieberman amendment and the possibility of war? Remember, the Republican Guard are all "terrorists" now thanks to Senators like Hillary Clinton.