Pre-emption makes the world go round….

what’s good for the cowboy is good for the Elvis: Japan considers pre-emptive strike against North Korea. if they can get some missiles, that is….

(AP) – Japan said Monday it was considering whether a pre-emptive strike on the North’s missile bases would violate its constitution, signaling a hardening stance ahead of a possible U.N. Security Council vote on Tokyo’s proposal for sanctions against the regime.
Japan was badly rattled by North Korea’s missile tests last week and several government officials openly discussed whether the country ought to take steps to better defend itself, including setting up the legal framework to allow Tokyo to launch a pre-emptive strike against Northern missile sites.

Japan’s constitution currently bars the use of military force in settling international disputes and prohibits Japan from maintaining a military for warfare. …A Defense Agency spokeswoman, however, said Japan has no attacking weapons

I hear that the Japanese love to imitate American culture. Kind of flattering, isn’t it?

Bush will use first veto on….

Of all the trash, corruption, destruction, irresponsible crap that has come out of the GOP Looting of the treasury, obliteration of the principles of the founding fathers congress, Bush decides to use his first veto on the best hope for medical advances, embryonic stem cell research.

This guy has really solved a lot of problems and protected the American public.

Kyl, Graham try to deceive Senate and Supreme Court

This is about as low as it goes, people. Sens. John Kyl and Lindsey Graham trying to fool the Senate and the Supreme Court. These guys have no shame. The issue was the Hamdan case, which the Supreme Court has now decided. The Kyl/Graham fraud was to invent a Senate discussion on the applicable law, then insert it into the Congressional Record as if it had actually happened on the floor of the Senate. Which it didn’t. Their “discussion” tried to reverse the meaning of the legislation. Then they used that as a basis for an amicus filing to the Supreme Court on the Hamdan Case (not to mention the fact that the government used the same material as the basis of its case). For the full story, see John Dean.

This is as disgusting a story as I have seen out of this sorry Republican Congress. And that is saying something.

Election issues per Carville et al

Digby posts a good list, which by coincidence dovetails with my previous post on the meaning of conservatism. These are issues on which Dems/progressives should be running:

strategy memo from insider Dem establishment polling outfit, Democracy Corps run by none other than Carville and Stan Greenberg. And lo and behold, here’s what they have to say:

The Democrats need to catch up with the country, which wants to vote for outsiders, is demanding change and ready to respond to the Democrats’ message and definition of the election. All things considered, this is not a bad problem to have, but it requires a new intensity and focus to grab ahold of the forces for change and take the Democrats to a new level.

Change dynamic one: The Iraq war. This is the biggest voting issue for Democrats (and independents and change voters). While voters are divided on policy issues(like timetable for withdrawal), the continuing attention to the war increases dissatisfaction and elevates the change vote.

This means that it is not a loser to run against the war. It has always been self-evident to me, but for some reason the Democratic leadership and the punditocrisy can’t seem to grasp this. Indeed, this Lamont challenge may just help other candidates around the country because it shows that the Democratic party is serious about challenging the Republican “stay the course” policy.

Change dynamic two: Washington is working for big corporations and the privileged, not the people or the country. There is an abiding sense that things are out of balance in Washington, with political leaders working for the big corporate interests and the privileged, rather than trying to have America work for everyone. This is the top reason (along with rising costs) for wanting to change the Republican Congress.

Change dynamic three: They’re not taking care of America. Across a whole range of issues – Iraq, Katrina, the borders and immigration, and trade and manufacturing – voters think the political leaders are failing to step up and take care of America. This is why the House Republicans are trying to keep immigration focused on the borders.

Change dynamic four: This economy brings you high gas and health care costs and financial pressure for the middle class. Because the elites, journalists and the Republicans think this is a strong economy, the campaign thus far has neglected the great frustration with rising costs and financial pressures – for many groups, the top reasons to change the Congress.

Change dynamic five: They’ve bankrupted the country. There is a sense of foreboding in the country that this Republican government has bankrupted the country, run up the deficits and passed on our debts and obligations to future generations. They have made a mess of things financially and hurt the country. This is one of the top worries about any future Congress, and one of the key things voters want to put a halt to.

What “Conservatism” means today

Conservatism in its present form is, at its heart, an effort to use the government to make a small number of people rich at the expense of the many. This is accomplished in part by reducing taxes on the rich, partly by eliminating controls on corporate corruption and pollution, partly by giving tax money/government assets to corporations/individuals, and partly by suppression of the labor force.

Since the scheme benefits only a small number, it is crucial that “conservatives” execute brilliant political strategies to hold power. These ploys include cynical exploitation of nationalism, religion, racial bias, ignorance, and jealousy; intimidation; control of the flow of information; kickback schemes; and manipulation of political races and voting. Further, modern conservatism recognizes that it will eventually be found out, and therefore actually intends and plans not just to win elections, but to eliminate its competition.