Monday, May 01, 2006
Operation...
Department of Defense
OPERATION ANNOUNCEMENT
.
.
.
.
.
The Pentagon is pleased to announce the code names for our upcoming invasion of Iran. The campaign will be conducted in two phases, beginning with targeted air strikes known as
.
Operation
.
Completely
Rejecting
American
Principles
.
and a follow-up phase of ground troop occupation known as
.
Operation
.
Further
Unnecessary
Criminal
Killing.
.
Thank You
Saturday, April 29, 2006
Friday, April 28, 2006
Separated at birth?
I'm looking for other suggestions, but something tells me that President Ahmadinejad doesn't have a "box of sunshine!"
Not that sweet...
Apparently this is part of a deal that lets the drug-addled gasbag off if he stays clean.
September 11, "Flight 93", and the attempted highjacking of a real national tragedy
Of all the things I despise George W. Bush for, exploiting 9/11 to steal, murder, lie, cheat, and attempt to destroy the world and my country may always reside at the top of the list. I know that not everyone shares my feelings, but I find that I still can't look at images or video of that day without feeling like I've been kicked in the gut. It may be more than four and a half years since that day, but my recollection of the shock, anger, pain, and everything else I went through has not faded. I don't know what it is - whether it's from living near New York at the time and seeing the smoke from the towers while driving home or just because of the magnitude of the event.
Now there's this new movie out, "Flight 93." (I promise, I'll get back to the President soon.) I have no interest whatsoever in seeing this movie. I don't understand why anyone would have any interest. Do we need a dramatization of those events? The reality not real enough for you? I've heard it's very well-made, and I'm sure it will make the producers buckets of money, and bully for them. They won't get any from me - I don't know if it's too soon, or if it will ever be long enough, but that's okay.
Back to the President. He's been trying to capitalize on 9/11, much the same way as the filmmakers are doing. However, while they are business people, creating and marketing a product that will likely make them money, he has a very different role in our country, a role which carries a responsibility to care more about right than profit.
Of course he doesn't. Everyone knows that the administration's sole objective for being in power is to acquire more power. In doing so, they threw away the best chance we've had to make collective progress as a nation in over half a century - think about what this country was like in the weeks following the attacks, the sense of national pride and connectivity - and then think about what things are like now, with the most bitter partisan politics (and resultant lack of progress) that nearly anyone can remember.
The main tactic they have used in this power grab, as we know, is fear. We're supposed to be terrified that terrorists could attack at any minute, and if we don't listen to everything he says, our children (even if we don't have any) will be killed and beaten and tortured and killed again and we'll have to watch and it will be the worst thing ever and then it will get worse than that and oh my god and and and
Sorry.
The leverage they use is the fear that we felt on 9/11. They have spent years trying to reach into people's guts to grab that fear, and use that fear to inspire hatred and lead us to war. Along the way, they have tried to hijack the real feelings of the American people and trade them for faux-jingoism and bigotry and war. They've acted as if somehow they have more of a claim on that tragedy than anyone else - that somehow their desire to kill and hate is more valid, is more urgent, is more necessary than any other reaction.
Stop it, Mr. President. Stop it right the hell now. You do not have the right to start a war based on lies, quoting my fear of terrorism as a reason. I do not need you (or a hack country singer, for that matter) to remind me how I felt that day. I do not give you the right to destroy the world in my name. I'm taking 9/11 away from you. It's mine. And my neighbor's. And my family's. It's everyone's, and you don't have the right to take it from us and use it for your evil purposes.
I was reading on a right wing blog about "Flight 93", and the delusional bloggers and commenters were busily spewing hate about how much everyone needs to see the movie, to remind us of the tragedy, and (in their sick minds, anyway) reawaken our national anger to lead us further into war. We've become complacent, they cry. We've forgotten, they say.
We have not. Just because we don't want to kill every brown person and build a wall around the country and burn the Constitution does not mean that we've forgotten. My reaction is as valid as any, and it's more human, and humane, than theirs. I say to them that they have no more right to claim ownership of 9/11 than the President, and I'm done. Hate if you want, but you will not do so in my name.
Now there's this new movie out, "Flight 93." (I promise, I'll get back to the President soon.) I have no interest whatsoever in seeing this movie. I don't understand why anyone would have any interest. Do we need a dramatization of those events? The reality not real enough for you? I've heard it's very well-made, and I'm sure it will make the producers buckets of money, and bully for them. They won't get any from me - I don't know if it's too soon, or if it will ever be long enough, but that's okay.
Back to the President. He's been trying to capitalize on 9/11, much the same way as the filmmakers are doing. However, while they are business people, creating and marketing a product that will likely make them money, he has a very different role in our country, a role which carries a responsibility to care more about right than profit.
Of course he doesn't. Everyone knows that the administration's sole objective for being in power is to acquire more power. In doing so, they threw away the best chance we've had to make collective progress as a nation in over half a century - think about what this country was like in the weeks following the attacks, the sense of national pride and connectivity - and then think about what things are like now, with the most bitter partisan politics (and resultant lack of progress) that nearly anyone can remember.
The main tactic they have used in this power grab, as we know, is fear. We're supposed to be terrified that terrorists could attack at any minute, and if we don't listen to everything he says, our children (even if we don't have any) will be killed and beaten and tortured and killed again and we'll have to watch and it will be the worst thing ever and then it will get worse than that and oh my god and and and
Sorry.
The leverage they use is the fear that we felt on 9/11. They have spent years trying to reach into people's guts to grab that fear, and use that fear to inspire hatred and lead us to war. Along the way, they have tried to hijack the real feelings of the American people and trade them for faux-jingoism and bigotry and war. They've acted as if somehow they have more of a claim on that tragedy than anyone else - that somehow their desire to kill and hate is more valid, is more urgent, is more necessary than any other reaction.
Stop it, Mr. President. Stop it right the hell now. You do not have the right to start a war based on lies, quoting my fear of terrorism as a reason. I do not need you (or a hack country singer, for that matter) to remind me how I felt that day. I do not give you the right to destroy the world in my name. I'm taking 9/11 away from you. It's mine. And my neighbor's. And my family's. It's everyone's, and you don't have the right to take it from us and use it for your evil purposes.
I was reading on a right wing blog about "Flight 93", and the delusional bloggers and commenters were busily spewing hate about how much everyone needs to see the movie, to remind us of the tragedy, and (in their sick minds, anyway) reawaken our national anger to lead us further into war. We've become complacent, they cry. We've forgotten, they say.
We have not. Just because we don't want to kill every brown person and build a wall around the country and burn the Constitution does not mean that we've forgotten. My reaction is as valid as any, and it's more human, and humane, than theirs. I say to them that they have no more right to claim ownership of 9/11 than the President, and I'm done. Hate if you want, but you will not do so in my name.
Denny, you big gas bag
Hydrogen, that is. You'll recall that Smirky's been talking about Hydrogen cars as the panacea for reducing dependence on oil for a long time. Well, if we are able to produce millions of safe, Hydrogen-powered cars, and develop a national infrastructure to distribute and store a flammable gas on that scale (oh, the humanity!), then that will work, but even the best guesses are that we're a couple decades away from that point. So, instead of working on other solutions which could reduce the problem in the short term, we're focusing our national agenda on pie-in-the-sky futures with no fallback.
Anyway, yesterday, some of the congresscritters decided that they needed some positive publicity, and did a photo-op at a gas station with some of GM's prototype Hydrogen cars. And when it was over, good ol' Denny left the event in one of those Hydrogen cars for the few block drive back to the capitol.
Until he stopped a block away and got out of that car and climbed into his Suburban.
Anyway, yesterday, some of the congresscritters decided that they needed some positive publicity, and did a photo-op at a gas station with some of GM's prototype Hydrogen cars. And when it was over, good ol' Denny left the event in one of those Hydrogen cars for the few block drive back to the capitol.
Until he stopped a block away and got out of that car and climbed into his Suburban.
More pics from the Republican PARTY!!!!
Some more photos of Rep. Blutarsky (AKA Rep. John Sweeney of new York, stupid enough to go to a frat party already allegedly in an "New York State of Mind."
(see story below)
Brother, can you spare a trillion?
Iraq Costs Said to Hit $320 Bln, Then Double Before War Ends
April 27 (Bloomberg) -- The cost of the war in Iraq will hit $320 billion once Congress approves an emergency spending measure that's now before the Senate, and that figure probably will double before the war ends, according to the Congressional Research Service.
The cost in fiscal 2006 alone will reach $101.8 billion, double the $51 billion spent in fiscal 2003, the nonpartisan service said. Even if U.S. troops start to leave this year, the total costs of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan will jump by $371 billion during the withdrawal, the report said, citing an estimate from the Congressional Budget office.
The total estimated cost of the two conflicts is now $811 billion, far surpassing the inflation-adjusted $549 billion spent on the Vietnam War, the service said.
And that's just what they are willing to tell us. Add in the off-book amounts (like state National Guard equipment that is destroyed, hidden contracts, ongoing expenses, and the stuff they are just lying about) abd the numbers become even more frightening.
April 27 (Bloomberg) -- The cost of the war in Iraq will hit $320 billion once Congress approves an emergency spending measure that's now before the Senate, and that figure probably will double before the war ends, according to the Congressional Research Service.
The cost in fiscal 2006 alone will reach $101.8 billion, double the $51 billion spent in fiscal 2003, the nonpartisan service said. Even if U.S. troops start to leave this year, the total costs of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan will jump by $371 billion during the withdrawal, the report said, citing an estimate from the Congressional Budget office.
The total estimated cost of the two conflicts is now $811 billion, far surpassing the inflation-adjusted $549 billion spent on the Vietnam War, the service said.
And that's just what they are willing to tell us. Add in the off-book amounts (like state National Guard equipment that is destroyed, hidden contracts, ongoing expenses, and the stuff they are just lying about) abd the numbers become even more frightening.
Thursday, April 27, 2006
A warm welcome to our first River City visitor
I saw we had a visitor from Fort Wayne, Indiana, the hometown of my lovely bride and where we were married:
Please visit again!
Please visit again!
How many shopping days are left?
We're coming right up on "Mission Accomplished" Day, the third anniversary.
How do you plan to celebrate the "holiday?"
How do you plan to celebrate the "holiday?"
Duuude.........
See the story here at Josh Marshall's site.
As James Taylor said,
Americano got the sleepy eye
But his body’s still shaking like a live wire
Outrage Overload Post
Note: The following contains no substantive content, I am on an outrage break.
I was reading one of my favorite (undisclosed) sites this morning when I saw that the president "could care" less about something. That one is on my list of grammar pet peeves, as that usage implies that the president does care (which of course, he doesn't--oh wait, that's outrage, sorry. Back to silliness)
Apostrophe abuse is another one of my favorite grammar gremlins. You have seen restaurant signs that say "Semi's Welcome." A fine fellow known to many team members here always gives us a hearty greeting of "Hey guy's!"
Semi's what? Guy's what? That usage is possessive, not plural!! It drives me crazy.
Any others? Comments are appreciated, but if you don't, I could care less, irregardless.
I was reading one of my favorite (undisclosed) sites this morning when I saw that the president "could care" less about something. That one is on my list of grammar pet peeves, as that usage implies that the president does care (
Apostrophe abuse is another one of my favorite grammar gremlins. You have seen restaurant signs that say "Semi's Welcome." A fine fellow known to many team members here always gives us a hearty greeting of "Hey guy's!"
Semi's what? Guy's what? That usage is possessive, not plural!! It drives me crazy.
Any others? Comments are appreciated, but if you don't, I could care less, irregardless.
Meanwhile, back in Frostbite Falls....
WASHINGTON, (UPI) -- Eight of Iraq's 18 provinces are dangerously unstable and violent, not just the four usually cited. (more)
And it is just a happy coincidence that those eight provinces are, oh, I don't know, how do you say it, WHERE MOST OF THE PEOPLE LIVE!!!??????????
And it is just a happy coincidence that those eight provinces are, oh, I don't know, how do you say it, WHERE MOST OF THE PEOPLE LIVE!!!??????????
The answer
Pete asked the question below about how long it wouldbe until ANWR got brought into the current fracas about gas prices - well, that would be, umm, right away.
From CNN.com:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Every American taxpayer would get a $100 rebate check to offset the pain of higher pump prices for gasoline, under an amendment Senate Republicans hope to bring to a vote Thursday.
However, the GOP energy package may face tough sledding because it also includes a controversial proposal to open part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil exploration, which most Democrats and some moderate Republicans oppose.
These guys (to be specific, Charles Grassley of Iowa, Ted Stevens of Alaska, Pete Domenici of New Mexico and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania - although not for long) will stop at nothing to drill in Alaska, despite the fact that it wouldn't produce oil for a decade and would have a minimal (few percent at most) impact on gas prices and oil supply. It's nothing more than another big sloppy kiss to the oil industry, which, believe it or not, is crying poor.
And are these guys offering this up as a bill which could stand or fall on it's own merits? Of course not. They're attempting to attach it to an amendment to an emergency spending bill which deals with Bush's murderous folly in Iraq and the still suffering Gulf Coast's attempt to rebuild after Katrina and Rita.
Now, part of the bill seems to deal with accountability for the oil companies (they want to examine tax returns), but that's just a political ploy. There's no way in hell this amendment will pass (it needs 60 votes), but it will allow these morons to stand up and say "We tried to hold big oil accountable, and the Democrats didn't want to help the American people", even though they're full of crap.
Oh, and as for the $100? Who's paying for that? Where does the money come from? That's right - Hu, and China, as the national debt goes up to pay for unrestrained spending by the GOP.
From CNN.com:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Every American taxpayer would get a $100 rebate check to offset the pain of higher pump prices for gasoline, under an amendment Senate Republicans hope to bring to a vote Thursday.
However, the GOP energy package may face tough sledding because it also includes a controversial proposal to open part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil exploration, which most Democrats and some moderate Republicans oppose.
These guys (to be specific, Charles Grassley of Iowa, Ted Stevens of Alaska, Pete Domenici of New Mexico and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania - although not for long) will stop at nothing to drill in Alaska, despite the fact that it wouldn't produce oil for a decade and would have a minimal (few percent at most) impact on gas prices and oil supply. It's nothing more than another big sloppy kiss to the oil industry, which, believe it or not, is crying poor.
And are these guys offering this up as a bill which could stand or fall on it's own merits? Of course not. They're attempting to attach it to an amendment to an emergency spending bill which deals with Bush's murderous folly in Iraq and the still suffering Gulf Coast's attempt to rebuild after Katrina and Rita.
Now, part of the bill seems to deal with accountability for the oil companies (they want to examine tax returns), but that's just a political ploy. There's no way in hell this amendment will pass (it needs 60 votes), but it will allow these morons to stand up and say "We tried to hold big oil accountable, and the Democrats didn't want to help the American people", even though they're full of crap.
Oh, and as for the $100? Who's paying for that? Where does the money come from? That's right - Hu, and China, as the national debt goes up to pay for unrestrained spending by the GOP.
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Conservative "Thought" from Rush's Dumber Brother
CAMPUS HETEROPHOBIA
by Rush's Dumber Brother
Does anybody really think homosexual activists aren't trying to push their lifestyle on America -- as opposed to merely striving to avoid discrimination? A few recent news items shed some light on the subject. Scott Savage, a librarian at Ohio State University at Mansfield, got a quick lesson in "tolerance" while serving on a committee responsible for selecting books for incoming OSU students to read as part of their "First Year Reading Experience."
Savage, a devout Quaker, recommended that a number of conservative-oriented books be added to the list, to balance other books on the list, many of which reportedly had a liberal slant.Savage recommended four books, "The Marketing of Evil," by David Kupelian, "The Professors," by David Horowitz, "Eurabia: the Euro-Arab Axis," by Bat Ye'or, and "It Takes a Family," by Sen. Rick Santorum. How dare he? Won't he ever learn the proper lessons of selective censorship? The school had earlier investigated him for recommending other forbidden conservative books to freshmen students.
But I guess the request to place these dread screeds on a formal school list was just way too rebellious for anyone employed by an institution of higher learning priding itself in maintaining an environment of academic freedom and open inquiry. Three professors strenuously objected to Savage's suggestions, describing the Kupelian book as "hate literature," and "homophobic tripe." The professors, two of whom are homosexual, said the inclusion of these books on the list made them feel threatened and unsafe on campus.
This one is remarkable, even for Rush's Dumber Brother. First of all, you notice in the above and in the rest of the screed that nowhere does he mention what the books were with the "liberal slant?" How's that for intellectual honesty?
But beyond that--look at who the freakshow librarian wanted to include on the list. David Kupelian? Editor of the WorldNetDaily, and author of wonderful little tomes like this? Why, he's a wonderful man, I would love for him to be required reading for college students. And Santorum and Horowitz, they were unanimous inductees into the Unhinged Rightwing Moonbat Hall of Fame. (I admit to not being familiar with Bat Ye'or, but a quick Google search certainly isn't promising--she is an Egyptian-born, virulently anti-Muslim Jewish historian and darling of the right wing).
So this is what passes for conservative "thought" these days. How pathetic.
by Rush's Dumber Brother
Does anybody really think homosexual activists aren't trying to push their lifestyle on America -- as opposed to merely striving to avoid discrimination? A few recent news items shed some light on the subject. Scott Savage, a librarian at Ohio State University at Mansfield, got a quick lesson in "tolerance" while serving on a committee responsible for selecting books for incoming OSU students to read as part of their "First Year Reading Experience."
Savage, a devout Quaker, recommended that a number of conservative-oriented books be added to the list, to balance other books on the list, many of which reportedly had a liberal slant.Savage recommended four books, "The Marketing of Evil," by David Kupelian, "The Professors," by David Horowitz, "Eurabia: the Euro-Arab Axis," by Bat Ye'or, and "It Takes a Family," by Sen. Rick Santorum. How dare he? Won't he ever learn the proper lessons of selective censorship? The school had earlier investigated him for recommending other forbidden conservative books to freshmen students.
But I guess the request to place these dread screeds on a formal school list was just way too rebellious for anyone employed by an institution of higher learning priding itself in maintaining an environment of academic freedom and open inquiry. Three professors strenuously objected to Savage's suggestions, describing the Kupelian book as "hate literature," and "homophobic tripe." The professors, two of whom are homosexual, said the inclusion of these books on the list made them feel threatened and unsafe on campus.
This one is remarkable, even for Rush's Dumber Brother. First of all, you notice in the above and in the rest of the screed that nowhere does he mention what the books were with the "liberal slant?" How's that for intellectual honesty?
But beyond that--look at who the freakshow librarian wanted to include on the list. David Kupelian? Editor of the WorldNetDaily, and author of wonderful little tomes like this? Why, he's a wonderful man, I would love for him to be required reading for college students. And Santorum and Horowitz, they were unanimous inductees into the Unhinged Rightwing Moonbat Hall of Fame. (I admit to not being familiar with Bat Ye'or, but a quick Google search certainly isn't promising--she is an Egyptian-born, virulently anti-Muslim Jewish historian and darling of the right wing).
So this is what passes for conservative "thought" these days. How pathetic.
The wisdom of John Stuart Mill
"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative."
.
.
Watch out, ANWR
So now that our courageous president has stepped up to "temporarily" ease environmental restrictions on the oil companies--can drilling in ANWR be far behind?
Redundancy
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush has picked Fox News radio host Tony Snow as his new White House Press Secretary and is expected to announce the choice on Wednesday, a Republican official said.
Fox News, presidential mouthpiece. Isn't that just a bit repetitive?
Fox News, presidential mouthpiece. Isn't that just a bit repetitive?
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
If you live in Illinois, contact your state representatives
The Illinois General Assembly is about to rock the nation.
Well, we can hope, anyway.
Representative Karen A. Yarbrough of Illinois' 7th District is about to shatter that perception forever. Representative Yarbrough stumbled on a little known and never utlitized rule of the US House of Representatives, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives, which allows federal impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of a state legislature. From there, Illinois House Joint Resolution 125 (hereafter to be referred to as HJR0125) was born.
Text of resolution below:
HJ0125 LRB094 20306 RLC 58347 r
1 HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION
2 WHEREAS, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of
3 the United States House of Representatives allows federal
4 impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of
5 a state legislature; and
6 WHEREAS, President Bush has publicly admitted to ordering
7 the National Security Agency to violate provisions of the 1978
8 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a felony, specifically
9 authorizing the Agency to spy on American citizens without
10 warrant; and
11 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that President Bush authorized
12 violation of the Torture Convention of the Geneva Conventions,
13 a treaty regarded a supreme law by the United States
14 Constitution; and
15 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration has held American
16 citizens and citizens of other nations as prisoners of war
17 without charge or trial; and
18 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that the Bush Administration
19 has manipulated intelligence for the purpose of initiating a
20 war against the sovereign nation of Iraq, resulting in the
21 deaths of large numbers of Iraqi civilians and causing the
22 United States to incur loss of life, diminished security and
23 billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses; and
24 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration leaked classified
25 national secrets to further a political agenda, exposing an
26 unknown number of covert U. S. intelligence agents to potential
27 harm and retribution while simultaneously refusing to
28 investigate the matter; and
29 WHEREAS, The Republican-controlled Congress has declined
1 to fully investigate these charges to date; therefore, be it
2 RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
3 NINETY-FOURTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, THE
4 SENATE CONCURRING HEREIN, that the General Assembly of the
5 State of Illinois has good cause to submit charges to the U. S.
6 House of Representatives under Section 603 that the President
7 of the United States has willfully violated his Oath of Office
8 to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United
9 States; and be it further
10 RESOLVED, That George W. Bush, if found guilty of the
11 charges contained herein, should be removed from office and
12 disqualified to hold any other office in the United States.
Well, we can hope, anyway.
Representative Karen A. Yarbrough of Illinois' 7th District is about to shatter that perception forever. Representative Yarbrough stumbled on a little known and never utlitized rule of the US House of Representatives, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives, which allows federal impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of a state legislature. From there, Illinois House Joint Resolution 125 (hereafter to be referred to as HJR0125) was born.
Text of resolution below:
HJ0125 LRB094 20306 RLC 58347 r
1 HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION
2 WHEREAS, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of
3 the United States House of Representatives allows federal
4 impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of
5 a state legislature; and
6 WHEREAS, President Bush has publicly admitted to ordering
7 the National Security Agency to violate provisions of the 1978
8 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a felony, specifically
9 authorizing the Agency to spy on American citizens without
10 warrant; and
11 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that President Bush authorized
12 violation of the Torture Convention of the Geneva Conventions,
13 a treaty regarded a supreme law by the United States
14 Constitution; and
15 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration has held American
16 citizens and citizens of other nations as prisoners of war
17 without charge or trial; and
18 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that the Bush Administration
19 has manipulated intelligence for the purpose of initiating a
20 war against the sovereign nation of Iraq, resulting in the
21 deaths of large numbers of Iraqi civilians and causing the
22 United States to incur loss of life, diminished security and
23 billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses; and
24 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration leaked classified
25 national secrets to further a political agenda, exposing an
26 unknown number of covert U. S. intelligence agents to potential
27 harm and retribution while simultaneously refusing to
28 investigate the matter; and
29 WHEREAS, The Republican-controlled Congress has declined
1 to fully investigate these charges to date; therefore, be it
2 RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
3 NINETY-FOURTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, THE
4 SENATE CONCURRING HEREIN, that the General Assembly of the
5 State of Illinois has good cause to submit charges to the U. S.
6 House of Representatives under Section 603 that the President
7 of the United States has willfully violated his Oath of Office
8 to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United
9 States; and be it further
10 RESOLVED, That George W. Bush, if found guilty of the
11 charges contained herein, should be removed from office and
12 disqualified to hold any other office in the United States.
Multiple Choice Test
Please circle the correct description of the picture below:
The picture represents:
A. The trilobite, an ancient arthropod that appeared roughly 600 million years ago during the Cambrian period.
B. Something placed on earth by God to test our faith.
C. A creature that perished 6,000 years ago when God sent the flood to wash away a sinful world.
D. The fact that anyone who circles (B) or (C) should not be allowed to reproduce.
E. Both (A) and (D) above.
The picture represents:
A. The trilobite, an ancient arthropod that appeared roughly 600 million years ago during the Cambrian period.
B. Something placed on earth by God to test our faith.
C. A creature that perished 6,000 years ago when God sent the flood to wash away a sinful world.
D. The fact that anyone who circles (B) or (C) should not be allowed to reproduce.
E. Both (A) and (D) above.
Shocking. I tell you, it's shocking
Smirky McWorstPresidentEver found yet another way to enrich his friends and destroy the environment, even in the midst of a financial situation that has many Americans worried about how to afford getting to work.
I know, can you believe it?
So Bush uttered some words this morning (I won't diminish the language by calling what he does "giving speeches") about rising gas prices. Something must be done, he hears the people cry - well, he hears Frist and Hastert cry, it didn't matter much when Chuck Schumer said exactly the same things a week ago. Now, he had all sorts of options, from increasing supply to asking his friends in the oil industry to reduce profiteering by a small amount, but he did, of course, what was expected.
First, there's the small bone tossed to those who want to see the oil supply go up - the US will temporarily cease putting oil into the strategic reserve. We'll ignore the reports that OPEC, etc, could actually produce more oil, and say fine, that at least gets at that whole supply/demand thing.
But then what's next? Well, we all know that the reason prices have gone up is that that MTBE, a gasoline additive for years, gets into the water supply, makes it undrinkable, and might cause cancer, is being replaced by ethanol, and that takes time and money. And we certainly can't expect the oil companies to eat any of that cost themselves - if the government is going to punish them by trying to make their products less toxic, dammit, the peons will have to pay!
Oh, and I'm sure it has nothing to do with the daily inferences that we will invade every oil producing nation on the planet. Nope, that uncertainty doesn't upset anything.
So, what does Bush want to do to ease prices?
President George W. Bush on Tuesday gave U.S. refiners extra time to pay back emergency oil loans, and called on the government to find ways to ease new clean-burning gasoline regulations.
In a speech to the pro-ethanol Renewable Fuels Association, Bush said the U.S. Congress should find a way to approve permits to build new refineries a year after they are filed.
Bush said he told the Environmental Protection Agency to use "all available authority to grant waivers that would relieve critical fuel shortages," and said he would seek more waiver authority from Congress if needed.
Let's see - he wants to give his buddies (the $10 billion profit club) extra time to pay back loans (but Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public had better not dawdle on those credit card payments when they get laid off because their employers moved to India).
He wants to reduce regulations designed to keep our air breathable and our water drinkable, even as companies like GE have come out in support of limits on greenhouse gas emissions to attempt to curb mankind's influence on global warming.
He wants to make sure that refineries aren't delayed by anything, so that his $10 billion buddies can make more money faster.
He wants the EPA (the Environmental Protection Agency. Protection. Sigh.) to allow the oil companies to not change from MTBE to ethanol, so that a small portion of their profits don't vanish ($10 billion) and drinking water continues to get more polluted.
Truly no shame.
I know, can you believe it?
So Bush uttered some words this morning (I won't diminish the language by calling what he does "giving speeches") about rising gas prices. Something must be done, he hears the people cry - well, he hears Frist and Hastert cry, it didn't matter much when Chuck Schumer said exactly the same things a week ago. Now, he had all sorts of options, from increasing supply to asking his friends in the oil industry to reduce profiteering by a small amount, but he did, of course, what was expected.
First, there's the small bone tossed to those who want to see the oil supply go up - the US will temporarily cease putting oil into the strategic reserve. We'll ignore the reports that OPEC, etc, could actually produce more oil, and say fine, that at least gets at that whole supply/demand thing.
But then what's next? Well, we all know that the reason prices have gone up is that that MTBE, a gasoline additive for years, gets into the water supply, makes it undrinkable, and might cause cancer, is being replaced by ethanol, and that takes time and money. And we certainly can't expect the oil companies to eat any of that cost themselves - if the government is going to punish them by trying to make their products less toxic, dammit, the peons will have to pay!
Oh, and I'm sure it has nothing to do with the daily inferences that we will invade every oil producing nation on the planet. Nope, that uncertainty doesn't upset anything.
So, what does Bush want to do to ease prices?
President George W. Bush on Tuesday gave U.S. refiners extra time to pay back emergency oil loans, and called on the government to find ways to ease new clean-burning gasoline regulations.
In a speech to the pro-ethanol Renewable Fuels Association, Bush said the U.S. Congress should find a way to approve permits to build new refineries a year after they are filed.
Bush said he told the Environmental Protection Agency to use "all available authority to grant waivers that would relieve critical fuel shortages," and said he would seek more waiver authority from Congress if needed.
Let's see - he wants to give his buddies (the $10 billion profit club) extra time to pay back loans (but Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public had better not dawdle on those credit card payments when they get laid off because their employers moved to India).
He wants to reduce regulations designed to keep our air breathable and our water drinkable, even as companies like GE have come out in support of limits on greenhouse gas emissions to attempt to curb mankind's influence on global warming.
He wants to make sure that refineries aren't delayed by anything, so that his $10 billion buddies can make more money faster.
He wants the EPA (the Environmental Protection Agency. Protection. Sigh.) to allow the oil companies to not change from MTBE to ethanol, so that a small portion of their profits don't vanish ($10 billion) and drinking water continues to get more polluted.
Truly no shame.
Get your tickets now!
Genesis of a Museum
Creationists, saying all the answers are in the Bible, put their beliefs on display in $25 million facility
By Lisa Anderson
Tribune national correspondent
PETERSBURG, Ky. -- The recent fossil discovery of a 375-million-year-old fish that could lurch ashore on bony transitional fins--apparently a long-sought missing link between sea creatures and land animals--made a spectacular splash in evolutionary science circles. But it created nary a ripple on the placid American campus of Answers in Genesis, where an enormous museum chronicling the biblical six days of creation is rising fast amid rolling fields.Ken Ham, co-founder and president of Answers in Genesis, believed to be the world's largest creationist organization, and most "young-Earth" creationists are as unimpressed by science's finding another piece in the evolutionary puzzle as they are with science's finding the Earth to be 4.5 billion years old.Using biblical calculations, young-Earth creationists believe the planet is about 6,000 years old; old-Earth creationists believe it could be older. Both, however, take the Bible literally and reject Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory that all life, including human, shares common ancestry and developed through random mutation and natural selection. Evolution enjoys near-universal support among scientists. [MORE]
Creationists, saying all the answers are in the Bible, put their beliefs on display in $25 million facility
By Lisa Anderson
Tribune national correspondent
PETERSBURG, Ky. -- The recent fossil discovery of a 375-million-year-old fish that could lurch ashore on bony transitional fins--apparently a long-sought missing link between sea creatures and land animals--made a spectacular splash in evolutionary science circles. But it created nary a ripple on the placid American campus of Answers in Genesis, where an enormous museum chronicling the biblical six days of creation is rising fast amid rolling fields.Ken Ham, co-founder and president of Answers in Genesis, believed to be the world's largest creationist organization, and most "young-Earth" creationists are as unimpressed by science's finding another piece in the evolutionary puzzle as they are with science's finding the Earth to be 4.5 billion years old.Using biblical calculations, young-Earth creationists believe the planet is about 6,000 years old; old-Earth creationists believe it could be older. Both, however, take the Bible literally and reject Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory that all life, including human, shares common ancestry and developed through random mutation and natural selection. Evolution enjoys near-universal support among scientists. [MORE]
Mr. History President
And they've got a powerful weapon, by the way -- the enemy does. And that is the willingness and capacity to kill innocent people. And they understand the United States of America is a compassionate nation. They view -- I'm sure they view it as a weakness of our country, I happen to view it as a strength that we value every life, that every person is precious. But they know, and it doesn't take much to realize that when you put carnage on our TV screens, it causes us to weep. It causes people rightly to say whether or not the cause is worth it. It's a legitimate question for the American people.
But it's very important for the American people to understand that they're trying to run us out of Iraq for a purpose. And the purpose is to be able to have safe haven from which to launch further attacks. And I understand it. And we've got a strategy in place to achieve victory.
I based a lot of my foreign policy decisions on some things that I think are true. One, I believe there's an Almighty, and secondly, I believe one of the great gifts of the Almighty is the desire in everybody's soul, regardless of what you look like or where you live, to be free. I believe liberty is universal. I believe people want to be free. And I know that democracies do not war with each other. And I know that the best way to defeat the enemy, the best way to defeat their ability to exploit hopelessness and despair is to give people a chance to live in a free society.
You know, the Iraqis went to the polls last December for the third time in one year. It seems like a decade ago, doesn't it? It seems like it was just an eternity ago that 12 million people defied terrorists, threats, and said, we want to be free. We're sick and tired of a society that had been suppressed by a brutal tyrant. We want to go to the polls. We want to be self-governing. I wasn't surprised; I was pleased, but not surprised. If you believe that liberty exists in the soul of each person on the face of the Earth, it shouldn't surprise you that, given the chance, people will say, we want to be free. And now the role of the United States is to stand by the courageous Iraqis as their democracy develops.
It's not easy work, by the way, to go from tyranny to democracy. We had kind of a round go ourself, if you look back at our history. My Secretary of State's relatives were enslaved in the United States even though we had a Constitution that said all were -- that believed in the dignity, or at least proclaimed to believe in the dignity of all. The Articles of Confederation wasn't exactly a real smooth start for our government to begin.
Oh my God.
But it's very important for the American people to understand that they're trying to run us out of Iraq for a purpose. And the purpose is to be able to have safe haven from which to launch further attacks. And I understand it. And we've got a strategy in place to achieve victory.
I based a lot of my foreign policy decisions on some things that I think are true. One, I believe there's an Almighty, and secondly, I believe one of the great gifts of the Almighty is the desire in everybody's soul, regardless of what you look like or where you live, to be free. I believe liberty is universal. I believe people want to be free. And I know that democracies do not war with each other. And I know that the best way to defeat the enemy, the best way to defeat their ability to exploit hopelessness and despair is to give people a chance to live in a free society.
You know, the Iraqis went to the polls last December for the third time in one year. It seems like a decade ago, doesn't it? It seems like it was just an eternity ago that 12 million people defied terrorists, threats, and said, we want to be free. We're sick and tired of a society that had been suppressed by a brutal tyrant. We want to go to the polls. We want to be self-governing. I wasn't surprised; I was pleased, but not surprised. If you believe that liberty exists in the soul of each person on the face of the Earth, it shouldn't surprise you that, given the chance, people will say, we want to be free. And now the role of the United States is to stand by the courageous Iraqis as their democracy develops.
It's not easy work, by the way, to go from tyranny to democracy. We had kind of a round go ourself, if you look back at our history. My Secretary of State's relatives were enslaved in the United States even though we had a Constitution that said all were -- that believed in the dignity, or at least proclaimed to believe in the dignity of all. The Articles of Confederation wasn't exactly a real smooth start for our government to begin.
Oh my God.
Monday, April 24, 2006
Bring me those puppies! And more wine!
One of the greatest joys of this political season is watching the self-immolation of Katherine Harris:
with
It is pathetically funny.
You see, Katie's problem is she actually believed she was important, rather than a bit player in a sordid drama. The Bushies needed her, used her, and then VROOM, under the bus with you! Just desserts, I say--very expensive desserts!
Josh Marshall has done a great job in covering her gymnastics routine in trying to cover up that she is up to her hideous fake breasts in dirty money.
Case in point, her dinner at Michael Richard's elegant Washington eatery, Citronelle, with Mitchell Wade, already convicted of bribery in the Duke Cunningham matter. Their dinner, folks, was almost THREE GRAND. First, she says she reimbursed the restaurant (which was a lie, because the money man paid Citronelle), and now she says that "the night of our dinner, Mr. Wade purchased several expensive bottles of wine which he took home with him uncorked-this is apparently the reason the bill was so high."
Right.
So apparently, Katie is saying that she and Mitch Moneybags confused Citronelle:
with
It is pathetically funny.
You see, Katie's problem is she actually believed she was important, rather than a bit player in a sordid drama. The Bushies needed her, used her, and then VROOM, under the bus with you! Just desserts, I say--very expensive desserts!
Sunday, April 23, 2006
He got all of that one
Sometimes when you read something, it says what it says so well that there's nothing to add:
From the Chicago Tribune (hat tip Knobboy):
Why Bush should keep Rumsfeld
Published April 20, 2006
Should the president fire Donald Rumsfeld? That's like asking if Disney should retire Mickey Mouse. Why get rid of someone who represents everything important about an institution--particularly if doing so leaves those things unchanged? No, President Bush should keep Rumsfeld as a perennial symbol of the administration's essential characteristic: hubris.
If you want to know what went wrong in the presidency of George W. Bush, you could find plenty of candidates. There is its ineptitude ...
There is its Soprano-style approach to critics and even in-house skeptics ...
There is its peerless gift for self-delusion ...
There is its brazen dishonesty ...
All these traits flow from the same source: a self-congratulatory narcissism that is utterly impervious to events in the real world.
That was a triumph of arrogance, which my dictionary defines as "an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions." And if you want a human embodiment of that trait, you can hardly do better than Rumsfeld, who was happy to take credit for the initial success of the invasion but pretends that anything that may have gone wrong is way beyond his control.
...
But none of that is reason for the president to sack him. The problem doesn't lie with Rumsfeld so much as with those above him. Worse, firing him would establish the principle that those entrusted with power are accountable for their failures. And if we followed that policy, who knows where it might lead?
Yipes! "Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria."
From the Chicago Tribune (hat tip Knobboy):
Why Bush should keep Rumsfeld
Published April 20, 2006
Should the president fire Donald Rumsfeld? That's like asking if Disney should retire Mickey Mouse. Why get rid of someone who represents everything important about an institution--particularly if doing so leaves those things unchanged? No, President Bush should keep Rumsfeld as a perennial symbol of the administration's essential characteristic: hubris.
If you want to know what went wrong in the presidency of George W. Bush, you could find plenty of candidates. There is its ineptitude ...
There is its Soprano-style approach to critics and even in-house skeptics ...
There is its peerless gift for self-delusion ...
There is its brazen dishonesty ...
All these traits flow from the same source: a self-congratulatory narcissism that is utterly impervious to events in the real world.
That was a triumph of arrogance, which my dictionary defines as "an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions." And if you want a human embodiment of that trait, you can hardly do better than Rumsfeld, who was happy to take credit for the initial success of the invasion but pretends that anything that may have gone wrong is way beyond his control.
...
But none of that is reason for the president to sack him. The problem doesn't lie with Rumsfeld so much as with those above him. Worse, firing him would establish the principle that those entrusted with power are accountable for their failures. And if we followed that policy, who knows where it might lead?
Yipes! "Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria."
Saturday, April 22, 2006
Speech Preview
A local college is sponsoring an address by Colin Powell. The topic--"Diplomacy: Persuasion, Trust and Values."
Let's see--you had no real intent to use diplomacy, so for the sake of persuasion you showed you have no core values, and now no one will trust you.
Let's see--you had no real intent to use diplomacy, so for the sake of persuasion you showed you have no core values, and now no one will trust you.
Is that about it?
Friday, April 21, 2006
Rolling Stone Nails One
Back in the day Rolling Stone was relevant, Rolling Stone was edgy. Rolling Stone had the pulse of the "under-30" crowd. They had Hunter S Thompson and Cameron Crowe and Fricke and the rest hammering out really readable prose, and Jann Wenner juggling a "brazillion" balls at once - effortlessly. Then of course, in a flash Rolling Stone became irrelevant. No one cared what they thought about pretty much everything. But perhaps they've turned a corner, if this week's cover is any indication.
In this treatise, expert historian Sean Wilentz (Princeton) lays out all the reasons that an overwhelming number of nationally recognized historians believe that Drinkey McMessiah-Complex is among the very worst presidents - if not THE very worst preznit - in our nation's long history.
It's a captivating and intriguing read. Here's just a snippet:
George W. Bush's presidency appears headed for colossal historical disgrace. Barring a cataclysmic event on the order of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, after which the public might rally around the White House once again, there seems to be little the administration can do to avoid being ranked on the lowest tier of U.S. presidents. And that may be the best-case scenario. Many historians are now wondering whether Bush, in fact, will be remembered as the very worst president in all of American history. Here is the link to the entire article. I urge you to invest the time.
In this treatise, expert historian Sean Wilentz (Princeton) lays out all the reasons that an overwhelming number of nationally recognized historians believe that Drinkey McMessiah-Complex is among the very worst presidents - if not THE very worst preznit - in our nation's long history.
It's a captivating and intriguing read. Here's just a snippet:
George W. Bush's presidency appears headed for colossal historical disgrace. Barring a cataclysmic event on the order of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, after which the public might rally around the White House once again, there seems to be little the administration can do to avoid being ranked on the lowest tier of U.S. presidents. And that may be the best-case scenario. Many historians are now wondering whether Bush, in fact, will be remembered as the very worst president in all of American history. Here is the link to the entire article. I urge you to invest the time.
Dear Thinky:
I normally don't go to Dear Abby for my material, but this is rich:
DEAR ABBY: My husband, "Ron," and I are at odds over parenting our 7-year-old son, "Brett." My husband is very domestic. He cooks like a world-class chef and does more housework than any man I know of.
I have read Dr. James Dobson's books on family. He clearly states that a father should be the manly role model for the son, to prevent the son from being homosexual. I'm concerned that Brett will learn feminine ways from my husband and turn out to be gay. How can I convince Ron that he needs to teach Brett the more manly things in life?
WORRIED MOM IN FLORIDA
Abby, I've got this one.
Dear Worried Mom:
Here's your problem in three little words: "Dr." James Dobson Stop right now. Burn anything you have written by him and try to forget EVERYTHING that vile freak has ever said.
That is the first step to help YOU avoid becoming a disturbed psychobigot who will certainly mess up your son's life. I just hope I'm not too late.
Hugs,
Thinky
DEAR ABBY: My husband, "Ron," and I are at odds over parenting our 7-year-old son, "Brett." My husband is very domestic. He cooks like a world-class chef and does more housework than any man I know of.
I have read Dr. James Dobson's books on family. He clearly states that a father should be the manly role model for the son, to prevent the son from being homosexual. I'm concerned that Brett will learn feminine ways from my husband and turn out to be gay. How can I convince Ron that he needs to teach Brett the more manly things in life?
WORRIED MOM IN FLORIDA
Abby, I've got this one.
Dear Worried Mom:
Here's your problem in three little words: "Dr." James Dobson Stop right now. Burn anything you have written by him and try to forget EVERYTHING that vile freak has ever said.
That is the first step to help YOU avoid becoming a disturbed psychobigot who will certainly mess up your son's life. I just hope I'm not too late.
Hugs,
Thinky
Thursday, April 20, 2006
How low can you go...
Jack be limbo, Jack be quick
Jack go unda limbo stick
All around the limbo clock
Hey, let's do the limbo rock
Limbo lower now
Limbo lower now
How low can you go?
FOX Poll: Gloomy Economic Views; Bush Approval at New Low
.....President Bush’s approval hits a record low of 33 percent this week..
And just so we're clear--that is the FOX poll.....
Jack go unda limbo stick
All around the limbo clock
Hey, let's do the limbo rock
Limbo lower now
Limbo lower now
How low can you go?
FOX Poll: Gloomy Economic Views; Bush Approval at New Low
.....President Bush’s approval hits a record low of 33 percent this week..
And just so we're clear--that is the FOX poll.....
OK, raise your hands out there..
I do this with great trepidation, because I take this very seriously (In the interest of full disclosure, I see a psychiatrist regularly and have a prescription for a tightly controlled psychoactive substance--I am the poster boy for adult ADD and take Concerta). That said--
Raise your hand if you think we have a %^&*$ing CRAZY man in the White House?
I don't mean stupid, evil, incompetent (although I exclude NONE of those). I mean just totally NUTS, BONKERS, INSANE, you name it.
I swear, he is just crazy.
Thoughts?
Raise your hand if you think we have a %^&*$ing CRAZY man in the White House?
I don't mean stupid, evil, incompetent (although I exclude NONE of those). I mean just totally NUTS, BONKERS, INSANE, you name it.
I swear, he is just crazy.
Thoughts?
Retired Senior Naval Officer Backs President
A retired naval captain countered the growing tide of criticism of the president and the Secretary of Defense. The captain (in the navy, a captain is the equivalent of an army colonel) briefly complemented Secretary Rumsfeld, but had the highest praise for the president.
"We've spent many hours, many days, and particularly many nights together. He rarely makes a decision without consulting me. I can guarantee you that the president and I have spent a tremdous amount of time together in the last few years, and I think it shows."
The captain, whose name was not disclosed, is pictured below:
"We've spent many hours, many days, and particularly many nights together. He rarely makes a decision without consulting me. I can guarantee you that the president and I have spent a tremdous amount of time together in the last few years, and I think it shows."
The captain, whose name was not disclosed, is pictured below:
The problem in a nutshell
I nearly never open forwarded email. However, when my brother sends it, I KNOW that something both profound and amusing will be contained within. This picture, forwarded to me, is no exception.
Two of these things belong together...
From the Chicago Tribune editorial discussing Fred Phelps and his hatemongers:
Plenty of exercises of free speech rights are bound to antagonize or even traumatize many people: Ku Klux Klan rallies are offensive to blacks, Nazis marching in Skokie to Jews, and Gay Pride parades to conservative Christians.
What? Let's see--the Klan tortured and killed blacks, the Nazis tortured and killed Jews, and the gays did WHAT to the "conservative Christians?"
Lynchings, gas chambers--and feather boas. Oh the humanity.
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Back atcha, Rummy
From The Onion: "It's unfair. You don't go to war with the Secretary of Defense you want, you go to war the Secretary of Defense you have."
The good old days?
Chimpy, on the departing Scott McClellan: "One of these days he and I are going to be rocking on chairs in Texas, talking about the good old days and his time as the Press Secretary."
THE GOOD OLD DAYS? THESE are the GOOD OLD DAYS? God help us.
Unfortunately though, Scott, that deal you signed with your benefactor is absolutely ironclad. Sorry about that one.
THE GOOD OLD DAYS? THESE are the GOOD OLD DAYS? God help us.
Unfortunately though, Scott, that deal you signed with your benefactor is absolutely ironclad. Sorry about that one.
EXCLUSIVE--Tom Cruise Baby Pic!
EXCLUSIVE!!!
As you all know, Katie Holmes gave birth to a baby girl. The proud papa, Tom Cruise, is of course into Scientology, the bizarre and controversial "religion" involving extraterrestrial past lives and the evil alien Xenu, who brought billions of people to Earth, stacked them around volcanoes and blew them up with hydrogen bombs.
Well, your intrepid reporter has scored an exclusive, the first baby picture of our newest little Scientologist:
New Press Secretary Named
Shortly after the resignation of White House spokesman Scott McClellan, the president named his successor.
"We looked long and hard to find someone who could bring Scott's honesty and dignity to the press room," said an anonymous source.
The new White House spokesman is pictured below:
"We looked long and hard to find someone who could bring Scott's honesty and dignity to the press room," said an anonymous source.
The new White House spokesman is pictured below:
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
What's wrong with this picture?
The wife will be here...
And your humble correspondent will be here in Libertyville!....
And your humble correspondent will be here in Libertyville!....
God help us
"I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense."
Deceased Generals Urge Rummy to Step Down
(National Fake Wires) At a recent seance, the spirits of several deceased U.S. military leaders called on Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to resign. The dead added their voices from beyond to those of several living generals who have recently criticized the secretary.Ulysses S. Grant said, "remember that line about how `the art of war is simple enough? Find out where your enemy is?' Rumsfeld doesn't even know who the enemy is, let alone where he is. Sweet Jesus, I need a drink."
An invisibly angry General George Patton expressed similar sentiments, when he said "Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way, right? Rumsfeld couldn't lead a kindergarten class in a round of Happy Birthday. The bastard is too arrogant to follow, so that leaves only option--GET THE HELL OUT OF MY WAY, DON!!
The disembodied voice of a rather philospohical Dwight Eisenhower remembered how he "hated war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity," and then added added "let's see, futile, brutal and stupid, sound like anyone we know, DON?"
These opinions were not unanimous, however. Secretary of State Rumsfeld received high marks for his loyalty from deceased former general Benedict Arnold. He was also was praised by some notable enlisted personnel.
"I've never met a smarter man than Secretary Don, smart as can be, smart, smart, smart," said
Finally, Secretary Rumsfeld was commended for his hard work and diligence by
Monday, April 17, 2006
Sunday, April 16, 2006
A question I cannot answer
This sorry conflict has exposed Colin Powell as a fraud, neither the good soldier nor an honorable man.
It has also severely damaged the political fortunes and legacy of another once well-regarded leader. I know the answers to my question with regard to our miscreants, but concerning him, I am puzzled. I just have one thing to ask:
WHY???
It has also severely damaged the political fortunes and legacy of another once well-regarded leader. I know the answers to my question with regard to our miscreants, but concerning him, I am puzzled. I just have one thing to ask:
WHY???A Theological Query
John writes in his Gospel:
On Sunday morning while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been rolled away from the entrance. She ran to Simon Peter and to Jesus' favorite disciple and said, "They have taken the Lord from the tomb! We don't know where they have put him." Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. They ran side by side, until the other disciple ran faster than Peter and got there first. He bent over and saw the strips of linen cloth lying inside the tomb, but he did not go in. When Simon Peter got there, he went into the tomb and saw the strips of cloth. He also saw the piece of cloth that had been used to cover Jesus' face. It was rolled up and in a place by itself.
My question--Jesus is raised and leaves the grave cloths in the tomb. He had been stripped before crucifixion. What the heck is he wearing? Where are you going to find a store open that early on a Sunday morning--on Easter?
Oh, I forgot...
The Wailing Wal-Mart
On Sunday morning while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been rolled away from the entrance. She ran to Simon Peter and to Jesus' favorite disciple and said, "They have taken the Lord from the tomb! We don't know where they have put him." Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. They ran side by side, until the other disciple ran faster than Peter and got there first. He bent over and saw the strips of linen cloth lying inside the tomb, but he did not go in. When Simon Peter got there, he went into the tomb and saw the strips of cloth. He also saw the piece of cloth that had been used to cover Jesus' face. It was rolled up and in a place by itself.
My question--Jesus is raised and leaves the grave cloths in the tomb. He had been stripped before crucifixion. What the heck is he wearing? Where are you going to find a store open that early on a Sunday morning--on Easter?
Oh, I forgot...
The Wailing Wal-Mart
Friday, April 14, 2006
Howard, we hardly knew ye....
Well, dammit, we're not going to have Howard Kaloogian to kick around any more.
Howie, the buffoon who thought he could pass pictures of Istanbul off as Baghdad to show how everything was skittels and beer there lost the special primary for Duke Cunningham's seat in Congress.
Howard thanked his many friends and supporters in his concession speech at a rally in San Diego. He gave us a picture of the crowd below:
Howie, the buffoon who thought he could pass pictures of Istanbul off as Baghdad to show how everything was skittels and beer there lost the special primary for Duke Cunningham's seat in Congress.
Howard thanked his many friends and supporters in his concession speech at a rally in San Diego. He gave us a picture of the crowd below:
Thursday, April 13, 2006
None of the above
bradblog has Ann Coulter's voter registration form. She apparently registered at a fake address, but what is more interesting are the check boxes for "sex." Apparently neither choice was right...
Dueling Realities
April 13, 2006
Analysts Say a Nuclear Iran Is Years Away
By WILLIAM J. BROAD, NAZILA FATHI and JOEL BRINKLEY
New York Times
Western nuclear analysts said yesterday that Tehran lacked the skills, materials and equipment to make good on its immediate nuclear ambitions, even as a senior Iranian official said Iran would defy international pressure and rapidly expand its ability to enrich uranium for fuel. The official, Muhammad Saeedi, the deputy head of Iran's atomic energy organization, said Iran would push quickly to put 54,000 centrifuges on line—a vast increase from the 164 the Iranians said Tuesday that they had used to enrich uranium to levels that could fuel a nuclear reactor.
Still, nuclear analysts called the claims exaggerated. They said nothing had changed to alter current estimates of when Iran might be able to make a single nuclear weapon, assuming that is its ultimate goal. The United States government has put that at 5 to 10 years, and some analysts have said it could come as late as 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iran, which is defying United Nations Security Council demands to cease its nuclear program, may be capable of making a nuclear bomb within 16 days if it goes ahead with plans to install thousands of centrifuges at its Natanz plant, a U.S. State Department official said. "Natanz was constructed to house 50,000 centrifuges,'' Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters today in Moscow. "Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days."
bloomberg.com
Analysts Say a Nuclear Iran Is Years Away
By WILLIAM J. BROAD, NAZILA FATHI and JOEL BRINKLEY
New York Times
Western nuclear analysts said yesterday that Tehran lacked the skills, materials and equipment to make good on its immediate nuclear ambitions, even as a senior Iranian official said Iran would defy international pressure and rapidly expand its ability to enrich uranium for fuel. The official, Muhammad Saeedi, the deputy head of Iran's atomic energy organization, said Iran would push quickly to put 54,000 centrifuges on line—a vast increase from the 164 the Iranians said Tuesday that they had used to enrich uranium to levels that could fuel a nuclear reactor.
Still, nuclear analysts called the claims exaggerated. They said nothing had changed to alter current estimates of when Iran might be able to make a single nuclear weapon, assuming that is its ultimate goal. The United States government has put that at 5 to 10 years, and some analysts have said it could come as late as 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iran, which is defying United Nations Security Council demands to cease its nuclear program, may be capable of making a nuclear bomb within 16 days if it goes ahead with plans to install thousands of centrifuges at its Natanz plant, a U.S. State Department official said. "Natanz was constructed to house 50,000 centrifuges,'' Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters today in Moscow. "Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days."
bloomberg.com
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Thank you Stephen Colbert
Pre-9/11 thinking criticizes the President, post-9/11 thinking supports the President. That's what President Bush tells us.
Hey hey LBJ
How many kids did you kill today?
Sorry, not LBJ, my age is showing--that would be GWB...
Well, April has already seen more troops killed than in March.
And you explain it to the families how?
Sorry, not LBJ, my age is showing--that would be GWB...
Well, April has already seen more troops killed than in March.
And you explain it to the families how?
Phi Slamma Jamma---or not??
Ah yes, Phi Slamma Jamma, the high-flying Houston Cougars of the Dream, Clyde (although I think the photo is a Rockets picture)...
and Guy Lewis with his towel..
No wait, it isn't PHI SLAMMA JAMMA-it is PHONE JAMMER SLAMMER I was thinking about---my bad.
Have you heard about the New Hampshire phone jamming scandal? Where high-profile Republicans actively disrupted the Democratic "get out the vote line" by hiring a telemarketing service to call and hang up on the Dems line?
We have criminal liability IN FEDERAL COURT in this case. What becomes very interesting is that James Tobin (Bush campaign regional manager and RNC official), who was convicted in the case, seemed to have special friends here:
Mr. Tobin made many many calls to the White House right around the time of this CRIMINAL conduct. The calls went to a political affairs office then headed up by self-loathing homosexual and now RNC Chair Ken Mehlman
who, according to Stephanie Miller, is played by Hillary Swank:
Hmmm..phone jamming felons calling the White House? Naaah.....
and Guy Lewis with his towel..
No wait, it isn't PHI SLAMMA JAMMA-it is PHONE JAMMER SLAMMER I was thinking about---my bad.
Have you heard about the New Hampshire phone jamming scandal? Where high-profile Republicans actively disrupted the Democratic "get out the vote line" by hiring a telemarketing service to call and hang up on the Dems line?
We have criminal liability IN FEDERAL COURT in this case. What becomes very interesting is that James Tobin (Bush campaign regional manager and RNC official), who was convicted in the case, seemed to have special friends here:
Mr. Tobin made many many calls to the White House right around the time of this CRIMINAL conduct. The calls went to a political affairs office then headed up by self-loathing homosexual and now RNC Chair Ken Mehlman
who, according to Stephanie Miller, is played by Hillary Swank:
Hmmm..phone jamming felons calling the White House? Naaah.....
Only you can prevent raging pants fires
Lacking Biolabs, Trailers Carried Case for WarAdministration Pushed Notion of Banned Iraqi Weapons Despite Evidence to Contrary
By Joby Warrick
Washington Post
On May 29, 2003, 50 days after the fall of Baghdad, President Bush proclaimed a fresh victory for his administration in Iraq: Two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops had turned out to be long-sought mobile "biological laboratories." He declared, "We have found the weapons of mass destruction."
The claim, repeated by top administration officials for months afterward, was hailed at the time as a vindication of the decision to go to war. But even as Bush spoke, U.S. intelligence officials possessed powerful evidence that it was not true.
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Memo Time
From the Desk of GodMemorandum
From: God
To: Pat Robertson
Pat:
Jesus Christ, Pat (ooops, sorry, son)
First of all, it is obvious that you did not take my advice on that high fiber diet...
But beyond that--have I become the Playboy Channel? Am I 1-900-DIRTY-GOD?
EXCUSE ME? For the sake of Me, what is this?
Mmmmm, Pat, I double-checked the calendar. I was busy saving poor homeless people, and the kid, he was at the Notre Dame football kickoff lunch that day, so please--just can the God talk, would you? Last time I asked anyone about their sex life, I was talking to Mary, OK?Pat: And then I prayed. And I said, "Lord, what's wrong
with her?" I just prayed silently. And the Lord said, "Ask about her sex life,,,.Yes, He said that to me."
Swedish web sites, late night Cinemax, maybe even the Department of Homeland Security--but Pat--it ain't me babe.
Love, and you're damned,
God
The leader of the free world
This is remarkable. The transcript doesn't really cut it, you have to see the video of him doing the "heh heh heh" nonsense, but even reading it says so much...
Q: My question is in regards to private military contractors. Uniform Code of Military Justice does not apply to these contractors in Iraq. I asked your Secretary of Defense a couple months ago what law governs their actions.
Giggly McMurder: I was going to ask him. Go ahead. Help.
Q: I was hoping your answer might be a little more specific. Mr. Rumsfeld answered that Iraq has its own domestic laws which he assumed applied to those private military contractors. However, Iraq is clearly not currently capable of enforcing its laws, much less against -- over our American military contractors. I would submit to you that in this case, this is one case that privatization is not a solution. And, Mr. President, how do you propose to bring private military contractors under a system of law?
Giggly McMurder: I appreciate that very much. I wasn't kidding--I was going to--I pick up the phone and say, Mr. Secretary, I've got an interesting question. This is what delegation -- I don't mean to be dodging the question, although it's kind of convenient in this case, but never--I really will--I'm going to call the Secretary and say you brought up a very valid question, and what are we doing about it? That's how I work. I'm--thanks.
Q: My question is in regards to private military contractors. Uniform Code of Military Justice does not apply to these contractors in Iraq. I asked your Secretary of Defense a couple months ago what law governs their actions.
Giggly McMurder: I was going to ask him. Go ahead. Help.
Q: I was hoping your answer might be a little more specific. Mr. Rumsfeld answered that Iraq has its own domestic laws which he assumed applied to those private military contractors. However, Iraq is clearly not currently capable of enforcing its laws, much less against -- over our American military contractors. I would submit to you that in this case, this is one case that privatization is not a solution. And, Mr. President, how do you propose to bring private military contractors under a system of law?
Giggly McMurder: I appreciate that very much. I wasn't kidding--I was going to--I pick up the phone and say, Mr. Secretary, I've got an interesting question. This is what delegation -- I don't mean to be dodging the question, although it's kind of convenient in this case, but never--I really will--I'm going to call the Secretary and say you brought up a very valid question, and what are we doing about it? That's how I work. I'm--thanks.
New day, same headline...
Bush Job Rating at New Low
This happens to be the Washington Post-ABC poll, but does it really matter?
Welcome to Oceana
The president tries to explain his leak, oops, "declassification" by saying "So I wanted to see-I wanted people to see the truth and thought it made sense for people to see the truth."
Let's see--he authorizes the surreptitious piecemeal disclosure of secret information KNOWN TO BE BOGUS for the sake of...truth.
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
Let's see--he authorizes the surreptitious piecemeal disclosure of secret information KNOWN TO BE BOGUS for the sake of...truth.
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
I think you need to check those numbers, folks
Driving 50 miles each way to work, I'm somewhat sensitive to the ever-elevating gas prices. Every time gas jumps by 20 cents, it's another $3 a week or $150 a year. So, when I see forecasts that gas prices are expected to jump again this summer, I get nervous. From CNN.com:
The department, in its seasonal forecast, said the average price of a gallon of regular gasoline will jump to $2.62 over the summer, up from last summer's average of $2.37 a gallon.
But here's where I'm confused:
The average price for a gallon of regular rose another cent Tuesday to $2.686, according to a AAA survey.
So, gas prices will rise to $2.62, but they're already at $2.69. Hmm. Math is, indeed, part of the axis of evil.
BTW, it was $2.79 driving in this morning.
The department, in its seasonal forecast, said the average price of a gallon of regular gasoline will jump to $2.62 over the summer, up from last summer's average of $2.37 a gallon.
But here's where I'm confused:
The average price for a gallon of regular rose another cent Tuesday to $2.686, according to a AAA survey.
So, gas prices will rise to $2.62, but they're already at $2.69. Hmm. Math is, indeed, part of the axis of evil.
BTW, it was $2.79 driving in this morning.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Putting 2 and 2 together...
Today, Fearless Leader tells us:
Wait, I've heard about that "letter" somewhere before. Oh I remember. It was a huge scoop by Dexter Filkins of the paper formerly known as the New York Times....Dexter Filkins, that name sounds familiar, where have I heard that name recently?
Oh that's right, I've got it. From the Washington Post's terrorist payola story this morning:
In 2004, we intercepted a letter from Zarqawi to Osama bin Laden. In it, Zarqawi expressed his concern about "the gap that will emerge between us and the people of the land." He declared "democracy is coming." He went on to say, this will mean "suffocation" for the terrorists.
Wait, I've heard about that "letter" somewhere before. Oh I remember. It was a huge scoop by Dexter Filkins of the paper formerly known as the New York Times....Dexter Filkins, that name sounds familiar, where have I heard that name recently?
Oh that's right, I've got it. From the Washington Post's terrorist payola story this morning:
One slide in the same briefing, for example, noted that a "selective leak" about Zarqawi was made to Dexter Filkins, a New York Times reporter based in Baghdad. Filkins's resulting article, about a letter supposedly written by Zarqawi and boasting of suicide attacks in Iraq, ran on the Times front page on Feb. 9, 2004.Disgraceful.
Monday's word of the day
Reality (re·al·i·ty) noun Actual being or existence, as opposed to an imaginary, idealized, or false nature; the state of the world as it really is rather than as you might want it to be.
Here is how NOT to use it in a sentence:
The President: Yesterday, our nation marked the third anniversary of a great moment in the history of freedom -- it was the liberation of Iraq.
Here is how NOT to use it in a sentence:
The President: Yesterday, our nation marked the third anniversary of a great moment in the history of freedom -- it was the liberation of Iraq.
The Novelty of "I Told You So" Wears Off Quickly
How many times has your humble correspondent advised that the administration has made way too much of Musab al-Zarqawi and "al Qaeda in Iraq?" Anyone with a passing familiarity with Iraq and middle east politics/terrorism has known for some time that al-Zarqawi is nothing more than a low-level thug prone to blunt violence. He reveled in his own self-aggrandizing claim of being "al-Qaeda in Iraq" and we knew that our simian boy king was grossly exploiting this small-time criminal by promoting him to an leadership position in "terror" so he could say "al-Qaeda" and "Iraq" in the same sentence. Hmm...
Military Plays Up Role of Zarqawi
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
The U.S. military is conducting a propaganda campaign to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, according to internal military documents and officers familiar with the program. The effort has raised his profile in a way that some military intelligence officials believe may have overstated his importance and helped the Bush administration tie the war to the organization responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The documents state that the U.S. campaign aims to turn Iraqis against Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian, by playing on their perceived dislike of foreigners. U.S. authorities claim some success with that effort, noting that some tribal Iraqi insurgents have attacked Zarqawi loyalists. For the past two years, U.S. military leaders have been using Iraqi media and other outlets in Baghdad to publicize Zarqawi's role in the insurgency. The documents explicitly list the "U.S. Home Audience" as one of the targets of a broader propaganda campaign.
Military Plays Up Role of Zarqawi
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
The U.S. military is conducting a propaganda campaign to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, according to internal military documents and officers familiar with the program. The effort has raised his profile in a way that some military intelligence officials believe may have overstated his importance and helped the Bush administration tie the war to the organization responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The documents state that the U.S. campaign aims to turn Iraqis against Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian, by playing on their perceived dislike of foreigners. U.S. authorities claim some success with that effort, noting that some tribal Iraqi insurgents have attacked Zarqawi loyalists. For the past two years, U.S. military leaders have been using Iraqi media and other outlets in Baghdad to publicize Zarqawi's role in the insurgency. The documents explicitly list the "U.S. Home Audience" as one of the targets of a broader propaganda campaign.
Sunday, April 09, 2006
The president is a Cryan' Shame--or perhaps a Buckingham
It seems the president has been talking a lot lately. As I was reading his speech in North Carolina (the one where reality so rudely intruded!), I realized that it is very difficult to come up with a critique of his remarks that is of any real value. The first problem is that he is 1) a delusional megalomaniac and/or a pathetic stooge with no concept of what is happening around him beyond the simplistic talking points drilled into him by his organ grinder handlers. The second problem is of course, the fact that we've heard it all before.
How many times have we pointed out the absurdity of his description of the "enemy," in which he lumps everyone from Shi'ite militias to the Sunni resistance to a handful of foreign fighters under the rubric of "terrorists" with a monolithic "totalitarian" ideology? Over and over, we've pointed out that his version of democracy is both a false god and a fool's paradise. First of all, "democracy" was the last thing the Bush administration wanted, as they sought to set up Ahmed Chalabi as a company stooge. The "elections" were a bastardized afterthought forced on the administration by Ayatollah Sistani.
"Democracy" as an ideal has been criticized at least from the time of Plato and it is no panacea. Plato questioned humanity's ability to seriously question their own situation and their basic assumptions. he doubted that people would do the necessary work to inform and enlighten themselves to participate in the process in a meaningful way.
H.L. Mencken was even more harshly critical of democracy, as he wrote that "democracy always seems bent upon killing the thing it theoretically loves. I have rehearsed some of its operations against liberty, the very cornerstone of its political metaphysic. It not only wars upon the thing itself; it even wars upon mere academic advocacy of it." He at various times referred to democracy as
"a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance,"
"a form of worship, it is the worship of jackals by jackasses."
"only a dream, it should be put in the same category as Arcadia, Santa Claus, and heaven" and finally as
"the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage."
Should we also note that our system was not conceived as democratic? You may note that the constitution as drafted contained no right to vote, and included several anti-democratic provisions, such as the indirect election of senators and our old friend, the electoral college. Even Martha Washington described Thomas Jefferson as a "friend of the filthy democrats."
The president reminds me of one of those bands from the 60s and 70s that tour the summer festival and "Taste of [insert your town here]" circuit. Every night, they go out and play the same songs over and over again exactly the same way. The audience hears the first familiar chords and joins in to sing along. In this case, though, it's not "Kind of a Drag." These oldies but baddies are "9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11, Did I Say 9-11," "Stand Up, Stand Down," "Progress," "The Freedom March," and "That French Guy Alexis." The band is unable to come up with anything new and keeps replaying the same tired old songs over and over again.
And THAT is a Cryan' Shame.
How many times have we pointed out the absurdity of his description of the "enemy," in which he lumps everyone from Shi'ite militias to the Sunni resistance to a handful of foreign fighters under the rubric of "terrorists" with a monolithic "totalitarian" ideology? Over and over, we've pointed out that his version of democracy is both a false god and a fool's paradise. First of all, "democracy" was the last thing the Bush administration wanted, as they sought to set up Ahmed Chalabi as a company stooge. The "elections" were a bastardized afterthought forced on the administration by Ayatollah Sistani.
"Democracy" as an ideal has been criticized at least from the time of Plato and it is no panacea. Plato questioned humanity's ability to seriously question their own situation and their basic assumptions. he doubted that people would do the necessary work to inform and enlighten themselves to participate in the process in a meaningful way.
H.L. Mencken was even more harshly critical of democracy, as he wrote that "democracy always seems bent upon killing the thing it theoretically loves. I have rehearsed some of its operations against liberty, the very cornerstone of its political metaphysic. It not only wars upon the thing itself; it even wars upon mere academic advocacy of it." He at various times referred to democracy as
"a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance,"
"a form of worship, it is the worship of jackals by jackasses."
"only a dream, it should be put in the same category as Arcadia, Santa Claus, and heaven" and finally as
"the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage."
Should we also note that our system was not conceived as democratic? You may note that the constitution as drafted contained no right to vote, and included several anti-democratic provisions, such as the indirect election of senators and our old friend, the electoral college. Even Martha Washington described Thomas Jefferson as a "friend of the filthy democrats."
The president reminds me of one of those bands from the 60s and 70s that tour the summer festival and "Taste of [insert your town here]" circuit. Every night, they go out and play the same songs over and over again exactly the same way. The audience hears the first familiar chords and joins in to sing along. In this case, though, it's not "Kind of a Drag." These oldies but baddies are "9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11, Did I Say 9-11," "Stand Up, Stand Down," "Progress," "The Freedom March," and "That French Guy Alexis." The band is unable to come up with anything new and keeps replaying the same tired old songs over and over again.
And THAT is a Cryan' Shame.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
