Ground Zero Indeed

Stolen from a friend:

"For Ned Lamont to say what's happening in Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror shows how ill prepared he is to be a U.S. senator," [Lieberman spokesman Dan] Gerstein said. "Iraq, right now, is ground zero in terms of terrorist activity."

This was said AFTER homegrown terrorists in London were foiled. Ground zero for terrorist activity is in Iraq? Tell that to London.

Go jump in a woodchipper, Mr. Gerstein.

Headlines you can't resist

Teen arrested after mom found in freezer

Here's the story, but the headline works for me.

This just in!

Breaking News!

We here at The Thinker-Entertainment Tonight want to share these exclusive photos with you. We brought you the first picture of the Tom Cruise-Katie Holmes baby as a newborn just moments after birth:

But we understand that there has been some controversy about the "TomKitten," as she has not been seen publicly, and some have even wondered if she actually exists, given her father's Scientology connection. Rest assured, we have photos, and you can see that Suri is beautiful and completely normal. Enjoy!

From Vice President Vader

The thing that’s partly disturbing about it [Lieberman's loss] is the fact that, the standpoint of our adversaries, if you will, in this conflict, and the al Qaeda types, they clearly are betting on the proposition that ultimately they can break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task.

Over under on the time it takes the MSM to blame Ned Lamont for the UK airplane bombing plot?

Fox News, you're on the clock.

Well, it IS true...

Separated at birth? (voice more than looks)

You have to be of a certain age, but if you can remember, just take














and replace him with the dad from Alf















Shamelessly stolen from Jim Ward's impression on the Stephanie Miller Show.

From the "Missing the point" files

What We Stand For

Administration Seeks to Weaken War Crimes Law
Changes would end risk of prosecution for political appointees, CIA officers
By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post

The Bush administration has drafted amendments to a war crimes law that would eliminate the risk of prosecution for political appointees, CIA officers and former military personnel for humiliating or degrading war prisoners, according to U.S. officials and a copy of the amendments. Officials say the amendments would alter a U.S. law passed in the mid-1990s that criminalized violations of the Geneva Conventions, a set of international treaties governing military conduct in wartime.


Call me crazy, but to me it seems that a better way to avoid prosecutions as war criminals is NOT TO COMMIT WAR CRIMES??

The administration has never gotten it. Let's accept just for a moment for the sake of discussion their laughable premise that these, um, "measures" are necessary to win the "war" on "turr." What is the ultimate result? Our personnel will suffer, take that to the bank. They fail to understand the whole point of international law, and it is a very simple one. WE should respect its norms so that we have a cogent, legitimate basis for asking others to do the same when necessary for our benefit. It boils down to credibility, and sadly, that pot has long since boiled dry.

There was a fever over the land. A fever of disgrace, of indignity, of hunger. We had a democracy, yes, but it was torn by elements within. Above all, there was fear. Fear of today, fear of tomorrow, fear of our neighbors, and fear of ourselves. Only when you understand that - can you understand what Hitler meant to us. Because he said to us: 'Lift your heads! Be proud to be German! There are devils among us. Communists, Liberals, Jews, Gypsies! Once these devils will be destroyed, your misery will be destroyed.' It was the old, old story of the sacrifical lamb. What about those of us who knew better? We who knew the words were lies and worse than lies? Why did we sit silent? Why did we take part? Because we loved our country! What difference does it make if a few political extremists lose their rights?

Dr. Ernst Janning from Judgment at Nuremberg

In the film, Judge Haywood responds:

But this trial has shown that under the stress of a national crisis, men - even able and extraordinary men - can delude themselves into the commission of crimes and atrocities so vast and heinous as to stagger the imagination. No one who has sat through this trial can ever forget....There are those in our country today, too, who speak of the "protection" of the country. Of "survival". The answer to that is, survival as what? A country isn't a rock, and it isn't an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for, when standing for something is the most difficult! Before the people of the world - let it now be noted in our decision here that this is what we stand for, justice, truth and the value of a single human being!

Letters to IL Senators about Lieberman

Dear Senator Durbin (and Obama):

Mine will only be one of a chorus of voices that will likely inundate your office within the coming days.

Within the last several months, I have increased my activism through contributions to Democratic candidates at both the Senate and House levels. I have contributed to incumbents as well as upstart challengers looking to advance the Democratic agenda and take our country back from those who have mismanaged, embarrassed and otherwise ruined our reputation at home and abroad.

As I watched events unfold tonight in Connecticut, particularly with Senator Lieberman abandoning the party in the wake of his loss to Ned Lamont, I must ask that you and your fellow Democratic Senate colleagues congratulate and support the Democratic nominee put forth by the voters of Connecticut, Ned Lamont.

We are all sad to lose colleagues with whom we work. I recently lost an election for a position on a board for an Association in my industry. I congratulated the winning candidate and wished him the best while still finding other ways to stay involved. Senator Lieberman should NOT put forth his candidacy as an Independent. The current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue thought that what HE had was a "mandate to spend political capital" and that hasn't exactly worked out so well, either.

I work for a family owned business that my father started nearly thirty years ago. When employees would give us two weeks notice that they were departing, more often than not my father would just go to the warehouse, get a box and tell people to pack up their belongings and go. His philosophy is to this day that if someone has decided that they don't want to be part of our team anymore, they have broken a trust and really hold further place within our organization.

The same applies for Senator Lieberman. His outright lies during his speech this evening, his snark about what happened with his website today (which proves to be of his OWN doing) and the continued denigration of the party, its members and apparatus, should serve as a message to all Democrats that he's only in it for himself.

Joe Lieberman is now persona non grata as far as I am concerned within the party. He should not benefit from party fundraising efforts nor from campaign assistance from other Democrats. I hope that you feel the same in this matter as I do.

Sincerely,

Weasel

Lieberman loses primary

Will run as an independent

Lieberman to voters - Go Cheney yourself!

CT-Senate Update

Results Page

10:54 pm EDT 93.85% of Precincts Reporting

Lamont, Ned 134,942 51.65
Lieberman, Joe 126,330 48.35

10:12 pm EDT 81.28% of Precincts Reporting

Lamont, Ned 116,387 51.71
Lieberman, Joe 108,683 48.29

9:52 pm EDT 71.79% of Precincts Reporting

Lamont, Ned 100,425 51.61
Lieberman, Joe 94,148 48.39

9:47 pm EDT 64.71% of Precincts Reporting

Lamont, Ned 89,814 51.60
Lieberman, Joe 84,231 48.40

9:33 pm EDT 50.27% of Precincts Reporting

Lamont, Ned 70,444 52.13
Lieberman, Joe 64,700 47.87

9:22 pm EDT - 38.37% of precincts reporting

Lamont, Ned 61,449 53.62
Lieberman, Joe 53,159 46.38

8:58 pm EDT

Lamont, Ned 25,969 57.79%
Lieberman, Joe 18,968 42.21%

8:40 pm EDT
Connecticut
U.S. Senate
Democrat
Candidate Votes Percent Winner
Ned Lamont 6,814 60%
Joe Lieberman 4,586 40%
Precincts Reporting - 29 out of 0 - 4%

CT-Senate may be a taste of November...

If anybody has any time today (and hell knows I don't but I'm getting caught up in the moment), you really should be watching events unfold in Connecticut. Ned Lamont, who came from nowhere to give Bush kisser Joe Lieberman a real fight is locked in a neck and neck battle.

Joe's campaign website went down (www.joe2006.com) and they're blaming Lamont's supporters for a denial of service attack on the server. There are some really damn bright people at Dailykos and MyDD disproving and fighting it as best as they can right now.

The media is once again portraying Joe as the victim...Joe isn't the victim; he's been the one on the assault by being the guy who supports the President on Iraq, wouldn't help in blocking the Alito nomination and in general, giving away the farm and our way of life.

Bugger him, bugger his incumbent ilk and go, Ned, go.

Presidenting for Dummies

"You know, I hear people say, well, civil war this, civil war that. The Iraqi people decided against civil war when they went to the ballot box. "

Let's see, there, George, I have a couple of things for you.

You did know that the "Iraqi people" voted EXACTLY along sectarian lines, reflecting the same ideological, religious and ethnic divisions underlying today's violence?

You do realize that the Iraqi "government" has just about the same amount of power, legitimacy and sovereignty as does the Homecoming Court at Crawford High?

And would you please let the "elections" (the elections you never wanted, by the way) go? I heard you were taking a couple of books on Lincoln to camp to the "Western White House" with you. You might want to read the part where it was the absolutely constitutional, legal and democratic election of Mr. Lincoln that prompted South Carolina to reject federal authority, leading to, you know--CIVIL WAR.

Sectarian Strife Re-enactors

Would you like warlords with that?

While the Bushites whistle their happy tune completely divorced from reality, Middle East Fuckup Version 1.0 is getting far worse in a big hurry. As "sectarian violence" escalates (so does that mean that those guys who wear Union and Confederate uniforms in staged battles and campsites are "Sectarian Violence re-enactors?"), it is also metastasizing into something far worse. Time correspondent Aparism Ghosh has a cover story this week entitled Life in Hell: A Baghdad Diary.

I haven't read it yet, but I just heard him interviewed and he said that even the relative "stability" of the Shi'a militia-controlled south is turning to violence as the various militias are fighting to establish Afghani warlord-style supremacy.

Something is on the march, and it is NOT freedom.

Schmidlap, you're right on this one

I am a firm believer that stupidity should be painful, and I enjoy in particular mocking the stupid who voluntarily publicly display their mental shortcomings through their comical letters to the editor, accompanied by my favorite "Go sit in corner, dumbass" graphic:

But as the wise Schmidlap said, "[h]owever, there are flavors of stupid out there that are anything but funny. They are dangerous, hateful, vile, and destructive. A cute picture and caption doesn't cut it as a response."

Here is such a case that reeks with repulsiveness, courtesy of Nancy Michalica of Clarendon Hills, Illinois.

Mel: Big deal. Madonna: Who cares?

Why is it that so many are so concerned with the comments a drunken movie star makes while Madonna prances around the world wearing a crown of thorns perched upon a mirrored cross and no one bats an eye? Go figure.

For starters, Nancy, Madonna has received significant public criticism for her routine (otherwise, how would a brain wizard like you have heard about it?)

But Nancy, if you can't tell the difference between a miserable miscreant spewing soul-poisoning hatred and a PERFORMER singing a song while (perhaps tastelessly to some) trying to draw attention to the AIDS epidemic, you really shouldn't be living among decent people.

I also don't recall Madonna abusing the police and endangering innocent people by driving 85 mph while impaired in a residential area. Nancy, wake up and get a clue. No, skip that. Forget the clue, just go straight to hell--via Schmidlap's woodchipper:.

Hypotheticals

On ABC's This Week With George Stephanopolous, Secretary of State Rice referred to civil war in Iraq as a "hypothetical." She added that "I'm not going to deal with a hypothetical and that's what this is. This is a hypothetical. Because I think what General Abizaid was saying -- and the tense is very important here. He said -- he didn't say they're sliding to civil war. He said that, yes, the sectarian violence is as bad as he's ever seen it. But he made very clear that we have the forces and, he believes, the plan to prevent any slide to civil war."

Below is a photo from her appearance on the show:

One more quote

From the article below:

Beyond that, Israel and its friends in the United States should seriously reconsider their alliances not only with the neocons, but also with the Christian Right. The largest "pro-Israel" lobby day during this crisis was mobilized by Pastor John Hagee and his Christians United For Israel, a believer in Armageddon with all its implications for a rather particular end to the Jewish story. This is just asking to become the mother of all dumb, self-defeating and morally abhorrent alliances.

Gee, ya think? You do realize that these people ONLY want to bring the world to an end, and anticpate that their Jewish friends will have a cooling dip in the eternity of the Lake of Fire? Are these the kind of people you want as your "friends?"

Scurrilous rumor center

Things that make you go hmmm......

Crawford, Texas:

Denver, Colorado (after a solo vacation to Alaska):

A Great Quote

From an Israeli publication, on the dangers of dancing the Neocon Tango:

Israel does have enemies, interests and security imperatives, but there is no logic in the country volunteering itself for the frontline of an ideologically misguided and avoidable war of civilizations.

Another reason we shouldn't drill in ANWR

Aside from it not being anything other than a boon for the oil companies. From CNN:

BP shuts largest U.S. oil field due to damaged pipeline

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- In a blow to drivers already struggling with high gasoline prices, BP was forced to shut off about 8 percent of the nation's oil supply after discovering "unexpectedly severe corrosion" in the Alaskan pipeline.

BP announced early Monday that the pipeline problems had caused it to begin the first shutdown ever in the biggest oilfield in the United States, Alaska's Prudhoe Bay.
...
Oil analyst Peter Beutel, president of Cameron Hanover, said shutting down an oil field is an expensive and risky step that is only taken in extreme circumstances. He said that suggests the 400,000 barrels a day produced in Prudhoe Bay could be shut off for some time to come.
...And the funny part
Beutel said he expects about a 5 cent a gallon rise in gasoline futures due to the pipeline problems.

So futures will go up 5 cents. How much do you expect we'll see at the pump? A quarter? It went up 20 cents this week for no apparent reason.

The outage will cut global daily oil output by about half a percent, putting more strain on an already tight market. Beutel said he believed the news in Alaska was outweighing even new threats out of Iran to shut production there if that country is hit with United Nations sanctions over its nuclear program.

"This is almost all Alaska," he said about Monday's price hikes. "It doesn't look like something that will have a quick fix or can be ignored by the markets. I think it's going to be measured in weeks, not days, and it could drag on for months."

And now with our jihad weather, Donald Rumsfeld

"Does the violence [in Afghanistan] tend to be up during the summer, in the spring, summer and fall months? Yes it does. And it tends to decline during the winter period. Does that represent failed policy? I don’t know. I would say not."

Because of course, the Taliban winters in Anguilla. They used to jihad off-season in St. Barts, but that is SO last year.

If

So I turned on "This Week" this morning, and the guest is the US Secretary of Making Things Worse, Condaleeza Rice. George Stephanopolous asked her if, as Congress has asked about (Republicans no less), Iraq does become embroiled in a civil war (BTW, if??), Bush would pull US troops out. It seems clear that much of Congress does not want the troops to stay there if there is a civil war.

Rice's response is that the question is a hypothetical (it contains the word if, after all), and she won't answer hypotheticals.

This is the same administration that has adopted Dick Cheney's 1% Solution, where if (there's that word again) there's a 1% chance that someone could be planning an attack on the US, we have to act pre-emptively and attack first. So we'll invade foreign countries based on a 1% fear, but knowing that Iraq is undergoing the worst sectarian violence since we've been there, where the chance of civil war has to be much greater than 1%, Secretary of Horrible Diplomacy Rice can't even discuss what we might do if it did break out.

Of course, we know this government never plans ahead, so maybe they really don't know.