Sadly, I missed the episode tonight. Critiques of the former US terrorism leader under both Clinton and Bush have described it as "tearing Mr. Bush a new one" (See Counterspin). I'm trying to locate a transcript or even smart excerpts.
Correction. That last piece was from Thursday's Washington Post (3-18-04), and the link I saw on Buzzflash.
From today's Washington Post:
From a piece by Larry Everest in the San Francisco Chronicle today:
From The Times' editorial page yesterday:
Although the mainstream coverage of this yesterday was scant and today, it's been referred to more parenthetically than authoritatively, several sources say that hundreds of thousands marched around the world yesterday to protest the invasion of Iraq by the US and coalition forces a year ago this week.
I'll second Josh Marshall on this one: you have to see today's Doonesbury.
An office of the Methodist Church in Washington state has acquitted a 47-year-old female minister who revealed three years ago that she was living in a committed lesbian relationship. These were brave men and women who, while realizing they could take some real heat for this, decided to do the right thing anyway. Sadly, that seems like rarity enough today to note.
For the first weekend since its release around the beginning of Lent, Mel Gibson's "The Passion of Christ" has been bested at the box office: by Dawn of the Dead.
New York-Presbyterian Hospital has been ordered by a Manhattan fed court to release abortion records to the DoJ. Right now, in a CNN poll, the results aren't too divided. With 80,000 voting thus far, people are against this DoJ mandate by more than 85%.
Apparently doctors failed to remove the deep burrowing bug from Ashcroft's ass while he was an ICU guest for better than a week. He's obviously still coating everything he touches with bile.
Tonight, there's a top headline on CNN saying "Thousands Cheer as Bush Mocks Kerry."
First, we've known for a very long time that Bush's handlers vette his audiences. Only those who are "true believers" or cowed into submission get anywhere within camera shot.
Second, imagine the ruckus that would be heard tomorrow if the reverse of this headline appeared. Dean, Kerry, Kucinich, and other crowds have cheered long and hard when Dems mock Bush, but you'd never see that headline and certainly not on CNN.
Third, it's a shame our millionaire president can't afford antiperspirant. The armholes of his blue shirt were sodden. Probably the first time in his life he ever worked up a sweat.
Buzzflash offers a link to an article that appeared in a Spokane (WA) paper last Sunday (3-14-04) suggesting a possible reason Bush's records appear so shy of some details: that he was failing drug/alcohol tests and had been grounded under the Human Reliability Program.
Unlike Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael ("you BET my dad got me this job so I could stop being a lobbiest media whore for communications corps") Powell, there are actual things I see and hear about on TV and in newspapers and on radio that I find more indecent than Janet Jackson's (it was covered) nipple, Bono saying the F word, and Howard Stern in general.
For example, I find the following pretty indecent:
That's the title of Maureen Dowd's Sunday Times column on dear, dear Antonin Scalia.
Many better bloggers and most notably, Kevin Drum over on his new Political Animal bog at The Washington Monthly (Kevin called it revolting), have taken Tom Friedman to task already for his 3-18-04 Times column, "Axis of Appeasement." Thus, I won't say much but...
Why is Spain bad for voting out Aznar and company? I've admired the way the people of Spain have responded to the bombing last week (3-11-04) which I don't believe in anyway represents their desire to appease or buy themselves protection from the terrorists.
I think their subsequent vote meant several different things, among them the fact that the way the War on Terror has been handled has been inappropriate and the specific way the existing government responded (through truth-mangling) to it egregious. They said NO to any more of this "whatever Bush wants, we'll do it" mentality. Remember, 85-90% of Spaniards were against the Iraq War before the war. Did you really expect them to vote in Aznar who sided with Bush against the vast majority of his own people?
Yesterday, I heard the tale end of an independent radio format's afternoon speaker talking about a conspiracy theory that the Spanish bombing was planned to try to ensure that Aznar would be returned to office. I don't buy that, although sometimes, the sheer audacity of the BushCo crowd does worry me in its breadth. They've gotten away with so much that one cannot conceive would be possible.
Today, I heard people say how scary this was for "poor Italy", who might feel forced to do something similar because they would not want to be the next target of violence. Now that, I think, is conspiracy theory, too. First, is anyone but Berlesconi a serious candidate? Second, Berlesconi manages almost every single word the people of Italy see and read. I'll bet what passes for my bank that Berlesconi would be returned to power if not a single vote was even cast.
But I can't do anything about Italy. I just want the current US administration removed in a completely fair election, even if the Supremes need to have all that Tom Ridge-sanctioned needlessly purchased duct tape applied to their mouths to keep them from intervening this time. Perhaps Scalia and Cheney can go duck hunting on election weekend.
Hmmm... sorry, I said much after all.
The untruths and corruption of Connecticut governor John Rowland (R) just deepen every day, yet he remains in office. An article from the same publication, I believe, a few months back indicated that Rowland is a long-time friend of the Bush family and they've been giving him support (Jeb, Georgie, and Poppy).
Yet, save for The New York Times, this is a topic rarely covered in the mainstream press. Just as when a friend of Rowland's, a GOP Waterbury mayor, was found guilty of soliciting little girls through a prostitute for sex.
Family values indeed.
Atrios, I believe, featured a link to a campaign fund-raising database of those who have given to one of the candidates.
The sad part is that I've now spent hours there trying to find names, patterns, and interesting bits of data. Here's the loony-ness I've come away with:
I tend not to have a very high opinion of WH functionary and former Bush speechwriter David Frum, from the moment his wife sent out Emails telling everyone he was the "mastermind" behind the "axis of evil" trademark Bush offered up to everything he's done since, up to and including writing a book with the Fat Old Prince of Darkness, Richard Perle (I mean, you could typecast him as the Devil Incarnate believably anywhere).
But last night, on Real Time with Bill Maher, Gore Vidal was wiping up the floor with Frum and doing a bang-up job to boot. Frum is one of the chief apologists for the Bush Administration and he always comes off like, "Please, I'm one of the few Jews these fat white so-called Christian politicians like. Believe what I'm telling you so that I can continue to orbit their planets, please!!!!"
I've been around looking for a few hours - having had a real dumb but unmanageable backache keep me from marching in a local protest in Montpelier - for any coverage whatsoever of the day of protests planned around the world to mark the anniversary of the Iraq War. Nothing.
The closest I came was CNN's Jack Cafferty yelling that Martha Stewart has never said she was "sorry" related to the government case against her. Strangely, however, I believe the same complaint was tendered by the bicyclist Jack Cafferty hit with his Cadillac and dragged several feet in New York a year or two ago. Cafferty, as I recall, got off with a rather small fine and no major impact on his ability to drive.
Via the mighty Skippy, here's a Boston Globe piece on whether we're over or underestimating what it means that Howard Stern is now rabidly anti-Bush on his program.
Personally, I think the most indecent thing about all of this is the way the FCC operates. They get a few thousand complaints about nipplegate - apparently allowing kids to watch violence on the football field and Viagra commercials is good while female anatomy is evil - and Michael Powell says he's speaking for ALL the American people. Hey, Michael Powell's pretty indecent in my book by taking the airwaves considered owned by the public and selling them to corporations. He's a shill and the worst thing Colin Powell ever did to us until Colin himself started selling the BushCo propaganda.
From a Newsday link I saw at Atrios:
From Eric Alterman's column yesterday (I'll spare you the hilarious description of Alterman appearing on Dennis Miller's CNBC show):
Gosh. This morning, I'm assaulted by news both that Donald Trump is trying to trademark the term, "You're fired!" and that people are complaining in Manhattan because he's put this huge "You're fired" banner over one of his downtown properties with his picture on it.
Can't we just fire The Donald instead?
I've literally found few people in my life as deeply repugnant as Donald Trump. He's like a bad late 70s movie that just keeps coming back to bite you. The hair, the attitude, and above all else, The Ego, is just too, too much.
No one... repeat NO ONE... stepped forward to corroborate the fact that George W. Bush served in Alabama when he said he did, so the $10,000 Doonesbury artist Gary Trudeau offered as a reward has been donated to the USO. Notice how this has been completely ignored by the media. This I found on Wonkette's site.
Long-time Vermont Rep Bernie Sanders (I) learned the day after announcing his intention to seek an eighth term that he'll be challenged by a Republican from Stowe.
Now, Bernie has been one of the sanest voices since 9/11, siding with librarians over some of the more ridiculous aspects of the Patriot Act, and against the widespread corruption going on throughout the government. Let's try to return Bernie to another term.
That's what MoveOn.org says is trying to be done. Read here for more.
As you'll recall, the Sierra Club has gone up against this administration several times and they're the plaintiff in the case against VP Dick Cheney regarding the energy task force. You know, the one Scalia won't recuse himself from regardless of the numerous calls for him to do just that.
Contrast this story about what happened when Taiwan's president was shot on the campaign trail (he was treated and released), with what GW would do. My God, that man would be in a bullet-proof fortress so fast and his handlers would be insinuating that anyone who votes against him is voting for the person who shot him.
We keep hearing what a hero GW is. I just don't see it. He takes no personal risks because he accepts no responsibility for anything. On 9/11, he literally hid from us (BS from that movie aside where he supposedly wrestled the Secret Service to make them turn around that plane).
This morning started off with the sad sounds of both my mate lying in bed next to me having a sinus attack and that of a mournful moose outside.
For those of you who've never heard a moose (I assume you have heard a sinus attack which my significant other has evolved into making it sound like a boardroom of angry ducks arguing), imagine a lone boat on the horizon in the fog, its crew tired, dirty, and aching for home. Think of the mournful noise it would emit. That's a moose.
Parenthetically, let me add that the hornier the moose gets, the more mournful it sounds. It can produce a range to make you weep.
I agree with Ezra at Pandagon on this one: Will Saletan's article on the Bush campaign is a must-read.
Via Cursor, Brendan O'Neill takes a look at something I'd only begun to notice: where pro-war people, mostly American, seem to be gloating over Europe's shock at the Madrid bombings, like some giant, "We told you Al Qaeda was baaad."
As I've listened on and off today of the breathless reporting that Osama's #2, the former acclaimed pediatrician turned Islamic revolutionary Al-Zawahiri, may be cornered, I've heard again and again this administration demonstrating their flip-floppability.
At times, Osama is the world's most wanted. At other times, he's "so diminished as to really not be too terribly important anymore". Then he's Global Villain #1 again before he's back being "minimalized". All uttered by this administration at different times over 2 1/2 years.
The same is true with Al Zawahiri and with Al Qaeda itself. Several times, the president and various members of this administration have said we've almost wiped out Al Qaeda and the Taliban is no more. Today, we're hearing how Al Qaeda will be crippled if Al Zawahiri is captured and that we're launching new offensives on the Taliban. But if both - as we were told before - practically no longer exist, why would we need to kill them again?
Geez. Pick a lie and stick with it for five consecutive minutes, OK?
For those of you not on the Dean mailing list, CNN talks about Howard's plan to continue some of the "want a change" momentum grown by his candidacy.
Did anyone catch Letterman last night?
If you saw it, it will come as little surprise that she was arrested a few hours later. That lady was flying particularly high.
Man, I've had to take tiny doses of oxicodone (one of the drugs she's been charged with having illegally) for nerve damage yet it's never had that effect on me. All I ever do when I take it is sit down and write the tech work that I can't when I'm in pain. I've never wanted to flash my breasts on TV or tell Letterman how much I love him.
Besides the suicide car bombing this morning, the AP wire is reporting several blasts have been heard tonight in Baghdad.
Wasn't Bush just taking credit for how well things are going? BTW, that's a rhetorical question. He was.
If you haven't done so already, go welcome Kevin Drum of Calpundit in his new digs as the Political Animal blogger over at The Washington Monthly.
a link to an article stating that Poland now is up in arms about that whole lack of WMD thing, too. Imagine that.
Listening to "Democracy Now" today and the author talking about how the Saud Royal Family and bin Laden family members were allowed to fly about after 9-11 when the rest of the country could not, the special ways in which the Bush family reverently treats the Sauds and bin Ladens, et al, just have left me fuming.
Of course, I see a huge difference between Osama and other Arabs. No question. But why would Sauds and the bin Laden family be treated far better than any American by the American president? I'm tired of paying for the Bushies' high crimes, misdemeanors, and outright philandering to support their bank balances.
To fill the void, in part, left by the brave New Paltz mayor who was stopped in his performance of marriages between same sex partners and to stand in solidarity with the upstate NY clergy arrested for doing same, a minister and a rabbi will marry same sex couples on the steps of NY City Hall today.
A reader at Atrios' site offers us George W. Bush's words on the eve of war last year. Made an interesting read.
And while you're there, Atrios is trying to raise lots of turkee money for the Democrats. If you've somehow managed to keep working and your bills paid during the Bush years, go contribute so you might still have a job after November.
Last night - probably prompted both by watching some of the WH daily press conference and a friend referring to the movie yesterday - I dreamed that the movie Deliverance was being reshot, but this time, WH spokesman Scott McClellan was playing the Ned Beatty role.
Everytime I see him today, I feel very uncomfortable. Urm.
The statement said it supported President Bush (news - web sites) in his reelection campaign, and would prefer him to win in November rather than the Democratic candidate John Kerry (news - web sites), as it was not possible to find a leader "more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom."
Let's disappoint al Qaeda. Let's vote out Mr. Bush.
I wonder if the right wing will be so glowing in their praise for Mel (The Visionary) Gibson now that Mel has come out with remarks questioning Bush and his credibility (that whole WMD matter concerns Mel, I read).
Questioning Bush would seem like a decent reality check, in fact, and perhaps Mel isn't as disconnected from the mothership as some have thought. But wait... the right wing said before that to question Mel's vision was anti-Christian. So if they come out and attack Mel now, won't the right wing be anti-Christian?
This is all so confusing. Smirk.
Now, granted, I consider Joe Scarbrough a buffoon, a sham, and I'm still trying to figure out why the bleep MSNBC would let him have a show. But even Joe surprised me last night with the depth of his stupidity.
He was going after Clinton full bore because Clinton didn't off Osama when they spotted him on that drone camera. No reality permeated Joe's veneer, however, like that Osama would have had to wait in the same place they spotted him for 18 hours before a mission could have gotten there. And God forbid Joe notice that Bush did nothing (and he was about to move into the White House and it would have been considered his call on how to proceed).
Joe reminds me of what a proctologist sees after he tells a man to bend over and pull his buttocks apart, especially if the patient has weeping hemorrhoids.
from rubble in the suicide car bomb in Baghdad, according to CNN and MSNBC. They do not expect any survivors.
This is mostly addressed toward the women who may be reading, although breast cancer strikes men, too (and for them, it's often far more serious because it's much less likely to be detected early).
After years of putting it off, I'm scheduled to go have a mammogram tomorrow. I'm discussing it here because a) I feel women should get them (even if I procrastinated again and again) and b) because it represents a terror for some of us.
I, for example, have been through breast cancer scares before. Thankfully, I always came out fine but the fear is always palpable. I've worked with advanced breast cancer patients and I know something of what they go through. Of course, cancer is always a great intrusion and life changer. But I think some cancer sites and types can be more destructive to the spirit. But then, I think we women often feel somewhat at the mercy of our hormones, and breast cancer is tied to those lovely hormones.
The next few days will be pretty tense for me. I have some suspicions they may find something (but I've been wrong before). I'm also kicking myself for not having the mammogram earlier.
If you're a woman who's 40 or over (or younger but with major concerns), even if you don't have health insurance, find a hospital or women's program that can help you connect with a screening center. Many cities, states, and private programs can seriously help defray the costs. When I signed up for mine, I got this lovely paperwork from the hospital telling me how I could pay for it if I didn't have coverage to handle it (I do, but the paperwork was still appreciated).
The last I heard of the big bombings today, I heard that you can see the bodies of children laying out on the street.
Is this really what we went into Iraq to bestow on the Iraqi people? Weren't all those years of Saddam Hussein enough punishment? Are we really going to just bail on them on June 30th just so Mr. Bush can get elected? No, I refuse to say re-elected. I think there's still too much doubt on that subject.
If you're reading this and you are not registered to vote or usually don't vote, please... reconsider. Your future and the future of the world depend on your vote. I'm not asking you to vote for one particular candidate. That's up to you. I'm just asking you to vote.
I'm just sick, tired, and angry over how we get lied to. Colin Powell now has to end his remarks by saying, "That's the truth" because he has to know his credibility is somewhere deep in the sewer system and he's the best in this particular bunch.
Cheney's continual lies in speeches, Rumsfeld on TV on Sunday, Bush and McClellan this week talking about John Kerry - it's like being caught in this web where nothing but terrible lies are told and you feel threatened unless you're willing to say, "I believe!"
I won't even raise the issue of Condi Rice, whose extremely careful and halting manner of speech and the sheer look on her face tell you that nothing remotely like the truth ever passes her lips.
And not a single one of these folks has ever even considered that they have any accountability to anyone on anything.
Yes, I suppose you could say I'm incensed. Insert tired grin here.
This whole "whether Kerry said more or foreign leaders with regard to those who wouldn't like to see Bush re-elected" is just patently stupid. Even the most devoted of the Republicans have to know the many, many times since late 2000 (long before 9-11) that those in other countries as well as our own have voiced the opinion that Bush is not received well.
But leave it to WH spinmaster (and he's not too masterful at it) Scott McClellan along with Bush and Cheney to pretend that Kerry simply mustname names. Frankly, it would be far faster to list those relative few places that would like to see Bush re-elected. And I'm not even sure Tony Blair would shoot to the top of that list anymore. The poodle's hind fur has been clipped too short too many times now.
Sorry for the dry spell in posts. I've been racing to finish up two projects (one book, one training CD) and float others. However, I've come up for air again.
Just what are the campaign ads going to be like over the summer, let alone next fall?
I'm not worried at this point that a Democratic can't beat an incumbent Republican. What I am worried about (besides the economy, the future of our civilization, our soldiers abroad, health care, that DoD report that says the planet will be practically uninhabitable in 50 years, and why I have such dryer lint buildup, of course) is how "fair" the election will be given the electronic voting machines (the history of 2000 lingers still) and what Rove and Company may engineer between now and then to try to get people united behind Bush again.
I was bowled over today when I saw that more than 70% of respondents to a preposterous CNN poll asking (I'm paraphrased), "Is the election result in Spain a vote for terrorism?" said, "yes." I can only assume they're tainting the water supply with mind control drugs.
Such a decree is idiotic at best. First, Spain (as in the people of, and not the ruling leader) did not support the way their government aligned themselves with Mr. Bush in the way the US has crafted the War On Terror. That horrible bombing didn't just magically change everyone's opinion, not when sentiment against Spain's involvement ran 85-90% in opposition before the bombing.
I don't think most of the world supports terrorism. Certainly, the people of Spain do not. But there are some legitimate questions to be asked - and answered - about whether we (and we means the US parties responsibility for such planning and execution) are doing the right thing in the War on Terror. There's good reason to think, for example, that we're just increasing the number of people who may turn to terrorism in the wake of our actions.
Spain doesn't deserve our skepticism or silly remarks like "their votes amounted to a huge vote for Osama bin Laden." Unlike many Americans who hid in their homes after 9-11, the people of Spain (millions of them) turned out the day after to mourn the dead and stand against those who had committed this heinous act. They didn't "buy" their present prime minister's cooperation with Bush and they used their votes to state that loudly and clearly.
Spain is hardly the only country to have serious questions about our War on Terror. Many Americans have questions, too. Everyone should, considering how many times we've caught the White House misrepresenting information to us.
Maybe the whole rest of the world isn't wrong. Maybe we are.
Salt Lake City has arrested a woman on murder charges because she refused a Caesarian mode of delivery for her twins.
They're making it sound awful, too, implying that she wanted to avoid a scar even at the sacrifice of her child's life. What they aren't forthcoming about is that the 28 yr old woman has a very long history of mental illness.
Aside from that, I'm sorry to say this is one more instance of the government deciding to hold a woman hostage to biological function. First, Caesarians have been refined, but they're still not completely aproblematic. To pretend that someone's concern could only be counted as purely cosmetic is probably a misstatement for any woman, and certainly one who has mental problems. A Caesarian is a surgical procedure and as such, it should be considered carefully and with a full understanding of the possible problems that could develop.
Second, there are women - a couple I've known - who scheduled an unnecessary Caesarian simply to choose the time when the baby arrives. I'm told some upscale doctors have recommended this to very busy working women, for example. If something happens during the Caesarian and a child dies, do you charge the mother and doctor with murder?
One woman I used to work for not only planned the date of her Caesarian for her best availability, but for her doctor's as well - he was about to leave on vacation and she wanted him to perform the delivery before he left. But one big difference between this woman's situation and the case of the Rowland woman who was arrested is that Rowland is poor, mentally ill, and likely was getting medical services through some public program. Thus, Rowland makes a much easier victim than a well-heeled business woman.
and I'd just lost 190 citizens to terrorist bombings in one day, I might be inclined to tell the leader of my country that he's endangering all of us by going along with Mr. Bush. Just a thought.
Jimmy Breslin's column on Bush's appearance on LI for a ground-breaking ceremony for 9-11 victims tells us that huge crews of people were employed solely to make sure the president's tender footsies never touched dirt.
Some cowboy.
From CNN:
Life interrupted my daily postings. In fact, it still is.
But I couldn't resist a few posts today.
The president, when caught up with and asked about whether his campaign is going to continue to use 911 footage - not to mention PAID actors as firefighters because they're "cheaper and easier to find", paraphrased from a quote that seems to have disappeared out of a Newsweek article - says, "I'm gonna talk about 911..." and grins, like it's something to be proud of.
He's creeping me out, man.
However, he's just happy that everyone seemed to stop talking at once about his oddly undocumented guard service. Doesn't matter that they found all of one person - whose dates don't match - who could substantiate that he ever appeared in Alabama for more than a dental appointment and to brag about his drinking.
Many do, based on his equating teachers with terrorists for demanding better education standards than the No (Poor) Child Left Behind (Not Serving in a War) offers.
Moveon.org has a petition for you to sign if you want to see him (Secretary of Education) go.
Funny thing is that while I was horribly offended and angry when Bush said it (and man, did the "enemy" comply, too - dozens upon dozens died after that stupid remark), I don't like it any better coming from John Kerry when referring to the Bush Administration's re-election campaign.
I know it's a strong phrase, and it's easily remembered. I know it symbolizes the cowboy bravado of a president who wouldn't serve in a war but loves sending young men and women into war. I even appreciate that one take on the remark is that Dems are prepared to handle anything BushCo sends their way.
But it's not the message I would use again and again and (ad nauseum) again.
Word is circulating that Calpundit's Kevin Drum has been chosen as the Washington Monthly's "Political Animal" blogger. That's good to hear. He's sure to do a great job.
Kevin is one of the most intelligent and yet reasonable voices in blogdom. But we're blessed with several like that. At least, I have a tough time finding the time needed to get around to all the great blogs that update at least once a day. For example, the ones listed at the left are just some of those I try to visit daily (y'know, while still trying to juggle work and home life and all that jazz), plus all the newspapers.
But having an abundance of fine resources is nothing to complain about.
Our Attorney General remains in the hospital. Today, they're removing his gallbladder, which unfortunately does not mean he won't still be one of the most galling individuals ever in so-called public service.
But exactly where he will now get his endless bile from is unknown.
And here's a piece of irony: I'm sure Mr. Ashcroft was offered a full range of painkillers to reduce the intractable pain he surely felt. Yet he makes certain that his people watch doctors very closely so they won't freely prescribe effective painkillers for the many chronically, critically, or terminally ill people who make up the rest of America.
Last week, I had the unfortunate opportunity, while visiting with a friend, to watch my first ever segment of a reality TV show.
I mean it. I've never watched one of these before ever. From the promos alone presented on what television I do see (and except for news, I'm not much of a TV person), I'd rather snack on ground glass, walk over hot coals, or have a colonoscopy without benefit of sedation that watch one of these programs.
They're always far from reality. The situations presented are almost always strange and bizarre and twisted (ok, the twisted part sounds like real life) and have no bearing on reality. Most of the people chosen for these shows remind you that some people will do anything for money or notoriety and have decided that eating a horse rectum or trying to survive in a bug-infested jungle for a few weeks beats actually applying themselves anywhere.
I'll spare you the details of how it came to pass that I had to watch, but suffice it to say that my virginity - as it relates to "reality tv", ahem - got broken by the Donald Trump-based program, The Apprentice. Donald Trump is one of the few people in the world about whom, if you asked me, "Would you rather eat a diseased horse rectum or spend time with him?", I'd think it over for a second or two but most likely pick the horse rectum. The Donald creeps me out, and we're not just talking that hair and his endless self-promotion. Thus, having him appear on this one reality TV episode I've seen was like being doubly damned.
What's made the experience worse for me is that everywhere I turn this week - even on so-called legitimate news programs - all I see is the woman who got fired from "The Apprentice"-ship last week, a tall, highly attractive, articulate, poised African American woman named Omarosa. The interesting thing is that The Donald's ego is perhaps only matched by Omarosa's. She's played every program this week, from early morning news to late night talk - and tonight, she did Hardball - and told everyone how superior she is to everyone else.
Tonight, for example, we were treated to the fact that she is writing a book and developing her own talk show as well as her own product line of clothing. What, pray tell, might this woman have to say to fill a whole book? I have no idea. I got the impression she didn't learn much on "The Apprentice". In fact, I suspect Omarosa's pretty sure she knows everything in every situation. And if she has a talk show, I'd assume she would be her only guest each day because who could possibly be more interesting to speak with than herself?
These several paragraphs are my long-winded way of asking this one simple question: what's the [bleep]-ing fascination with this kind of programming?
That's the topic of yesterday's Frank Rich column in The New York Times.
Mel's a raving loon. The sooner all this brouhaha dies down, the better.
Speaking on the above-referenced radio program this morning (which is also shown via Free Speech TV, the cable network), Aristide was very clear that he says he was abducted by the US military and forcibly removed from Haiti, not knowing his destination until just 20 minutes before they landed after a 20 hour flight.
On the one hand, Aristide has never struck me as a completely credible character. On the other, I don't put what he's accusing our government of doing past the Bush Administration. Bush isn't the first who likely wanted him gone. But subverting a democracy is a much bigger issue than the removal of a single man, and that gravely concerns me.
The NYC police have confirmed tonight that a body pulled last night from the East River was that of Spalding Gray, writer and actor, who disappeared after leaving his apartment in mid-January. They believe he probably committed suicide by jumping from the Staten Island Ferry.
Aside from his mental demons or perhaps because of, I've always liked Gray's work. His monologues were superb, his delivery even better, and he was great in every movie I ever saw him in - usually as the enigmatic, eccentric smaller character rather than the lead.
I'm sorry that he apparently felt he could no longer continue.
If Aristide left Haiti of his own accord, and wasn't forced out by the U.S., then is what I read at Buzzflash and some other sources true? If so, it doesn't sound much like Aristede is free to come and go or to receive visitors and tends to support what Maxine Waters and others are saying about the situation. I read about an American chaplain in Haiti who says he's spoken with as many 50 different people who reportedly saw Aristede taken forcibly away by people who appeared to be Americans.
Why then is he free to speak on the telephone? Because we can easily recant what he says? I'm mystified.
If you haven't read Brian D. Barry's excellent piece on Common Dreams, please do so. An excerpt from its start:
I'm sure I'm not the only one who was floored at the behavior of the press to Friday's Martha Stewart verdict. MSNBC actually ran special programming ALL DAY today to discuss it in detail.
Now, from what I've read, Martha was brought up on charges that are rarely if ever pursued. From Wall Street insiders, we hear that much more egregious stuff happens all the time in stock trading and they're surprised Martha's taking the fall for something relative minor and open to interpretation. And from what I've heard from the jury (mostly that one vociferous fellow who has appeared on every program), they bore some prejudice because a) Martha was being tried by the Feds (hearing, "the US Government Against Martha Stewart" sounds important) b) some celebs appeared at the trial and c) Martha did not testify (something juries are told not to factor into their decision).
My view on this is simple: Martha got hit the way she got hit because a) she's a woman b) she's a woman who supported Democratic causes and c) she made a lovely target.
Martha's actions, as charged, did not hurt anyone else's stock portfolio. The same cannot be said of those at Enron, WorldCom, and such who are walking around free in one of their many mansions, while their investors are looking at working into their 70s and 80s to pay for the money they lost. But Kenny Boy Lay and others supported the RNC almost exclusively. Martha did not.
I just watched a small piece on the cable news about the growing furor, particularly in (where else?) Texas, over people refusing to buy Girl Scout cookies this year to protest the fact that the Girl Scouts have some program in common with Planned Parenthood. They interviewed all these mothers who said they were either forming new girls' groups (and one said she would make certain her group sponsored good conservative, Christian causes and not Planned Parenthood), or quitting a GS leaders or pulling their daughters from the organization after explaining that "Girl Scouts help kill babies."
What a crock.
First, the Girl Scouts and Planned Parenthood aren't one. What they do share is a common interest in the rearing of intelligent, healthy young women.
Second, Planned Parenthood isn't the Anti-Christ. Abortions are a very small part of what PP does. Perhaps their most vital role is in performing GYN health screenings and protection information to young women who either can't afford or don't have access to their own doctors. Planned Parenthood does sliding scale fees, and that it just terribly important. I've accompanied a few different women to Planned Parenthood who were pregnant, looking for help, and trying to weigh decisions. Termination simply was NOT pushed. Each of three different sessions I sat in on as a friend of the patient were intelligent counseling sessions where a number of options were discussed: first and foremost, the woman's immediate health and the health of her fetus, and then how the woman would protect from an unwanted pregnancy occurring again.
Abortion mill? I think not.
Third: do you really want to lie to children to remove them from an organization? Think about what you're saying in not liking the Girl Scouts because they support little girls like your daughter growing up to be healthy and well-informed.
Interestingly enough, I also read this week that the teenage pregnancy rate in the country, while down in most areas, has risen recently in Texas.
Salon and a number of other publications, including this one, are stating that one of the reasons Howard Stern may have been pulled in strategic Clear Channel markets is not the same old crap he's presented every day of his broadcasting career.
Instead, charges Howard and some others, it was only after (just 3-4 days after) Howard returned from a vacation to go on the warpath against the Bush Administration, stating we needed to get him out of the WH, did Howard get canned.
Howard, in the past, has tended to favor GOP candidates: Pataki, Whitman, and Schwarzenegger. And except for going against Bush, those who listen to the show tell me that Howard's schtick and MO had not changed one bit. They question the timing of the kill: the same week Howard actually spoke out against Bush, coupled with the cushy comfort between the Bush family and the owner of Clear Channel.
It would be interesting to see if this conflict kills Howard altogether, redefines him as a more political commentator on issues (albeit still trying to appeal to the same audience), or the brouhaha just dies off.
The sanctimonious RNC is warning television stations NOT to run ads critical of Mr. Bush. To be clear, they say it's not because the ads are critical, but because there is some question whether their funding is legal. But the funding is perfectly legal (lots of us have contributed small amounts to the cause) and... yes, it's because the ads are against Mr. Bush.
Send these folks out to the garbage-strewn curb where they belong.
The Chicago Tribune today, via BuzzFlash, has a story about how the Bushies tried to discredit the CIA operative's husband, former Ambassador Joe Wilson, before Plame was outed in a Novak column in mid-July. Nasty, nasty business.
Well, records of its communications, anyway.
For an administration that was going to cooperate fully with the investigation into the outing of CIA operative, Valerie Plame, word is that most of what the investigators are getting is "I invoke my 5th Amendment right to keep silent."
I keep thinking about what a powerful message this sends (if not received) to the families of others, either in the military or CIA or so on, who serve. If their child happens to uncover some US bad faith or their spouse or relation does same, the US government feels its fully within their right to "out" that person in service, to effectively make them pay for the crime of exposing injustice or lies by endangering their lives.
The Bush people say "tough" to 9-11 families who want them to stop using footage from the day as campaign backdrop. They have a right to it because it's framed Mr. Bush's presidency, they tell us.
And we have the right to remember on whose watch 9-11 happened and on whose watch a complete and unfettered investigation into it has not been allowed.
If you missed Paul Krugman's column Friday on the above-referenced matter, look at it now. All of the background I've read about this issue suggests there is no reason for SS to be taken away for sometime to come EXCEPT to fund the tax cuts to the wealthy.
Talk about delayed response.
For weeks, there have been rumors afloat regarding what was described as the First Lady of Texas' departure from the state residence and supposedly seeking out a divorce lawyer, followed by stranger tales that she may have caught him in flagrante delicto with a male uh.. staff member.
Perry finally calls the Austin American-Statesman and agrees to an interview, but he puts everything off on the Democratic party chair in Texas. His wife, notably, declines to comment.
True or not, it's unfortunate that these rumors abound where his children could learn about them. But a) Perry has engaged in some truly evil stuff over the years and b) there has been something in the way Mr. and Mrs. Perry have handled the matter which seemed to just add fuel to the fire. Perry's been around in politics and life long enough to know about part b above. So why did they do it?
Even the denial seems.. I dunno... off. In some ways, it came off in a way that made me wonder if Perry wouldn't have been better off continuing to say nothing on the matter.
They say it's complications from a gallbladder, but we suspect it's because of the deep, burrowing bug up his ass.
In all seriousness, a bout of pancreatitis is patently evil. The pain and the nausea are astounding in their severity. I would not wish this on anyone.
Yet, considering Mr. Ashcroft's role the past three years, I cannot help but think that pancreatitis is akin to what he's put this country - and specific people within it - through. Perhaps God is telling him something.
As one might expect, .Rudy Giuliani wasted NO time defending President Bush's use of 9/11 footage in his campaign. He's still hoping he's one Cheney pacemaker reset away from becoming the next VP.
Interestingly enough, however, CNN also features a poll - with a particularly high response rate (some 345,000 so far) - asking people if Mr. Bush was right to use the footage. A resounding 63% say NO.
It's nice to see America speak strongly against an administration that has used 9/11 as backdrop for everything. Wait til the GOP convention in NYC just before the 3rd anniversary of 9/11
Congratulations to the 422 gays who have married in Portland this week.
Onya to the folks in NYC trying to make it happen, and to the mayors of New Paltz and San Francisco, and everyone else trying to allow fair representation for all.
Gosh, all these homosexuals have married now and yet I still don't feel moved to a)break off my 16 yr relationship b) have sex with a cat or c) marry my brother. What does it all meaaaaaaaannnn?
Gosh, March is so young, and yet we already have a Moron of the Month. This is especially noteworthy considering everything else going on in the world - between Republicans equating gay marriage to a certain road to both bestiality and marrying your 5-yr-old sister to listening to Bush tell us anew while making tax cuts permanent for billionaires will help our economy.
But, without further ado, our congratulations to Rep. Tim Cole (R-OK) who equates a vote against Bush in November to a vote for Adolph Hitler during WWII or a vote for Osama Bin Laden today.
Of course, as Atrios pointed out today:
I think the families who feel aggrieved at watching the president use footage from 9/11 to hype his political campaign have every right to speak out.
What amazes and unnerves me that Mr. Bush's handlers would never begin to understand that for some of these families - as with some of the rest of the country - such footage reminds them that 9/11 happened on Mr. Bush's watch.
He's never apologized. He's never said he wished we had handled it better. He's never said, "I know we're trying to buy families out with this settlement to keep them from suing the airline companies, but we really care anyway." No. He told us to go shopping and then happily surrender our civil rights to "protect us" because he won't.
Writer Jennifer Nelson has a piece in SFGate citing the fact that the media disdains religion and that's why Mel Gibson has taken so much criticism for his film, The Passion.
First, she jumps in to say that SC Justices Scalia and his sock puppet, Thomas, are exactly right when they wrote in dissent of a majority Supreme decision that the court demonstrates "a trendy disdain for deep religious conviction." [Ed: I don't think the court disdains religious conviction but I think they appropriately - those not Scalia or Thomas - have disdain the practice of using the courts to force someone else's religious belief on the rest of us.]
Then Nelson says:
Via Atrios, I read that Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell is retiring from Congress.
I used to watch him with some interest as one of the few Native Americans to sit in Congress (frankly, I have no idea of the stats). Part (one-eighth or one-sixteenth, I never remember) Native American myself and regardless of that, someone none too happy with the way their affairs and lives have been handled by our government, I was taken aback when he jumped to the Republican Party several years ago. It made no sense to me then or now.
But for what he represents at least, I'll be sorry to see him go.
More than 140 dead, and hundreds more injured during one of the most holy Sunni day observances.
What have we done, folks?
The state of Vermont - always its own critter - served up John Kerry's only defeat in a total sweep of Super Tuesday primaries by giving their votes to their former governor, Howard Dean, M.D.
John Edwards is expected to announce his departure from the race today.
I'm still bowled over that Edwards has taken so many races, leaving pundits to complain for weeks now that everyone else should drop out. I'm glad many hung in there past the first few primaries. People should have a choice.
I just wish I warmed more to Kerry. Mind you, there's much I admire about the man, and nothing about him troubles me to the degree another 4 years of Bush, or a potential President Lieberman would worry me. But he's yet to make me feel that he's the absolute best person for the job.
Remember: I said for me, it's not "anybody but Bush." I want Bush out because I think he's been a disaster for us and a tragedy for the world. I doubt we'll even begin to appreciate how bad he's made things until he's been out of office for some time (some things, of course, we'll never know).
But I also want to really throw my support behind the person who runs for office. I could do that with Gore in 2000. I suspect I can do it for Kerry. But I still want a better reason than, "he's not GW."
It's hard to measure how good or bad a day the Senate had yesterday in handling two bills - one to continue the assault weapon ban (good) and another that would have protected gun manufacturers from most types of lawsuits except in the case of manufacturing defects.
Bush doesn't want the assault weapon ban because Rove feels his constituency doesn't want it. So let's see what happens. Certainly Delay would keep it from going through the House.
As for the manufacturers, I'm divided. I have no admiration for people who manufacture anything that's best use is to shoot someone or something. While I am strongly opposed to guns, I'm willing to tolerate a free society in which responsible people can if they choose - although I personally can't understand it - own a gun they keep under lock and key.
Yet I also don't understand suing a gun manufacturer for the actions of what someone does with that gun. If you could have a suit that would end the manufacture of guns anywhere, I might join in.
But there are some problems with the logic of manufacturer suits, at least in my mind. For one, there are far more ways to hurt people and other living things than through the use of a gun. Do you sue the manufacturer of Andrea Yates' bathtub because she used it to kill her children? Do you sue the manufacturer of a car because some fool decided to drive his car into a tree to deliberately kill himself and his family?
Guns are unique, yes. The only reason to have them, to large degree, is to shoot them... or have the potential to do so. But the bigger problem isn't that a company exists that will make the product (unless they make it too freely available considering its inherent dangers). No, the real problem is that anyone wants a gun in the first place.
However, it is the ultimate responsibility of the person who commits the heinous act of shooting another being. Smith and Wesson didn't pull the trigger. Sure, there may be contributory guilt: a gun seller who deals under the table, someone who makes the gun otherwise available to someone else (a parent who leaves a loaded weapon within reach of a child, for example).
It's an intriguing question.
Today, I've read such possible Dem VP names as Dick Gephardt, Howard Dean, John Edwards (natch), and Max Cleland.
Each of them offer both strengths and weaknesses. While I admire Gephardt for much of what he has done in his career, I don't think he'd be the best choice. I'd love to see Howard Dean get it (and Kerry could use some of the former Deanie momentum - not to be confused with Joe-mentum) but I think it's unlikely.
Conventional wisdom says a Northern presidential candidate has to have a Southern VP to try to win Southern states. I'm sorry, I don't like this. It shouldn't be true if it is true.. and I'm not sure it is. But Dems love to play it safe. However, if it is.. both John Edwards and Max Cleland would bring something worthy to the table.
I have to agree with Digby on this one:
It was nice to see Rumsfeld and Powell on TV today telling us that Aristide's claims to have been kidnapped and taken forcibly from the country by US forces are in error. Now if only these gentlemen had any credibility left.
You know them: the ones where employees of Wal-Mart tell us how kind and caring the company is, and how much it offers to its workers.
Well, if that's true, why is Georgia's health care program to cover the children of those uninsured by their employers FILLED with Wal-Mart employees?
The Defense Department will offer its own news feed.
Can't you just imagine how fair and unbiased it will be, too? I mean, Mr. Rumsfeld is still running about telling us that any moment now, we'll find huge stores of WMD. It's only been a year since we rolled into Iraq, too. Perhaps it's taking this long for them to "create" doctored WMD and make it look like it was Iraqi based (those damned Europeans will expect proof, after all - they're not as easy to fool as those American chumps).
Please: 246 days until Election 2004 sounds like a long time, but if you're not registered, please get yourself registered to vote. And if you are registered, check to be sure you are (names have a strange way of rolling off).
And whatever you do, VOTE. Your life depends on it.
Like some of it, I didn't always exercise my right. I felt too defeated by the system to bother. But with John Ashcroft and Company at hand, it's one of the few rights we continue to have.
Election 2000 taught us that some people will do anything to stop certain others from exercising that right. For example, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush ordered another purging of voting records for felons, which is likely to result in a number of people whose names just "sound" like those of felons being purged, too. [Ed. note: Once someone has done their time, I cannot conceive why they would be kept from voting. The whole point is to get people "back into the system" and denying them rights is not the way to do that.]
That's how much time the president will deign to grant just two members of the 9/11 investigation.
And based on his MTP interview earlier this month, Bush could spend up to 15 minutes using the word "context", another five discussing his imperatives as a War President (caps deliberate), and then another 10 giving the commission members cute nicknames.
That brings us down to 30 minutes.
Of all the things Mr. Bush has done, this may actually be the one I resent most. He's invoked hell on earth in the name of 9/11, but God forbid he help into its proper investigation. If I were a survivor or the family of someone who died, I would be rabidly unhappy.
Although, in some respects today, we're all survivors of 9/11. The entire world. Thanks to Mr. Bush. And I don't mean that in a positive way about how well he protected us.
That's what some of the predictions are for Haiti, even though the president says otherwise (my, it's hard to imagine that he would say one thing publicly and arrange another, eh?). Let's see... Iraq has oil and some marginally white people so they get Democracy (heh) and since Haiti has mostly black people and has no discernable oil, they get a police state?
Body and Soul has had some worthwhile links on the topic.
| Gasoline Prices |
| energy policy |
| Pounds of CO2 this year |
Cost of the War in Iraq
Vermonters and Vermont Lovers? Click above to visit our Vermont "sister" blog, Vermont, Now & Zen.
NEW: Buy Peter Lance's
Buy David Kuo's
Buy Amy Goodman's
"Static: Gov't Liars...And The People Who Fight Back"
Buy Frank Rich's
"The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of the Truth from 9/11 to Katrina"
Buy Bob Woodward's
Buy Keith Olbermann's
"The Worst Person in the World"
Buy John Dean's
"Conservatives Without Conscience"
Buy Thom Hartmann's
"Screwed: The Undeclared War Against The Middle Class"
Buy David Sirota's
Buy Kate J. Chase's
Buy Kate J. Chase's
"Savvy Guide to Car Maintenance & Repair"
Buy Kate J. Chase's
