Doesn't this (NYT: "Video Shows G.I.'s at Weapon Cache") pretty much make blaming the Russians a little pointless?
30 October 2004
details details
their editors couldn't have picked a worse time to miss this one.
Alisa Bowen, head of Reuters.co.uk: "Reuters has reputation for accuracy"
Today is FINISH YOUR APPLICATION day
I'm putting this here so that every single time you look at this page today, you'll be reminded that you still have to finish that incredibly long application for Federal government employment. No, it won't do you any good to wait until after election day to decide whether or not you even want to work for the Feds, and no, it won't do you any good to cry about it either. So get off your ass and go finish up... Maybe when you're done you can play a poker tournament. And stop talking to yourself in 3rd person.
29 October 2004
mmmmmm
looking for the perfect girl? Check liegirls.com for sexy women who are willing to say just about anything to make you happy. Click here to view their commercial. (windows media player) Content disclaimer update: Don't worry, this isn't an actual porn site. =)
100,000+ civilians dead b/c of Iraq War
28 October 2004
The Economist endorses...
Kerry for President, reversing their position from 2000. Bad news for republicans.
almost halloween: what are you wearing?
here are some suggestions... maybe "Jenna Bush's liver"... ? Or the "Arrested Protester"? Or the "Littlest Prisoner at Abu Ghraib"?
guess we killed enough
that we don't need to kill any more. I wonder if these gun nuts actually thought that an 84 lb baby bear (less than 1 year old) would end up hurting them? If so, they shouldn't be allowed to possess weapons in the first place. update: Hey, whattya know? Here's exactly the kind of nut I was talking about.
(How exactly do you tell if a bear is bad? Would that be the one with the six year olds leg in his mouth?)How many 6 year olds have been eaten by a bear in the State of Maryland?
What happened at Al-QaQaa? Blame the Russians
according to Drudge (laugh), and the Moonie Times, quoting John Shaw, Undersecretary of Defense for International Technology Security, Russian Intelligence "almost certainly" removed the explosives. Hmmmmm. I tend to believe Marshall far more than than flack that keeps coming from the echo chamber. Wake me when they get their story straight.
27 October 2004
from silly little wingnut
Rush's baby brother slings this crap about how Kerry can't keep you safe. So pathetic that it's actually funny.
Memphis Flyer for Kerry
EDITORIAL: FOR A STRONGER, SAFER, SANER AMERICA "Since its foundation in 1989, The Memphis Flyer has strictly adhered to a policy of not endorsing candidates for public office..... This year's extraordinary presidential campaign, however, requires our making an exception to our traditional non-endorsement policy. Four more years of George W. Bush is a potential disaster of such magnitude that we feel obliged to add our editorial voice to those of so many other newspapers around this country, and declare our support for John F. Kerry's candidacy for the presidency."
the GOP's new man at CIA
great question by laura rozen on the delay by the CIA in submitting their draft internal report, which reportedly calls out specific 'senior administration officials' for poor performance handling intelligence prior to 9/11.
"Will anyone remember the obstruction of Congressional oversight the next time it's time to approve a CIA budget?"
General Wesley Clark: hot off the press
via USNewswire, Wesley Clark issued this statement in response to Bush's curious quote from this morning.
U.S. Newswire : Releases : "Statement from General Wesley Clark in Response to President Bush's Remarks Today" "'Today George W. Bush made a very compelling and thoughtful argument for why he should not be reelected. In his own words, he told the American people that '...a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your Commander in Chief.' 'President Bush couldn't be more right. He jumped to conclusions about any connection between Saddam Hussein and 911. He jumped to conclusions about weapons of mass destruction. He jumped to conclusions about the mission being accomplished. He jumped to conclusions about how we had enough troops on the ground to win the peace. And because he jumped to conclusions, terrorists and insurgents in Iraq may very well have their hands on powerful explosives to attack our troops, we are stuck in Iraq without a plan to win the peace, and Americans are less safe both at home and abroad.' 'By doing all these things, he broke faith with our men and women in uniform. He has let them down. George W. Bush is unfit to be our Commander in Chief.'
bad news for republicans
36 newspapers that endorsed Bush in 2000 have switched their endorsements... and now support John Kerry.
"The Orlando Sentinel has backed every Republican seeking the White House since Richard M. Nixon in 1968. Not this time."more here
Kevin Drum hits a homerun
on Dick Cheney's recent outburst at a CIA briefer who pointed out to Das Vice Fuhrer that Saddam Hussein had not materially supported al-Zarqawi, contrary to the echo chamber's fear mongering talking points. Cheney's reaction after hearing this?
Cheney reacted with fury, screaming at the briefer that CIA was trying to get John Kerry elected by contradicting the president's stance that Saddam had supported terrorism and therefore needed to be overthrown.Kevin Drum, at The Washington Monthly:
"You can't excise a cancer if you spend your time screaming at the lab because the biopsy report isn't what you expected. Why would anyone think that Bush and Cheney can successfully fight terrorism if they willfully refuse to understand the true nature of the threat?"
and the winner is...
If there is a God in heaven, I hope he subscribes to The Washington Post and read today's edition. Today they cover the various electoral college scenarios that we might find ourselves dealing with (although highly unlikely).... in less than 1 week. 1 week? Is that all?
THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING YOU
And you still manage to &$@% things up? "60,000 mailed ballots missing, Broward elections office says"
GOP hijinks in Florida
Looks like the GOP's plan wasn't super secret enough... this report from the BBC details more evidence of disenfranchisement, targeting (again) Florida's black voters. Rest assured they're trying this in other battleground States too.
A secret document obtained from inside Bush campaign headquarters in Florida suggests a plan - possibly in violation of US law - to disrupt voting in the state's African-American voting districts, a BBC Newsnight investigation reveals.
Where's Osama?
According to 9/11 Commissioner John Lehman, he's living safely in Pakistan, still receiving money from his Saudi family. But don't worry, although this guy is pretty sure where he is, he's also pretty sure that we couldn't capture him because he's with so many like-minded terrorists who will protect him, and then something about Vietnam. Whatever. It's sad how the Vietnam references fly when it comes to catching Osama, but they're shunned when mentioned in the context of Iraq. So let me get this straight: We know where he is, but we can't kill him because there are too many people around him that are also bent on reigning Holy terror on America? Does that make sense to anyone else? Where's the 'war' part of the War on Terror?
26 October 2004
Election 2004(th Estate)
Last week, Charles Peters, guest blogging over at Washington Monthly, had this very pointed post on the media's responsibility to ensure that the public is truthfully informed on election issues by cutting through the rhetoric coming from both campaigns. The major premise is that the majority of Americans who consider terrorism their #1 issue when determining who they'll vote for overwhelmingly support George Bush, despite a strikingly underwhelming record actually fighting it. This brings me back to another issue that's been bothering me for some time; that the GOP (generally) has managed to convince their base that the media cannot be trusted, and that they shouldn't rely on anything that they hear from mainstream media because the entire media 'world' is out to get them, whether it's referring to CNN as the Communist News Network, or President Bush laughing at the mention of The Washington Post during the debates, or his ridiculous comment about 'the mainstream media' during the same debate. They ignorantly claim that news organizations are 'filtering' out good news in Iraq to paint an artificially uglier picture than reality would otherwise show... yada yada... Meanwhile FOX', The Weekly Standard, Newsmax, WND, et al receive "atta-boys" from the administration because their programming is based almost entirely on promoting a GOP agenda. In less than 2 weeks we will be in the midst of an election unlike any we have experienced before. The public is divided right down the middle... half scared to death, convinced that Kerry doesn't know how to fight the war on terror; strangely afraid to let go of the President who put them in this situation in the first place. The same man who scoffs when questioned about his ability to make it right in the end. And damnit if it doesn't seem like most of these people get their news exclusively from FOX. Yeah, I realize I'm over-simplifying and generalizing, but the results are undeniable. There is a stark difference between reality and perception when it comes to FOX viewers. It has affected people in such a way that FOX alone has poisoned the well. The credibility of objective journalists is under assault by virtue this overtly biased programming. It seems MOST crucial that, during the next 2 weeks, the media cut through campaign rhetoric and report the FACTS... period! When facts are being manipulated by campaign officials (or your own President or Vice President) for political expedience then there is an occupational responsibility for those in the news industry to hold those officials accountable for their misstatements. And no, I don't expect that FOX would change their ways, but that raises the stakes for the rest of the media to prove that they DO HAVE INTEGRITY. FOX has already proven that they have none. We need reporters, journalists and editors to revisit why they entered the industry, because as a whole they are effectively proving the Bush administration’s rhetoric correct... that they are not objective arbiters of fact, but (more accurately) sounding boards for corporate owners and their wealthiest advertisers, all of whom happen to have gained the most from Bush’s silly tax cut. Today, Laura Rozen has this post on today's Boston Globe article where she highlights how calculated misconceptions and deceipt by the Bush administration could have long-term effects on the public's trust in their government. These are the things that help me determine who I'm voting for. Simply put, I'm voting for the guy less likely to lie to me.
[From the Globe piece:] The explanation for the Bush divide seemed to come from another poll released last week, this one by the Harris organization. It found sharply diverging views of the facts about Iraq and the 9/11 attacks between Bush's supporters and Democrat John F. Kerry's. In many cases, Bush's supporters -- representing a large swath of the electorate -- went beyond the assertions of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney in describing dangers posed by prewar Iraq.Forty-one percent of all respondents, for instance, agreed that ''Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the US on 9/11." This interpretation persists even after Cheney, in his debate with Democratic rival John Edwards, denied ever suggesting such a thing.
In addition, 38 percent believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the US invaded, despite the conclusion of the Iraq Survey Group that none existed.
And a large majority of 62 percent agreed that ''Saddam Hussein had strong links with Al Qaeda," even though the bipartisan 9/11 Commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee said he did not.
[laura rozen] What are the consequences that so many people can be taught to believe something not true? They could believe anyone has done it. Those who push such falsehoods should beware. They could become the victims of their own deliberate conspiracy mongering. Because they have demonstrated that for a large number of people the truth doesn't matter, is something to be manipulated. It's a dangerous lesson.
Indeed.
RNC: Up is Down
from Salon.com Politics
As the mountain of newspaper endorsements pile up in favor of Sen. John Kerry, including dozens from dailies that backed Bush in 2000, the Bush/Cheney campaign is dismissing the trend as no big deal. "Look, the Republican candidate will never win the contest for editorial board endorsements. The major dailies across the country tend to skew liberal," RNC chairman Ed Gillespie told CNN last week. That spin comes straight out of the GOP handbook that insists the mainstream press tilts to the left, so of course newspapers love Democrats come Election Day. Only problem is it's not accurate. In fact, the complete opposite is true. Since 1940 when the industry trade magazine Editor & Publisher began tracking newspapers during presidential elections, only two Democratic candidates -- Lyndon Johnson in 1964 and Bill Clinton in 1992 -- have ever won more endorsements than their Republican opponent. That's because newspaper publishers, who usually sign off on endorsements, tend to vote Republican (like lots of senior, corporate executives), which means GOP candidates pick up more endorsements. A lot more. In 1984, president Ronald Reagan landed roughly twice as many endorsements as Democrat Walter Mondale in the president's easy re-election win. And in 1996, despite his weak showing at the polls, 179 daily newspapers endorsed Republican Bob Dole, which easily outpaced the Democrats' tally by nearly a 2-to-1 margin. In 2000, the overwhelming trend towards Republicans continued. According to estimates, candidate Bush enjoyed a huge newspaper advantage, picking up nearly 100 more daily endorsements than Gore. On the eve of the election four yeas ago, Editor & Publisher spelled out the newspaper love affair with Bush in a Nov. 6 article: "The nation's newspaper editors and publishers strongly believe the Texas governor will beat Al Gore in Tuesday's election for president. By a wide margin, they plan to vote for him themselves. And, to complete this Republican trifecta, newspapers endorsed Bush by about 2-to-1 nationally." E&P's results come from industry-wide surveys it conducted among 800 top newspaper executives one week before the election. Asked how they were going to vote in 2000, 59 percent of newspaper publishers signaled they were voting for Bush, compared to just 20 percent for Gore. And even among newsroom editors, Bush won support among 33 percent, compared to just to 24 percent for Gore. As E&P noted in 2000, "One has to wonder: whatever happened to the so-called 'liberal press'?" The better question for the Bush/Cheney team is, why have all those GOP publishers abandoned the president this time around? -- Eric Boehlert
Sawt Al-Jihad to Jihadists: "Intensify fight during Ramadan"
From MEMRI, through the CRA Terrorism Update.
In issue #27 of Sawt Al-Jihad, an Internet journal affiliated with the branch of Al-Qa'ida based in the
25 October 2004
Shorter NY Times: Alberto Gonzales is a bad man
whose chief concern is finding innovative ways to limit your freedoms.
After Terror, a Secret Rewriting of Military Law
This is interesting though:
"Everybody who was involved in this process had, in my mind, a white hat on," Timothy E. Flanigan, the former deputy White House counsel, said in an interview. "They were not out to be cowboys or create a radical new legal regime. What they wanted to do was to use existing legal models to assist in the process of saving lives, to get information. And the war on terror is all about information."
He's right, the war on terror IS about information. In fact more information is exactly what the American people need. What they DON'T need are misleading interpretations of information, massaged information, or just plain old disinformation. If we expect to win the war on terror then we better start being truthful with the American public. INFORM THEM. Let them know the true nature of the terror threat. What is the terrorists' intent? Who is their enemy? What goal do they aim to acheive? And let the American public know what they can do to help.
Terrorists want to incite fear. So long as our government continues to be vague about the threat there will remain a heightened sense of unease. If we continue to use the threat index disingenuously, rather than as a bonafide warning system, then malaise will continue to be a factor in public perception. If we continue to kill innocent men, women and children in Iraq, we will NEVER escape the cycle of violence associated with radical Islamic terrorism. Moreover, secret meetings held by administration officials with the express purpose of bypassing due process and granting unreasonable legal powers to the executive branch is not what the American public needed to keep them safe, but don't tell that to Gonzales' crew. And why do these guys habitually meet in echo chamber environments? In this instance without SoS Colin Powell, NSA Condoleeza Rice or consultation of Congress? Because dissenters are not welcome and opposing points of view be damned. They had a mission with an expected outcome, and nobody was going to interfere. Par for the course.
American Conservative Magazine
Endorses John Kerry for President Well not exactly, but one of their editors does... another endorses a constitution party candidate, one is for nobody, this guy is endorsing some libertarian, here's that constitution party guy again, this frickin guy is endorsing nader?????, and here is 1 vote for some guy named bush.
Who was wrong?
The Bush administration swears that nobody warned them that coalition troops would not be treated like Santa Claus upon 'liberating' the Iraqi people. Of course, many in and around Washington know this to be patently untrue (or what you might call another one of those EX-A-GER-A-SHUNS). And then there's this report from the USA Today: Prewar intelligence predicted Iraqi insurgency
Cleveland Plain Dealer publisher: "Endorse Bush or no one"
like one of those oft-forwarded emails, this through julia (of sisyphus shrugged)... originally from skippy:
meanwhile, back at the liberal media skippy (y,sctp) informs us that the editorial board of the Cleveland Plain[s just Plain, so I'm told, and apparently a misnomer at that] Dealer, in prominent swing state Ohio, voted overwhelmingly to endorse Kerry and were overruled by their publisher, who insisted that they endorse Bush. The Plain Dealer will not be endorsing this year."
Josh Marshall: unanswered questions in Iraqi looting fiasco
"TPM Assignment Desk: a list of questions reporters might do well to get to the bottom of in this looted explosives story ..." Much more here.
Too scared to vote: Part DCXLVII
Bush: No Intel on Plans for Election Day Terror Attack... (but that won't stop me from hitting the morning talk show circuit to remind you that bad people want to kill you and your family, with weapons that they may not have, but we're not going to tell you that). Sleep tight. George will take care of you.
Bill Vaughn on what's wrong with America
"A citizen of America will cross the ocean to fight for democracy, but won't cross the street to vote in a national election." -from The Quotations Page
Ashlee Simpson = Milli Vanilli: Part III
OK, well it took about 48 hours... but finally everyone is on it. Here are more Ashlee Simpson links than you'll care to see, and HOT99.5 has the video so check it out for yourself.
24 October 2004
DonkeyRising: Kerry Leads in 10th Straight PA Poll
The Emerging Democratic Majority WebLog - DonkeyRising: "John Kerry leads George Bush 48-46 percent of Pennsylvania RV's, according to a Morning Call/Muhlenberg College Poll conducted 10/17-22. This makes 10 straight Pennsylvania Polls showing Kerry leading."
Ashlee Simpson = Milli Vanilli: Part II
editoriale: Ashlee Simpson = Milli Vanilli and now she's lying to cover her ass..... eyyeow... bad idea. Her band 'started playing the wrong song' so she 'decided to do a hoedown'??? Ummmm.... sorry Ashlee, but everyone saw you with their own eyes. It's a really bad move throwing a lie on top of it all. You got busted. And with all the TALENTED musicians out there who don't get a chance to play on SNL, it's very enjoyable to see a no-talent wannabe get exposed for lip-synching. Priceless. Thanks for the memories, your 15 minutes are over now.
22 October 2004
eh, what does he know?
from OperationTruth.org...
From the Top down My name is Roy Vincent Edwards. I am a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom as well as Operation Desert Storm. I served in the U.S. Army twice. The first in 1990 to 1995 and then 2001 to 2004. I would have considered staying in if I felt that our current adminstration had been up front and honest to us and the American people. From the top down the civilian heads of our armed forces have lied and mislead the American public about the war in Iraq both in validation of reasons for the war and about the situation on the ground. The [sic] sent us in to this conflict without enough troops, not enough or sub-standard equipment, and tied the hands of our military leaders to do the job right.
The Washington Monthly/Political Animal: comments
My question is this: The 9/11 hijackers didn't do this on their own.
This attack in particular required a assitance from agents of the Saudi government and money from rich Saudis. Unlike the hijackers, a lot of these people behind the scenes, as well as the Saudi government itself would fear the righteous vengeance of the United States.
And yet the attack went forward, and there were no tipoffs. How is it conceivable that these people would even allow such an attack to take shape, much less be carried off?
The only answer I can come up with is that these terror enablers were so sure that the President Bush would not only ignore their involvement, but would actively block and classify investigations that exposed them. And they were right.
21 October 2004
new CIA director covering Bush's ass until the election
Fascinating, outrageous, complety unsurprising and discussed in some detail in Seymour Hersh's new book Chain of Command, the LA Times has this report (registration required) on the CIA withholding the release of their 9/11 report until after the November 2nd elections. According to several members of Congress (both Democrat and Republican), the CIA is purposefully holding this back to protect the President because, in part, the findings hold "very senior-level officials responsible". Among the excerpts:
"It is infuriating that a report which shows that high-level people were not doing their jobs in a satisfactory manner before 9/11 is being suppressed," an intelligence official who has read the report told me, adding that "the report is potentially very embarrassing for the administration, because it makes it look like they weren't interested in terrorism before 9/11, or in holding people in the government responsible afterward."
white Catholics now favor Kerry
According to the Pew Research Center's latest poll, (via Kevin Drum at the Washington Monthly), it looks like Bush has lost what was once a sizeable lead with white Catholic voters... Kerry now leads 50-43, a 12 to 17 point gain within the past month. Hopefully this means that they have finally recognized that Bush panders to religious folks merely out of political expedience.
slimy Cheney lies to scare: Volume CCCLXXXVII
does this guy ever tell the truth? or ever have evidence to back up the nonsense that comes out of his mouth? Sadly, somehow, this election is going to be close despite the fact that I can't for the life of me figure out why ANYONE would vote for this crew of lying manipulators.
Check this from the Center for American Progress:
In an interview with Fox's Sean Hannity that aired last night, Vice President Dick Cheney soared to new heights of hypocrisy. Fresh off warning that terrorists would bomb U.S. cities if Sen. Kerry were elected, Cheney chided Democrats for "shameless scare tactics." He then implied insurgents in Iraq were attempting to influence the election in Kerry's favor, despite admitting he had "no hard evidence" to back up that claim. Cheney repeated over and over again how dismayed he was by the "over the top" tone of the current campaign. But in the same interview, he parroted the hypocrisy and lies that have characterized his vice presidency for four years.
Bill O'Reilly: can I pay you off?
from the New York Daily News
Bill O'Reilly (sic) accuser turned down $2 million to make her sexual harassment complaint disappear, sources told the Daily News.
Lawyers for Fox News had proposed the $2 million settlement to Andrea Mackris and her lawyer Benedict Morelli, sources at Fox told The News.
The negotiations took place days before Mackris filed her suit.
But Mackris and Morelli thumbed their noses at the money, the sources said, and suggested that $60 million was a more appropriate starting point.
"When Benedict Morelli demanded $60 million, that was the end of any discussion, period and absolutely," said a Fox spokesman.
George Bush: UNITER
... unless you happen to be black.
Add this to Bush's refusal to speak at the NAACP conference earlier, and what else are people to think?
Bush campaign lying: AGAIN
(as if we needed another example....) this on the anti-Kerry film that Sinclair Broadcasting, echo-chamber mouthpiece and water-carrier for the Bush campaign, will be showing on Friday night. from the NY Times: The Film: Accusations and Flaws, All Serious
19 October 2004
18 October 2004
steve clemons
points to more slimy RNC campaign hijinks, this time in Tennesee, where apparently some 'over-zealous campaign staff' decided to give an election season bend to the old 'arguing over the internet is like winning the special olympics' joke.
for what it's worth
Inside Scoop on Rove's View of the Election
By Alan Abramowitz
I just received the following message from a colleague at another university who is totally trustworthy:
"I have friend who is a co-chair of the Bush Cheney campaign. Rove believes that Bush needs to have a 4 point lead going into the last weekend to win given the undecideds that will break againt the
president."
"Putinization of American life"
an insightful post from Matthew Iglesias, proud member of the reality-based community, *grin*... on what he deems the Putinization of American life... a well-conceived reference to the similarities between Putin's new Russia and George's New American World Order, contains this passage:
Suskind's article along with other pieces of evidence of what one might call the creeping Putinization of American life (the Sinclair incident, the threatening letter to Rock The Vote, the specter of the top official in the House of Representatives making totally baseless charges of criminal conduct against a major financier of the political opposition [shades of Mikhail Khodorovsky], the increasing evidence that the 'terror alert' system is nothing more than a political prop, the 'torture memo' asserting that the president is above the law, the imposition of rigid discipline on the congress, the abuse of the conference committee procedure, the ability of the administration to lie to congress without penalty, the exclusion of non-supporters from Bush's public appearances, etc.) are beginning to make me think this assessment may have been misguided. Terrorist forces operating in and around Chechnya have done some horrible things -- I was in Moscow for the big apartment bombings -- but ultimately the most harmful thing they have done was to enable Putin to tighten his grip on power.
That pretty well sums it up.
weird science
from Defense Tech: DARPA: PLANES = PLANTS?
The Pentagon wants planes to start acting more like plants. That's the ultimate goal of a research project, funded by Darpa, the Defense Department's mad science division.
We all know plants change their shape. Some bend to catch the sun's rays; some snap to catch a meaty treat; some stiffen when they're watered. Darpa would like to have tough, man-made materials that can pull off some of the same tricks. Maybe, one day, it can lead to a jet that can pull back its wings when it's ready to attack, or extend 'em to glide.
Researchers at Virginia Tech have won from Darpa a $2.1 million, year-and-half grant to start to figure out ways to do this. "The plan calls for the investigation of the protein structures of plants for the purpose of understanding their role in generating shape changes in natural materials," says a Virginia Tech press release. "The protein structures under analysis would then be used to develop a synthetic material that incorporates properties that produce controllable shapes."
The project – Nastic Materials -- is part of a whole range of efforts by Darpa to make materials that act a little like living things. As John Main, the program's manager, said at a DarpaTech conference earlier this year:
The intersection of materials science and nature appears to show great promise for delivering materials with unobtainable properties.
Natural materials are truly magnificent: Living bones grow, repair damage, remodel to distribute stress, and produce blood. Muscle turns lipids into work to help us regulate body temperature, maintain balance, and walk. Plant tissues grow, distribute nutrients, isolate injury, self-clean, support leaves, and sometimes even move with surprising force, such as tree roots upending concrete sidewalks.
All of these characteristics are unobtainable [in man-made things] if you limit yourself to the world of conventional materials. Yet they are all clearly possible, because nature has supplied us with examples to study and potential paths to follow to create similar capabilities.
16 October 2004
Martha Stewart: stories from inside a West Virginia prison
Interested in the latest and greatest from homemaking maven Martha Stewart? Check www.MarthaTalks.com to read a letter from Martha to her supporters... she indicates that she will update (or at least try to update) the site regularly.
15 October 2004
"The Choice 2004" now available online
THE CHOICE 2004 will be available for viewing online on the evening of October 15th, 2004.
As Americans prepare to choose their next president, FRONTLINE offers viewers a special, two-hour dual biography of the two candidates who hope to lead the nation for the next four years. The fifth installment in FRONTLINE's continuing election series pairs filmmaker Martin Smith and correspondent Nicholas Lemann, who go beyond sound bites and political rhetoric to explore how the candidates and their values have been shaped by family background, history, victory, and defeat. By eschewing political pundits in favor of insightful comments from friends, families, colleagues, political adversaries and top journalists who have incisively reported on the candidates, "The Choice 2004" offers viewers -- and voters -- a chance to see the candidates in a fresh light before the campaign reaches its climax on Election Day. [Note: FRONTLINE moves to Tuesday night broadcasts this season.]
jailing journalists imprisons America
from Clarence Page, columnist for the Chicago Tribune, on the ongoing saga of the Plame investigation... which now has Federal investigators jailing journalists who write stories ABOUT stories in which the name of a covert CIA agent had been leaked. To this day Robert Novak still has yet to see the business end of a judge's gavel, but 2 other journalists have... and strangely it was Novak who did the 'outing' (at the whim of a still-nameless 'senior administration official'). * update: check out billmon's most recent post on the Plame investigation.
MUST READ: Bush's hometown newspaper
is endorsing John Kerry for President... and in spectacular fashion. Not only are they endorsing Kerry, but in this editorial they clobber Dubya's record and rhetoric and attempt to hold him accountable for his poor decision-making. Although I agree with this reversal entirely... I'm a bit surprised at the complete indictment of the President's record.... they don't seem too pleased with anything George has accomplished.... but they strongly supported him prior to the 2000 election.
Here are some choice excerpts... from Crawford, Texas' own Lone Star Iconoclast.
Few Americans would have voted for George W. Bush four years ago if he
had promised that, as President, he would:
• Empty the Social Security trust fund by $507 billion to help offset
fiscal irresponsibility and at the same time slash Social Security
benefits.
• Cut Medicare by 17 percent and reduce veterans’ benefits and military pay.
• Eliminate overtime pay for millions of Americans and raise oil prices by 50 percent.
• Give tax cuts to businesses that sent American jobs overseas, and, in fact, by policy encourage their departure.
• Give away billions of tax dollars in government contracts without
competitive bids.
• Involve this country in a deadly and highly questionable war, and
• Take a budget surplus and turn it into the worst deficit in the history of the United States, creating a debt in just four years that will take
generations to repay.
These were elements of a hidden agenda that surfaced only after he took office. The publishers of The Iconoclast endorsed Bush four years ago, based on the things he promised, not on this smoke-screened agenda.
Today, we are endorsing his opponent, John Kerry, based not only on the things that Bush has delivered, but also on the vision of a return to normality that Kerry says our country needs. ~ Rather than using the billions of dollars expended on the invasion of Iraq to shore up our boundaries and go after Osama bin Laden and the Saudi Arabian terrorists, the funds were used to initiate a war with what Bush called a more immediate menace, Saddam Hussein, in oil-rich Iraq. After all, Bush said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction trained on America. We believed him, just as we believed it when he reported that Iraq was the heart of terrorism. We trusted him. The Iconoclast, the President’s hometown newspaper, took Bush on his word and editorialized in favor of the invasion. The newspaper’s publisher promoted Bush and the invasion of Iraq to Londoners in a BBC interview during the time that the administration was wooing the support of Prime Minister Tony Blair.Again, he let us down. ~ Iraq is now a quagmire: no WMDs, no substantive link between Saddam and Osama, and no workable plan for the withdrawal of our troops. We are asked to go along on faith. But remember, blind patriotism can be a dangerous thing and “spin” will not bring back to life a dead soldier; certainly not a thousand of them. ~ John Kerry has 30 years of experience looking out for the American people and can navigate our country back to prosperity and re-instill in America the dignity she so craves and deserves. He has served us well as a highly decorated Vietnam veteran and has had a successful career as a district attorney, lieutenant governor, and senator. Kerry has a positive vision for America, plus the proven intelligence, good sense, and guts to make it happen. That’s why The Iconoclast urges Texans not to rate the candidate by his hometown or even his political party, but instead by where he intends to take the country. The Iconoclast wholeheartedly endorses John Kerry.
Fantastic!
just plain strange
Male Bass in Potomac Producing Eggs Pollution Suspected Cause of Anomaly in River's South Branch
By David A. Fahrenthold Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, October 15, 2004; Page A01
MOOREFIELD, W.Va. -- The South Branch of the Potomac River is as clear as bottled water here, where it rolls over a bed of smooth stones about 230 miles upstream from Washington. But there is a mystery beneath this glassy surface.
Many of the river's male bass are producing eggs.
more here.
14 October 2004
watch the 3rd debate online
and see America's beligerent soon-to-be ex-husband ridicule the mainstream press, laugh at the mention of The Washington Post... and single-handledly undermine his own re-election bid by banging on the podium like a spoiled child. Video and transcript available at t r u t h o u t.org
bad news for republicans
Nader won't be siphoning votes from John Kerry this year in Pennsylvania....
Bill O'Reilly: in his own words
with all the news about Bill O'Reilly's sexual harassment suit, thought it might be fun to take another peak into his "classic romance novel" Those Who Trespass. Here's the same excerpt Al Franken quotes in his book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them.
Ashley was now wearing only brief white panties. She had signaled her desire by removing her shirt and skirt, and by leaning back on the couch. She closed her eyes, concentrating on nothing but Shannon's tongue and lips. He gently teased her by licking the areas around her most sensitive erogenous zone. Then he slipped her panties down her legs and, within seconds, his tongue was inside her, moving rapidly.
How could anyone possibly think that Bill could sexually harass someone?
i'll double down
looks like I'm getting screwed... according to costofwar.com , I've paid $649 to help finance George's ill-conceived escapade in Iraq... but i'll be more than happy to pay another $649 if it meant that George would lose in November.
Enron Defendant Says Barge Deal Was a Sham
HOUSTON (Reuters) - A former Enron Corp. executive told a jury on Thursday in the first Enron criminal trial that he knew the disgraced energy company had made a bogus deal with Merrill Lynch in order to post fraudulent profits. But the former finance executive, Daniel Boyle, said he had no part in the secret 1999 deal that guaranteed Enron would buy back three electricity-generating barges floating off the Nigeria coast it sold to Merrill.
The trial of Boyle, one other former Enron executive and four former Merrill bankers centers on the prosecution's charge that the sale of the barges was a sham that allowed Enron to book $12 million in illicit profits and fill an earnings gap before the end of 1999.
Boyle said under cross-examination by prosecutors that he found out about Enron's promise to buy back the barges only shortly before the energy company repurchased them in June 2000 through a partnership run by former Enron Chief Financial Officer Andrew Fastow.
Boyle, asked by prosecutor Matt Friedrich whether he knew Enron had illegally booked a profit from the sale because of the buyback, answered, "Yes I do ... it was wrong."
By guaranteeing to repurchase the barges, Enron should have booked the deal as a loan under accounting rules.
Boyle testified that his involvement in the deal was limited to setting up seller financing of $21 million through Enron for Merrill Lynch to complete the deal.
Merrill Lynch put up $7 million of its money for the barges.
Defense lawyers have sought to portray the deal as a legitimate sale, arguing that Merrill Lynch assumed real risk when it agreed to buy the barges.
In addition to Boyle, former Enron accountant Sheila Kahanek and former Merrill bankers Daniel Bayly, Robert Furst, William Fuhs and James Brown are on trial.
The six face charges of conspiracy and fraud in the case, and Brown and Boyle are also charged with lying to cover up the transaction.
© Reuters 2004. All Rights Reserved.
© Reuters 2004. All Rights Reserved.
poor beleaguered bill o'reilly
damn, this guy is a perv. and lest we forget... he's not much for being truthful either. (Quicktime required)
sleep tight
From the Israeli foreign ministry:
Film clips taken by IDF reconnaissance drones over the Jabalya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip between September 20 and October 1 show Hamas terrorists launching a Kassam rocket at an Israeli population center and in various stages of preparing other rockets for firing.
The first clip (30.9) shows terrorists launching a Kassam rocket near a crowded residential street in the Jabalya refugee camp.
Download: http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=40865&ak=null
Streaming: http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=40881&ak=null
The second clip (30.9) shows them preparing to bury an explosive charge, a land mine, in a crowded Jabalya street.
Download: http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=40862&ak=null
Streaming: http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=40883&ak=null
The third clip (1.10) shows terrorists loading a Kassam into a vehicle marked "UN".
Download: http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=40878&ak=null
Streaming: http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=40868&ak=null
The last clip (20.9) shows terrorists loading Kassam rockets into a vehicle in
Download: http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=40871&ak=null
Streaming: http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=40882&ak=null
Va., Md. Among States Receiving Most Money from DHS
Va., Md. Among States Receiving Most Money from DHS Updated: Thursday, Oct. 7, 2004 - 6:26 AM RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - Virginia received nearly $1.7 billion from the Department of Homeland Security during the agency's first year. That's the fourth-highest sum nationally and the second-largest per capita.
According to Census Bureau data, Virginia got about $229 for each of the state's nearly 7.4 million residents. Nationally, only New York, Texas and the District of Columbia received more of such disbursements, salaries and wages, procurement contracts and grants than Virginia in fiscal year 2003.
Maryland ranked sixth in federal Department of Homeland Security expenditures in fiscal year 2003. The department spent or earmarked a total of $431 million in Maryland in grants, contracts and salaries. Maryland's grants paid for improved communications among emergency responders, personal protective gear for firefighters and police, equipment for handling hazardous materials, training and overtime reimbursement.
Among Maryland counties, Anne Arundel, which includes the state capital, received the largest amount of federal homeland security funds, $141.6 million. Montgomery County was next with $124.6 million, followed by Prince George's, Frederick County and the city of Baltimore. (Copyright 2004 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
new terrorism database available
Site tracks and charts terrorism information
By Howard Witt
Tribune senior correspondent
Published October 10, 2004
That meant, for example, creating a "weapons" category that includes such traditional means as bombs, guns and knives, and also the more terrifying variants of chemical and biological agents, all of which have been employed by terrorists during the last four decades covered in the database.
But it also meant creating another category that remains hidden from public view: the one labeled "nuclear." It's being held in reserve, against the day when some terrorist group might finally lay its hands on a nuclear device or detonate a radioactive "dirty" bomb.
"To our knowledge, there have been no acts of nuclear terrorism so far," said Chip Ellis, the chief designer of the database. "But if something happened, yes, it's available to be added to the database."
The database, known as the Terrorism Knowledge Base, is still in its final shakedown stage and has yet to be officially unveiled, but it is already available for public use at www.tkb.org Created by the National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism in Oklahoma City, a research institute founded after the 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, the database represents the largest repository of international terrorism information ever made publicly available on the Internet.
More than 18,000 terrorist incidents, and nearly 1,000 terrorist groups and their leaders, are described in detail in the database, which stretches back to 1968. Information sources include the FBI, the CIA and the Rand Corp., a non-profit research think tank that for the first time is making its proprietary terrorism incident database--long regarded by government experts and scholars as the world's most extensive--available to the public. The Department of Homeland Security is providing some of the funding to support the project.
The database allows users to search by more than a dozen criteria, including terrorist group, region, date, type of incident and number of casualties. It can chart results, display them on a map, compare them and suggest further resources to dig more deeply. Indictments, verdicts and other court documents from 120 FBI terrorism cases are also available.
The intended audience ranges from citizens curious about terrorism to journalists, researchers, intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, and even spies in the field working clandestine assignments.
"We've heard back on this already," Ellis said. "Having a system that's online and unrestricted and has good information is very useful to people who may not be able to find a secure connection back to a secure database."
The database contains some unexpected surprises for Americans focused on the threat posed by foreign terrorists. Of the 18 terrorist incidents recorded in the
Moreover, of the 15 listed incidents of biological attacks that have occurred around the world, 12 occurred in the
There are also some quirks and apparent omissions. One of the world's worst incidents of terrorism employing chemical weapons is not included in the database: the 1988 attack against the Kurdish city of
The database designers say that's because a government, rather than a terrorist group, committed the crime, which qualified it as political oppression and placed it outside the definition of terrorism used to filter incidents for possible inclusion.
Nor are there any entries for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the suspected Al Qaeda militant and Iraqi insurgency leader who has claimed responsibility for the recent spate of kidnappings and beheadings of civilian contractors.
Ellis said that omission would be corrected in a pending update of the database, which will be refreshed about every month.
"It's not a real-time system, and we're not pitching it as that," Ellis said. "The main value of this system is that it contains 36 years of terrorism data. So we see this as not necessarily being the last stop for every question that someone has, but certainly the first."
But even a terrorism database that is refreshed only a dozen times a year, Ellis said, beats the currency of other available resources, such as the State Department's "Patterns of Global Terrorism" report, which is issued annually.
Given the ability of the database to compile, sort and analyze past terrorist incidents, is there any danger that terrorists themselves might find it useful? Ellis thinks not.
"Terrorists know what terrorists do," Ellis said. "There's nothing in here that educates terrorists on how they can better perpetrate acts. If anything, we think that this system helps put terrorism in perspective, so that people can see how often terrorism fails, how infrequently it leads to measurable political change."
He added: "Not to be flippant, but we've always said: Hey, if Osama bin Laden wants to write in and say, `You got this wrong,' we'd happily accept that--as long as he gives us a return address. But to be quite frank, we think it's more important to educate the good guys rather than worrying about the bad guys in this case."
- - -
Terrorism by the numbers
An online database maintained by the National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism at http://www.tkb.org includes detailed reports on more than 18,000 terrorist incidents dating back more than three decades.
Terrorist incidents, 1968-present*
Terrorism deaths
BY TACTIC
Bombing 9,710
Armed attack 4,031
Assassination 2,062
Kidnapping 1,461
Other 1,267
BY REGION
Other 2,929
BY TARGET
Private citizens 3,056
/property
Businesses 2,987
Diplomatic 2,547
Government 2,401
Other 7,540
*Includes international terrorism events since 1968 and domestic terrorism events since 1998. Totals as of July 8, 2004.
13 October 2004
12 October 2004
world's bravest man
got this in an email from my little sister...
check out the yellow orange sign that this nut is holding at a feminist rally.
10 October 2004
09 October 2004
08 October 2004
north korean nukes: Bush vs Kerry
a good piece in the boston globe about the current situation in North Korea.
''The difference between Bush and Kerry comes down to Bush believes that you don't negotiate with evil people," said Ivo Daalder, a scholar at the Brookings Institution, a centrist think tank based in Washington. ''Kerry's position is that we do negotiate with evil. We did that with the Russians from 1963 until 2001."
When Bush took office, many of his most influential foreign policy advisers, including Vice President Dick Cheney and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, already were deeply skeptical about the deal Clinton struck in 1994 to provide massive economic aid and two light-water reactors to North Korea in exchange for a halt in the country's nuclear program.
Quote of the Day: 10/08/04
"It's frankly frightening that just for doing my job and talking to government employees about public issues, I may be deprived of my freedom and family"
Judith Miller
no doubt
terrorism bulletin for schools
The issue du jour for many of us yesterday was the joint DHS-FBI bulletin that went to school administrators warning them of a possible terror threat to school districts in the United States. Today I read this from Josh Marshall... and based on this administration's track record of manufacturing threats for political expedience, I can't help but think that what he is suggesting is true.
another pissed off economist
Over here I posted the letter from many of the nation's top business and economics professors who, it seems accurate to say, are just plain fed up with the President's overly-rosy and often complete distortions of reality when it comes to painting America's economic picture. Well... here's another to add to the mix; Nobel Prize winner and professor of economics at Columbia University, Joseph Stiglitz has a rant of his own over at Business Day.
07 October 2004
be careful what you ask for
BBC NEWS: Web blunder boosts Bush bashers
A slip of the tongue by Dick Cheney has given a boost to anti-Bush campaigners.
During a televised debate Mr Cheney told viewers to visit factcheck.com when answering accusations by vice presidential nominee John Edwards. But rather than being the address of a project to check the facts politicians use, the site merely hosts adverts. Soon after being mentioned, it began redirecting visitors to the website of billionaire George Soros, who is very critical of the Bush administration.
Quick, do what Dick says... visit http://www.factcheck.com, and enjoy what's there.
Smart people FIGHTING BACK
October 4, 2004
Dear Mr. President: As professors of economics and business, we are concerned that U.S. economic policy has taken a dangerous turn under your stewardship. Nearly every major economic indicator has deteriorated since you took office in January 2001. Real GDP growth during your term is the lowest of any presidential term in recent memory. Total non-farm employment has contracted and the unemployment rate has increased. Bankruptcies are up sharply, as is our dependence on foreign capital to finance an exploding current account deficit. All three major stock indexes are lower now than at the time of your inauguration. The percentage of Americans in poverty has increased, real median income has declined, and income inequality has grown. The data make clear that your policy of slashing taxes – primarily for those at the upper reaches of the income distribution – has not worked. The fiscal reversal that has taken place under your leadership is so extreme that it would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. The federal budget surplus of over $200 billion that we enjoyed in the year 2000 has disappeared, and we are now facing a massive annual deficit of over $400 billion. In fact, if transfers from the Social Security trust fund are excluded, the federal deficit is even worse – well in excess of a half a trillion dollars this year alone. Although some members of your administration have suggested that the mountain of new debt accumulated on your watch is mainly the consequence of 9-11 and the war on terror, budget experts know that this is simply false. Your economic policies have played a significant role in driving this fiscal collapse. And the economic proposals you have suggested for a potential second term – from diverting Social Security contributions into private accounts to making the recent tax cuts permanent – only promise to exacerbate the crisis by further narrowing the federal revenue base. These sorts of deficits crowd out private investment and are politically addictive. They also place a heavy burden on monetary policy – and create additional pressure for higher interest rates – by stoking inflationary expectations. If your economic advisers are telling you that these deficits can be defeated through further reductions in tax rates, then you need new advisers. More robust economic growth could certainly help, but nearly every one of your administration’s economic forecasts – both before and after 9-11 – has proved overly optimistic. Expenditure cuts could be part of the answer, but your record so far has been one of increasing expenditures, not reducing them. What is called for, we believe, is a dramatic reorientation of fiscal policy, including substantial reversals of your tax policy. Running a budget deficit in response to a short bout of recession is one thing. But running large structural deficits over a long period is something else entirely. We therefore urge you to consider the fiscal realities we now face and the substantial burden they are placing on our economy. We also urge you to consider the distributional consequences of your policies. Under your administration, the income gap between the most affluent Americans and everyone else has widened. Although the latest data reveal that real household incomes have dropped across the board since you took office, low and middle income households have experienced steeper declines than upper income households. To be sure, the general phenomenon of mounting inequality preceded your administration, but it has continued (and, by some accounts, intensified) over the past three and a half years. Some degree of inequality is inherent in any free market economy, creating positive incentives for economic and technological advancement. But when inequality becomes extreme, it can be socially corrosive and economically dysfunctional. Problems of this sort are visible throughout much of the developing world. At the moment, the most commonly accepted measure of inequality – the so-called Gini coefficient – is far higher in the United States than in any other developed country and is continuing to move upward. We don’t know where the breakpoint is for the U.S., but we would rather not find out. With all due respect, we believe your tax policy has exacerbated the problem of inequality in the United States, which has worrisome implications for the economy as a whole. We very much hope you will take this threat to our nation into account as you consider new fiscal approaches to address the nation’s most pressing economic problems. Sensible and farsighted economic management requires true discipline, compassion, and courage – not just slogans. Given the tenuous state of the American economy, we believe that the time for an honest assessment of the problem and for genuine corrective action is now. Ignoring the fiscal crisis that has taken hold during your presidency may seem politically appealing in the short run, but we fear it could ultimately prove disastrous. From a policy standpoint, the clear message is that more of the same won’t work. The warning signs are already visible, and it is incumbent upon all of us to pay attention. Respectfully submitted,
(signed by 180 of the top business and economic professors in the U.S.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)