Thursday, September 30, 2004
MR. McCLELLAN: The President has already talked about what Prime Minister Blair said. The President said we all thought we were going to find the stockpiles, and we're surprised that we did not. But also look at what Prime Minister Blair said and what the President has said: It was the right decision to go in and remove Saddam Hussein's regime from power; he was a threat that we could no longer afford to ignore and let -- and let him continue to deceive the world.
Q Was it appropriate to apologize?
MR. McCLELLAN: The President has already spoken to that issue, John. So he's already said that --
Q Did he apologize?
MR. McCLELLAN: He's already said that, I thought we would have found the stockpiles.
Q That's not an apology.
Q Is that an apology?
MR. McCLELLAN: Dick, he's already addressed this issue. It's the same -- Prime Minister Blair said what he's been saying, too. We all expected to find the stockpiles, but the decision to remove Saddam Hussein, as Prime Minister Blair reiterated again yesterday, was the right decision, because he was a threat and the world is better off with Saddam Hussein removed from power. And that's --
Q Can you say that's more an explanation or an apology? I don't think the statements are --
MR. McCLELLAN: The President said this quite some time ago, he spoke to this very issue quite some time ago. He said the same thing -- Prime Minister Blair said we all thought we were going to find the stockpiles. We all thought we were going to find the stockpiles. But it was the right decision to remove Saddam Hussein --
Q Where is the word sorry?
MR. McCLELLAN: -- from power, and that we're better off -- and we're better off because of it.
Q -- into a place where you use words like --
MR. McCLELLAN: I'd be glad to show you where he said that we all expected to.
Q It's the contrition --
MR. McCLELLAN: I think he's already said --
Q There's no apology.
MR. McCLELLAN: He's already talked to this very issue, Jodi.
(shorter Scotty: I got 99 problems, but the bitch ain't one)
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
Monday, September 27, 2004
Counterspin is back full-bore and he's recommending liberals go out and get themselves a firearm for self defense. I posted on it before and highlighted the instinct of some of the more radical cons who can't discern from a nice piece of propaganda to get them to vote and an actual call to arms to kill liberals. Billmon's freaky picture captures it succinctly.
I tell you one thing, my little girl impresses upon me just how important this election year is. This year's vote is a "vote of a lifetime" and that is not leftist dribble - it is, in fact, a very real truth. One that I think people, I mean undecideds or apathetic nimrods, are starting to realize --
Pictures forthcoming. Thanks for the kind words. Things are going well -- though whoever invented the breast pump should be shot :) how am I supposed to lay all the night feedings on my significant other when she can point to the damn fridge? Grr, I hate technology. :)
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
Standard praise warning -- caution -- here it comes:
She is the cutest baby in the freakin' world!
That is all.
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
"A couple arrested for wearing anti-Bush T-shirts to a July 4 presidential appearance filed a federal lawsuit on Tuesday alleging their First Amendment rights were violated.
Nicole and Jeff Rank were removed from the event at the West Virginia Capitol in handcuffs after revealing T-shirts with President Bush (news - web sites)'s name crossed out on the front. Nicole Rank's shirt had the words "Love America, Hate Bush" on the back and Jeff Rank's said "Regime change starts at home."
The SS were in on the arrest and are also named in the lawsuit.
"Nicole Rank, 30, initially was dismissed from her job with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (news - web sites), but was rehired after the charges were dropped. "
Liberty at work. No pun intended.
Monday, September 13, 2004
The weapons ban is a no win issue for democrats. The sheer amount of money and lobbying done in the name of weaponry can not be matched by any grassroots organization, even StoptheNRA. No matter how many studies prove a society is safer without guns in the hands of it its populace, and no matter how many times academic/scientific studies prove that there was a positive correlation between the ban and the reduction of serious injury in violent crime, we will have our populace who wants their guns. Ask Kistoff who says,
Assault weapons aren't necessary for any kind of hunting or target shooting, but they're popular because they can transform a suburban Walter Mitty into Rambo, for a lot less money than a Hummer.
Yeehaw! Those who tout the 2nd amendment as some panacea for all weaponry see an armed populace as a safe populace -- when terrorist walk into a mall with their AK's and start shooting people, Bubba wants to be able to get to his truck, grab his own AK and return fire -- because, well, that will show them. Or they believe that a criminal bent on murder may change his or her mind if they think their victim is armed. Uh huh, those crazy people are always rational like that.
We know that in states where everyone ones at least one weapon, like Texas, there isn't any crime. You may be surprised, though, that most rational thinking people including card-carrying members of the NRA believe the assault ban is a good thing. Maybe they realize they can take out a would be thief with their Glock, but if that thief comes in with an AK, the situation changes.
And we all know where the cops stand on this -- keep the damn things off the street.
Instead, democrats, indeed, all liberals should probably go out and buy their own assault weapons with bayonet and muzzle flash screening. It's simple: libs may need something to protect themselves from the nutcase administration and right wing radicals that are way ahead in the weapons game.
Consider the AEI set of political principles which can be seeping into all the right wing propaganda:
1. Politics is war conducted by other means. In political warfare you do not fight just to prevail in an argument, but to destroy the enemys fighting ability.
2. Politics is a war of position. In war there are two sides: friends and enemies. Your task is to define yourself as the friend of as large a constituency compatible with your principles as possible, while defining your opponent as their enemy wherever and whenever you can. The act of defining combatants is analogous to the military concept of choosing the terrain of battle. Choose the ground that makes the fight as rigged in your favor as possible.
3. In political wars, the aggressor usually prevails.
4. Position is defined by fear and hope. The twin emotions of politics are fear and hope. Those who provide people with hope become their friends; those who inspire fear become enemies. Of the two, hope is the better choice.
But fear is a powerful and indispensable weapon. If your opponent defines you negatively enough, he will diminish your ability to offer hope. That is why liberals are so determined to portray conservatives as hostile to minorities, working people, and the poor.
5. The weapons of politics are symbols that evoke hope and fear. Style, especially for high public office, is as important as any issue position or propaganda strategy.
6. Victory lies on the side of the people. This is the bottom line. You must define yourself in ways that the people understand. You must give people hope in your victory, and make them fear the victory of your opponent. You can accomplish both by identifying yourself and your issues with the underdog and the victim, with minorities and the disadvantaged, with the ordinary Janes and Joes.
Now consider their political monikers for a minute and think about the last four years. Everything from the failed energy policy to the tax cuts to the constant references to the war on terra highlights their two campaign mantras: fear and aggression. It's not enough to debate -- rationality be damned -- one has to destroy the opposition and the only sure fire way to do that is through emotion. Dick clarke: traitor. Paul O'Neil: traitor. Wilson: traitor. Kerry: traitor. Michael Moore: commie pig.
How has that effected their following? Well, we have a young republican kicking a womanwhile she is on the ground -- this little guy is taking fear and aggression to heart, dontcha think? "oh, that's just a boy being young and stupid." Yeah, and how about this old fart? Nice job old man; pull her hair, make her shut-up -- you shouldn't be subjected to any view not your own (why does Bush ask for loyalty oaths before people can hear him -- same reason). Or consider stories like this or this where local DNC headquaters were vandalized. Ask the Jews, gypsies, or homosexuals if there were any cases of vandalism in 1938-39 Germany. Not that I am equating the two in any sense except in the attitudes of the apathetic populace who willfully refused to connect the dots.
Another parallel to 1939 is the SS. Digby notes a story here, that the SS are acting a little out of bounds to reporters. Another story is highlighted here:
It's becoming increasingly clear that a major, ugly battle in Bush and Co.'s ongoing war against the U.S. Constitution was waged right here in the Philly area yesterday. As the usually on-target Dana Milbank of the Washington Post recounts, Secret Service agents at the president's rally in suburban Colmar were used for the purpose of blocking reporters' access to anti-Bush protestors -- a clear and blatant violation of the First Amendment.
One only need to consider their wonderful running of free speech zones as well to wonder what the hell they're up to, as Ward Reilly notes,
Free Speech Zones" in the U.S.A.? I thought our entire nation was a "Free Speech Zone." I thought that is what "freedom of speech" meant in our Constitution. That we could say anything we wanted, anywhere on public property where we wanted to say it. What was I thinking? Welcome to "Free Speech, 2004, "Dubya" Bush Style." On Friday morning, May 21st, 2004, during a visit to my city by President George W. Bush, I learned what it means to live in a country when "free speech" means something entirely different if you don`t happen to agree with what your President, and/or his cabinet, have done in your name.
Ok, fine some weird things may be happening but these are weird times. As long as I got my job and my kids got soccer practice, you know, things ain't so bad -- this is still America and people won't bother me.... One might want to ask this Moulton woman who lost her job for sporting a Kerry sticker before making that assumption. Fear and aggression in practice -- the slow slide into something else -- a kind of fascism.
The stories coming out of the arrests of protestors and bystanders is also chilling. The pier itself is being hailed as Guantanamo on the Hudson , the prisoners even being referred to as detainees which should be horrifying to everyone seeing as how our other detainees may never get a lawyer nor be released, and the land was leased by the RNC.
This rounding up of protestors dealt with fear. Round em up, and forget about em; confuse them, make them afraid of ever protesting again. Simple enough; who wants that kind of hastle? Meanwhile there is no mainstream outrage. The only people truly disturbed by the state's actions are the people who were arrested and their families.
Just as the media speaks with one voice -- everyone trying to outfox Fox -- libs find themselves 20 years behind even influencing the media in any meaningful way. One not need look far to see that even right wing blogs nuttery gets into mainstream press quickly and efficiencly (others have covered this pretty extensively) while left leaning blogs may never see any action from their investigative work or questioning.
Libs will never get true representation in the media as they don't own any; however, it's not too late to catch up with the gun nuts and extreme right wingers and start their own caches of weapons to protect themselves. And defense is key here because as we see, some of these cons have the emotional stability, psychological willingness, and pure hatred to finally move from this to actually killing people who don't agree with them. -- hehe, now what was I saying about fear?
And before any of you hippies start questioning my lib creds, I don't own a weapon nor do I plan on purchasing one. As far as I can figure the Big Man upstairs will do any life takin' that needs to be takin' including mine. The premise still stands, however. This ban was bad to begin with and we can't fight it. But we can fight the crazy ideologues who seem hell-bent on their way or the highway with no discussion or compromise. How we fight is then the question -- I'm personally in the non-violence camp, but those who espouse "By any means necessary" idea of self defense are not being unreasonable. Should be an interesting new world order we'll be experienceing shortly.
Do not go into that good night, buy your AK today. Maybe next week we'll be able to purchase real cool stuff like RPG's. Those damn tree rats won't have a chance.
Sunday, September 12, 2004
"Hersh's thesis is that "the roots of the Abu Ghraib scandal lie not in the criminal inclinations of a few Army reservists" who have been charged so far, "but in the reliance of George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld on secret operations and the use of coercion -- and eye-for-eye retribution -- in fighting terrorism."
Forget the law. Forget the values this country was founded on. Forget the moral superiority we once had. And forget responsibility -- those in charge will not be held acountable. War criminals every one.
But here, war criminals are hailed with yard signs and bumper stickers. Praised as "religous" and moral characters. I think that's what blows my mind the most -- despite all the evidence of this scandal and others, people willfully dismiss it because Dear Leader, what, took the war to the terrorists? Or is helping bring the second coming of christ? I just don't get why someone would want ths to continue.
"As the Americans withdrew, jubilant fighters and young boys swarmed around the burning vehicle, dancing and cheering.
Suddenly, a U.S. Apache attack helicopter swooped down and opened fire around the Bradley. Witnesses said several people, including a correspondent for the Arabic language Al-Arabiya television station, were killed.
Maj. Phil Smith, a spokesman for the 1st Cavalry Division, said the helicopter fired to try to destroy the burning vehicle "for the safety of the people around it."
Health Ministry official Saad al-Amili said 13 people were killed and 55 wounded — all on Haifa street. Scattered shoes, pools of fresh blood and debris littered the street."
Wednesday, September 08, 2004
"To: Bush-Cheney '04 Grassroots Team
From: Ed Gillespie, Republican National Committee Chairman
Subject: Brace Yourselves
In response to President Bush's Agenda for America's Future and a critique of his policies and Senate record, Senator Kerry's campaign is implementing a strategy of vicious personal attacks against the President and Vice President.
The campaign is bringing in a bevy of former Clinton henchmen, including CNN commentators James Carville and Paul Begala. In August alone, Begala called President Bush a "gutless wonder," said he has a "lack of intelligence," and called Vice President Cheney a "dirt bag." Carville said the President is "ignorant big time" and said "George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are a couple of nobodies."
It's not like Bob Shrum needed encouragement to engage in personal attacks. At a Kerry rally Friday morning in Ohio, campaign surrogate John Glenn compared the Republican Convention to a Nazi rally, and Kerry called the President unfit to lead our nation and once again sought to divide the country by who served and how 35 years ago.
Of course, the President was called a "cheap thug," a "killer" and a "liar" at a Kerry-Edwards campaign event in New York, Mrs. Kerry has called the President's policies "unpatriotic" and "immoral" and DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe falsely accused the President of being AWOL.
Democratic strategist Susan Estrich outlined the strategy last Wednesday in a column warning Republicans to "watch out." "I'm not promising pretty," she wrote before going on to call President Bush and Vice President Cheney alcoholics, then ask "is any alcoholic ever really cured?" ("I can see the ad now.") She deems the President's service as a National Guard fighter pilot "draft dodging," and says, "a forthcoming book by Kitty Kelly raises questions about whether the President has practiced what he preaches on the issue of abortion." (Interestingly, the New York Daily News reported back in February that the Kerry campaign intended to spread such a rumor in pro-life chat rooms late in the campaign.)
So the former Dukakis campaign manager has an advance copy of Democrat donor Kitty Kelly's book, which promises to throw unsubstantiated gossip at President Bush in the same way she falsely maligned the late President Reagan as a date rapist who paid for a girlfriend's abortion and wrongly castigated Nancy Reagan as an adulterer who had an affair with Frank Sinatra. A recent story says Kelly's book alleges President Bush used cocaine at Camp David while his father was President, which is as credible as her story that then Governor and Nancy Reagan smoked marijuana with Jack Benny and George and Gracie Burns.
And tonight on CBS, longtime Democratic operative Ben Barnes-a friend of, major contributor to and Nantucket neighbor of Senator Kerry's and vice chair of the Kerry Campaign--will repudiate his statement under oath that he had no contact with the Bush family concerning the President's National Guard service. (Anyone surprised that Barnes would contradict a statement he made under oath probably doesn't know his long history of political scandal and financial misdealings.)
So brace yourselves. Any mention of John Kerry's votes for higher taxes and against vital weapons programs will be met with the worst kind of personal attacks. Such desperation is unbecoming of American Presidential politics, and Senator Kerry will pay a price for it at the polls as we stay focused on policies to continue growing our economy and winning the War on Terror."
All I have to say -- whoohoo! Bout time. I think it's significant that they are trying to reassure their base and deflect any damage these "allegations" may cause -- because as Gillespie surely knows, many of the allegations are, well, true.
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
In a report released Tuesday, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) revised its projection for the country's budgetary shortfalls, lowering its previous forecast for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 but raising its estimates for cumulative 10-year deficits by $281 billion.
Under current laws and policies, the projected 10-year deficit is expected to total $2.28 trillion, or 1.5 percent of the estimated 10-year combined gross domestic product (GDP), up from a March projection of $2 trillion.
CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eaking said in a press conference Tuesday morning that the upward revision is due mainly to military expenditures for Iraq and Afghanistan that were not included in the March analysis.
and what does the pres say, he celebrates. i'm not kidding.
Chad Kolton, a spokesman at the White House's Office of Management and Budget, said the lower numbers for 2004 and 2005 are evidence that the president's tax cut is working. He also said Bush's current deficit-reduction plan will erode those numbers even further.
"If we continue with these pro-growth policies, we'll be able to cut the deficit in half in five years," said Kolton.
Kerry's response is classic:
"Only George W. Bush could celebrate over a record budget deficit of $422 billion," Kerry said in a press release, adding that he also had a plan to halve the deficit in four years.
And the CBO offers this nugget
"This is a fiscal situation in which we cannot rely on economic growth to cause deficits to disappear," CBO's Holtz-Eakin said at the agency's press conference earlier today. "Instead, the central path of the budgetary outlook will be dictated by policy choices."
What does that mean, exactly? That means trickle down ain't gonna be worth the bowl its spit in.
Why do I think of Bob Herbert's columns on the NEW Florida elections scandals that just won't go away. Or even elctronic voting machines that leave no paper trail? Democracy is over-rated just ask "There ought to be limits to freedom" Bush.
Monday, September 06, 2004
According to the BBC: "Meanwhile, a report says that the number of US soldiers injured in Iraq in August is the highest since the war began. About 1,100 soldiers and marines are thought to have been wounded last month."
Judging by our media, I didn't know we had any wounded. Where are they?
I'm calling it now -- somehow, some way Bush will win. It's too ugly out there for him not to -- there will be another attack upon us, the elctronic voting machines will prove beneficial for the RNC, Osama will be captured, somehow Bush will be proclaimed victor in November.
I am a cynic, and I will work my ass off for Kerry, but I have a feeling these cons will stop at nothing to remain in power, even if that means tallyho-ing into Iran. God I hope I am proven wrong.
Might I just say that kid has a bright future with the RNC hate machine. Where are the decent republicans callng this kid out and holding him accountable for his actions? Isn't that what they stand for: personal responsibility? Compassionate conservativism? I'm extrememly surprised CNN, MSNBC, et al. haven't picked up on it. It's great -- violence, people being assholes to one another, more violence.
Happy Labor Day.
Sunday, September 05, 2004
Indy media has a ton of great vids of the protests.
Friday, September 03, 2004
Sidebar -- I wonder what it's like to have yer name made into a verb? Bush needs to be Einsteined or at least Englanded. And all you freepers, don't you Limbaugh me.
I think this paragraph syays it all:
"It's been a long week," said demonstrator Sam Nolan, 37, of Queens, as he walked away from the protest. "The cops really wore us down. I guess people got intimidated."
Sad day when the police are used to effectively shut down protests and no one says anything about it --
I would not be surprised if a number of lawsuits come out of this. And rightfully so. There were many arrested who were not protesting but were just swept up in the fencing and they were held for two days. Nice.
It does make you wonder that if the police were so ready for the protests and the protests were actually less than what they expected, why the hell couldn't they process and release people in a timely manner. Either A) they held them on purpose till the convention was over or B) they highlight the republican administration's incompetance -- they had detailed knowledge of the problem that could occur and prepared for weeks in advance and still could not get their shit together (they go full bore into the war, but can't handle the reprocussions.) I'm leaning toward A. Just get those people out of the way.
"conservative values," which must have come as a surprise to a lot of his
supporters. Now, there are some problems with this claim. If you say the
heart and soul of America is found in Hollywood, I'm afraid you are not the
candidate of conservative values."
I wonder how Ahnuld feels about this?
Thursday, September 02, 2004
S. Korea has been enriching uranium. Classic. Is it embarassing to the current administration? You betcha. How will N. Korea react is the real question. More on this later.
Wednesday, September 01, 2004
Now certain programs or departments may be liberal, but others are decidedly conservative. Humanities v. Business for example. Shoot, at a local state university of about 20 thousand students, the student run paper had 3 weekly columnists who preached the wonders of jesus and their born again beliefs. I had never seen that before. Ever. Bob Jones U, I'd expect it, but a state run college? That's not very commie like -- that's not very godless liberal of them to publish those folks. Last year they brought in Horowitz to, get this, talk about how liberal campus was and how closed off it was to conservative ideas/speakers. I'm not kidding.
Most instructors are very straight forward with their beliefs and don't threaten students with failing grades if they don't submit to the instructor's beliefs. It's just not accurate or proven in any capacity. It's a myth, a fallacy that cons throw out to rabidize their following.
Students going to state colleges are generally conservative. This poll highlights the trend. Generally they come to school with their parents ideals and values. They see the world in black and white. They don't question. Once at the university, they hold onto most of those values. Will those values change? Maybe. The more they read, the more they think, the more liberal they may become, but overall they have to be willing to read and understand new/different viewpoints. If they don't, they won't change. Period. And I am not advocating that they have to change. However, the misperception of a commie instructor ruining today's youth is ridiculous. Parents, family, friends, and their community including their faiths have more of an impact than 3 hours a week with an instructor for 4 months. If an teacher had that much power, we could send them en mass to Iraq and have it subdued before Christmas break. Truth is, they can't. Perhaps these students are merely thinking on their own and, gasp, making up their own minds on issues. God forbid they question what their parents believe to be true. What's funny is, college is designed to develop the "whole" person and expose people to new ideas/thoughts/viewpoints -- and parents get angry when their kids actually start thinking for themselves? Go figure.
UPDATE: A column that was first published in the Boston Globe looks at this same issue -- published on the 13th.
Laura Bush said her husband's friends and values don't change. There are some friends, like the dictator of Uzbekistan, who maybe he should reconsider -- likewise he seemed to move away from Kenny boy pretty quickly. I suppose she should have qualified his values haven't changed sine he was reborn, no? That's the whole idea of being reborn -- values change. I can't even go there. This whole thing and the fact that their is no, absolutely no, response from anyone in the dem party on any of the media outlets, and their is so little critique of the convention's messages, that I'm completely flumoxed.