Sunday, December 31, 2006
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Bumps Ahoy
Larry Beinhart
Huffington Post
* * * *
True believers don't lose their beliefs. Corporations don't lose the machinery by which they reach for power and influence. The greedy don't lose their greed. The corrupt don't attain purity.
2007 will be the year in which they fight back.
Huffington Post
* * * *
The Bush Administration's great innovation was to stop seeing government as the enemy of wealth, but to see it as a tool to transfer wealth from normal people to the very rich. They did this through tax policy, by running up debts, privatizing as many government functions as they could (the reconstruction of Iraq is the poster child for their successes), and by increasing the size of government so that there was more money to be handed out. They were willing to throw away the chains that Republican believed in - fiscal restraint, balanced budgets, smaller government - to get at the gold piles.
The Republican congress enthusiastically went along with those programs and that transfer of wealth and with it, they hoped, a permanent transfer in power.
Presumably, the new majority doesn't see government that way.
They will put forth their own initiatives and resist the administration's plans.
However, the administration won't go away. The Republican minority won't roll over and die. The right-wing propaganda and spin industry won't pack it in. The rich people, corporations and institutions who benefit from such policies aren't going to stop.
* * * *True believers don't lose their beliefs. Corporations don't lose the machinery by which they reach for power and influence. The greedy don't lose their greed. The corrupt don't attain purity.
2007 will be the year in which they fight back.
Thursday, December 21, 2006
stupidest person on earth?
Lovely.
According to Network World's Paul McNamara, the communications director for U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-AZ), Todd Shriber, hired two 'hackers' to break into the computer of his alma mater, Texas Christian University, and change his college grades.
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Thursday, December 14, 2006
It's Not The Bloggers, It's The Blogs
Dave Johnson
The Huffington Post
A quick comment on all the big-name pundits and Washington insiders who criticize "the bloggers" and question their legitimacy: Anyone can start a blog.
The Huffington Post
A quick comment on all the big-name pundits and Washington insiders who criticize "the bloggers" and question their legitimacy: Anyone can start a blog.
(pause)
Here is what I am saying. When you criticize "the bloggers" and question the legitimacy of what they are saying, you are questioning the concept of democracy itself. ANYone can start a blog -- so everyone is a blogger.
If it makes you uncomfortable that the rabble is allowed to speak and express their opinions you need to think about your own understanding of and commitment to democracy. The blogs that reach prominence do so through an entirely democratic process - people have chosen to read or echo what is being written on them.It's not the bloggers you have a beef with, it's the blogs themselves -- the tool that lets the public have a say.
Virtual Arianna
The Huffington Post
I'm going virtual tonight and I'd like you all to join me, or at least the virtual version of me -- Arianna Hera -- tonight at 9 p.m. ET. I couldn't pass up the invitation to join our friends at iVillage as they launch their first "Girls Night Out" in the virtual realm of Second Life, an online world with over 1.9 million residents. We'll be meeting at the sleek iVillage Loft on Sheep Island, where we'll be given a brief history of Second Life, and then head out to visit museums, design studios, and hear a musical performance. I'm also going to be looking for office space for our new virtual HuffPost offices. To join me, click here for directions. It should be a lot of fun. See you in the virtual world!
I'm going virtual tonight and I'd like you all to join me, or at least the virtual version of me -- Arianna Hera -- tonight at 9 p.m. ET. I couldn't pass up the invitation to join our friends at iVillage as they launch their first "Girls Night Out" in the virtual realm of Second Life, an online world with over 1.9 million residents. We'll be meeting at the sleek iVillage Loft on Sheep Island, where we'll be given a brief history of Second Life, and then head out to visit museums, design studios, and hear a musical performance. I'm also going to be looking for office space for our new virtual HuffPost offices. To join me, click here for directions. It should be a lot of fun. See you in the virtual world!
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Threat Scenarios
Talking Points Memo
Does anybody have a good explanation for why the Saudi ambassador to the United States just resigned his post and left the country on a day's notice? Officials are giving various unconvincing explanations, the best of which is that, in the words of an unnamed embassy official, "He wants to spend more time with his family."
Does anybody have a good explanation for why the Saudi ambassador to the United States just resigned his post and left the country on a day's notice? Officials are giving various unconvincing explanations, the best of which is that, in the words of an unnamed embassy official, "He wants to spend more time with his family."
Perhaps we can take that as a foreigners gently parodic homage to the American tradition of political white lies.
Ordinarily, even if there were some hidden backstory, it would likely be some palace intrigue in the Saudi royal family or some arcane point in US-Saudi relations. But look at the geopolitical context. Saudi Arabia's neighbor Iraq is in some sort of slow motion civil war. The neighbor across the water, Iran, has been empowered tremendously and stands to gain even more power if their Shi'a coreligionists in Iraq take over the country and slaughter or dominate the Sunni Arab minority. And the White House is signalling that it might opt to take the side of the Shi'a in that cataclysm and, shall we say, go along for the slaughter.
That would cut at the heart of the seven decade US-Saudi alliance, though admitteldy it's taken quite a few cuts already of late. The White House has also just been presented with the Baker-Hamilton report which has, I think fairly, been characterized as a bid to return to the earlier US policy of aligning its regional interests with those of the Sunni autocracies in the region. The White House has dismissed that out of hand.
I'm no expert on the finer points of US-Saudi relations. But I don't think you need to be to see that the underpinnings of the relationship are on the table right now. And just at this moment, the ambassador resigns and gets on the next plane home. To borrow a phrase from our judicial pals, I think any excuse that this is just some personal matter deserves the strictest scrutiny. Something must be up.
And one other thing. Many readers have written in to say that there's just no way we're going to let ourselves take sides in what would likely be at least a borderline genocidal civil war between Iraq's Sunni minority and Shi'a majority. To which, I can only say, why not? Is there anything we've seen in the last six years that makes you think we wouldn't pull the trigger on a ridiculously foolish new plan? I don't just mean that as trash talk. I think it's the only sensible way to approach the case at hand.
The main mistakes I've made thinking about foreign policy over the last half decade were, I think, all cases where there were certain outcomes I just didn't find credible because they were just too stupid and dangerous for anybody in a position of power to try. Goog luck on that.
Another point, and one I'm not sure is widely appreciated. The folks who brought you the Iraq War have always been weak in the knees for a really whacked-out vision of a Shi'a-US alliance in the Middle East. I used to talk to a lot of these folks before I became persona non grata. So here's basically how the theory went and, I don't doubt, still goes ... We hate the Saudis and the Egyptians and all the rest of the standing Arab governments. But the Iraqi Shi'a were oppressed by Saddam. So they'll like us. So we'll set them up in control of Iraq. You might think that would empower the Iranians. But not really. The mullahs aren't very powerful. And once the Iraqi Shi'a have a good thing going with us. The Iranians are going to want to get in on that too. So you'll see a new government in Tehran. Plus, big parts of northern Saudi Arabia are Shi'a too. And that's where a lot of the oil is. So they'll probably want to break off and set up their own pro-US Shi'a state with tons of oil. So before you know it, we'll have Iraq, Iran, and a big chunk of Saudi Arabia that is friendly to the US and has a ton of oil. And once that happens we can tell the Saudis to f$#% themselves once and for all.
Now, you might think this involves a fair amount of wishful and delusional thinking. But this was the thinking of a lot of neocons going into the war. And I don't doubt it's still the thinking of quite a few of them. They still want to run the table. And even more now that it's double-down. I don't know what these guys are planning now. But there's plenty of reason to be worried.
-- Josh MarshallArianna Huffington: Welcome to the Web, Tom DeLay!
The Huffington Post
Dear Tom,
First let me say, welcome to the blogosphere -- always nice to have a new voice in the mix. So good to know you have access to a computer in jail (oh, sorry, you dodged that bullet). And thanks for the link.
But since you're a newbie blogger, I want to give you a hand by pointing out some rookie mistakes your site made in its diatribe about me and the Huffington Post today.
For starters, you seem to have missed the class on the difference between linking to a news story and offering an opinion on said news story. You claim that I was "in quite a tizzy" and that I'd "acquired sound intel" that there are Christians in the Defense Dept.
Acquired sound intel? That sounds so cloak and dagger, like a secret fact-finding golf mission to Scotland. You make it seem like I'm skulking around in a trench coat and fedora -- oh wait, that's your pal Jack Abramoff. Far from skulking or acquiring intel, what we actually did was "link" (a key term you should know as a blogger) to a story written by a reporter for "Reuters," which is a news wire service (a handy place to get "facts." Here's a link.)
As for my being in "a tizzy" over the story: trust me, linking, while fun, isn't that big a deal -- we do it at HuffPost dozens of times a day.
In this case, we linked to the story and headlined it "Senior Officers Accused of Coercing Soldiers to Adopt Evangelical Christianity." Which, if you read the story, is precisely what happened. You see, we don't make up the news. You're thinking of Fox.
One more thing: the Internet is a pretty fast moving place. So if you want to draw blood, you might want to try using a fresher zinger than saying I'm "the long lost 4th Gabor sister." No one LOLs at that one anymore. (I realize you may not understand what LOL means -- it's only 10 years out of date. Once you figure out the difference between a link and an opinion, let me know and I'll explain it. ; )
Welcome to the Internets!
Arianna
Saturday, December 09, 2006
achieving clarity, one politician at a time
Talking Points Memo
Via Muckraker, here's a snippet of a Congressional Quarterly interview with incoming House intelligence committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX):
Reyes stumbled when I asked him a simple question about al Qaeda at the end of a 40-minute interview in his office last week. Members of the Intelligence Committee, mind you, are paid $165,200 a year to know more than basic facts about our foes in the Middle East.
We warmed up with a long discussion about intelligence issues and Iraq. And then we veered into terrorism’s major players.
To me, it’s like asking about Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: Who’s on what side?
The dialogue went like this:
Al Qaeda is what, I asked, Sunni or Shia?
“Al Qaeda, they have both,” Reyes said. “You’re talking about predominately?”
“Sure,” I said, not knowing what else to say.
“Predominantly — probably Shiite,” he ventured.
He couldn’t have been more wrong.
Al Qaeda is profoundly Sunni. If a Shiite showed up at an al Qaeda club house, they’d slice off his head and use it for a soccer ball.
Ladies and gentlemen, your new intel committee chairman.
-- David Kurtz
Via Muckraker, here's a snippet of a Congressional Quarterly interview with incoming House intelligence committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX):
Reyes stumbled when I asked him a simple question about al Qaeda at the end of a 40-minute interview in his office last week. Members of the Intelligence Committee, mind you, are paid $165,200 a year to know more than basic facts about our foes in the Middle East.
We warmed up with a long discussion about intelligence issues and Iraq. And then we veered into terrorism’s major players.
To me, it’s like asking about Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: Who’s on what side?
The dialogue went like this:
Al Qaeda is what, I asked, Sunni or Shia?
“Al Qaeda, they have both,” Reyes said. “You’re talking about predominately?”
“Sure,” I said, not knowing what else to say.
“Predominantly — probably Shiite,” he ventured.
He couldn’t have been more wrong.
Al Qaeda is profoundly Sunni. If a Shiite showed up at an al Qaeda club house, they’d slice off his head and use it for a soccer ball.
Ladies and gentlemen, your new intel committee chairman.
-- David Kurtz
Friday, December 08, 2006
get your head around it
Talking Points Memo
Maybe if I ignore this for a while it'll get better?
From USNews ...
White House advisers say Bush won't react in detail to the ISG report for several weeks, while he assesses it and awaits various internal government reports on the situation from his own advisers. Bush tells aides he doesn't want to "outsource" his role as commander in chief. Some Bush allies say this is a way to buy some time as the president tries to decide how to deal with rising pressure to alter his strategy in Iraq and hopes the critical media focus on the Iraq war will soften.
What a pitiful coward this man is. Maybe if I just sort of shuffle the papers a bit and clear my throat everybody will get off my case. That's his response.
Just above that passage there's this ...
"We have a classic case of circling the wagons," says a former adviser to Bush the elder. "If President Bush changes his policy in Iraq in a fundamental way, it undermines the whole premise of his presidency. I just don't believe he will ever do that."
I'm not sure I've ever heard anything truer said on the whole sorry topic of this war. And it gets to the heart of the issue. He won't ever change course. Not because there's anyone who can't see that the present course is a catastrophe, but because changing course would cut the legs from under the collective denial of the president and his supporters. As bad as things get they can still pretend they're on the way to getting better. It's a long hard slog to January 2009 when it becomes someone else's fault. Once they pull the plug themselves, though, they admit it was all a disaster, that the whole presidency was, in Dick Gephardt's half forgotten phrase, "a miserable failure."
That is why we're in Iraq today. Get your head around it.
-- Josh Marshall
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Upset In The Demo: MSNBC Beats CNN Five Out Of Seven Days Last Week
The Huffington Post
Note that these numbers specifically reflect just one slice of the ratings pie, a specific slice of viewers in a specific block of time. It just so happens to be the most important slice .... if you juxtapose the numbers, CNN is still the clear winner in total viewers for both the day and for primetime. But as TVNewser — who, frankly, oughta know — says, 'the mere fact that Countdown, Scarborough Country and the Doc Block are competing against Paula Zahn, Larry King and Anderson Cooper must be striking fear into the hearts of CNN Center and Time Warner Center.'
Third place? When you crunch all the numbers, yes. 'Perennial third place?' Hmm. Looking ahead, maybe not so much.
Note that these numbers specifically reflect just one slice of the ratings pie, a specific slice of viewers in a specific block of time. It just so happens to be the most important slice .... if you juxtapose the numbers, CNN is still the clear winner in total viewers for both the day and for primetime. But as TVNewser — who, frankly, oughta know — says, 'the mere fact that Countdown, Scarborough Country and the Doc Block are competing against Paula Zahn, Larry King and Anderson Cooper must be striking fear into the hearts of CNN Center and Time Warner Center.'
Third place? When you crunch all the numbers, yes. 'Perennial third place?' Hmm. Looking ahead, maybe not so much.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Jamba Juice warns consumers about smoothie contamination
Los Angeles Times
SAN FRANCISCO -- Jamba Juice Co. warned consumers today that a potentially deadly bacterium may have contaminated smoothies that contain strawberries.
SAN FRANCISCO -- Jamba Juice Co. warned consumers today that a potentially deadly bacterium may have contaminated smoothies that contain strawberries.
Monday, December 04, 2006
David Corn
David Corn: "It's crunch time for George W. Bush.
He has to decide whether or not to change his Iraq policy, as James Baker, his father's secretary of state, weighs in with a report that applies much pressure on him. According to Friday's edition of The Washington Post, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group chaired by Baker and former Democratic Representative Lee Hamilton will recommend next week that Bush withdraws nearly all US combat troops from Iraq by early 2008. Baker's group attaches qualifiers to its call for this redeployment, noting such a drawdown should occur only if circumstances on the ground permit it. (And this pullout would be accompanied by moves aimed at enhancing US support of Iraqi military units, such as embedding US troops within Iraqi units.) But even Baker's conditional call for disengagement is a sharp retort to Bush, who has repeatedly dismissed the notion of withdrawing troops until, as he puts it, 'the mission is completed.' The commission's report--if the leaked accounts are correct--will send a message to Bush: Iraq is not working, you must shift strategies."
He has to decide whether or not to change his Iraq policy, as James Baker, his father's secretary of state, weighs in with a report that applies much pressure on him. According to Friday's edition of The Washington Post, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group chaired by Baker and former Democratic Representative Lee Hamilton will recommend next week that Bush withdraws nearly all US combat troops from Iraq by early 2008. Baker's group attaches qualifiers to its call for this redeployment, noting such a drawdown should occur only if circumstances on the ground permit it. (And this pullout would be accompanied by moves aimed at enhancing US support of Iraqi military units, such as embedding US troops within Iraqi units.) But even Baker's conditional call for disengagement is a sharp retort to Bush, who has repeatedly dismissed the notion of withdrawing troops until, as he puts it, 'the mission is completed.' The commission's report--if the leaked accounts are correct--will send a message to Bush: Iraq is not working, you must shift strategies."
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Russert speaks plainly to Hadley
The Huffington Post
Bush National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley appeared on NBC's Meet The Press Sunday morning. Host Time Russert confronted Hadley about a memo by outgoing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that was leaked over the weekend. The latest leaked memo appears to have been the last straw for Russert, whose frustration was palpable as he bluntly listed the numerous aspects of the war about which the Bush administration has been wrong.
Watch the video...
Read a transcript of the interview here.
From Meet The Press.
Friday, December 01, 2006
Barney Frank and Bill O’Reilly Square Off
Crooks and Liars
After this teaser the other day, you knew Bill O'Reillys interview with Rep. Barney Frank was going to be fun. Frank succinctly breaks down why he called Chris Wallace out on his "odd view of balance" saying that the interview was promoted as a chance for the Democrats to talk about their agenda yet began with Wallace nitpicking points of controversy while all but ignoring the positive Democratic agenda the incoming Chairmen were prepared to discuss. Frank made his case so persuasively that O'Reilly — who claimed he's been "sabotaged" before too — conceded he had a point.
After this teaser the other day, you knew Bill O'Reillys interview with Rep. Barney Frank was going to be fun. Frank succinctly breaks down why he called Chris Wallace out on his "odd view of balance" saying that the interview was promoted as a chance for the Democrats to talk about their agenda yet began with Wallace nitpicking points of controversy while all but ignoring the positive Democratic agenda the incoming Chairmen were prepared to discuss. Frank made his case so persuasively that O'Reilly — who claimed he's been "sabotaged" before too — conceded he had a point.
Sparks began to fly when O'Reilly brought up the topic of income redistribution and freaked out when Frank gave him an answer he didn't like. This prompted the Congressman to tell Bill to "stop being a silly would-be district attorney" when he demanded an answer "for the record" and told him to "go to law school" if he wanted to do that. O'Reilly couldn't resist the urge to fire back accusing Frank of thinking he was the "czar of the interview." Good times.
Newshounds has more…
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Playing the al Qaeda Card
Crooks and Liars
When the situation in Iraq is deteriorating by the second and you refuse to call it what it is (aka a civil war), what's a desperate President to do? Blame al Qaeda, of course.
Video WMP Video MOV
However, as Olbermann and NBC's Sr. Pentagon Correspondent Jim Miklaszewski point out, despite the President's newfound excuse that al Qaeda is to blame, Generals Caldwell, Abizaid and Mapes testified just two weeks ago that al Qaeda's influence in Iraq is negligible in the grand scheme of things.
When the situation in Iraq is deteriorating by the second and you refuse to call it what it is (aka a civil war), what's a desperate President to do? Blame al Qaeda, of course.
Video WMP Video MOV
However, as Olbermann and NBC's Sr. Pentagon Correspondent Jim Miklaszewski point out, despite the President's newfound excuse that al Qaeda is to blame, Generals Caldwell, Abizaid and Mapes testified just two weeks ago that al Qaeda's influence in Iraq is negligible in the grand scheme of things.
Barack Hussein Obama
Crooks and Liars » Ed Rogers
That's his real middle name. Stay tuned for transparent, pathetic, long-term smear attempts based on this superficial bit of irrelevance.
What's in a name? We're going to find out I guess.
That's his real middle name. Stay tuned for transparent, pathetic, long-term smear attempts based on this superficial bit of irrelevance.
What's in a name? We're going to find out I guess.
No Slam Dunk for Net Neutrality (with apologies to George Tenet)
TPMCafe
It’s getting down to the end of this Congressional session, and any number of commentators are bemoaning the fact that telecom legislation has been stuffed, in large part, due to the opposition of those favoring Net Neutrality.
That’s fine. The bills that were up for consideration this year had some good things, but tremendous flaws as well, and shouldn’t have been considered in a hurry. At the same time, though, we shouldn’t rush to any conclusions about how the issue will play out next year, when the Democrats take over Congress. Some people are saying the Bell companies won’t want to pursue telecom legislation because they will work through the states to get what they want. Others are saying that Net Neutrality, the idea that telephone and cable companies can’t make special deals to favor transmission of some content over other content, will have a great chance next year with the Democrats in charge.
The best prediction is somewhere in the middle, in part because some of the factors involved aren’t yet known and in part because some of the old politics is still in play. In full.
It’s getting down to the end of this Congressional session, and any number of commentators are bemoaning the fact that telecom legislation has been stuffed, in large part, due to the opposition of those favoring Net Neutrality.
That’s fine. The bills that were up for consideration this year had some good things, but tremendous flaws as well, and shouldn’t have been considered in a hurry. At the same time, though, we shouldn’t rush to any conclusions about how the issue will play out next year, when the Democrats take over Congress. Some people are saying the Bell companies won’t want to pursue telecom legislation because they will work through the states to get what they want. Others are saying that Net Neutrality, the idea that telephone and cable companies can’t make special deals to favor transmission of some content over other content, will have a great chance next year with the Democrats in charge.
The best prediction is somewhere in the middle, in part because some of the factors involved aren’t yet known and in part because some of the old politics is still in play. In full.
Powell: Iraq Is In A Civil War And Bush Should Stop Denying It
Think Progress
Speaking with CNN reporter Hala Gorani in Dubai today, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Iraq’s violence meets the standard of a civil war and thinks President Bush needs to acknowledge that. According to Gorani’s report, Powell said if he were heading the State Department right now, he would recommend that the Bush administration adopt that language “in order to come to terms with the reality on the ground.” Video & Transcript here.
Speaking with CNN reporter Hala Gorani in Dubai today, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Iraq’s violence meets the standard of a civil war and thinks President Bush needs to acknowledge that. According to Gorani’s report, Powell said if he were heading the State Department right now, he would recommend that the Bush administration adopt that language “in order to come to terms with the reality on the ground.” Video & Transcript here.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
James Boyce: Netroots!
The Huffington Post
... But slowly there is a growing library of information that tears apart their dismissals of the online world. Over at DailyKos, an enterprising blogger (a phd with professional experience in polling by the way) has torn a hole in the myth that the bloggers are ranting youth online.
A poll of the age of the readers of DailyKos has been taken and with almost 12,000 people replying to the survey, the number one age bracket is 45-49 years old with 14% of those replying to survey. Second is the 50-54 age bracket with 13% replying and a full 83% are over the age of 30.
The rest of the results are here. But the answer is clear. The people online are the heart, the soul and the core of the Democratic Party and the energy and active base of the party. It is a huge diverse group of people who care and people who pay attention and give money and time and the future belongs to those outside of DC not those inside.
You can deny it. You can dismiss it. You can ignore it. You can also kiss your ass goodbye while you're at it.
... But slowly there is a growing library of information that tears apart their dismissals of the online world. Over at DailyKos, an enterprising blogger (a phd with professional experience in polling by the way) has torn a hole in the myth that the bloggers are ranting youth online.
A poll of the age of the readers of DailyKos has been taken and with almost 12,000 people replying to the survey, the number one age bracket is 45-49 years old with 14% of those replying to survey. Second is the 50-54 age bracket with 13% replying and a full 83% are over the age of 30.
The rest of the results are here. But the answer is clear. The people online are the heart, the soul and the core of the Democratic Party and the energy and active base of the party. It is a huge diverse group of people who care and people who pay attention and give money and time and the future belongs to those outside of DC not those inside.
You can deny it. You can dismiss it. You can ignore it. You can also kiss your ass goodbye while you're at it.
Bringing Bush to Court - by Elizabeth de la Vega and Tom Engelhardt
antiwar.com
Sometime last spring, I was on the phone with former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega talking about books she might someday write, when she suddenly said to me, "You know what I'd like to do?" When I asked what, she replied, "What I've done all my life."
"What's that?" I wondered innocently enough.
"I'd like to draft an indictment of President Bush and his senior aides, and present the case for prewar intelligence fraud to a grand jury, just as if it were an actual case of mine, using the evidence we already have in the public record. That's the book I'd like to do."
I assure you, this is a must-read event; no less important, this is a must-buy book that must be given over the holiday season to friends, relatives, those who politically disagree with you, and even perhaps sent to congressional representatives. Please get the investigative ball rolling by purchasing the book at Amazon.com.
Sometime last spring, I was on the phone with former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega talking about books she might someday write, when she suddenly said to me, "You know what I'd like to do?" When I asked what, she replied, "What I've done all my life."
"What's that?" I wondered innocently enough.
"I'd like to draft an indictment of President Bush and his senior aides, and present the case for prewar intelligence fraud to a grand jury, just as if it were an actual case of mine, using the evidence we already have in the public record. That's the book I'd like to do."
I assure you, this is a must-read event; no less important, this is a must-buy book that must be given over the holiday season to friends, relatives, those who politically disagree with you, and even perhaps sent to congressional representatives. Please get the investigative ball rolling by purchasing the book at Amazon.com.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Monday, November 20, 2006
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Twistory
talkingpointsmemo.com
Was anyone besides me delighted to note that the last two Republican senators to concede were Burns and Allen?Say goodnight, Gracie.
-David Kurtz
one-time charge against earnings?
Talking Points Memo: by Joshua Micah Marshall November 11, 2006 05:43 AM
You get the sense from the GOP that in its analysis of the election results the congressional seats lost due to Republican ties to public corruption shouldn't really count. Sort of like losing the game not because you got beat but because the refs made a bad call.
I think most people would view bribery, influence peddling, and sexually predatory congressmen as substantive problems, not mere technicalities. Maybe that's just me.
You get the sense from the GOP that in its analysis of the election results the congressional seats lost due to Republican ties to public corruption shouldn't really count. Sort of like losing the game not because you got beat but because the refs made a bad call.
I think most people would view bribery, influence peddling, and sexually predatory congressmen as substantive problems, not mere technicalities. Maybe that's just me.
BBC NEWS: Bolton unlikely to get confirmed
BBC NEWS
"[T]he senators who opposed Mr Bolton last time, including one Republican, are refusing to change their minds. 'I see no point in considering Mr Bolton's nomination again,' said Sen. Joseph Biden, Foreign Relations Committee.
Lincoln Chafee, who was defeated by his Democrat rival in Rhode Island this week, said it would be illogical to change his stance at the last minute. 'The American people have spoken out against the president's agenda on a number of fronts, and presumably one of those fronts is on foreign policy,' Mr Chafee said."
"[T]he senators who opposed Mr Bolton last time, including one Republican, are refusing to change their minds. 'I see no point in considering Mr Bolton's nomination again,' said Sen. Joseph Biden, Foreign Relations Committee.
Lincoln Chafee, who was defeated by his Democrat rival in Rhode Island this week, said it would be illogical to change his stance at the last minute. 'The American people have spoken out against the president's agenda on a number of fronts, and presumably one of those fronts is on foreign policy,' Mr Chafee said."
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Andrew Sullivan | The Daily Dish: The Stewart Factor
I believe we said this too (a couple of years ago):
Andrew Sullivan The Daily Dish: The Stewart Factor
Andrew Sullivan The Daily Dish: The Stewart Factor
Thirty-eight dishonest rhetorical tricks
Thirty-eight dishonest rhetorical tricks and how to overcome them.
From Straight and Crooked Thinking by Robert H. Thouless, Pan Books, ISBN 0 330 24127 3, copyright 1930, 1953 and 1974, via this site.
In most textbooks of logic there is to be found a list of "fallacies", classified in accordance with the logical principles they violate.
Undoubtedly it is also important to be able to say of an argued case whether it has or has not been established by the arguments brought forward. Mere detection of crooked elements in the argument is not sufficient to settle this question since a good argumentative case may be disfigured by crooked arguments.
The study of crooked thinking is, however, an essential preliminary to this problem of judging the soundness of an argued case. It is only when we have cleared away the emotional thinking, the selected instances, the inappropriate analogies, etc., that we can see clearly the underlying case and make a sound judgement as to whether it is right or wrong.
The thirty-eight dishonest tricks of argument described in the present book are listed here [a more readable version of the list as shown on this page].
See also Arthur Schopenhauer's 38-item list in The Art of Controversy.
From Straight and Crooked Thinking by Robert H. Thouless, Pan Books, ISBN 0 330 24127 3, copyright 1930, 1953 and 1974, via this site.
In most textbooks of logic there is to be found a list of "fallacies", classified in accordance with the logical principles they violate.
Such collections are interesting and important, and it is to be hoped that any readers who wish to go more deeply into the principles of logical thought will turn to these works.
[Those who wish to go more deeply into the principles of effective communication and the art of persuasion should likewise consult treatises on Rhetoric and other readily available works on the subject of thinking straight.]The present list is, however, something quite different. Its aim is practical and not theoretical. It is intended to be a list which can be conveniently used for detecting dishonest modes of thought which we shall actually meet in arguments and speeches.
Sometimes more than one of the tricks mentioned would be classified by the logician under one heading, some he would omit altogether, while others that he would put in are not to be found here.Practical convenience and practical importance are the criteria I have used in this list.
If we have a plague of flies in the house we buy fly-papers and not a treatise on the zoological classification of Musca domestica. This implies no sort of disrespect for zoologists; or for the value of their work as a first step in the effective control of flies.
The present book bears to the treatises of logicians the relationship of fly-paper to zoological classifications.Other books have been concerned with the appraisal of the whole of an argumentative passage without such analysis into sound and unsound parts as I have attempted.
Undoubtedly it is also important to be able to say of an argued case whether it has or has not been established by the arguments brought forward. Mere detection of crooked elements in the argument is not sufficient to settle this question since a good argumentative case may be disfigured by crooked arguments.
The study of crooked thinking is, however, an essential preliminary to this problem of judging the soundness of an argued case. It is only when we have cleared away the emotional thinking, the selected instances, the inappropriate analogies, etc., that we can see clearly the underlying case and make a sound judgement as to whether it is right or wrong.
The thirty-eight dishonest tricks of argument described in the present book are listed here [a more readable version of the list as shown on this page].
See also Arthur Schopenhauer's 38-item list in The Art of Controversy.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Monday, November 06, 2006
Sunday, November 05, 2006
AMERICAblog: A blog for a great nation that deserves the truth
AMERICAblog: A blog for a great nation that deserves the truth
from The American Conservative
GOP MUST GO
....It should surprise few readers that we think a vote that is seen—in America and the world at large—as a decisive “No” vote on the Bush presidency is the best outcome....
Faced on Sept. 11, 2001 with a great challenge, President Bush made little effort to understand who had attacked us and why—thus ignoring the prerequisite for crafting an effective response. He seemingly did not want to find out, and he had staffed his national-security team with people who either did not want to know or were committed to a prefabricated answer.
As a consequence, he rushed America into a war against Iraq, a war we are now losing and cannot win, one that has done far more to strengthen Islamist terrorists than anything they could possibly have done for themselves. Bush’s decision to seize Iraq will almost surely leave behind a broken state divided into warring ethnic enclaves, with hundreds of thousands killed and maimed and thousands more thirsting for revenge against the country that crossed the ocean to attack them. The invasion failed at every level
...The war will continue as long as Bush is in office, for no other reason than the feckless president can’t face the embarrassment of admitting defeat. The chain of events is not complete: Bush, having learned little from his mistakes, may yet seek to embroil America in new wars against Iran and Syria.Meanwhile, America’s image in the world, its capacity to persuade others that its interests are common interests, is lower than it has been in memory. All over the world people look at Bush and yearn for this country—which once symbolized hope and justice—to be humbled
....There may be little Americans can do to atone for this presidency, which will stain our country’s reputation for a long time. But the process of recovering our good name must begin somewhere, and the logical place is in the voting booth this Nov. 7. If we are fortunate, we can produce a result that is seen—in Washington, in Peoria, and in world capitals from Prague to Kuala Lumpur—as a repudiation of George W. Bush and the war of aggression he launched against Iraq
....On Nov. 7, the world will be watching as we go to the polls, seeking to ascertain whether the American people have the wisdom to try to correct a disastrous course. Posterity will note too if their collective decision is one that captured the attention of historians—that of a people voting, again and again, to endorse a leader taking a country in a catastrophic direction. The choice is in our hands.
from The American Conservative
GOP MUST GO
....It should surprise few readers that we think a vote that is seen—in America and the world at large—as a decisive “No” vote on the Bush presidency is the best outcome....
Faced on Sept. 11, 2001 with a great challenge, President Bush made little effort to understand who had attacked us and why—thus ignoring the prerequisite for crafting an effective response. He seemingly did not want to find out, and he had staffed his national-security team with people who either did not want to know or were committed to a prefabricated answer.
As a consequence, he rushed America into a war against Iraq, a war we are now losing and cannot win, one that has done far more to strengthen Islamist terrorists than anything they could possibly have done for themselves. Bush’s decision to seize Iraq will almost surely leave behind a broken state divided into warring ethnic enclaves, with hundreds of thousands killed and maimed and thousands more thirsting for revenge against the country that crossed the ocean to attack them. The invasion failed at every level
...The war will continue as long as Bush is in office, for no other reason than the feckless president can’t face the embarrassment of admitting defeat. The chain of events is not complete: Bush, having learned little from his mistakes, may yet seek to embroil America in new wars against Iran and Syria.Meanwhile, America’s image in the world, its capacity to persuade others that its interests are common interests, is lower than it has been in memory. All over the world people look at Bush and yearn for this country—which once symbolized hope and justice—to be humbled
....There may be little Americans can do to atone for this presidency, which will stain our country’s reputation for a long time. But the process of recovering our good name must begin somewhere, and the logical place is in the voting booth this Nov. 7. If we are fortunate, we can produce a result that is seen—in Washington, in Peoria, and in world capitals from Prague to Kuala Lumpur—as a repudiation of George W. Bush and the war of aggression he launched against Iraq
....On Nov. 7, the world will be watching as we go to the polls, seeking to ascertain whether the American people have the wisdom to try to correct a disastrous course. Posterity will note too if their collective decision is one that captured the attention of historians—that of a people voting, again and again, to endorse a leader taking a country in a catastrophic direction. The choice is in our hands.
Friday, November 03, 2006
Talking Points Memo: by Joshua Micah Marshall
Talking Points Memo: by Joshua Micah Marshall
TPMmuckraker.com will be doing its usually cataloging of political muck and skullduggery of all sorts. But from now through the election muckrakers will be given special focus to voter suppression efforts, dirty tricks and all election related muck. You're in a far better position to see this stuff than any network news producer or prestige journalist in Washington or New York. Because you'll see it first in your mailbox, or hear it on your phone or you'll see it in the roadblocks thrown up on election day. These stunts come in all shapes and sizes. So keep your eyes and ears open.
TPMmuckraker.com will be doing its usually cataloging of political muck and skullduggery of all sorts. But from now through the election muckrakers will be given special focus to voter suppression efforts, dirty tricks and all election related muck. You're in a far better position to see this stuff than any network news producer or prestige journalist in Washington or New York. Because you'll see it first in your mailbox, or hear it on your phone or you'll see it in the roadblocks thrown up on election day. These stunts come in all shapes and sizes. So keep your eyes and ears open.
Army Times to call for Rumsfeld's resignation - CNN.com
Army Times to call for Rumsfeld's resignation - CNN.com:
An editorial to be published Monday in independent publications that serve the four main branches of the U.S. military will call for President Bush to replace Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
'Basically, the editorial says, it's clear now, from some of the public statements that military leaders are making, that he's lost the support and respect of the military leadership,' said Robert Hodierne, senior managing editor for the publications' parent company Army Times Publications.
'That they're starting to go public with that now, with their disagreements, added up with all of the other missteps we believe he's made, that it's time for him to be replaced,' Hodierne.
Army Times Publications publishes the Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and the Marine Corps Times.
It is the second time the publications have called for Rumsfeld to resign.
Bush has maintained that Rumsfeld will stay on the job until 2008. (Watch Bush say Rumsfeld is staying on the job -- 1:20 )
In May 2004, when the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal broke, an Army Times editorial said, 'This was not just a failure of leadership at the local command level. This was a failure that ran straight to the top. Accountability here is essential, even if that means relieving top leaders from duty in a time of war.'
The timing of Monday's editorial was prompted not by midterm elections, scheduled for Tuesday, but by Bush's statement earlier this week that he intends to keep Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney in their posts through the end of his term, Hodierne said.
No one running for midterm elections, he noted, would have the power to replace Rumsfeld.
Swaying conservative voters 'is not our aim"
An editorial to be published Monday in independent publications that serve the four main branches of the U.S. military will call for President Bush to replace Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
'Basically, the editorial says, it's clear now, from some of the public statements that military leaders are making, that he's lost the support and respect of the military leadership,' said Robert Hodierne, senior managing editor for the publications' parent company Army Times Publications.
'That they're starting to go public with that now, with their disagreements, added up with all of the other missteps we believe he's made, that it's time for him to be replaced,' Hodierne.
Army Times Publications publishes the Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and the Marine Corps Times.
It is the second time the publications have called for Rumsfeld to resign.
Bush has maintained that Rumsfeld will stay on the job until 2008. (Watch Bush say Rumsfeld is staying on the job -- 1:20 )
In May 2004, when the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal broke, an Army Times editorial said, 'This was not just a failure of leadership at the local command level. This was a failure that ran straight to the top. Accountability here is essential, even if that means relieving top leaders from duty in a time of war.'
The timing of Monday's editorial was prompted not by midterm elections, scheduled for Tuesday, but by Bush's statement earlier this week that he intends to keep Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney in their posts through the end of his term, Hodierne said.
No one running for midterm elections, he noted, would have the power to replace Rumsfeld.
Swaying conservative voters 'is not our aim"
Neo Culpa
vanityfair.com
As Iraq slips further into chaos, the war's neoconservative boosters have turned sharply on the Bush administration, charging that their grand designs have been undermined by White House incompetence. In a series of exclusive interviews, Richard Perle, Kenneth Adelman, David Frum, and others play the blame game with shocking frankness. Target No. 1: the president himself.
As Iraq slips further into chaos, the war's neoconservative boosters have turned sharply on the Bush administration, charging that their grand designs have been undermined by White House incompetence. In a series of exclusive interviews, Richard Perle, Kenneth Adelman, David Frum, and others play the blame game with shocking frankness. Target No. 1: the president himself.
Another Dingalink
BloggingHeads.tv: smart conservatives coming out of the woodwork who are equally appalled ...
e.g. Belgravia Dispatch blog
e.g. Belgravia Dispatch blog
Info Age Humor
The Blog Marty Kaplan: They Found The WMD! The Huffington Post
The idea, see, is that people all over the world could use the google to find the nucular needles in that docstack.
And it wikiworked! Classified information wants to be free. Poor kids in madrassas no longer have to suffer on the wrong side of the digital divide; now it's as easy to download a cached blueprint for catastrophe as it is to stoke your iPod. Rip, mix, and burn, baby, burn!
Clearly this is the just the beginning of open-source killware. As long as Republicans keep control of Congress, imagine the possibilities. They could put the contents of everyone's hard drive on the net. No more lonely, frantic searching for that honey-it-must-have-been-the-cable-guy-who-went-to-that-site you forgot to delete; now, the distributed intelligence of the whole world can be mobilized on your behalf. And think of it: when no one has any privacy any more, no one will need to worry about identity theft any more!
Forget MySpace -- MySpore is the new killer ap. Googlebombing will never be the same.
The idea, see, is that people all over the world could use the google to find the nucular needles in that docstack.
And it wikiworked! Classified information wants to be free. Poor kids in madrassas no longer have to suffer on the wrong side of the digital divide; now it's as easy to download a cached blueprint for catastrophe as it is to stoke your iPod. Rip, mix, and burn, baby, burn!
Clearly this is the just the beginning of open-source killware. As long as Republicans keep control of Congress, imagine the possibilities. They could put the contents of everyone's hard drive on the net. No more lonely, frantic searching for that honey-it-must-have-been-the-cable-guy-who-went-to-that-site you forgot to delete; now, the distributed intelligence of the whole world can be mobilized on your behalf. And think of it: when no one has any privacy any more, no one will need to worry about identity theft any more!
Forget MySpace -- MySpore is the new killer ap. Googlebombing will never be the same.
Thursday, November 02, 2006
SHOWDOWN 06: The Washington Monthly
SHOWDOWN 06: The Washington Monthly:
"Of course, the generic congressional contest does not tell you directly about how the myriad individual races will turn out (we'll get to the race by race data in a moment) so some caution is advised in assessing just what this gaudy lead is likely to mean for the Democrats on election day. But here's some food for thought. Three political scientists, Joseph Bafumi, Robert Erikson and Christopher Wlezien, have recently released a paper that forecasts the level of seat shifts from the generic congressional vote question, using model-based computer simulations of the 435 individual House contests.
"As I have continually stressed--and the mainstream press is now starting to pick up on--the Rovean fire-up-the-base-and-screw-the-middle strategy only works mathematically if losses in the political center can be minimized. Now they can't and the GOP is likely to pay the price--and very probably not just in this election....
"Let me also draw your attention to a very interesting study released by the Pew Research Center that, among other things, compares a wide range of demographic groups' current voting intentions to their voting intentions at this point in the 2002 campaign. If you read one poll in detail this election cycle, let it be this one. The Pew data show huge swings toward the Democrats among many important voter groups including seniors, middle income voters, non-college educated voters, whites, rural residents, married moms, white Catholics--the list goes on and on. In effect, these shifts have turned yesterday's swing voters into Democratic groups and many of yesterday's Republican groups into swing voters."
"Of course, the generic congressional contest does not tell you directly about how the myriad individual races will turn out (we'll get to the race by race data in a moment) so some caution is advised in assessing just what this gaudy lead is likely to mean for the Democrats on election day. But here's some food for thought. Three political scientists, Joseph Bafumi, Robert Erikson and Christopher Wlezien, have recently released a paper that forecasts the level of seat shifts from the generic congressional vote question, using model-based computer simulations of the 435 individual House contests.
"As I have continually stressed--and the mainstream press is now starting to pick up on--the Rovean fire-up-the-base-and-screw-the-middle strategy only works mathematically if losses in the political center can be minimized. Now they can't and the GOP is likely to pay the price--and very probably not just in this election....
"Let me also draw your attention to a very interesting study released by the Pew Research Center that, among other things, compares a wide range of demographic groups' current voting intentions to their voting intentions at this point in the 2002 campaign. If you read one poll in detail this election cycle, let it be this one. The Pew data show huge swings toward the Democrats among many important voter groups including seniors, middle income voters, non-college educated voters, whites, rural residents, married moms, white Catholics--the list goes on and on. In effect, these shifts have turned yesterday's swing voters into Democratic groups and many of yesterday's Republican groups into swing voters."
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Pollster.com releases charts to blogosphere
Pollster.com
Polster announced some new upgrades to their charts. Some changes are small, but if you're a blogger (or anyone else with a web site) we have one huge new feature we hope you will want to try. Here are the details ...
The blogger feature is simply this:
The chart is supposed to update automatically -- right on each embedding blog -- whenever Pollster adds new data. Readers can use the controls to turn data points, trend lines and confidence intervals on and off.
Polster announced some new upgrades to their charts. Some changes are small, but if you're a blogger (or anyone else with a web site) we have one huge new feature we hope you will want to try. Here are the details ...
The blogger feature is simply this:
- Embed Chart -- This is the big one for bloggers or anyone else with a web site. At the bottom of each chart you will now find a box labeled "Embed Chart," that works just like the one on YouTube. It includes some HTML code that when copied into a blog post or web page will produce a small version of that chart on your blog...just like this...
The chart is supposed to update automatically -- right on each embedding blog -- whenever Pollster adds new data. Readers can use the controls to turn data points, trend lines and confidence intervals on and off.
The Pathology of Compulsive Lying
Daily Kos: State of the Nation:
"What I find interesting (in a strictly car wreck, we're-all-going-to-die sort of way) is while the think tanks started out to provide thin but important-sounding justifications for whatever conservative graft or manipulation was being attempted during any particular period, the think tank model has now entirely transferred to the White House itself. Listening to Tony Snow (or any of the previous press secretaries) is like listening to an off-off-Broadway theatrical production exploring the pathology of compulsive lying. They don't care what the truth is: after spending every minute of every day reinforcing their fragile little bubbles of newspeak, in fact, it's not even clear they know what the actual truth is.
"Which is why, in a nutshell, we're in Iraq to begin with, the perfect think-tank-produced war -- because the policy came first, and actual knowledge was ignored as new 'facts' were fixed around that desired policy. And all of those facts -- nearly every single one of the 'big' facts used to enter the war -- turned out to be either fabricated or a product of extraordinary incompetence."
"What I find interesting (in a strictly car wreck, we're-all-going-to-die sort of way) is while the think tanks started out to provide thin but important-sounding justifications for whatever conservative graft or manipulation was being attempted during any particular period, the think tank model has now entirely transferred to the White House itself. Listening to Tony Snow (or any of the previous press secretaries) is like listening to an off-off-Broadway theatrical production exploring the pathology of compulsive lying. They don't care what the truth is: after spending every minute of every day reinforcing their fragile little bubbles of newspeak, in fact, it's not even clear they know what the actual truth is.
"Which is why, in a nutshell, we're in Iraq to begin with, the perfect think-tank-produced war -- because the policy came first, and actual knowledge was ignored as new 'facts' were fixed around that desired policy. And all of those facts -- nearly every single one of the 'big' facts used to enter the war -- turned out to be either fabricated or a product of extraordinary incompetence."
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Rocky Mountain News: Local
Rocky Mountain News: Local:
"Two people ejected from a speech by President Bush in Denver in 2005, allegedly because of an anti-war bumper sticker on a car they drove to the event, won a court order Monday they hope will uncover who gave the order to kick them out.
Leslie Weise and Alex Young, two of the three people removed from the taxpayer-funded event, are suing two Denver men for actually ousting them. But they believe a White House official gave the order.
Weise and Young say they did nothing disruptive at the speech and maintain the ouster violated their rights to free speech and protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
On Monday, U.S. District Judge Wiley Daniel rejected a motion to dismiss the case by defendants Michael Casper and Jay Klinkerman, who worked as volunteers at the event.
That decision allows attorneys for Weise and Young to question the two Denver men under oath.
Daniel limited their questioning of the defendants to issues of whether they are entitled to governmental immunity. But the judge said in his order that includes 'whether defendants were 'closely supervised' by government officials.'
'I think it's pretty clear,' Young said. 'Whether they were closely supervised' must include 'who the supervisors were and what their functions were.'
Weise and Young arrived at the president's speech March 21, 2005, at the Wings Over the Rockies museum at Lowry in a car with a bumper sticker that said, 'No More Blood for Oil.'
Klinkerman, head of the Colorado Young Republicans at the time, has admitted to being the volunteer who stopped them at the entrance of the event. He directed them to another man wearing a dark blue suit, radio earpiece and lapel pin, which made Weise and Young think he was a member of the Secret Service.
The man, whom they believe was Casper, a General Services employee working the event as a volunteer, allowed them in but later found them in the crowd and forced them to leave before the president arrived. Weise and Young believe he was ordered to do so by someone higher up in the Bush party."
"Two people ejected from a speech by President Bush in Denver in 2005, allegedly because of an anti-war bumper sticker on a car they drove to the event, won a court order Monday they hope will uncover who gave the order to kick them out.
Leslie Weise and Alex Young, two of the three people removed from the taxpayer-funded event, are suing two Denver men for actually ousting them. But they believe a White House official gave the order.
Weise and Young say they did nothing disruptive at the speech and maintain the ouster violated their rights to free speech and protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
On Monday, U.S. District Judge Wiley Daniel rejected a motion to dismiss the case by defendants Michael Casper and Jay Klinkerman, who worked as volunteers at the event.
That decision allows attorneys for Weise and Young to question the two Denver men under oath.
Daniel limited their questioning of the defendants to issues of whether they are entitled to governmental immunity. But the judge said in his order that includes 'whether defendants were 'closely supervised' by government officials.'
'I think it's pretty clear,' Young said. 'Whether they were closely supervised' must include 'who the supervisors were and what their functions were.'
Weise and Young arrived at the president's speech March 21, 2005, at the Wings Over the Rockies museum at Lowry in a car with a bumper sticker that said, 'No More Blood for Oil.'
Klinkerman, head of the Colorado Young Republicans at the time, has admitted to being the volunteer who stopped them at the entrance of the event. He directed them to another man wearing a dark blue suit, radio earpiece and lapel pin, which made Weise and Young think he was a member of the Secret Service.
The man, whom they believe was Casper, a General Services employee working the event as a volunteer, allowed them in but later found them in the crowd and forced them to leave before the president arrived. Weise and Young believe he was ordered to do so by someone higher up in the Bush party."
Monday, October 30, 2006
Viacom asks YouTube to purge certain clips -source | Business News | Reuters.com
Viacom asks YouTube to purge certain clips -source Business News Reuters.com
Internet observers including Reifman noted the irony of pulling down clips from Stewart and Colbert. Bloggers note that Colbert joked that he deserved $700 million of the $1.65 billion in stock Google plans to pay for YouTube.
Internet observers including Reifman noted the irony of pulling down clips from Stewart and Colbert. Bloggers note that Colbert joked that he deserved $700 million of the $1.65 billion in stock Google plans to pay for YouTube.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
AMERICAblog: A blog for a great nation that deserves the truth
AMERICAblog: A blog for a great nation that deserves the truth:
"Unfortunately I can't give you the video because CBS is making YouTube take down video we post there, claiming copyright infringement, so we're no longer posting CBS's video. I can however quote CBS's Bob Schieffer from this morning's Face the Nation with Ken Mehlman."
"Unfortunately I can't give you the video because CBS is making YouTube take down video we post there, claiming copyright infringement, so we're no longer posting CBS's video. I can however quote CBS's Bob Schieffer from this morning's Face the Nation with Ken Mehlman."
Think Progress » CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Calls Out Lynne Cheney For ‘Sniping At My Patriotism’
Think Progress » CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Calls Out Lynne Cheney For ‘Sniping At My Patriotism’
Today on CNN’s Late Edition, Blitzer said he was “surprised” at Cheney’s “sniping at my patriotism,” and pointed out that CNN had specifically labeled the tape of a U.S. soldier under fire as terrorist “propaganda.” He also said that CNN had made clear to Cheney’s staff “only hours before the interview” that she would be asked questions about politics during her appearance, not just about her children’s book.
Today on CNN’s Late Edition, Blitzer said he was “surprised” at Cheney’s “sniping at my patriotism,” and pointed out that CNN had specifically labeled the tape of a U.S. soldier under fire as terrorist “propaganda.” He also said that CNN had made clear to Cheney’s staff “only hours before the interview” that she would be asked questions about politics during her appearance, not just about her children’s book.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Atom Films CEO Appointed New Head Of MTV
Eat The Press | Atom Films CEO Appointed New Head Of MTV | The Huffington Post
Hmmm. Now why new CEO dropped in there like that?
Hmmm. Now why new CEO dropped in there like that?
Crooks and Liars » Letterman vs. O’Reilly…Round Two…Fight!
Crooks and Liars » Letterman vs. O’Reilly…Round Two…Fight!:
Letterman to O'Reilly:
"You're trying to put words in my mouth just like you put fake facts in your head."
Letterman to O'Reilly:
"You're trying to put words in my mouth just like you put fake facts in your head."
Friday, October 27, 2006
Crooks and Liars » Michael J Fox makes a fool out of Limbaugh
Crooks and Liars » Michael J Fox makes a fool out of Limbaugh
The sound and video aren't synced, but listen to Michael J. Fox....he is truthboy.
The sound and video aren't synced, but listen to Michael J. Fox....he is truthboy.
Lynne Cheney Claims Her Steamy Lesbian Novel Isn't "Sexually Explicit" | TPMCafe
I didn't pay attention to the whole story here -- something about a Dem candidate getting tagged by Imus for sex scenes in a novel he wrote. Which prompted the DNC to bring up a 2004 AP article about Lynne Cheney's book Sisters, which apparently had some lurid content too. (And which, by the way is selling for like $280 on Amazon when I went there just now to fetch the URL.)
Anyway, Lynne Cheney is on the Situation Room with Wolf, to plug her new children's book (which is selling for $10.77 and is Amazon #8 in books today). But he apparently leads off with questions regarding the news item regarding the DNC's statement about her book.
Just a nice Lynne Cheney vignette. She's all "Wolf, Wolf, can we just talk about a children's book here," y'know, extremely righteous and indignant.
VA-SEN: Lynne Cheney Claims Her Steamy Lesbian Novel Isn't "Sexually Explicit" | TPMCafe
includes link to video, which is a nice portrait of a lying liar imho
UPDATE: There's a longer version on Crooks & Liars.
Anyway, Lynne Cheney is on the Situation Room with Wolf, to plug her new children's book (which is selling for $10.77 and is Amazon #8 in books today). But he apparently leads off with questions regarding the news item regarding the DNC's statement about her book.
Just a nice Lynne Cheney vignette. She's all "Wolf, Wolf, can we just talk about a children's book here," y'know, extremely righteous and indignant.
VA-SEN: Lynne Cheney Claims Her Steamy Lesbian Novel Isn't "Sexually Explicit" | TPMCafe
includes link to video, which is a nice portrait of a lying liar imho
UPDATE: There's a longer version on Crooks & Liars.
Cook Political Report
Another week has gone by and little has changed. The Republican Party still seems to be headed toward a very tough election.
In the House, Republicans are most likely to see a net loss of 20 to 35 seats, and with it their majority. In the Senate, the GOP could lose at least four, but a five- or six-seat loss is more likely. A six-seat change tips the chamber into Democratic hands.
Could the situation change? Could the trajectory of this election be altered if the spotlight shifts from Iraq, congressional scandals, budget deficits, Hurricane Katrina, Terri Schiavo, stem-cell research and immigration onto something else, like terrorism or national security? Of course it could. In the time it takes to read this article, something could happen. A confrontation at sea involving a freighter going into or coming out of North Korea, for example, could dominate the news and the public consciousness. But unless something of that magnitude happens, we have to go with the situation as it stands.
While some stick to the assumption that this is a normal political environment, that this election is an "all politics is local" election like 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002 and 2004, they do so in the face of an enormous amount of polling data that demonstrates a horrendous political climate -- the kind that one sees periodically in midterm elections like 1958, 1966, 1974 and 1994, and even occasionally in presidential election years like 1932, 1964 and 1980.
Since 1994 is the most recent of these "wave" elections, when all politics is hardly local, compare the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, conducted October 13-16 among 1,006 registered voters nationwide, with the comparable NBC/WSJ poll from October 1994. President Bill Clinton and the Democrats were in the hot seat, headed toward a 52-seat loss in the House and an eight-seat Senate defeat.
In the October 1994 NBC/WSJ poll, 39 percent of voters thought the country was headed in the right direction, compared with 48 percent who said it was on the wrong track -- a nine-point lead for wrong track. In the recent poll, just 26 percent said right direction and 61 percent said wrong track; a net difference of 35 points, significantly worse than 1994.
The October 1994 poll gave Clinton a job approval rating of 48 percent and a disapproval rating of 43 percent, a five-point difference. This month, just 38 percent approved of President Bush's performance compared to 57 percent who disapproved, a net disapproval of 19 points. Again, it's significantly worse than 1994.
In the poll taken 12 years ago, 24 percent approved of the job Congress was doing and 67 percent disapproved, a net disapproval of 43 points. In last week's poll, just 16 percent approved of Congress and a whopping 75 percent disapproved, a 59-point net disapproval.
At this point in 1994, the GOP had moved into a six-point lead in the generic congressional ballot test (44 percent to 38 percent). In the latest poll, the Democrats have a 15-point lead -- 52 percent to 37 percent. Once again, much worse than '94.
Finally, in October 1994, 39 percent said their congressman had performed well enough to deserve re-election compared with 49 percent who thought it was time to give a new person a chance -- a 10-point difference. In the new poll, the same 39 percent favored re-election, but the percentage preferring a new representative was a bit lower at 45 percent, a six-point difference and only marginally better for incumbents than 12 years ago.
In short, in four of the five diagnostic indicators, the situation is significantly worse for Republicans today than it was for Democrats in 1994. And in the remaining one, this year is marginally better.
Before anyone can erroneously draw the conclusion that this survey is just another mainstream/liberal media effort, the poll was supervised by designates from both the NBC News Political Unit and the political editor of the Wall Street Journal, collaborating with a top pollster from each party. The Democrat is Peter D. Hart, truly one of the deans of the political and Democratic polling communities. The Republican side was headed up by the late Robert Teeter, a true pioneer and leader in polling for the GOP. After Teeter passed away several years ago, Bill McInturff took over. McInturff is a senior partner in Public Opinion Strategies (R), the largest and most-respected survey research firm in the party, with the largest share of sitting senators, governors and House members. So this is hardly a poll that could be labeled slanted, and in fact is designed by two of the best practitioners on the planet.
Does this mean that Democrats are headed to victories of 52 or more seats in the House and eight or more seats in the Senate? Of course not. The number of vulnerable GOP House and Senate seats is smaller than the number Democrats faced in 1994, and the number of retirements this year is less than 12 years ago. But then again, no one is talking about a 52-seat House or eight-seat Senate gain for Democrats this year. In the House in fact, the halfway point between the 20- to 35-seat estimate mentioned above is 27.5 seats, just a bit over half of the 52 seats gained by the GOP in 1994.
Do Republicans have a financial advantage over Democrats in terms of national party spending? Yes, but that advantage is the narrowest its been in 20 years. The Sept. 30 cash-on-hand figures for the Republican National Committee and the GOP Senate and House campaign committees were just $10 million more than the Democratic National Committee and its Senate and House committees, $77 million to $67 million. The GOP spending advantage is there, but it's nothing like the 50- to 125-percent advantages that we have seen in previous elections.
Do Republicans, in their "72-hour program," have a superior get-out-the-vote operation compared with Democrats? No question. But the rule of thumb that campaign professionals have always used is that a strong GOTV operation is good for a point or two, certainly not much more than that. Having to pull out voters who are disillusioned by Iraq, scandals and other issues will be a challenge even for this exquisitely designed operation.
One way of looking at it is that the wave this year may be as big as or even bigger than in 1994, but there are fewer structures on and near the beach, and those that are in danger are made with somewhat sturdier construction than those in 1994, hence the likelihood of smaller losses. But smaller losses like 20 to 35 seats still would cost the GOP the House, and losses of five or six in the Senate put that chamber right at the tipping point.
At this stage, the Cook Political Report puts four GOP seats in the "Lean Democratic" column, and classifies 27 more as "Toss Ups." (Keep in mind that the almost ironclad, years-old policy of the Cook Political Report is to not rate unindicted incumbents worse than a Toss Up.) Another 17 GOP seats are in competitive races, but are still ahead by enough to warrant a "Lean Republican" rating, and then there are 18 more long-shot opportunities for Democrats, those rated in the "Likely Republican" column, leaving 166 as "Solid Republican." No Democratic seats remain in the Toss Up column, while seven are considered "Lean Democratic."
In the Senate, GOP incumbents Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania and Mike DeWine in Ohio remain distinct underdogs. Conrad Burns of Montana and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island also run consistently behind and face uphill struggles, but in most polls they are not nearly as far behind as Santorum and DeWine. In Missouri, incumbent Jim Talent is basically running even, while George Allen maintains a modest but consistent lead in Virginia. In the Tennessee Republican open seat, there has been a small but potentially important shift in momentum away from Democratic Rep. Harold Ford Jr. in favor of former Chattanooga Mayor Bob Corker, the GOP standard-bearer. Ford had maintained a small lead and a world-class campaign but stumbled a little bit recently, while the Corker campaign, for the first time in this general election campaign, is showing signs of life. The race is likely to remain very close, but there were no positive signs for the GOP until the last week or two -- now there are.
Will Republicans pick off a Democratic seat? Republicans continue to argue that Democratic incumbent Debbie Stabenow remains highly vulnerable and that Macomb County Sheriff Mike Bouchard is within single digits and showing signs of life. That seat looks to be a better shot for the GOP than the Cantwell race in Washington state or the open seat in Minnesota.
But the seat most recently considered the best GOP pickup opportunity has seen a bit of a reversal. Republican state Sen. Tom Kean Jr.'s momentum appears to have halted in the last week or two, with very real questions arising about whether Kean will have the funding to compete in the extraordinarily expensive New York City and Philadelphia media markets. Appointed Sen. Robert Menendez (D) remains plagued by ethical and legal allegations -- he clearly has problems -- but the inability of the GOP to commit the $5 million or so necessary to do the job could make the difference.
Could things change, as they did in early September when the pendulum swung from Iraq and scandals to terrorism, national security and appreciation for falling gasoline prices, only to swing back at the end of the month? Sure. But it has to swing, and that does not appear to have happened yet. Maybe it will, but maybe it won't.
In the House, Republicans are most likely to see a net loss of 20 to 35 seats, and with it their majority. In the Senate, the GOP could lose at least four, but a five- or six-seat loss is more likely. A six-seat change tips the chamber into Democratic hands.
Could the situation change? Could the trajectory of this election be altered if the spotlight shifts from Iraq, congressional scandals, budget deficits, Hurricane Katrina, Terri Schiavo, stem-cell research and immigration onto something else, like terrorism or national security? Of course it could. In the time it takes to read this article, something could happen. A confrontation at sea involving a freighter going into or coming out of North Korea, for example, could dominate the news and the public consciousness. But unless something of that magnitude happens, we have to go with the situation as it stands.
While some stick to the assumption that this is a normal political environment, that this election is an "all politics is local" election like 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002 and 2004, they do so in the face of an enormous amount of polling data that demonstrates a horrendous political climate -- the kind that one sees periodically in midterm elections like 1958, 1966, 1974 and 1994, and even occasionally in presidential election years like 1932, 1964 and 1980.
Since 1994 is the most recent of these "wave" elections, when all politics is hardly local, compare the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, conducted October 13-16 among 1,006 registered voters nationwide, with the comparable NBC/WSJ poll from October 1994. President Bill Clinton and the Democrats were in the hot seat, headed toward a 52-seat loss in the House and an eight-seat Senate defeat.
In the October 1994 NBC/WSJ poll, 39 percent of voters thought the country was headed in the right direction, compared with 48 percent who said it was on the wrong track -- a nine-point lead for wrong track. In the recent poll, just 26 percent said right direction and 61 percent said wrong track; a net difference of 35 points, significantly worse than 1994.
The October 1994 poll gave Clinton a job approval rating of 48 percent and a disapproval rating of 43 percent, a five-point difference. This month, just 38 percent approved of President Bush's performance compared to 57 percent who disapproved, a net disapproval of 19 points. Again, it's significantly worse than 1994.
In the poll taken 12 years ago, 24 percent approved of the job Congress was doing and 67 percent disapproved, a net disapproval of 43 points. In last week's poll, just 16 percent approved of Congress and a whopping 75 percent disapproved, a 59-point net disapproval.
At this point in 1994, the GOP had moved into a six-point lead in the generic congressional ballot test (44 percent to 38 percent). In the latest poll, the Democrats have a 15-point lead -- 52 percent to 37 percent. Once again, much worse than '94.
Finally, in October 1994, 39 percent said their congressman had performed well enough to deserve re-election compared with 49 percent who thought it was time to give a new person a chance -- a 10-point difference. In the new poll, the same 39 percent favored re-election, but the percentage preferring a new representative was a bit lower at 45 percent, a six-point difference and only marginally better for incumbents than 12 years ago.
In short, in four of the five diagnostic indicators, the situation is significantly worse for Republicans today than it was for Democrats in 1994. And in the remaining one, this year is marginally better.
Before anyone can erroneously draw the conclusion that this survey is just another mainstream/liberal media effort, the poll was supervised by designates from both the NBC News Political Unit and the political editor of the Wall Street Journal, collaborating with a top pollster from each party. The Democrat is Peter D. Hart, truly one of the deans of the political and Democratic polling communities. The Republican side was headed up by the late Robert Teeter, a true pioneer and leader in polling for the GOP. After Teeter passed away several years ago, Bill McInturff took over. McInturff is a senior partner in Public Opinion Strategies (R), the largest and most-respected survey research firm in the party, with the largest share of sitting senators, governors and House members. So this is hardly a poll that could be labeled slanted, and in fact is designed by two of the best practitioners on the planet.
Does this mean that Democrats are headed to victories of 52 or more seats in the House and eight or more seats in the Senate? Of course not. The number of vulnerable GOP House and Senate seats is smaller than the number Democrats faced in 1994, and the number of retirements this year is less than 12 years ago. But then again, no one is talking about a 52-seat House or eight-seat Senate gain for Democrats this year. In the House in fact, the halfway point between the 20- to 35-seat estimate mentioned above is 27.5 seats, just a bit over half of the 52 seats gained by the GOP in 1994.
Do Republicans have a financial advantage over Democrats in terms of national party spending? Yes, but that advantage is the narrowest its been in 20 years. The Sept. 30 cash-on-hand figures for the Republican National Committee and the GOP Senate and House campaign committees were just $10 million more than the Democratic National Committee and its Senate and House committees, $77 million to $67 million. The GOP spending advantage is there, but it's nothing like the 50- to 125-percent advantages that we have seen in previous elections.
Do Republicans, in their "72-hour program," have a superior get-out-the-vote operation compared with Democrats? No question. But the rule of thumb that campaign professionals have always used is that a strong GOTV operation is good for a point or two, certainly not much more than that. Having to pull out voters who are disillusioned by Iraq, scandals and other issues will be a challenge even for this exquisitely designed operation.
One way of looking at it is that the wave this year may be as big as or even bigger than in 1994, but there are fewer structures on and near the beach, and those that are in danger are made with somewhat sturdier construction than those in 1994, hence the likelihood of smaller losses. But smaller losses like 20 to 35 seats still would cost the GOP the House, and losses of five or six in the Senate put that chamber right at the tipping point.
At this stage, the Cook Political Report puts four GOP seats in the "Lean Democratic" column, and classifies 27 more as "Toss Ups." (Keep in mind that the almost ironclad, years-old policy of the Cook Political Report is to not rate unindicted incumbents worse than a Toss Up.) Another 17 GOP seats are in competitive races, but are still ahead by enough to warrant a "Lean Republican" rating, and then there are 18 more long-shot opportunities for Democrats, those rated in the "Likely Republican" column, leaving 166 as "Solid Republican." No Democratic seats remain in the Toss Up column, while seven are considered "Lean Democratic."
In the Senate, GOP incumbents Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania and Mike DeWine in Ohio remain distinct underdogs. Conrad Burns of Montana and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island also run consistently behind and face uphill struggles, but in most polls they are not nearly as far behind as Santorum and DeWine. In Missouri, incumbent Jim Talent is basically running even, while George Allen maintains a modest but consistent lead in Virginia. In the Tennessee Republican open seat, there has been a small but potentially important shift in momentum away from Democratic Rep. Harold Ford Jr. in favor of former Chattanooga Mayor Bob Corker, the GOP standard-bearer. Ford had maintained a small lead and a world-class campaign but stumbled a little bit recently, while the Corker campaign, for the first time in this general election campaign, is showing signs of life. The race is likely to remain very close, but there were no positive signs for the GOP until the last week or two -- now there are.
Will Republicans pick off a Democratic seat? Republicans continue to argue that Democratic incumbent Debbie Stabenow remains highly vulnerable and that Macomb County Sheriff Mike Bouchard is within single digits and showing signs of life. That seat looks to be a better shot for the GOP than the Cantwell race in Washington state or the open seat in Minnesota.
But the seat most recently considered the best GOP pickup opportunity has seen a bit of a reversal. Republican state Sen. Tom Kean Jr.'s momentum appears to have halted in the last week or two, with very real questions arising about whether Kean will have the funding to compete in the extraordinarily expensive New York City and Philadelphia media markets. Appointed Sen. Robert Menendez (D) remains plagued by ethical and legal allegations -- he clearly has problems -- but the inability of the GOP to commit the $5 million or so necessary to do the job could make the difference.
Could things change, as they did in early September when the pendulum swung from Iraq and scandals to terrorism, national security and appreciation for falling gasoline prices, only to swing back at the end of the month? Sure. But it has to swing, and that does not appear to have happened yet. Maybe it will, but maybe it won't.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Dingalinks
Use those dingalinks.
Dingalinks are hotlinks that take you to a specific time in a bh.tv diavlog. For example, the dingalink http://bloggingheads.tv/?id=42&in=7:28 would start playing the video 7 minutes and 28 seconds into diavlog number 42. You can use dingalinks—in e-mails or on blogs—to direct people's attention to any particular utterance or exchange within any diavlog. (At last—quoting out of context comes to the world of video!)
How do you create a dingalink? When the video you're watching reaches the point you want to call attention to, click the "dingalink" button below the screen (lower right). Then look up in your browser's address space and you'll see the dingalink, which you can now copy and paste. (Users of the Mozilla Fireflox browser may need a plug-in, and they should receive instructions to this effect when they click on the dingalink button. The place to find the plug-in is: http://www.iol.ie/~locka/mozilla/plugin.htm#download.) If you feel you've clicked the dingalink button a few seconds too late, or too early, you can of course alter the digits at the end of the dingalink manually. (For that matter, if you're having trouble with the dingalink button, you can create the dingalink from scratch manually by using the formula above.)
If you are having difficulty creating or using dingalinks, please email us at support@bloggingheads.tv where we will do our best to assist you.
Dingalinks are hotlinks that take you to a specific time in a bh.tv diavlog. For example, the dingalink http://bloggingheads.tv/?id=42&in=7:28 would start playing the video 7 minutes and 28 seconds into diavlog number 42. You can use dingalinks—in e-mails or on blogs—to direct people's attention to any particular utterance or exchange within any diavlog. (At last—quoting out of context comes to the world of video!)
How do you create a dingalink? When the video you're watching reaches the point you want to call attention to, click the "dingalink" button below the screen (lower right). Then look up in your browser's address space and you'll see the dingalink, which you can now copy and paste. (Users of the Mozilla Fireflox browser may need a plug-in, and they should receive instructions to this effect when they click on the dingalink button. The place to find the plug-in is: http://www.iol.ie/~locka/mozilla/plugin.htm#download.) If you feel you've clicked the dingalink button a few seconds too late, or too early, you can of course alter the digits at the end of the dingalink manually. (For that matter, if you're having trouble with the dingalink button, you can create the dingalink from scratch manually by using the formula above.)
If you are having difficulty creating or using dingalinks, please email us at support@bloggingheads.tv where we will do our best to assist you.
Crooks and Liars » Olbermann Gives Us The Visual To Limbaugh’s Attack On Michael J. Fox
By now everyone has heard Limbaugh's little commentary about Michael J. Fox's appearance in the ad for Claire McCaskill. Well tonight Keith Olbermann supplied us with the visual to accompany Rush's latest show of idiocy.
Video - WMV Video - QT
After showing the clip of Limbaugh's sad reenactment of Fox's appearance, Keith was joined by Sam Seder to discuss it, along with other ways the Republicans turn to attacks instead of addressing the issues. Seder nails the main talking point surrounding this whole discussion - How the right attacks those who are actually affected by these issues and posses the bravery to bring them into the political arena. Just ask the Congressional pages about that one.
Video - WMV Video - QT
After showing the clip of Limbaugh's sad reenactment of Fox's appearance, Keith was joined by Sam Seder to discuss it, along with other ways the Republicans turn to attacks instead of addressing the issues. Seder nails the main talking point surrounding this whole discussion - How the right attacks those who are actually affected by these issues and posses the bravery to bring them into the political arena. Just ask the Congressional pages about that one.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Andrew Sullivan | The Daily Dish: Reynolds' Lame Excuses
Andrew Sullivan The Daily Dish: Reynolds' Lame Excuses:
"Choosing Republicans over Dems if you are a single issue voter on gay matters means your partisanship has warped your judgment beyond measure, as, in Reynolds case, it has for a very long time."
"Choosing Republicans over Dems if you are a single issue voter on gay matters means your partisanship has warped your judgment beyond measure, as, in Reynolds case, it has for a very long time."
Where's the Shame?
Interesting post from March/April 2006 by Glenn Greenwald, linked from firedoglake yesterday. Firedoglake was taking instapundit to task (a la the geebus of late) for being an unremorseful (so far) war cheerleader. Greenwald's post hammers instapundint and a number of others for their positions c. 2003, wondering aloud why these guys have not yet been entirely shamed into silence.
Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: The Death of Shame in our Pundit Class: "There are not many episodes in our national history which can compete with the invasion of Iraq in terms of the profound failures of every one of our institutions -- failures which allowed this sort of deceit and detachment from reality to persist. But until we identify those responsible and end the influence which they continue to exert over our political dialogue, we will continue to be at risk of following them down these same deceitful, destructive paths."
Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: The Death of Shame in our Pundit Class: "There are not many episodes in our national history which can compete with the invasion of Iraq in terms of the profound failures of every one of our institutions -- failures which allowed this sort of deceit and detachment from reality to persist. But until we identify those responsible and end the influence which they continue to exert over our political dialogue, we will continue to be at risk of following them down these same deceitful, destructive paths."
Monday, October 23, 2006
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Friday, October 20, 2006
Thursday, October 19, 2006
David Corn
David Corn: "RUMOR ALERT. Former Clerk of the House Jeff Trandahl has told the House ethics committee about two Republican House members who had sex with congressional pages, and neither man is page-chaser Mark Foley. That's the rumor circulating in Washington. One of these Republicans supposedly had sex with a male page; one with a female page. The names of the implicated Republicans are on the rumor-mill, but I'm not going to disclose these identities. I assume if there's truth to this, the allegation will become public. (But then I assumed someone would post The List.) In any event, what impact would such a revelation have on the coming elections? Are Republicans bracing for this bombshell? Perhaps they're preparing to blame Democratic operatives.
questionable source
Wayne Madsen Report - Home:
"October 19, 2006 -- WMR's Capitol Hill sources report that the final shoe on the Jack Abramoff scandal has not yet dropped and that something 'big' may come just prior to the November 7 election. WMR has previously reported that forced child prostitution in the U.S. Pacific territory of the Northern Marianas may involve some GOP members of Congress. Abramoff represented the Northern Marianas and its unregulated clothing manufacturers that imported slave laborers from China and the Philippines. There is evidence that the children of the laborers were used as child prostitutes for visiting U.S. 'dignitaries.'"
"October 19, 2006 -- WMR's Capitol Hill sources report that the final shoe on the Jack Abramoff scandal has not yet dropped and that something 'big' may come just prior to the November 7 election. WMR has previously reported that forced child prostitution in the U.S. Pacific territory of the Northern Marianas may involve some GOP members of Congress. Abramoff represented the Northern Marianas and its unregulated clothing manufacturers that imported slave laborers from China and the Philippines. There is evidence that the children of the laborers were used as child prostitutes for visiting U.S. 'dignitaries.'"
Crooks and Liars » As I predicted: Bill relates his own criticism to Bush’s; still attacks bloggers
Crooks and Liars » As I predicted: Bill relates his own criticism to Bush’s; still attacks bloggers
The second half of this on bloggers - very interesting
The second half of this on bloggers - very interesting
The Raw Story | FBI investigating Beauprez for attack ad
The Raw Story FBI investigating Beauprez for attack ad:
"A criminal investigation that now involves the FBI sent shock waves through the race for Colorado governor Wednesday.
The Colorado Bureau of Investigation announced that it had determined that someone accessed information in an FBI database on Carlos Estrada Medina, who has been the star of a TV attack ad against Democrat Bill Ritter.
That ad was sponsored by Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez, and he and his campaign staff will now be interviewed by FBI agents."
"A criminal investigation that now involves the FBI sent shock waves through the race for Colorado governor Wednesday.
The Colorado Bureau of Investigation announced that it had determined that someone accessed information in an FBI database on Carlos Estrada Medina, who has been the star of a TV attack ad against Democrat Bill Ritter.
That ad was sponsored by Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez, and he and his campaign staff will now be interviewed by FBI agents."
people don't really buy this...do they?
GOP to air ad warning of terror attacks - Yahoo! News:
"WASHINGTON - The Republican Party will begin airing a hard-hitting ad this weekend that warns of more cataclysmic terror attacks against the U.S. homeland.
The ad portrays Osama bin Laden and quotes his threats against America dating to February 1998. 'These are the stakes,' the ad concludes. 'Vote November 7.'"
"WASHINGTON - The Republican Party will begin airing a hard-hitting ad this weekend that warns of more cataclysmic terror attacks against the U.S. homeland.
The ad portrays Osama bin Laden and quotes his threats against America dating to February 1998. 'These are the stakes,' the ad concludes. 'Vote November 7.'"
The Raw Story | GOP wants own cand. to withdraw in CA
The Raw Story GOP wants own cand. to withdraw in CA:
"GARDEN GROVE, Calif. - Orange County Republican leaders on Thursday called for the withdrawal of a GOP congressional candidate they believe sent a letter threatening Hispanic immigrant voters with arrest.
Tan D. Nguyen denied knowing anything about the letter in an interview Thursday with The Associated Press but said he fired a campaign staffer who may have been responsible for it.
County Republican Chairman Scott Baugh, however, said that after speaking with state investigators and the company that distributed the mailer, he believes Nguyen had direct knowledge of 'obnoxious and reprehensible' letter. He told the AP that the party’s executive committee voted unanimously to Nguyen to drop out of the race against Democratic U.S. Rep. Loretta Sanchez."
"GARDEN GROVE, Calif. - Orange County Republican leaders on Thursday called for the withdrawal of a GOP congressional candidate they believe sent a letter threatening Hispanic immigrant voters with arrest.
Tan D. Nguyen denied knowing anything about the letter in an interview Thursday with The Associated Press but said he fired a campaign staffer who may have been responsible for it.
County Republican Chairman Scott Baugh, however, said that after speaking with state investigators and the company that distributed the mailer, he believes Nguyen had direct knowledge of 'obnoxious and reprehensible' letter. He told the AP that the party’s executive committee voted unanimously to Nguyen to drop out of the race against Democratic U.S. Rep. Loretta Sanchez."
The Blotter
The Blotter:
"The Republican source said Trandahl planned to name Ted Van Der Meid, the speaker's counsel and floor manager, as the person who was briefed on a regular basis about any issue that arose in the page program, including a 'problem group of members and staff who spent too much time socializing with pages outside of official duties.' One of whom was Mark Foley. "
"The Republican source said Trandahl planned to name Ted Van Der Meid, the speaker's counsel and floor manager, as the person who was briefed on a regular basis about any issue that arose in the page program, including a 'problem group of members and staff who spent too much time socializing with pages outside of official duties.' One of whom was Mark Foley. "
The Raw Story | O’Reilly on Blogs: I'd go in with grenade
The Raw Story O’Reilly on Blogs: I'd go in with grenade:
"O’Reilly said that he knew “for a fact that President Bush doesn’t know what’s going on in the Internet.”
"O’Reilly said that he knew “for a fact that President Bush doesn’t know what’s going on in the Internet.”
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Sources: House clerk warned GOP about Foley years ago - CNN.com
Sources: House clerk warned GOP about Foley years ago - CNN.com:
"'Jeff is a guy who always does the right thing,' Shniderman said. 'He lives by the truth. He lives by one truth. He's not a man that tells different stories to different people.'"
"'Jeff is a guy who always does the right thing,' Shniderman said. 'He lives by the truth. He lives by one truth. He's not a man that tells different stories to different people.'"
Monday, October 16, 2006
danieldrezner.com :: Daniel W. Drezner :: The economics of worlds colliding#more
danieldrezner.com :: Daniel W. Drezner :: The economics of worlds colliding#more: "Reuters' Adam Pasick reports that the market for virtual goods is beginning to draw the attention of real-world tax authorities (hat tip: Greg Mankiw):
Users of online worlds such as Second Life and World of Warcraft transact millions of dollars worth of virtual goods and services every day, and these virtual economies are beginning to draw the attention of real-world authorities."
Users of online worlds such as Second Life and World of Warcraft transact millions of dollars worth of virtual goods and services every day, and these virtual economies are beginning to draw the attention of real-world authorities."
The Blog | Matt Stoller: Post-2006 Part One: Sesame Street or Lord of the Flies? | The Huffington Post
The Blog | Matt Stoller: Post-2006 Part One: Sesame Street or Lord of the Flies? | The Huffington Post: "You don't really get a sense of the structural integrity of a system until it falls under pressure. In 1977, New York was a lot sicker than it was in 2004, and this became obvious when the lights went out and Lord of the Flies, as opposed to Sesame Street, began.
If the Republicans go down this year, the entire right-wing system will be put under new pressure. Not a lot of pressure, mind you, but a marginally larger amount of pressure than the wingnuts are used to. So we have to start asking ourselves how their system will respond. Will they regroup quickly and counterattack in 2008, or will they fall to backbiting and infighting as they try to distance themselves from Bush, who isn't of course a real conservative?"
If the Republicans go down this year, the entire right-wing system will be put under new pressure. Not a lot of pressure, mind you, but a marginally larger amount of pressure than the wingnuts are used to. So we have to start asking ourselves how their system will respond. Will they regroup quickly and counterattack in 2008, or will they fall to backbiting and infighting as they try to distance themselves from Bush, who isn't of course a real conservative?"
Sunday, October 15, 2006
there's something happening there
Wolf kicked Mehlman around today
Never thought Wolf would ask Mehlman about his relationship with Abramoff despite the major coverage of their relationship in today's LA Times article. But, he did. Mehlman's answer was completely Nixonian. He kept saying, "I don't recall the specifics" and "I don't recall it specifically."
Never thought Wolf would ask Mehlman about his relationship with Abramoff despite the major coverage of their relationship in today's LA Times article. But, he did. Mehlman's answer was completely Nixonian. He kept saying, "I don't recall the specifics" and "I don't recall it specifically."
Instapundit.com -KARL ROVE'S SECRET WEAPON
Instapundit.com -KARL ROVE'S SECRET WEAPON
Help me understand how this guy can link to this article (I assume he read those words which struck me as so soundly logical and reality-based) and make the comments he did in his blog post. What am I missing?
Help me understand how this guy can link to this article (I assume he read those words which struck me as so soundly logical and reality-based) and make the comments he did in his blog post. What am I missing?
Friday, October 13, 2006
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
FT.com / In depth - Politicians yet to realise impact of internet, warns Google chief
FT.com / In depth - Politicians yet to realise impact of internet, warns Google chief
Politicians have yet to wake up to the impact of the -internet, which will expose them to online "truth predictor" tests and affect the outcome of general elections, the head of Google said on Tuesday.
Politicians have yet to wake up to the impact of the -internet, which will expose them to online "truth predictor" tests and affect the outcome of general elections, the head of Google said on Tuesday.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Monday, October 09, 2006
83 percent of respondents thought that Mr. Bush...
Foley Scandal Is Hurting G.O.P.'s Image, Poll Finds - New York Times:
"83 percent of respondents thought that Mr. Bush was either hiding something or mostly lying when he discussed how the war in Iraq was going."
"83 percent of respondents thought that Mr. Bush was either hiding something or mostly lying when he discussed how the war in Iraq was going."
AMERICAblog: A blog for a great nation that deserves the truth
AMERICAblog: A blog for a great nation that deserves the truth
this is anexample (albeit a minor one) of the truth machine
this is anexample (albeit a minor one) of the truth machine
USATODAY.com - Poll: Democratic candidates open large lead in congressional races
USATODAY.com - Poll: Democratic candidates open large lead in congressional races:
Big change in a month:
"On the question of which party's candidate would receive their vote if the election were held today, Democrats held a 23-point lead over Republicans among every type of person questioned — likely voters, registered voters and adults. That's the largest lead Democrats have held among registered voters since 1978 and a jump from last month's 48%-48% split among likely voters."
Big change in a month:
"On the question of which party's candidate would receive their vote if the election were held today, Democrats held a 23-point lead over Republicans among every type of person questioned — likely voters, registered voters and adults. That's the largest lead Democrats have held among registered voters since 1978 and a jump from last month's 48%-48% split among likely voters."
USATODAY.com - Poll: Democratic candidates open large lead in congressional races
USATODAY.com - Poll: Democratic candidates open large lead in congressional races:
Big change in a month:
"On the question of which party's candidate would receive their vote if the election were held today, Democrats held a 23-point lead over Republicans among every type of person questioned — likely voters, registered voters and adults. That's the largest lead Democrats have held among registered voters since 1978 and a jump from last month's 48%-48% split among likely voters."
Big change in a month:
"On the question of which party's candidate would receive their vote if the election were held today, Democrats held a 23-point lead over Republicans among every type of person questioned — likely voters, registered voters and adults. That's the largest lead Democrats have held among registered voters since 1978 and a jump from last month's 48%-48% split among likely voters."
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Lawmaker Saw Foley Messages In 2000 - washingtonpost.com
Lawmaker Saw Foley Messages In 2000 - washingtonpost.com:
"A Republican congressman knew of disgraced former representative Mark Foley's inappropriate Internet exchanges as far back as 2000 and personally confronted Foley about his communications.
A spokeswoman for Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) confirmed yesterday that a former page showed the congressman Internet messages that had made the youth feel uncomfortable with the direction Foley (R-Fla.) was taking their e-mail relationship. Last week, when the Foley matter erupted, a Kolbe staff member suggested to the former page that he take the matter to the clerk of the House, Karen Haas, said Kolbe's press secretary, Korenna Cline."
"A Republican congressman knew of disgraced former representative Mark Foley's inappropriate Internet exchanges as far back as 2000 and personally confronted Foley about his communications.
A spokeswoman for Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) confirmed yesterday that a former page showed the congressman Internet messages that had made the youth feel uncomfortable with the direction Foley (R-Fla.) was taking their e-mail relationship. Last week, when the Foley matter erupted, a Kolbe staff member suggested to the former page that he take the matter to the clerk of the House, Karen Haas, said Kolbe's press secretary, Korenna Cline."
Saturday, October 07, 2006
Andrew Sullivan | The Daily Dish: The Clerk
Andrew Sullivan The Daily Dish: The Clerk
I know nothing about the details of the page scandal, except what's in the press and D.C. gossip, and have no idea who might have tried to prevent or not prevent Foley from continuing his predation. It is clear, however, that the House Clerk at the time, Jeff Trandahl, is close to the center of it. Today's Washington Post has an interesting story that suggests that Trandahl was a strict disciplinarian of the pages, took his responsiblities very seriously, did everything he could to stop Foley, and after being unable to get Hastert or Reynolds to stop it, quit:
Sources close to Fordham say Trandahl repeatedly urged the longtime aide and close family friend to confront Foley about his inappropriate advances on pages. Each time, Foley pledged to no longer socialize with the teenagers, but, weeks later, Trandahl would again alert Fordham about more contacts. Out of frustration, the sources said, Fordham contacted Palmer, hoping that an intervention from such a powerful figure in the House would persuade Foley to stop.
Now, a second House aide familiar with Foley and his actions told The Washington Post yesterday that "Scott Palmer had spoken to Foley prior to November 2005." The aide spoke on the condition of anonymity because the matter is now the subject of a criminal investigation and the House ethics committee inquiry.
I know nothing about the details of the page scandal, except what's in the press and D.C. gossip, and have no idea who might have tried to prevent or not prevent Foley from continuing his predation. It is clear, however, that the House Clerk at the time, Jeff Trandahl, is close to the center of it. Today's Washington Post has an interesting story that suggests that Trandahl was a strict disciplinarian of the pages, took his responsiblities very seriously, did everything he could to stop Foley, and after being unable to get Hastert or Reynolds to stop it, quit:
Sources close to Fordham say Trandahl repeatedly urged the longtime aide and close family friend to confront Foley about his inappropriate advances on pages. Each time, Foley pledged to no longer socialize with the teenagers, but, weeks later, Trandahl would again alert Fordham about more contacts. Out of frustration, the sources said, Fordham contacted Palmer, hoping that an intervention from such a powerful figure in the House would persuade Foley to stop.
Now, a second House aide familiar with Foley and his actions told The Washington Post yesterday that "Scott Palmer had spoken to Foley prior to November 2005." The aide spoke on the condition of anonymity because the matter is now the subject of a criminal investigation and the House ethics committee inquiry.
Friday, October 06, 2006
The Swamp - Chicago Tribune - Blogs.
The Swamp - Chicago Tribune - Blogs.:
"'We know there are reports of people that knew it and kind of fed it out or leaked it to the press,' Hastert said. 'That's why we've asked for an investigation. So, let me just say, that's why we've asked for an investigation, to find who that is.'"
"'We know there are reports of people that knew it and kind of fed it out or leaked it to the press,' Hastert said. 'That's why we've asked for an investigation. So, let me just say, that's why we've asked for an investigation, to find who that is.'"
Doofusboy-in-Chief
Robert J. Elisberg
The Huffington Post
[I]t would take a blind ostrich to miss the trademarks of a childish fratboy punk who is so insecure and wrapped up in being a bully and burying his daddy issues and born-again issues and alcohol/cocaine/AWOL issues that he can't stand disagreement and must absolutely have his own way.
But, of course, I mean that in a nice way. Is the description actually true? Oh, who knows? Fake pop-psychology doesn't require a degree. But what is true is that we all know people like this from growing up. We can deny what we see before our eyes, but the body knows. And shivers in remembrance.
The Huffington Post
[I]t would take a blind ostrich to miss the trademarks of a childish fratboy punk who is so insecure and wrapped up in being a bully and burying his daddy issues and born-again issues and alcohol/cocaine/AWOL issues that he can't stand disagreement and must absolutely have his own way.
But, of course, I mean that in a nice way. Is the description actually true? Oh, who knows? Fake pop-psychology doesn't require a degree. But what is true is that we all know people like this from growing up. We can deny what we see before our eyes, but the body knows. And shivers in remembrance.
Evangelicals Fear the Loss of Their Teenagers
New York Times
While some critics say the statistics are greatly exaggerated (one evangelical magazine for youth ministers dubbed it “the 4 percent panic attack”), there is widespread consensus among evangelical leaders that they risk losing their teenagers.
“I’m looking at the data,” said Ron Luce, who organized the meetings and founded Teen Mania, a 20-year-old youth ministry, “and we’ve become post-Christian America, like post-Christian Europe. We’ve been working as hard as we know how to work — everyone in youth ministry is working hard — but we’re losing.”
While some critics say the statistics are greatly exaggerated (one evangelical magazine for youth ministers dubbed it “the 4 percent panic attack”), there is widespread consensus among evangelical leaders that they risk losing their teenagers.
“I’m looking at the data,” said Ron Luce, who organized the meetings and founded Teen Mania, a 20-year-old youth ministry, “and we’ve become post-Christian America, like post-Christian Europe. We’ve been working as hard as we know how to work — everyone in youth ministry is working hard — but we’re losing.”
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Brad Blog: Diebold
Princeton Study of Diebold Voting Machines:
http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/
Diebold Election Systems Response:
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=72390
Diebold says:
http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/
Diebold Election Systems Response:
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=72390
Diebold says:
A virus was introduced to a machine that is never attached to a network.
This response dodges the question, expressing a complete misunderstanding of the nature of viruses by implying that viruses are irrelevant if there is no network. First, viruses originally emerged as a threat in the era of the Apple ][ personal computer, where they were spread on floppy disks that were hand carried between machines. What matters, clearly, is the presence of communication, not wires. Communication by hand carried disks, or PCMCIA cards, creates an environment in which the possibility of viruses is worthy of investigation.
The current generation AccuVote-TS software - software that is used today on AccuVote-TS units in the United States - has the most advanced security features, including Advanced Encryption Standard 128 bit data encryption, Digitally Signed memory card data, Secure Socket Layer (SSL) data encryption for transmitted results, dynamic passwords, and more.
Diebold has not released to the public sufficient information to allow an assessment of the competence with which these measures were applied. As a result, we cannot determine whether these are applied in an effective way, or whether they are as ineffective as the use of DES was back in 1997.
In addition to this extensive security, the report all but ignores physical security and election procedures. Every local jurisdiction secures its voting machines - every voting machine, not just electronic machines. Electronic machines are secured with security tape and numbered security seals that would reveal any sign of tampering.
See Avi Rubin's report. See the report from Cleveland [PDF] on the frequency with which these measures were used effectively. See Ed Felton's comments on the denial of service attack that security seals offer. I commented on the same with regard to the ES&S iVotronic in my comments on the pre-election tests in Miami [PDF] [see page 13 and 24-25] in 2004.
If you take seals seriously, you must inventory seal numbers at the time applied and insist on recording the seal numbers at the time they are broken. Auditors must routinely check that these records are properly maintained, and any seal found broken should disqualify the machine it is attached to. Jurisdictions don't do this, and the seals being used are so flimsy that if they did, someone could shut down a polling place by careful use of their thumbnail. In sum, the use of seals, as it is being done now, is about cosmetics, not about security.
Secure voting equipment, proper procedures and adequate testing assure an accurate voting process that has been confirmed through numerous, stringent accuracy tests and third party security analysis.
Diebold owes the public a list of the third party security analyses that have found their system to be secure. None of the analyses I'm aware of drew positive conclusions. Certainly the redacted SAIC study, [ed note: The redacted SAIC report was originally posted here on Maryland's website, but now appears to be gone. So it's really redacted at this point apparently. The preceding link is to the Exec Summary of its findings instead] and the Compuware study [PDF], and the Raba study [PDF] all found major flaws. I've spoken with authors of the Raba study who were livid about the way Diebold lobbied them during the writing of their report to soften the wording, and then misrepresented the results in their public relations campaign that followed. The SAIC study is still not available in unredacted form. Does this mean that it still documents weaknesses that have yet to be corrected?
Every voter in every local jurisdiction that uses the AccuVote-TS should feel secure knowing that their vote will count on Election Day.
Indeed. I agree completely. They should feel secure. Or at least, that is what we owe them. I wish we could follow through on that promise.
Doug Jones
jones@cs.uiowa.edu
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Hubris
David Corn discusses his book Hubris on bloggingheads tv with James Pinkerton (Newsday, New America Foundation, etc.) There's an interesting exchange about 13 or 14 minutes in, when the name Laurie Milroy is mentioned. Pinkerton asks who Laurie Milroy is. Corn, who evidently knows of some connection between Pinkerton and Milroy, turns the tables on him, saying "I guess I should ask you that," which flusters Pinkerton, who starts sputtering and wincing etc.
But that's not why I'm posting it. It speaks for itself about why I'm posting it.
But that's not why I'm posting it. It speaks for itself about why I'm posting it.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Andrew Sullivan | The Daily Dish
Andrew Sullivan The Daily Dish:
"First off, most young people today use an IM program called Trillian. The program allows you to use a single interface for all your IM contacts even though your IM friends may all use different IM programs (AIM, MSN, Yahoo, ICQ, etc.).
As a by-product of using Trillian (and most other IM programs), all conversations are stored as a log file in the Trillian history folder. I've gone in and double checked and all of my IM conversations, going back years, are saved as long log files, one for each contact in my contact list. I believe that all of the main IM programs do the same thing.
So, no, people don't actively or purposely 'save' IMs. Most tech-savvy people know that IMs are automatically saved as a by-product of using an IM program. So if anyone, at any time, has any reason to go back and track down a previous IM exchange, it's relatively easy to do.
It's scary to think, but unbeknownst to him, I'd assume that all of Mr. Foley's old IM’s are probably stored on his PC, assuming a staffer did not go in and delete them once the story broke."
"First off, most young people today use an IM program called Trillian. The program allows you to use a single interface for all your IM contacts even though your IM friends may all use different IM programs (AIM, MSN, Yahoo, ICQ, etc.).
As a by-product of using Trillian (and most other IM programs), all conversations are stored as a log file in the Trillian history folder. I've gone in and double checked and all of my IM conversations, going back years, are saved as long log files, one for each contact in my contact list. I believe that all of the main IM programs do the same thing.
So, no, people don't actively or purposely 'save' IMs. Most tech-savvy people know that IMs are automatically saved as a by-product of using an IM program. So if anyone, at any time, has any reason to go back and track down a previous IM exchange, it's relatively easy to do.
It's scary to think, but unbeknownst to him, I'd assume that all of Mr. Foley's old IM’s are probably stored on his PC, assuming a staffer did not go in and delete them once the story broke."
Monday, October 02, 2006
Crooks and Liars » Andy Card dances around Woodward’s book: Doesn’t criticise him
Crooks and Liars » Andy Card dances around Woodward’s book: Doesn’t criticise him
This is long (about 10 minutes) and not that interesting, but it is Card not lying...just not particularly telling the truth, but not lying. Dancing a lot and ignoring the direct questions, but affirming that he met with Woodward a lot and that he was very forthcoming with Woodward.
"I was probably too candid."
This is long (about 10 minutes) and not that interesting, but it is Card not lying...just not particularly telling the truth, but not lying. Dancing a lot and ignoring the direct questions, but affirming that he met with Woodward a lot and that he was very forthcoming with Woodward.
"I was probably too candid."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
