Pfffffffffffffffff!

This is too funny:

Thirty-five Greenpeace (search) protesters got more than they may have bargained for when they stormed the International Petroleum Exchange in London on Wednesday. According to "The Times" of London, they slipped into a closing door and then roared onto the trading floor, blowing whistles and sounding foghorns.

They were hoping to paralyze oil trading at the exchange. But the traders, most of them under 25 years old, rushed the protesters, pushing filing cabinets on top of them and kicking and punching them until they retreated. Twenty-seven protesters were arrested. Two were hospitalized, one with a broken jaw and the other with a concussion. One protester says, "I have never seen anyone less amenable to listening our point of view."

Don't go messing up someone else's house.

I Was Wondering the Same Thing

Josh Marshall:

I sometimes wonder -- genuinely wonder -- how often some folks on the rightward side of the privatization debate simply repeat claims they know to be false or whether they simply shovel them up from the noise machine and dish them back out without making any attempt to find out whether what they're repeating is true or not.

A few moments ago, a TPM Reader sent me a link to this post on the site of Roger L. Simon.

He says many things in it on the Social Security debate which one may agree or disagree with. But what pops out to me is his flat claim that both Sen. Harry Reid and President Bill Clinton supported private Social Security accounts in the late 1990s. The point being that the two men are transparently hypocritical since they now attack President Bush for supporting what they endorsed less than a decade ago.

This is simply false, presumably because Simon simply isn't familiar with the subject. It's not an issue up for debate or a question of interpretation. It's simply a matter of the difference between what did happen and what did not happen.

There's no particular reason to pick on Simon. This stuff is ubiquitous. One might just as easily have chosen from a thousand other examples -- not a few of them on cable networks and other places that are supposed to have checks in place to prevent egregious error and misstatement of fact.

What Bill Clinton proposed was that rather than having the Social Security Trust Fund invest all its assets in Treasury bonds that it invest a relatively small portion of those assets in private securities. Again, no point of interpretation here: that's not private accounts, period. The president also proposed so-called USA Accounts, a universal 401k available to all Americans, but not part of Social Security. Again, completely different from what the president is proposing.

I am close to certain that this is exactly what Sen. Reid endorsed or proposed as well. My only reason for the slight qualification is that I cannot say that I am familiar with every quotation or press release that the senator put out in the 90s, though the ones I've seen purporting to show his support for private accounts are just what I described above in the case of Clinton. I can't say it in his case, but I can say it in Clinton's.

The pattern here is pretty much just the same with the intentional misconstrual or distortion of the quote from FDR which purports to show him supporting a transition to private accounts. Kevin Drum has a good run-down on that one here.

In both cases, the misinformation or lies continue to cycle through the echo chamber, apparently with no penalty for their falsehood or attempt to correct.

I'm not sure what there is to say about this really other than to observe the relative half-life of misinformation on the right today. But it seems worth noting it for the record.

-- Josh Marshall

Party of Less Federal Government

Seems to dig federal courts:

WASHINGTON - Congress on Thursday passed legislation that would transfer most large, multistate class action lawsuits to federal court, fulfilling one of President Bush (news - web sites)'s second-term goals.

The aim of the bill was to protect businesses and stop lawyers from reaping huge profits by filing suits in carefully selected state courts.

The legislation, given final congressional approval by the House on a 279-149 vote, would ban state courts from hearing large multistate class action lawsuits. Such courts have been known for issuing multimillion-dollar verdicts like they did against tobacco companies.

Niiiice

LA Times:

WASHINGTON — The latest chapter in the legal history of torture is being written by American pilots who were beaten and abused by Iraqis during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. And it has taken a strange twist.

The Bush administration is fighting the former prisoners of war in court, trying to prevent them from collecting nearly $1 billion from Iraq that a federal judge awarded them as compensation for their torture at the hands of Saddam Hussein's regime.

The rationale: Today's Iraqis are good guys, and they need the money.

The case abounds with ironies. It pits the U.S. government squarely against its own war heroes and the Geneva Convention.

Many of the pilots were tortured in the same Iraqi prison, Abu Ghraib, where American soldiers abused Iraqis 15 months ago. Those Iraqi victims, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has said, deserve compensation from the United States.

At least they're consistent.

To think it wasn't even doctors doing the torturing, or the pharmy companies running the show, and they still can't get paid.

Zactly

Dowd:

I am very impressed with James Guckert, a k a Jeff Gannon.

How often does an enterprising young man, heralded in press reports as both a reporter and a contributor to such sites as Hotmilitarystud.com, Workingboys.net, Militaryescorts .com, MilitaryescortsM4M.com and Meetlocalmen.com, get to question the president of the United States?

Who knew that a hotmilitarystud wanting to meetlocalmen could so easily get to be face2face with the commander in chief?

It's hard to believe the White House could hit rock bottom on credibility again, but it has, in a bizarre maelstrom that plays like a dark comedy. How does it credential a man with a double life and a secret past?

It's easy: Hypocrites receive top billing. Or:

With the Bushies, if you're their friend, anything goes. If you're their critic, nothing goes. They're waging a jihad against journalists - buying them off so they'll promote administration programs, trying to put them in jail for doing their jobs and replacing them with ringers.

That seems right.

How Dare They

Be independent:

Some public television executives said that running PBS was a thankless job, and that managing a far-flung network composed of independent fiefs around the country was a particularly daunting assignment. They also said they were facing larger issues that would challenge any executive, like increased competition from the cable industry.

Corporate underwriters have been less willing to finance PBS programs, which has left the network increasingly dependent on Washington, where Republicans criticize its programming as elitist and liberal.

The network has also struggled to develop popular new shows.

I don't trust anyone in government who consistently wants to cut funding for the arts, and guess who those people are...

Interesting

I'm just curious if George Sr. & Babs raised George to not have sex as a youngster, and whether he listened. Mine did. I actually did listen, believe it or not.

If he didn't listen then how can he expect others to? He has all these expectations of others who don't own silver spoons.

I think it's more likely they tried to raise him well and he didn't listen than the other way around.

Just Imagine

Joe Conason:

Imagine the media explosion if a male escort had been discovered operating as a correspondent in the Clinton White House. Imagine that he was paid by an outfit owned by Arkansas Democrats and had been trained in journalism by James Carville. Imagine that this gentleman had been cultivated and called upon by Mike McCurry or Joe Lockhart—or by President Clinton himself. Imagine that this "journalist" had smeared a Republican Presidential candidate and had previously claimed access to classified documents in a national-security scandal.

Then imagine the constant screaming on radio, on television, on Capitol Hill, in the Washington press corps—and listen to the placid mumbling of the "liberal" media now.

Oh, you don't know about this story? What a surprise.

Fantasy Hockey

I'm starting my own league, and it's the REAL FANTASY!

Each week we imagine what it would be like to have a league. Pure fantasy.

I'm looking for creative types who can envision quadruple overtime games like the one Pat Lafontaine won for the Isles.

At least they can't take away our dreams.

Ohio's Odd Numbers

Chris Hitchens wrote a piece for Vanity Fair discussing aspects of Ohio's Presidential race. This blog here provides an exerpt.

I've yet to hear a defense on how this came about aside from ignoring it.

One glaring issue is when there are voting irregularities it seems the democrats keep getting shortchanged, and not the other way around. If it computer malfunction was the cause one would think it would affect the two parties evenly, yet that's rarely the case. If it has happened, and I do believe computers can certainly be problematic, it's not overwhelming, or consistent, like the problems facing the democratic candidate.

I guess the computers just want to be good employees, and being that Republicans own companies like Diebold it makes sense.

Let us not forget, Hitchens supports the mess in Iraq.

That's Nice

MosNews:

Holding up dozens of anti-Semitic signs, hundreds of people rallied in central Moscow’s Tverskaya Street on Saturday to protest the arrest warrant out for nationalist leader Boris Mironov, wanted on charges of inciting interracial hatred.

The party that apparently organized the rally — the National Power Party of Russia — was banned by the Justice Ministry for inciting interracial hatred. On one poster held up at the rally, it identified itself as the party of “those who are ready to fight the Jewish yoke.”

They want more ham in the eggs.

Los Puertas

 

"The Gates"

Not that exciting, to be honest. I'm not sure anyone actually was excited by it, but I'm sure I wasn't.

The gates themselves are pretty cool, especially how they lined them all up straight regardless of the incline. I pushed on a few to see how sturdy they are. Pretty sturdy! A friend mentioned to me one of Christo and Jean-Claude's other "artistic works", the Umbrellas, actually killed two people, so I wanted to see know if "The Gates" had such potential. Seems pretty safe.

Is it worth going to see? I guess so. Actually, on a beautiful day like today the gates actually detract from Central Park's beauty, which bothered me slightly. If the ground had been completely snow covered it would look so much more amazing, so there's hope for that. To visit it once on a day like today hardly tells the whole story, assuming there is one. I was initially taken back by how many there are, but was sorta wishing they weren't there at all by the end. I would also enjoy it more in the fall when the trees are full of different colors as well.

Christo told the press "The Gates" were for the two of them, and no one else, like any piece of art, and that if others enjoy them, so be it. Those are not exact words, but it's close, and frankly I'm glad they didn't make it for me because if you did it was a waste of your time.

Lastly, I wish it had been pulled off 25 years ago, as planned, because photography was so limited compared to today where everyone has a camera. There was no need for me to have one since I can rely on better photographers to snap shots for me. Had it been done years ago I think I may have found the pictures more exciting for some reason. In fact, the website photos are better than anything I would have come up with.

It is a good reason to visit Central Park, but then again, there are just so many reasons to go anyway.

I'll say this: It's probably a great week to get over to the MoMA!

Help

If you like music, particularly Chris Harford & WEEN, then this might be something you want to attend:

Special Benefit Concert 2/17

Last Monday our friends Bill McNamara and his wife Maura lost their house and all of their belongings when a construction crew ruptured a gas main in the street in front of their house. Their house exploded and they were very lucky to escape uninjured. We are having a benefit concert at John and Peter's in New Hope on Thursday 2/17 to help raise money to get them back on their feet again. Appearing will be Chris Harford and the Band of Changes (Dean Ween, Dave Dreiwitz, and Claude Coleman), Gringo Starr (featuring Dickie Moist on vocals), and HALO (featuring Cribber on drugs). Please come out to this special show and support a worthy cause. Tickets are $25. For more info please call the bar at 215-862-5981 or visit John & Peters Website.

La Dee Dah

More of the same:

WASHINGTON - (KRT) - Military lawyers at the Guantanamo Bay terrorist prison tried to stop inhumane interrogations, but were ignored by senior Pentagon officials, The New York Daily News has learned.

Judge advocates - uniformed legal advisers known as JAGs who were assigned to a secret war crimes task force - repeatedly objected to aggressive interrogations by a separate intelligence unit at Camp Delta, where Taliban and al-Qaida suspects have been jailed since January 2002.

But Pentagon officials "didn't think this was a big deal, so they just ignored the JAGs," a senior military source said.

Where are our site conservatives to tell us why this is ok?

I notice they only comment on the really poignant stuff.

Bizarro World

This is too much:

"We expected to fight cuts to rural programs under the Clinton administration," he said. "But those who are currently advocating these draconian cuts would not be in office today if it weren't for rural America. These cuts disproportionately target essential programs in rural communities while turning a blind eye to the wasteful spending that is rampant in many big cities across the country."

So what you're saying is you thought Clinton was for cutting government farm aid, and Bush was for it? Therefore, you voted for him?

I guess red-staters are about to figure out the harsh reality of Bush over the next 4 years.

As for Ag programs, THEY SHOULD BE CUT.

The US does not have a competitive advantage in farming, and farming is one of the only ways for third world nations to rise out of poverty. It's called FREE TRADE. It's the type of study Paul Krugman has been involved with for years.

Most of the government aid to farms isn't going to the small farmers (however many there are), but to HUGE FARMS which are practically corporations. It's a joke.

Bush, Clinton, and every other politician who is for cutting the aid is correct in doing so. The red state politicians (and places like Vermont) are all too happy to take US tax dollars to keep their constituents farms afloat, and this needs to be the beginning of the end.

It's a great fight worth watching because you'll get to see true hypocrisy on display.

Organized Crime?

Pretty much:

WASHINGTON (AP) U.S. officials in postwar Iraq paid a contractor by stuffing $2 million worth of crisp bills into his gunnysack and routinely made cash payments around Baghdad from a pickup truck, a former official with the U.S. occupation government says.

Because the country lacked a functioning banking system, contractors and Iraqi ministry officials were paid with bills taken from a basement vault in one of Saddam Hussein's palaces that served as headquarters for the Coalition Provisional Authority, former CPA official Frank Willis said.

Officials from the CPA, which ruled Iraq from June 2003 to June 2004, would count the money when it left the vault, but nobody kept track of the cash after that, Willis said.

Stop Loss = Draft

This is the most overlooked story EVER.

David Qualls, who joined the Arkansas National Guard for a year, is one of 40,000 troops in Iraq who have been informed that their enlistment has been extended until December 24th, 2031. "I've served five months past my one-year obligation," says Qualls, the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit challenging the military with breach of contract. "It's time to let me go back to my life. It's a question of fairness, and not only for myself. This is for the thousands of other people that are involuntarily extended in Iraq. Let us go home."

There is a draft.

The United States Military is telling its reservists they can re-enlist, but if they don't they will be kept until 2031. The military is claiming they will only hold most reservists for up til 18 months, but after you've served your duty what right do they have to even do that?

The recruitment goals for the reserves is down 50 percent, and you can be sure re-enlistment is down because of the wars and treatment of the troops.

When you hold someone in the military you are basically cheating them out of life.

They served their commitment, and now they want to get back to their lives. Instead they're being threatened. That's really good for morale.

There should be a draft, and the first to go should be all the children of the people who voted for George W. Bush.

Confused

By this article:

LITTLE ROCK, Ark., Feb. 14 - In front of more than 5,000 cheering constituents in a North Little Rock sports arena, Gov. Mike Huckabee took the former Janet McCain to be his lawfully wedded wife Monday night, just as he did nearly 31 years ago, for better or for worse, in sickness and in health, until death do them part.

This time, although the actual vows were not repeated, the emphasis was clearly on the "until death" pledge.

Upgrading their vows to that of a covenant marriage, a legally binding contract available only in Arkansas, Arizona and Louisiana, the Huckabees hope to jump-start a conservative movement that has shown little sign of moving in recent years. A covenant marriage commits a couple to counseling before any separation and limits divorce to a handful of grounds, like adultery or abuse.

In the audience there were gay rights activists calling for equal rights. After reading this I don't see how it's an affront to gays. I am sure there is latent homophobia, if not outright, existing in many of the 5,000 attendees of this ceremony, but Governor Huckabee is affirming marriage, and not necessarily between a man and woman. The focus here seems to be on the ease in which people can get divorced (Young Wall St conservatives should tremble), and frankly, it's too easy.

On Route 18 South in the town I grew up there is a huge sign reading "DIVORCE", and there is also a similar sign on the NJ Turnpike just past Exit 12 Northbound advertising divorce as well. It's disgusting.

I believe people have a right to divorce, especially under the circumstances the Arkansas, Arizona, and Louisiana laws make exception for, but it really should be a last option, not an easy one. If it was more difficult to get divorced and the penalties more severe maybe a lot more people would reconsider getting married in the first place, and avoid having children. There should be a greater penalty for those who divorce after having children since they're the ones who bear the brunt in divorces.

All this aside, it's annoying to see how an affirmation of marriage is viewed as a partisan issue simply by its placement in the newspaper, and mention of gay activists and President Bush's spending $200 Million to promote marriage. It doesn't mention it, but how many of those 5,000 people in attendance voted for Huckabee and Bush? I'd bet ALL OF THEM. I'd also bet if Huckabee was a Democrat those 5,000 marriage supporters wouldn't be there, and this would be viewed by Republicans as a ploy.

A certain group of people have claimed standard marriage as their own, but I'd love to know the divorce percentages broken down by political affiliation. That's be interesting.

We suck.

No Missile Left Behind!

It fails again!

When asked for comment President Bush said, "Well, our education system fails us every year, but you don't hear people complaining about all the money we dump into that government program. It's hypocriticickal."

Symmetry

Would be if Allad Allawi remains president of Iraq after losing the election.

The NHL

I'm really surprised the NHL cannot come to a labor agreement.

It's clearly the lowest rated sport of the big four, and that should tell you something.

Fact is, live, the NHL is far and away the best sport, and yet attendance remains below average even for the good teams. One has to wonder why.

First off, the league should not have expanded into Carolina, Florida, Atlanta, possibly Anaheim, and I'm sure I can think of a few others. These are not places where people care about hockey. In fact, most of these people drink bottled water, so they don't even come across ICE that often!

When the Tampa Bay Lightning are in the Stanley Cup led by players with names like Lecavalier and St. Louis you know something isn't right. These are French Canadiens from Quebec where there is no longer a team!

Second, who is leading the NHLPA? Here are the current leaders:

Trevor Linden - Medicine Hat, Alberta
Bob Boughner - Windsor, Ontario
Vincent Damphousse - Ile-Bizard, Quebec
Daniel Alfredsson - Gothenburg, Sweden
Bill Guerin - Worcester, Massachusetts
Trent Klatt - Robbinsdale, Minnesota
Arturs Irbe - Riga, Russia

And now, here's my point.

All these players are from places where socialized medicine, safety nets, and things of that nature are practiced by their governments. However, the league itself, made up of players from all over Europe, Canada, and America seems as money driven and clueless as any other. Actually, they seem even more clueless than the other three.

Hockey does not rake in the cash!

Certainly, the NHL has pretty uniforms and some decent marketing/advertising, but just because these players deem themselves to be on par with baseball, football, and basketball players does not mean they are. Just because their jerseys hang along side Lebron James' does not mean they are along side of Lebron James.

I think this is a real problem for the NHL.

If a sport ever needed a salary cap for survival it is hockey. If ever there was a sport where the players would actually understand this concept, and accept it, it's hockey. I mean, afterall, many of them grew up being governed by similar concepts, and yet all of a sudden a cap cannot be agreed upon.

I am never surprised when football and basketball players are totally cash driven, ex. fighting the "franchise tag, and things of that nature because they are completely American, or at least the union is. Hockey is different though. Yet the NBA and NFL still have types of caps, but not hockey.

Another aspect is the education of these players. Sure, a lot of these hockey players from other countries do not goto college, but their education is usually better than that of the basketball phenom from Philadelphia. Many of the American players goto very good colleges throughout New England and the upper Midwest. They receive, I would think, quality educations. That's just reality. Yet, they seem as dumb as any other league, if not dumber.

Greed is a powerful thing.

Third, the owners have every right to not lose money. I fault them for allowing expansion which they believed would bring cash to the sport, but that's another story. These people OWN THE TEAMS. They have a right to make more cash than the players do. Without the owners there are no teams. The owners are complaining about losing money, and how can they not be? The Devils have won 3 Stanley Cups recent years yet they're not selling out in the populated state per square mile in the US!

I'm sure the owners are at fault on some level. Surely, they always are. They are businessmen with power, and to be that there must be some greed, but the players have got to be kidding me to go on like this.

Suck it up, take less money, make more here then you will anywhere else, and play the damn game.

I'm sure a cap is coming or else there will be no hockey in America. Frankly, I'll be bummed out because it's a sports I really do enjoy, especially during the playoffs. Only the NCAA Tournament can touch the Stanley Cup Playoffs (assuming teams like Tampa are not in it).

I would like to see a salary cap so the game can survive, and so Canada can continue to have teams.

I would also like to see these southern teams fold so I can watch teams like the Blackhawks, Bruins, Rangers, and Islanders in the playoffs again. These are the places with true fans, where hockey thrives.

You think you'd know who Pat Lafontaine was if he was playing in Tampa?

Jose

I find it entertaining when Tony LaRussa and Jack McKeon on are on ESPN talking about Jose Canseco's claims of steroid use, and the use of them by others.

“I couldn’t disagree more. I categorically refuse to accept anything that Jose says about Mark.” LaRussa says that the claims about McGwire are driven by greed and jealousy.

McKeon said on ESPN

"Look at the source..."

While it is true Canseco admittedly used drugs, steroids, drove fast cars, and beat his wife, none of these things makes him a liar. It's very easy to smear when things like that are in the record, but I really think these managers are engaged in hardcore damage control.

Is everything in Canseco's book accurate? I doubt it, highly. Considering how much partying he did I would be surprised if he could remmeber everything. However, in his book he calls out Ivan Rodriguez, Juan Gonzalez, and Rafael Palmeiro for doping.

Rodriguez was once skinny. Now he's a tank.

Gonzalez is a physical freak of nature.

Palmeiro, for years was a great contact hitter with a sweet swing. Check the records now, for this guy's power numbers are off the charts later in his career. For years he had good numbers, and occassionally in the high 30s. It was not until 1998, the year of the McGwire/Sosa Juice Fest that he too eclipsed the 40 mark, and then did it 3 more times.

The year Canseco became a Texas Rangers player is the year Palmeiro really started killing the ball. What a coincidence.

Just look at history. While most guys tend to slow down later in life these players took it to another level throughout the 90s.

Jose Canseco is far from a good person, and I'm sure he's trying to grab a cash bag, but I'm not about to write this guy off as being dishonest when it comes to the juice. Sure, he's doing it at a time when he benefits from it, and takes no heat, but I think he's more likely to be forthright because of it. Doesn't make him any less trashy, or me more likely to read his broken english on paper.

I Almost Forget

It's the most pointless holiday of all time!

If you thought chocolate was addicting, I am bringing back two things more addicting than the classic sweet.

Game 1

Game 2

Cheers!

Why Write It?

Spurred on by Don Law's comments to write this, I am often moved by his concerned thoughts on humanity, for he gets it right. So many others get it right too, but we're preaching to the choir, and I'm certainly part of the "we" in the "we're."

The New York Times has written an Op-Ed about how the President should handle budget problems, tax cuts, etc.

Congress can avert this crisis-in-waiting by forcing Mr. Bush to be serious about deficit reduction. The first-term tax cuts should be allowed to lapse. Cuts that are not yet in effect should not be allowed to begin. And no new programs should be started that require megaborrowing. If the president doesn't see that he has more important tasks than cutting taxes for the rich and undermining Social Security, Congress should set him straight.

I think we're past the point where we expect this guy to make any decisions a normal, rationale, realistic, caring person would, and should, make. That's why when I see a Times Op/Ed like this I wonder what the point is. I guess they need to keep writing about what the right thing to do is, or at least what they perceive it to be. I mean, afterall, there are so many Americans who have faded from even thinking about Bush after the election since all their balloons were deflated. That's why it's important for the Times to not cave, and to keep writing about what's right, even if they are preaching to the choir. The administration would like nothing more than to watch the world's newsrooms shift rightward more so than they already have.

With regard to the Op/Ed itself I've developed my own theory on Bush that explains why he doesn't read the papers, and why he continues to make poor choices whenfaced with facts.

President Bush was basically given everything he has. He really never had to worry about anything in his life, and so he doesn't. His father/family gave him the presidency, and all his business contacts/deals. In his private life everything he touched basically turned to crap.

George W. Bush views himself as a person who was saved by Jesus, and his wife. These two things have nothing to do with what has been given to him. Therefore, he relies on these things wholly because it gives him cover, character, and individuality. If he didn't have these things to look to as to why he's succesful he couldn't view himself as being a strong person, who actually made personal sacrifice, and choices, to reach this point of his life. All he would have is what has been given to him, and that doesn't make him a strong person at all. He knows that well.

In GW Bush's simplistic mind, and worldview, all he has is this imaginary concept of who he actually is, regardless if the FACTS continue to tell a different reality/story than the one he has conjured up.

If God, as Bush says, hadn't chosen him to be president then it would have to be his father, and to him that is probably unacceptable. It's so obvious.

It's really no different when it comes to taxes, and things of that nature. He truly believes he needs to make an impression that is lasting on America, so he has his drastic tax cuts. Obviously, the people guiding him believe in the 'trickle-down' absurdity they preach, and he is just running with it. No one else has taken this approach, not even Reagan (who actually raised taxes). Therefore, Bush needs to make something all his own, again. He puts forward radical changes solely because it hasn't been done. We never hear about the "great" choices he makes, but only that they're "bold" choices. He wants the statue when it's all said and done, for there are many statues of his idol.

When the facts state the rich are getting richer Bush is unfazed. That's just a sidenote to his greater overall plan on allowing investors, and others, to have control of "their own money" to make decisions, and he hopes spending is that decision. Theoretically, if everyone just keeps spending, the money will trickle down, create jobs, etc. Regardless of the FACT the rich have ways of sheltering their money, and not paying their fair share of taxes like the middle class of this country. When Bush hears "the rich are getting richer" this doesn't deter him, for he doesn't care. He expects that to happen, and believes it needs to in order for his plan to work, irrespective of the FACT this country's economic system is clearly works in a different way; one not prepared to handle his drastic plans. He doesn't know any better, for he has faith, and this is his plan, unlike his father's which involved raising taxes. Must be seen as stronger than Dad!!!

George W. Bush is living in a dreamland. It's not just a joke when you hear people say it. It's the real thing. He needs to live in it to justify who he is, and what he does. In order to be perceived as a success to himself he needs to concoct ways to make this true.

There's a reason he admits to not reading the newspapers, but rather he has people like Condi Rice give him the news. It's because he doesn't want to know the reality for that would just make his dream unstable. Therefore he ignores Op/Eds like the NYTIMES' and so many others. The FACTS just get in the way of his dream.

This is truly a historic time. He's not so much a puppet, but rather he's just an actor, more so than Reagan could ever be. Reagan could play a part, but when he got down from the podium he went back to being who he was, and actually listening to two different sides, both in his cabinet. Bush has no idea who he is, so he's just acting his way through life, hoping the script he has written for himself doesn't end.

Sidenote: As for Congress "setting him straight" that's never going to happen, or at least the conservatives hope it doesn't.

There are many concerned Congressfolk on both sides of the aisle, but the hardcore conservatives live for Bush. He provides them with a cover they could only dream of.

Think about it a bit: here's a guy who is pretty much irresponsible, so he's the perfect guy to blame. This is why conservatives always refer to "his leadership." When S hits the F, he's the guy, not me. Typical, blame someone else, conservativism.

Bush cuts taxes, spends big, bombs whenever, tells lies, whatever it takes. Perfect for the conservatives. As long as they can keep a strong hold on power, change the courts, pay less taxes, they don't care what he does, as long as they can lay the blame.

Right now so many people in this country lap it up, and look to Bush as the leader, not Congress. Cover is in effect.

Certainly there are those in Congress who will make a stand, whether it be over Social Security, Taxes, the budget, or all three, but so many will not. Bush is the perfect conservative for these people since he embodies (without knowing it) the selfishness in governing that is so on par with their beliefs.

As long as taxes are cut, monies flow to their districts, but away from government programs for the needy (since if you're conservative your district probably isn't based on what the neediest need), all is good, since, like Bush, they won't be around when it's time to judge these people. They live for today, not tomorrow, and as far as today goes Bush is almost perfect.

Grammy

I'm sure Ray Charles never saw this coming. Is there an award he could have won but didn't? Give me a break. I've heard some of those tracks, and while pretty good, it's not THAT GOOD. So ridiculous.

The good money says, Jamie Foxx for an Oscar. How dare we disrespect the memory of Ray.

Some other personal notes:

Best Alternative to Wilco, "A Ghost is Born"? Puhhhlease. That album is average at best. Wilco's "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" from 2002 shits on it, yet in 2002 it wasn't even nominated.

Is there anyone with ears, who likes Alt music, that believes "A Ghost..." should win a Grammy? How about the Arcade Fire for a nomination (and countless others)?

Also, Bill Frisell (my fave jazz guitarist) won for "Unspeakable" (can be heard right here), which is a great album, no doubt, but is it the best Jazz album of the year?

Does the Recording Academy even listen to all the jazz albums? I mean, Dave Binney's album "Welcome to Life" is a much better jazz album, at least to me, even though it's more mainstream than is Frisell's. Plus, Frisell's bassist and drummer play on both albums, so it's not as if the Academy would be unfamiliar with the players themselves.

I think it'd be better if the Academy admitted they're not looking to give out awards to what is best, but rather, what is the best of what is mainstream.

The show would be so much more entertaining if certain unknowns would actually go up against the knowns.

Had Wilco gone up against Coldplay's "Parachutes" in 2002 I would've been more impressed, rather than giving Wilco a Grammy 3 years later for something not so great.

I guess we've reached the point where alternative awards for music, film, and what have you, can be deemed accurate. Then again, it's been like that with the news for at least 5 years.

Classic

Where does one begin:

A security screener at Newark Liberty International Airport was reassigned yesterday after failing to spot a butcher knife in a passenger's pocketbook.

The passenger, 27-year-old Katrina Bell of Greensboro, N.C., was waiting to board a flight in Terminal A yesterday morning when she opened her bag and discovered she had forgotten to remove the knife, said Bell's sister, Tikisha Bell Gowens, also of Greensboro. The two women, former Newark residents, were traveling together.

"She said to me, 'Oh my God, I have this butcher knife in my pocketbook,'" Bell Gowens said. "My first thought was, 'They're going to think we're terrorists.'"

The women promptly informed airport personnel, who summoned Port Authority police officers and officials with the U.S. Transportation Security Administration, which employs the airport's screeners. The sisters were not charged, and while Bell went on with her trip, Bell Gowens remained behind with a relative in Newark because of the delay.

The exact size of the knife was in dispute. TSA spokeswoman Ann Davis said the knife had a 5-inch blade, while Bell Gowens said the blade measured 7 to 8 inches. Bell, who had been carrying the knife, was traveling last night and could not be reached.

Bell Gowens said her sister had placed the knife in her bag Thursday night before embarking on a blind date.

"My aunt made her take it just in case," Bell Gowens said.
Fortunately, she said, the date went well.

I guess I need to ask my dates a few more questions, such as, "Are you carrying?"

Damn, Did We Do That?

Ooops! Our bad.

When the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq two years ago, it envisioned a quick handover to handpicked allies in a secular government that would be the antithesis of Iran's theocracy -- potentially even a foil to Tehran's regional ambitions.

But, in one of the greatest ironies of the U.S. intervention, Iraqis instead went to the polls and elected a government with a strong religious base -- and very close ties to the Islamic republic next door. It is the last thing the administration expected from its costly Iraq policy -- $300 billion and counting, U.S. and regional analysts say.

Well, don't you worry. We're not about to waste another $300 bill to fix it.

Yet, the fearless one did have these unexpected comments:

In a statement, President Bush praised Iraqis "for defying terrorist threats and setting their country on the path of democracy and freedom. And I congratulate every candidate who stood for election and those who will take office once the results are certified."

Right On

Not often Tom Friedman is right on, but this is RIGHT ON THE MONEY.

By adamantly refusing to do anything to improve energy conservation in America, or to phase in a $1-a-gallon gasoline tax on American drivers, or to demand increased mileage from Detroit's automakers, or to develop a crash program for renewable sources of energy, the Bush team is - as others have noted - financing both sides of the war on terrorism. We are financing the U.S. armed forces with our tax dollars, and, through our profligate use of energy, we are generating huge windfall profits for Saudi Arabia, Iran and Sudan, where the cash is used to insulate the regimes from any pressure to open up their economies, liberate their women or modernize their schools, and where it ends up instead financing madrassas, mosques and militants fundamentally opposed to the progressive, pluralistic agenda America is trying to promote. Now how smart is that?