:(

Posting will be light from here through the weekend.

It's one of those days.

Another First in Pro Sports

Colin Powell might become an owner of the Washington Nationals. This would make him the first black owner to be thought of as white to own a major professional sports franchise.

Oh, Lookie Here!

Who woulda thunk it?

Nearly a dozen detainees at the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba told FBI interrogators that guards had mistreated copies of the Koran, including one who said in 2002 that guards "flushed a Koran in the toilet," according to new FBI documents released today.

The summaries of FBI interviews, obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union as part of an ongoing lawsuit, also include allegations that the Koran was kicked, thrown to the floor and withheld as punishment and that guards mocked Muslim prisoners during prayers.

As I said from day one you knew it was going to be true. I'm putting a timer on Scott McClellan's apology, that douche.

The Crowd Cheers!!!

Liverpool wins!

One of the craziest games you've never seen.

RIDICULOUS.

Future of War

I was sorta freaked out yesterday when I received The New Republic mailer and there was an article by Gregg Easterbrook titled "The End of War?"

I can't stand Easterbrook, so I was stunned to think he had just written the article addressing thoughts I was having. To give him credit, he does make some good points in this one, but it's also littered with his standard stupidity.

It occurred to me, while devouring a 1 lb burger cooked up by Shwilson and Agent Hynd during the final episode of "24", the United States might find itself completely against war really soon. It had nothing to do with Jack Bauer or Marwan.

The gist of what I'm thinking is pretty simple. There's probably no way were ever going to goto war with Europe, that's a given. Then you look at Southeast Asia, and the memories of Korea and Vietnam are way too ingrained for Americans to support an assault on that region. That's really why Kim Jong Il can act with impunity during this nuclear stand off. A war in Asia wouldn't be much different than the last one. In fact, it could be worse. Now we have a war in Iraq, a country we deemed to be ripe for a transition into democracy. Obviously, this is unlikely.

Europe is generally stable as far as major powers go, but the Middle East and Asia are still crapshoots. Americans like guarantees, not crapshoots. The first war in Iraq, and the lies, made Americans think this would be a cakewalk. I mean, afterall, we had SHOCK AND AWE! I think that campaign is still ongoing, so it's a good thing no one cares.

There will not be any regions left in the world where America is willing to use overwhelming force in battle once this Middle East War ends. Americans won't be supportive of these wars, and soldiers won't be running to sign up for them. This could be another reason why Secretary Rumsfeld supports remaking the military with technology: avoiding body counts.

It's possible we could launch missile attacks , but full scale war will be most difficult for Presidents and Congresses to bring us to since no one likes a quagmire.

I guess there's always Africa, but unless we discover enormous amounts of natural gas and oil there won't be a reason. Aftearll, there is perpetual war there and no one seems to care already. Unless a nation in Africa becomes powerful chances are we'll never fight there. But if a nation in Africa did become powerful, well, my advice? Hide!

Another Mix

To get you through your day.

BTTB-X-Series: United States of Audio

United States Of Audio - "BTTB-Intro 3" (BTTB 2005)
Southside Break Crew - "Time To Rock The Party" (Swedish Brandy 2003)
Boca 45 - "Air Drums" (Hombre 2001)
EPMD - "So Watcha Sayin'" (Fresh 1989)
Steinski + Mass Media - "It's Up To You (Instrumental)" (Ninja Tune 1992)
Young Holt Trio - "Wack Wack" (Brunswick 1967)
Cash Money & Marvelous - "The Mighty Hard Rocker (Instrumental)" (Sleeping Bag 1988)
Edan - "Fumbling Over Words That Rhyme (acapella)" (Lewis 2004)
The Orb - "Perpetual Dawn" (Island 1991)
Original Concept - "Can U Feel It? 88!" (Def Jam 1988)
Coldcut - "Last Night A Cliche Saved My Life" (Ninja Tune 1998)
Martin Brew - "Sand Steppin" (Fat City 1999)
The Nilsmen - "The Sandstep" (RJR 196x)
Rufus Thomas - "Do The Funky Penguin (Part 2)" (Stax 1971)
Selectah - "Wede Man" (Hoody 1993)
James Brown - "Good Foot (Part 1)" (Polydor 1972)
Grandmaster Flash & The Furious 5 - "Super Rappin'" (Enjoy 1979)
DJ Dren - "Old Skoolin Part 2" (33Throwdown 2004)
De La Soul - "A Roller Skate Jam Named Saturday (Disco Fever Mix)" (Tommy Boy 1991)
Jackie Wilson - "Light My Fire" (Brunswick 1969)
Pete Rock & C.L. Smooth - "Creator (Instrumental)" (Elektra 1991)
LL Cool J - "Illegal Search" (Def Jam 1989)
Young MC - "Know How (Instrumental)" (Delicious Vinyl 1989)
Time Zone - "The Wildstyle" (Celluloid 1983)
The Ballistic Brothers - "Peckings" (Junior Boys Own 1995)
Sugarloaf Gangsters - "Samba Swat" (G.A.M.M. 2005)
DJ Food - "Importance Of Body Rhythm" (Ninja Tune 1992)
DJ Prao-D + Boogie B - "Breaks Seminar pt. 6" (G.A.M.M. 2005)
DJ Revolution - "Juggle Me (Part 2)" (Ground Control 2000)
Bonobo - "Pick Up" (Ninja Tune 2003)

The Final

Is today on ESPN 2 at 2:45 PM:

It might not quite garner the same attention as this week's latest installment of American Idle, but this morning's Champions League Final is a classic David versus Goliath, and in sports they're usually worth watching.

The game, which will be televised live in 233 countries, is the single biggest annual sporting event on the planet -- eclipsing the Super Bowl -- and will be played in Istanbul, Turkey, between Italy's AC Milan, and England's Liverpool.

How About Just a 180?

Anderson Cooper is such a douche bag.

If you saw him interview Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware on CNN last night you'd know what I'm talking about. Castle is the sponsor of the new stem-cell bill President Bush plans to veto, that will pass both houses of Congress.

Here's how it sounded to me:

"Congressman Castle, the White House claims your bill kills babies."

"Well, I think that language is quite inflamatory, and insulting," responds Castle.

"Ok, but the White House disagrees with you, and thinks you're killing babies."

"Listen, we're not killing anything. These are embryos that are being discarded. We think rather than discard them at the clinics we should be doing research on them to help save lives."

"The President was surrounded by children today who were born from embryos that weren't killed," says Cooper.

"This is not killing babies. It's saving lives."

"Ok, well thanks for coming on to discuss your bill to kill babies. Much appreciated."

The S.S. Bullshit

You watch, in the next few weeks Congressional Republicans will be running from Social Security, and the President will sign any bill that gets to his desk. All he cares about is one sentence: We saved Social Security for our seniors.

That's it. That's all he cares about. The photo-op, and nothing more. Republicans have no desire to go down a road of tampering with a program that has received broad support over 70 years.

Out of this will come some kind of compromise, I'm sure. One that neither fixes a problem, or creates private accounts. Democrats should refuse anything short of a real solution. They are not the ones who dredged this issue up month after month solely to avoid news about Iraq. Where was this debate between George Bush and John Kerry? When did they ever discuss Social Security at length? This was foisted upon us after the election, and of course it's clearly not an overly pressing matter. Sure, something needs to be done, and no one denies that, but it's not nearly as pressing as all our other problems.

Democrats should hold the line, and not settle before the 2006 elections on this. If they lose the battle with the voters, fine, so be it. If Bush tries to portray them as obstructionist, fine, so be it. But at least fight the battle during the election season unlike Bush was willing to do last time around.

There are prime examples of retirees and the middle class getting screwed left and right. Have confidence in your plan to fix Social Security, and the middle class's ability to see things for how they are. Don't settle on a plan that neither fixes a real problem, and gives this stupid prick any credit.

Is there a democrat in the world who could possibly stand that stupid, shit-eating, smug grin that would come as he signed some half-ass Social Security legislation?

I'd rather lose, watch things get worse, than give him that facade of a day. Again, things have to get worse before they get better, and if people are going to make stupid choices then they deserve it.

There's nothing like the real thing, and some people are going to have to live it to realize it.

Odd

This is the human at it's 5th stage President Bush, Senator Rick Santorum, and Tom Delay won't touch when it comes to stem-cell research.

This is the human at age 5 President Bush, Senator Rick Santorum, and Tom Delay will touch when it comes to war in Iraq.

The Most

Retarded video ever.

YES!

Reports that Zarqawi is injured, and people are praying for him.

Guess what happens if they kill this guy, or even capture him? NOTHING GOOD! Doesn't take a genius to plan car bombing raids. The guy will be replaced in 5 minutes, and militants will be even more driven now that their leader is dead.

Polls & Puppets

Check out the new Bush/Congress Polls.

Great stuff.

Notice how Congress is taking more heat than Bush the Bold. Strange since he has never vetoed a single bill. No, you didn't misread that. But fear not, he swears he might this week, and of course it's over an issue 70% of Americans disagree with him on. A uniter, not a divider.

Here's the thing about puppets and polls. Bush has 35% of the nation in his camp regardless of what he does. Democrats don't have that number because unlike Bush puppets they engage in deeper thought. Not all of them, for we have our share of morons for sure, but it's clear that liberals/democrats are more likely to analyze things and form an opinion based on the facts. That's probably why more scientists, professors, etc. are moderate to left. The other side, well, more simplistic, more willing to goose step, always want to be right. I notice they don't take an issue, analyze, and figure out where they stand. They stand and then try to figure out excuses to keep the ground. Again, anti-science, if you will. You see this most clearly with money matters, and more and more with faith matters, which can't be proven. A perfect issue for the right.

So Bush the Bold has 35% no matter what, where as the other base is probably around 25%, maybe less, because the left is willing to intellectualy debate an issue without a preconceived answer. When the answer is consistently at odds with the politician that represents them, say Clinton, they will take a stand against that person. Then you combine those folks with the middle and the right, and the numbers will be stacked against someone like Clinton. This wouldn't happen to Bush. His simplistic followers are willing to goose-step just because he's a "values" guy, or a "believer." That's enough for them. You'll hear things like, "Well, it's a hard job, and he's doing the best he can" which really means, "He prays every night, and God will answer those prayers." Sorry, but Clinton, or any Democrat doesn't get that leeway. There are a lot of dumb people in this country. Don't be so surprised by their inability to think on their own.

Bush voters have decided to blame Congress instead of the Preisdent. It's remarkable. Again, never a veto. He has both brances of Congress on his side, but still, it's them, not him. They have faith. He has faith.

You can expect with the Christian Right firmly supporting any candidate that openly displays faith, that candidate will always have higher approval numbers than someone on the other side who has upset his/her base. It's obvious those on the Right are admitting things are going badly because they are focusing their disdain on Congress, not their puppet.

Eventually, when financial matters hit home, and they will, some of this base will erode. They won't give up the religious puppet because that puppet will eventually start spending money on them. Big government won't matter to them as long as Jesus is at the fore, and they're doing better. Religion, regardless of everything else Conservatives stand for will net them at least 30% every time.

Hope this makes sense.

"Kicking the Can"

As my old Professor put it:

"I think they did what the Senate very often does," said Ross K. Baker, a professor of political science at Rutgers University and a longtime student of the Senate. "They kicked the can down the road. They basically postponed a crisis and set up the predicate for another one in the future on the Supreme Court nomination."

Basically, every Senator is scared to hold ground because of 2006 elections, so they'll hopefully handle this another day.

Of course, the issue is going nowhere.

Lets talk blue slips, please.

Hmmm

Never saw this coming:

Senior Bush administration officials reacted with outrage to a Newsweek report that U.S. interrogators had desecrated the Koran at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility, and the magazine retracted the story last week. But allegations of disrespectful treatment of Islam's holy book are far from rare.

An examination of hearing transcripts, court records and government documents, as well as interviews with former detainees, their lawyers, civil liberties groups and U.S. military personnel, reveals dozens of accusations involving the Koran, not only at Guantanamo, but also at American-run detention facilities in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Pentagon is conducting an internal investigation of reported abuses at the naval base in Cuba, led by Air Force Lt. Gen. Randall Schmidt. The administration has refused to say what the inquiry, still weeks from completion, has found so far.

But two years ago, amid allegations of desecration and hunger strikes by inmates, the Army instituted elaborate procedures for sensitive treatment of the Koran at the prison camp. Once the new procedures were in place, complaints there stopped, said the International Committee of the Red Cross, which monitors conditions in prisons and detention facilities.

The allegations, both at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere, contain detailed descriptions of what Muslim prisoners said was mishandling of the Koran — sometimes in a deliberately provocative manner.

In one instance, an Iraqi detainee alleged that a soldier had a guard dog carry a copy of the Koran in its mouth. In another, guards at Guantanamo were said to have scrawled obscenities inside Korans.

Other prisoners said Korans were kicked across floors, stomped on and thrown against walls. One said a soldier urinated on his copy, and others said guards ridiculed the religious text, declaring that Allah's words would not save detainees.

Some of the alleged incidents appear to have been inadvertent or to have resulted from U.S. personnel's lack of understanding about how sensitive Muslim detainees might be to mishandling of the Koran. In several cases, for instance, copies were allegedly knocked about during scuffles with prisoners who refused to leave their cells.

In other cases, the allegations seemed to describe instances of deliberate disrespect.

"They tore it and threw it on the floor," former detainee Mohammed Mazouz said of guards at Guantanamo Bay. "They urinated on it. They walked on top of the Koran. They used the Koran like a carpet."

Can we stop pretending that soldiers who guard prisoners are geniuses? I'm sure a few of them can do simple math, and what not, but if you're a prison guard in the armed forces that's pretty much the lowest of the low.

I'm not surprised Koran desecration has taken place. I'm sure most of these soldiers are either Christian or not religious, and don't give a shit about the Koran, or the feelings of prisoners, in this case Muslims.

Seriously, think about the biggest douche/bully you went to high school with, now imagine him in the Army guarding Muslim prisoners in 100 + degree heat. Think he's going to be cool?

I'm not saying they're all idiots, but I'm sure there's a lot of idiots, and they're the ones who do these things. The only difference is their teachers look the other way, unlike high school, which I'm sure was tough enough for many of them.

Malkmus

I believe the new Stephen Malkmus cd comes out today.

You can hear some live versions of the new songs here. Some of them sound little like the cd version.

The album is phenomenal.

Is This Talked About?

With the supposed Senate compromise on judges completed I am wondering what happened to a certain other policy. One that Republicans used against Clinton for 8 years, and one that make sure Janice Rogers Brown never gets an "up or down vote on the floor."

Senate Republicans also had significant influence after Clinton judicial nominees were selected. However, like other Congressional procedures, the blue slip policy can be-and has been-misused. After he assumed control of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the mid-1990s, Senator Hatch began to rigorously enforce a blue slip policy under which nominations could not move forward without the consent of both home state Senators. In 1998, this policy was made explicit on the blue slips themselves, which stated that “[n]o further proceedings on this nominee will be scheduled until both blue slips have been returned by the nominee’s home state senators.” Suddenly, a policy that had helped to force consultation and consensus was transformed into a vehicle for partisan obstruction.

Specific information on whether and when Senators returned blue slips is not made public. Nevertheless, it is clear that the strict blue slip policy effectively stopped any and all action on a number of Clinton nominees. For example, President Clinton nominated Helene White from Michigan for a seat on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on January 7, 1997. Then-Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan reportedly failed to return his blue slip for more than three years. During that time, the Judiciary Committee took no action whatsoever on the nomination. By the time Abraham was finally pressured to return the blue slip late in 2000, Hatch had indicated that no further action would be taken on appeals court nominees that year. President Clinton renominated White in 2001, but President Bush withdrew the nomination in March without any action by the Senate. As a result, the Hatch-led Judiciary Committee took no action on the White nomination, not even scheduling a hearing, for more than four years.

Senator Jesse Helms used his blue slip to block any action on all African-American nominees to the Fourth Circuit for more than four years. No African-American has ever been confirmed for a seat on the Fourth Circuit court of appeals, which covers North and South Carolina and several other southern states. Starting in 1995, President Clinton submitted several African-American nominees to that court from North Carolina, including James Beaty and James Wynn. Reportedly as a result of Helms' failure to return either of his blue slips, however, neither of these nominees even received a hearing from the Judiciary Committee. Not until President Clinton's 2000 recess appointment of Roger Gregory, whose nomination also failed to receive a hearing, has an African-American ever served on the Fourth Circuit.

Other Clinton appeals court nominees, mostly women or minorities, were reportedly blocked by home state Republican senators withholding their blue slips. Examples included: Jorge Rangel and Enrique Moreno of Texas, and Kathleen McCree Lewis of Michigan. Other appeals court nominees, such as Barry Goode of California, Elena Kagan of D.C., and Allen Snyder of Maryland, were blocked even when there was no home state Republican senator to object. Overall, although not a single Clinton-nominated appeals judge was voted down by the Senate, blue slip and related delays and blockades meant that the Senate approved only 61% of President Clinton's appellate court nominees, compared with 87% of those nominated by President Reagan. In 1999-2000, 19 out of 32 Clinton appeals court nominees — roughly 60% — were blocked from receiving a vote.

For some reason I'm not hearing a lot about this issue.

He Doesn't Get It

Never rely on a conservative to critique a movie, or even use one to make a point. If you haven't seen Star Wars, stop reading this.

The new Times columnist John Tierney falls short of making a point because like a good conservative he only uses the facts that support his anecdote.

He (Anakin) says he could never betray the Jedi because they're his family, but then the chancellor puts the family question in perspective: "Learn to know the dark side of the Force, Anakin, and you will be able to save your wife from certain death." Anakin promptly recognizes the limits of altruism, just as Adam Smith did in the 18th century.

But it was only moments later when Palpatine withdrew his guarantee, and said it might be possible, but only with as a member of the Sith. Of course, Anakin wasn't able to save anyone, and Palpatine's promise never materialized. It was then too light for Anakin, and he would forever remain a tormented soul until he realized the error in his ways. He killed Palpatine in the end.

The Precedent

A not so prescient President wants Congress to defer to a precedent: holding an up or down vote on judicial nominations.

All that sounds great, but why is this "precedent" so important? This word is being bandied around way too much.

There may be a "precedent" with regard to floor votes, but only in a broad sense. That precedent was also established long before the days when Republicans locked Democrats out of meetings in Congress.

It's unprecedented for Congress to interfere with state courts with regard to Terri Schiavo.

It's unprecedented for our nation to start a war.

It's unprecedented for a president to setup free speech zones.

It's unprecedented to invest Social Security funds in the stock market.

It was unprecedented for the President and his minions to lie and smear as much as they did during a presidential election.

All these things are unprecedented, yet, they had no problem doing them.

Now, precedents matter A LOT!

Conservatives like Bill Frist want to change the rules of the Senate in order to shift America rightward. This has always been the most important issue for them. They are at the point where gaining anymore Senate seats is unlikely. They've had to attach their wagons to those of liars, and now they're being exposed. Feeling that now is the time they want to change the rules. Changing rules within Congress is not unprecedented to Republicans since they did it earlier in the year to protect Tom Delay.

The thing about precedents is they have to be set, and it's the dawn of a new day.

At a time when this country is losing control of many of it's freedoms and liberties I hope the members of the US Senate set a new precedent by not allowing these votes to get to the floor. Then I will be very happy following that precedent, until we need a new one of course.

Why?

Because it's just a fucking word!

No, No, Not Photos, Just Newsweek

Such a douche:

To The New York Post, which first published the pictures on Friday along with its sister publication The Sun of Britain, the photographs were a chance to emphasis Mr. Hussein's crimes and indulge in public humiliation of the former strongman. The Sun and The Post say a US military source gave them the pictures.

The Sun and The Post, both owned by Rupbert Murdoch, supported the war and tend to paint the insurgency there as Baathist terrorists. The Sun quotes the unnamed source of the pictures as saying: "It's important that the people of Iraq see him like that to destroy the myth. Maybe that will kill a bit of the passion in the fanatics who still follow him."

President Bush doubted that the pictures would have much impact on Iraq's insurgency. "I don't think a photo inspires murderers. I think they're inspired by an ideology that's so barbaric and backwards that it's hard for many in the Western world to comprehend how they think."

So proof of making a former Iraqi strongman look dumb isn't worse than hearsay of a Koran being supposedly flushed down a toilet. Somehow I doubt that.

"...it's hard for many in the Western world to comprehend how they think", Bush says. Actually, it's not hard at all.

If people from another country started reigning bombs on the United States, captured the President, and moved him to a jail cell in another nation, do you think US citizens would sit at home and do nothing (assuming it wasn't Bush)?

Now pretend this other nation then wrote your Constitution for you, and wouldn't leave. Yeah, it's really hard for me to comprehend why Iraqis fight us. Toss in the fact you can't find a job anywhere and it becomes really really hard to "comprehend."

When I goto court for assault I'm going to blame Yahoo! and the Associated Press for printing this article because I'm sure the United States military will deny any negative press attached to the photos.

Extreme States' Rights

I've claimed in recent years that "states' rights" is going to be something supported by normal folks throughout the country. States' rights is a term that has been used to describe conservatives, especially down south, who want to maintain their own states' history. For example, South Carolina doesn't want the Federal Government telling them to integrate schools. They want their state governed by their own.

However, all this has changed. Why has it changed? Well, it's probably because there are so many Americans who don't believe in becoming educated, and therefore don't care what the laws are, and therefore pressure their congressfolks to do things that don't jive with the laws of this country, and/or the basis of it's foundation. Take Congress intervening with in the Terri Schiavo case, blah blah blah...

So now I look at states' rights completely differently. I'm from New Jersey. The way the nation is going I don't want Tom Delay, Rick Santorum, Tom Coburn, and George Bush governing my life. They don't believe in the things this country has stood for; they want to change it. Here in New Jersey I'm relatively safe, although the Chris Smiths of the world, and folks down in Southern Jersey do worry me. But there could possible come a point where religious fundamentalists influence the nation so thoroughly that Roe v. Wade could be overturned, science stifled in the classroom, religion taught in schools, and the nation as a whole falls behind other countries academically (have already) and scientifically leading to a worse off economy. If this happens states' rights will be very important.

New Jersey was the second state to propose funding for stem cell research (under Jim McGreevey), and now it may be held up because of the costs. Meanwhile, the South Koreans are racing ahead of the United States in this extremely important scientific field. It's not a good thing. I want New Jersey to go forward with this because the gains will produce even greater gains for the state.

If Roe v. Wade were overturned it would go back to the states. Abortion wouldn't be banned completely. New Jersey would likely continue to keep abortion legal. That's a state I'd want to live in. I think a lot of others would too.

If religious fundamentalists have their way and God is taught in schools over science, well, I assume those who learned the sciences, or wanted their children to attend schools in states where religion isn't taught, would eventually filter to the more moderate states. These people would probably be more educated. We'd have an even further divided country.

These are extreme issues, but this is why "states' rights" are becoming more important to blue staters. I'm sure when someone makes that call conservatives will call them racists :) That'll be some ironic shit.

In the long run I'm all for this if this is what has to happen. People just assume the United States as an experiment is going to hold. I wouldn't bet on it. The blue states fund the red states. The red states support liars, cheats, and fundamentalists. At some point the blue staters will agree with the red states about one thing: We want tax cuts! We're tired of paying to keep these people afloat! Of course, at that point red states will have turned colors again, and will now be supportive of taxing the rich.

The really pissed off people will be the conservatives in blue states who make all their money there. But they won't complain too much since they'll still be part of the cut my taxes crowd, which is the only issue they care about, regardless of religion.

Don't take away my states' rights!

(sorry, no proofreading today)

When Republicans Attack

Other republicans:

WASHINGTON, May 18 - In Republican Washington, Jack Abramoff and Grover Norquist worked all the angles.

One was a $750-an-hour lobbyist, the other an antitax activist, and they helped drive the Republican takeover of the capital and cement the party's power. Both had a close ally in the House majority leader, Tom DeLay. And they shared a conservative ideology and a friendship going back to their days in college.

Now, with widening Congressional and criminal inquiries in the capital into Mr. Abramoff's dealings, they are sharing trouble, too.

While Mr. Abramoff has been under scrutiny for more than a year, Mr. Norquist has attracted unwelcome attention in recent weeks. A Congressional committee investigating whether Mr. Abramoff defrauded Indian tribes has subpoenaed records from Mr. Norquist's group, Americans for Tax Reform, after he refused for six months to turn them over voluntarily.

The Justice Department is reviewing records of an advocacy group Mr. Norquist started with Gale A. Norton, now secretary of the interior, after reports that Mr. Abramoff instructed Indian tribes to give it $250,000. And Mr. Norquist's name appears over and over in newly disclosed documents outlining Mr. Abramoff's work in the Northern Mariana Islands, an American protectorate in the Pacific, which Democrats are agitating to investigate.

In interviews, Mr. Norquist dismissed any suggestion of wrongdoing on his part and said that the only reason he is "getting dragged into this" is because Senator John McCain, the head of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, which is investigating Mr. Abramoff, holds a grudge against Mr. Norquist for campaigning for President Bush in the 2000 Republican primaries.

"McCain hates me," he said.

Seems John and I have something else in common.

I love when Republicans start attacking Republicans. Eventually all the Santorums will attack all the Specters.

Dear NYTIMES

Cut down on some of the unnecessary bullshit on the front of your website, and maybe put the story about Pat Tillman on there. SOMEWHERE!

This guy performed one of those most heroic acts Americans have seen in ages, was killed, then was used by our lying leaders who are now being called out on it by his parents.

If you want to attract people who goto CNN and FOX News, you have to report these stories prominently, sometimes.

It's so upsetting that Newsweek killed Pat Tillman.

Uh-raq

More good news, right?:

A car bomb exploded Monday at a Baghdad restaurant popular with police, killing at least seven people and wounding at least 82, and militants assassinated a top national security official. Five U.S. troops were killed by roadside bombs and a vehicle accident.

South of Baghdad, a car bomb blew up Monday outside a Shiite mosque, killing at least 10 people and injuring another 30, authorities said. The explosion occurred at 8 p.m. in front of the Abul-Fadl Abbas mosque in Mahmoudiya, about 20 miles south of Baghdad, Lt. Odai al-Zayadi said.

Dawoud al-Tai, director of the Mahmoudiya general hospital, said 10 bodies and 30 wounded people were brought to his facility.

U.S. and Iraqi forces detained 300 suspected insurgents in the biggest sweep in the capital to date.

The White House is set to report that a new militant group called Newsa Weeq-ah is responsible.

The S.S. Bullshit

This isn't short, but this part sticks out.:

It is important to register the magnitude of the benefit cuts relative to current law that Pozen is proposing. For those retiring in 2075, Pozen would keep the replacement rate at 49 percent for the working poor—those making half the average income. But the replacement rate for those making more would be cut: At the average income, the replacement rate would go from 36 percent to 26 percent; at one-and-a-half times average, from 30 percent to 17 percent; at the Social Security maximum, from 24 percent to 12 percent. Medicare premiums are already deducted from your Social Security check. Deduct the claw-back for the private-accounts diversion as well, and by late in this century the odds are that—-at least for the upper middle class—-the standard Social Security check would be zero. Social Security would no longer be a universal program: It would be a program in which the half of America that is richer and more powerful and more likely to vote sees large chunks of its money going in and nothing coming out.

It is possible that this is the point, at least for some factions within the White House: perhaps creating a large and powerful class of Americans who get much, much less out of Social Security than they put in and for whom Social Security as a whole is demonstrably a very bad deal is the objective. It was early Social Security guru Wilbur Cohen who said that "in the United States, a program that deals only with the poor will end up being a poor program. ... " Loading a large chunk of the burden of fixing Social Security onto America's upper middle class may be the first step in the creation of a mid-21st-century political majority for the phasing-out of the program as a whole. But it is also possible that the White House doesn't have such a long-run Machiavellian plan in mind--that it is hoping to attract some more support for its proposals by making them more progressive, and is just trying to trick its right-wing supporters by pretending that this is a deep, long-run, Machiavellian plan to eventually eliminate Social Security entirely. The only thing that is clear is that it is very unlikely that the White House is proposing progressive price indexing because it believes the government needs to put its thumb on the scales to make the U.S. distribution of income and wealth more equal: that's not their game. (It is, however, Robert Pozen's game: that's why he advocates this proposal.)

Let me skip over point four, solvency, by pointing out that the Bush plan--excuse me, there is no Bush plan, there are only "ideas" that are "not necessarily" the Bush plan but are only "directionally consistent" with it--doesn't reach actuarial solvency unless Bush's embrace of Pozen includes his plans to rest part of Social Security on income taxes. If that is in fact what Bush's embrace of Pozen means, that's big news.

And let me end with point five: competence in implementation. A Social Security reform plan could clear hurdles one through four, and still fall flat on its face if incompetently implemented: the devil is in the details. And looking at the farm bill, the steel tariff, the return of deficits bigger than ever, the use of intelligence by the NSC, the absence of a real plan for post-invasion Iraq, the Medicare drug bill that ex-HHS Secretary Thompson now really wishes had been structured differently, et cetera, et cetera, it is hard to believe that any reform to be implemented by this administration will be implemented competently. It has the anti-Midas touch: whatever it grasps turns to mud.

Let me give a small example of this, from George W. Bush's statement on April 28:

In a reformed Social System, voluntary personal retirement accounts would offer workers a number of investment options.... I know some Americans have reservations about investing in the stock market, so I propose that one investment option consist entirely of treasury bonds, which are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government.... Options like this will make voluntary personal retirement accounts a safer investment that will allow an American to build a nest egg that he or she can pass on to whomever he or she chooses.

The "build a nest egg" part... The "invest in Treasury bonds" part... On April 28 the Federal Reserve was reporting that the twenty-year inflation-protected Treasury bond was yielding 1.87% plus inflation per year. The money you divert into your private account under the Bush plan is clawed back--charged against your normal Social Security benefit--at a rate equivalent to 3% per year plus the rate of inflation. Were interest rates to stay where they are now over the next fourty years, if you were 25 now, made an average of $80,000 a year over your career, and diverted all 4% of your wages possible into your private account and invested them in twenty-year inflation-protected Treasury bonds... then your Social Security benefits--normal plus the annuitized check from your private account balance--would be $514 a month less than if you had said "No thanks" to private accounts and kept your money in the standard program.

"Building a nest egg"?! Given current interest rates, following George W. Bush's advice and investing Social Security private-accounts money in inflation-protected Treasury securities is a really bad idea. Yet they let him go out there and say that.

Did nobody inside the White House bother to run the numbers? Did nobody care? This breaks my heart--for in yet another of my hearts-of-hearts, I am a technocrat who believes in administrative competence, and think that the President of the United States should not be sent out to make speeches that only an underbriefed fool would write because of the nonsensical things that they say.

Until the center of policy making and implementation in this administration is moved outside the White House to someplace else where people seriously concerned with the substantive design and implementation of policy, nothing the White House proposes--nothing, no matter how good it sounds at first--can be expected to turn out to be anything other than a large pile of mud.

Thank you.

Not so "Press"ing

So while Scott Mclellan worries about anonymous sources he can't seem to release information relating to bogus ones on his watch:

WASHINGTON, DC -- In light of yet another scandal involving the Bush administration's manipulation of the media, United States Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) today requested from White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan all the documents relating to the press credentials of James. D. Guckert, a.k.a. "Jeff Gannon"; the "journalist" now famous for being the White House correspondent for his softball questioning of President Bush and various Administration spokespeople.

"I am writing to request that you immediately release documents to my office relating to the White House press credentials of James D. Guckert, a.k.a. "Jeff Gannon." Specifically, I am seeking documentation related to the question of which name Mr. Guckert/Gannon used when applying for credentials, and which name was on the official White House press credentials he received," wrote Lautenberg.

"As you may know, Mr. Guckert/Gannon was denied a Congressional press pass because he could not show that he wrote for a valid news organization. Given the fact that he was denied Congressional credentials, I seek your explanation of how Mr. Guckert/Gannon passed muster for White House press credentials," Lautenberg wrote.

Senator Lautenberg has been the Senate leader in exposing the Bush administration's propaganda efforts.

They don't like anonymous sources. They like services they pay for, which is probably why Gannon is such a fan since he does too.

NewsWeak

news 


I find it incredible that the White House can still rail against Newsweek about this story, and yet questions do not get asked of the White House's lies with regard to war in Iraq, and now we learn (again) of Pat Tillman.

There is "a credibility problem in the media regarding the use of anonymous sources," Mr. (Scott) McClellan said on Tuesday during a regular White House press briefing.

"That's one of the issues that concerns the American people when they look at the media," he added, "and I think sometimes the media does have difficulty going back and kind of critiquing itself."

Hmmm, that's odd. I always noticed that the anonymous sources he speaks of are actually people who work at the White House! What about the anonymous source that outted Valerie Plame?

Doing away with anonymous sources is pure stupidity. All that would do is keep Americans further in the dark about what's going on inside our government. There's as good a chance this story about the Koran being put in a toilet, or something like it, is a true one, as opposed to it not having happened. But that's not the issue at all. Anonymous sources gave us Watergate. Anonymous sources give us ALL of our news, it seems.

This White House has come into office as the most secretive we've ever seen. They probably believe that with so many news sources these days, and so many people trying to get the scoop they have to stay on message, and be private. That'd be well and good if they didn't lie and cheat all the time. Don't forget, almost immediately upon taking office President Bush moved to seal off Ronald Reagan's papers to historians. Bush has no idea what's in them, but others do, and they got it done. It's the most secretive group ever. I wouldn't be surprised to see them declare all President's papers off record because of "national security." They'll do anything to avoid the Reagan monuments not being built.

This White House will talk about anonymous sources being a bad thing to make it seem as if they're an honest lot. They're the lying lot. But again, if they can pretend to be something they'll do it. They'll be at the front of giving Americans the honest news! If there's a way to exploit, trick, then fuck you, they'll do it. Then they'll goto church and make it all better for themselves.

----

And checkout the fat whore with the "Newsweek Lied People Died" sign. A sure play on Bush. It's like they're admitting the quote was previously accurate, and now they're using it against Democrats. Take it further, these people standing out there are so brainwashed they really think the media is actually an arm of the Democratic Party. Apparently they don't watch the debates, or Cable News, or READ!

Quote of the Weekend

I almost forgot to post yet another dandy:

"I made very clear to Congress that the use of federal money, taxpayer's money, to promote science which destroys life in order to save life — I'm against that," Bush said. "Therefore, if the bill does that, I would veto it."

Here's the second best:

"It is easy to sell New England in the Midwest," as Mr. Freeman put it later. Midwesterners, he said, see New Englanders as "a bunch of heathens."

So Mr. Havens drove home each day from a summer job at a stone supply warehouse to work the phone from his cluttered childhood bedroom. He told potential donors that many of the American-born students at Brown had never even been to church, to say nothing of the students from Asia or the Middle East. "In a sense, it is pre-Christian," he explained.

Just give the man some time.

Hey, We'll See!

Who knows what's going to happen?

Later in Jericho Mrs. Bush spoke of "what an emotional place this is as we go from each one of these very, very holy sites to the next." After meeting separate groups of Israeli and Palestinian women, she said: "What we all want is peace, and the chance that we have right now to have peace. To have a Palestinian state living by a secure state of Israel, both living in democracy, is as close as we've been in a really long time." The process would take "a lot of baby steps, and I'm sure it will be a few steps backward on the way."

The United States would help, she said. But "it also requires the work of the people here, of the Palestinians and the Israelis, to come to the table, obviously, and we'll see."

Yeah, we'll see.

If the Western Wall was ever going to fall yesterday would have been a perfect day.

This woman has as much right talking about women's rights as I do. She married the leader of the party that represents male dominance. Then again, she does control a pretty powerful puppet, so I guess there's something to be said for that.

They want her in Israel to attract the Jewish vote here in America. Bush's policy of letting Sharon do whatever he wants has resulted in zero net gains since Bush took office. Bush is completely happy with 8 years of nothingness as long as the situation doesn't change much.

Bad news in Israel results in bad press for Bush at home, which means he gets less done. Also, losing the Jewish vote they've gained on some level would be regression. Can't have that.

She's there just to put a different face on the puppet. A softer puppet face.

Nice

Just one more reason I want to name a son, if I'm lucky enough to have one, "Pat.":

Former NFL player Pat Tillman's San Jose family is lashing out against the Army, saying that the military's investigations into Tillman's friendly-fire death in Afghanistan last year were a sham and that Army efforts to cover up the truth have made it harder for them to deal with their loss.

More than a year after their son was shot several times by his fellow Army Rangers on a craggy hillside near the Pakistani border, Tillman's mother and father said in interviews that they believe the military and the government created a heroic tale about how their son died to foster a patriotic response across the country. They say the Army's ``lies'' about what happened have made them suspicious, and they are certain they will never get the full story.

``Pat had high ideals about the country; that's why he did what he did,'' Mary Tillman said in her first lengthy interview since her son's death. ``The military let him down. The administration let him down. It was a sign of disrespect. The fact that he was the ultimate team player and he watched his own men kill him is absolutely heartbreaking and tragic. The fact that they lied about it afterward is disgusting...''

Patrick Tillman Sr., a San Jose lawyer, said he is furious about what he found in the volumes of witness statements and investigative documents the Army has given the family. He decried what he calls a ``botched homicide investigation'' and accuses high-ranking Army officers of presenting ``outright lies'' to the family and to the public.

``After it happened, all the people in positions of authority went out of their way to script this,'' Patrick Tillman said. ``They purposely interfered with the investigation. They covered it up. I think they thought they could control it, and they realized that their recruiting efforts were going to go to hell in a handbasket if the truth about his death got out. They blew up their poster boy.''

They lie about everything.

The Reds

I can look at a few stories from this weekend and be confident a lot of red state people don't give a crap about terrorism, drugs, and wars.

The most obvious is the Hamid Karzai visit to the White House. In a real world you would expect the people who support their President that takes them to war without plans to be upset about the results. One would think he'd be held responsible by the very people who gave him the green light. So not the case.

In Afghanistan warlords still run the country. Karzai is pushing for more control over how the US conducts operations. The opium drug trade is booming. Osama bin Laden is nowhere in sight. Do these things matter to red staters? Apparently not since you never hear any critiques.

I'm going to assume that most Bush supporters see drugs as something the "colored people" do in the hoods, and it can't be stopped. Afghanistan itself is irrelevant to them since they're not going to actually come here and attack us. Osama bin Laden, well, they believe Bush is more likely to catch him than anyone because God is on our side. If Karzai wants control, give it to him. These people don't care, or know about ramifications. They just have faith, which on some level makes theem as smart as scientists! All in all, a bunch of morons.

Then there's the domestic terrorism issue. For a few years Senator Jon Corzine from New Jersey and Olympia Snowe from Maine have been pushing their bipartisan bill to protect Americans. Their bill forces chemical plants/companies to add more protection to avoid a terrorist attack from killing thousands. Yet their bills seems to be going nowhere.

However, a competing bill by Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, which is more amenable to the concerns of the chemical industry, seems to be getting more play. Here we have the Senators from New Jersey and Maine, the places where chemicals are much closer to large civilian populations, and the state Mohammad Atta traveled through on 9/11, coming together to protect citizens. Then we have the red state senator pushing a bill that favors the corporate backers.

Do you think Senator Corzine, for the former head of Goldman Sachs, wants to slow down American business? Isn't it likely that he understands how important it is to protect these plants, and how business would suffer a lot more by an attack than they would by any bill? One would think the Senator Inhofe, having the Oklahoma City Bombing on his mind, would be all for protecting Americans, but he's more concerned about protecting lobbyists.

The people who bare the brunt of likely terrorist attacks are being held hostage by fools who will pray for us. That's comforting.

God Fearing

This past weekend I read a few columns on the "intelligent design" argument going on in Kansas. These people are relentless and ridiculous.

For those not in the know the "intelligent design" crowd are pushing states and municipalities around the country to add this to their curriculums. It's not science, it's just a charade. It's another way of getting God into the classrooms. Claiming there's a higher power that designs life is exactly what God is, right?

I don't care that there are polls showing people favor it. Majority rules is not the basis of this country. Also, the majority of people don't know jack shit about science. I'm sure there are hosts of people in this debate who think the scientists are elitist. WHATEVER! They should be! They're scientists! They do know more than you, and when it comes to science in the classroom it should be the opinion of scientists that count, not random people who don't know a thing about it.

Should we be surprised that people think "intelligent design", or God, should be taught as well? Of course not. People goto church, they believe in God, and they certainly have a better understanding of a concept that can't be defined than they do about all the definitions that make up science. So when the question is asked, "Hey, do you think in addition to science, students should be taught about "intelligent design?"

"Uhh, what's that?"

"Well, it's a philosophy that believes science doesn't answer all questions, and that some greater force must be responsible for creating life."

"You mean, God?

"No, not God, but possibly God."

"Sure, why not."

Even if districts were to teach this "intelligent design"/God theory, what would they sat that couldn't be summed in 6 seconds? There's no curriculum to it. It's a simple, "Well, for all the questions that can't be answered we assume there's a higher force at work."

"Mrs. Johnson, what kind of higher force?"

"Well, sorta like God, but we don't call it that. Now lets move on."

It's not like there's anything to learn from it, and it's not like students around the country don't know who, or what, God is, or is supposed to be. EVERYONE KNOWS. What there is to know can be learned at home, and is. It can also be learned at religious schools. NOT IN SCIENCE CLASS!

Why don't they start teaching "intelligent design" in history, or math? I mean, afterall, if a "designer" exists then it clearly is at work when it comes to every aspect of life, not just science. But of course these people don't care about that. They want every student to learn about God and Jesus in place of science.

God is simple. It's unexplained. Everyone is on the same level when it comes to thoughts about God because you can't be wrong. There are no answers. You can't be "elitist" with God.

However, with science, there are answers, smarter people, dumber people, etc. It takes work. It takes intelligence. It takes knowledge that flies in the face of the God theory, so they hate it. If God didn't exist people would have to do the right thing on their own. People wouldn't be so equal any more. They couldn't do horrible things and then goto church to wipe it away. There would be no more excuses.

They fear science.