This Is No New...

Romantic Blitzkrieg...

I always end up on this song.

"Vague Space" - SM 2.5.2001, Paris.

Classy

This family never ceases to amaze:

MIAMI, June 17 - Gov. Jeb Bush asked a state prosecutor on Friday to investigate the circumstances of Terri Schiavo's collapse, saying a new autopsy report revealed a possible gap between when Ms. Schiavo fell unconscious and when her husband called paramedics.

"It's a significant question that during this entire ordeal was never brought up," Governor Bush told reporters in Tallahassee after faxing a letter to Bernie McCabe, the state attorney in Pinellas County, where Ms. Schiavo suffered extreme brain damage when her heart temporarily stopped beating in 1990.

In a statement on Friday, Ms. Schiavo's husband, Michael, called Governor Bush's actions "sickening" and said he had called 911 promptly.

The governor's letter could further prolong an exhaustively fought case that even many of his fellow Republicans said it was time to close after the autopsy found no evidence of foul play in Ms. Schiavo's collapse nor any sign that further treatment would have restored the functions of her withered brain.

Governor Bush, who vehemently fought the court-ordered removal of Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube, said he decided to seek an investigation after speaking with Dr. Jon R. Thogmartin, the medical examiner who conducted the autopsy, on Tuesday, a day before his report was released. According to records, the report says, a 911 call was placed about 5:40 a.m. on Feb. 25, 1990.

But Mr. Schiavo said in an interview with CNN's Larry King in 2003 that he found his wife on the floor outside their bedroom about 4:30 a.m. and quickly called 911.

Where Were You in November

I appreciate what Senator Danforth says, but I don't appreciate the Mid-2005 timing. Hopefully he'll be around in '06.

He should consider running.

It's Like "Bonus Footage!"

Behind the scenes!!!

Bush administration officials working behind the scenes have succeeded in weakening key sections of a proposal for joint action by the eight major industrialized nations to curb climate change.

Under U.S. pressure, negotiators in the past month have agreed to delete language that would detail how rising temperatures are affecting the globe, set ambitious targets to cut carbon dioxide emissions and set stricter environmental standards for World Bank-funded power projects, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post. Negotiators met this week in London to work out details of the document, which is slated to be adopted next month at the Group of Eight's annual meeting in Scotland.

The administration's push to alter the G-8's plan on global warming marks its latest effort to edit scientific or policy documents to accord with its position that mandatory carbon dioxide cuts are unnecessary. Under mounting international pressure to adopt stricter controls on heat-trapping gas emissions, Bush officials have consistently sought to modify U.S. government and international reports that would endorse a more aggressive approach to mitigating global warming.

Gotta love these people. Don't even have the balls to do it up front, even though they supposedly believe what they're doing is right.

See, Bush is a straight shooter...

I Do It For You, Guy

I received an email from someone who apparently likes inflicting pain upon himself asking why I didn't comment on the Sunnis committing to an Iraqi Constitution.

Why you ask? I'm doing YOU a favor by not commenting on Iraq.

The place is a disaster. The violence gets worse every day. Not better, worse. I don't want to list the names of soldiers, and I hardly want to pretend Iraq is going to be a democracy, ever. I'm not that guy.

But if you really want my take, I'll give it to you.

I think it's wonderful the Sunnis are getting along with Shiites, and others, for 10 minutes. Thank Allah.

This thing is never going to work. Deal with it because we have to. The buck has already been passed. Republicans and Democrats are looking for an exit strategy as reported by the NYTIMES.

As long as the people living in the Middle East don't have jobs, and nothing substantial to strive for, it's never going to work. We're not in it for the long haul because Americans aren't committed to really helping anyone. Therefore, it's only a matter of time, I'll say 2 years, before the place is a complete clusterfuck.

I don't comment because I'm at the point where I don't see a point. I'm just waiting to see all hell break loose, and I've got a few days before that happens. But worry not since no American will be anywhere near the place when it happens.

Sunnis will remain committed, as will the rest of them, until they want something else. Then they'll start again.

The only nations that have any semblance of control are the ones that are ruled, except Israel, of course, which is the only democracy.

Latahs.

I....Ammmm...a....Huuuuuge....MORE-RON

Not sure what's funnier, Triumph or Schwarzenegger getting booed off the stage.

Follow the links to Triumph.

Stunning

The NYTIMES doesn't have a single story covering yesterday's PBGC hearing on Capitol Hill. It's not only the Times, but you'd be hard pressed to find any articles about it outside of some of the Hearst papers.

This is a major issue.

I watched Bradley Pelt discuss the Administration's strategy, and aside from making broad statements about the administration plans to do something, the details were lacking.

Pelt claimed the PBGC has liabilities of $23 Billion while the Congressional Budget Office puts the number closer to $100 Billion. If I had to take a guess I'd say it's probably a combination of the two: $123 Billion. Since when have we received accurate numbers when it comes to finances during this Administration's run?

The point of all this is as more companies face bankruptcy they will continue to rely on the PBGC to pay pensions. Companies have underfuned their liabilities since 2000 (coincidence?), and now something needs to be done because of the recent United Airlines ruling.

There are Republicans like Rep. John Boehner who are putting forward a bill forcing companies to get in line with their obligations within 7 years. There are democrats who are against the bill because they believe companies will no longer use defined-benefit plans, and that's bad for workers. Unfortunately for democrats and workers, Boehner is more right than wrong.

Companies should be moving toward shared plans, like 401Ks. It just doesn't seem realistic anymore for companies to offer defined-benefit plans. Maybe for some smaller companies, but not for major corporations who are doing their best to outsource jobs, and meet analysts expectations. Large companies will continue to ignore their obligatons while focussing dollars on other aspects of the business if they know they're insured by the PBGC.

I don't find it coincidental that Bush's Social Security plan is nose-diving today. Republicans are less and less supportive of his plans, and would like it to go away. Yesterday's hearing on the PBGC may have woken up some legislators. How in the world can we be discussing a major PBGC bailout for companies, which will leave workers with a lot less money than previously promised, and the possibility that taxpayers will fill the PBGC gap (currently they don't); at the same time be talking about putting Social Security into a riskier environment with investment accounts?

Here we are watching the possibility of a major pension disaster, and here are the Republicans putting Social Security at further risk. Now maybe we'll start to understand why there were hearings on PBGC last week and yesterday, and today there's more articles about the President's Social Security plan going down hill. Not a coincidence.

Not only should the Times be writing about this, but it should be front page news.

What They'd Like

Republicans desire an end to Public Broadcasting:

A House subcommittee voted yesterday to sharply reduce the federal government's financial support for public broadcasting, including eliminating taxpayer funds that help underwrite such popular children's educational programs as "Sesame Street," "Reading Rainbow," "Arthur" and "Postcards From Buster."

In addition, the subcommittee acted to eliminate within two years all federal money for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting -- which passes federal funds to public broadcasters -- starting with a 25 percent reduction in CPB's budget for next year, from $400 million to $300 million.

In all, the cuts would represent the most drastic cutback of public broadcasting since Congress created the nonprofit CPB in 1967. The CPB funds are particularly important for small TV and radio stations and account for about 15 percent of the public broadcasting industry's total revenue.

Expressing alarm, public broadcasters and their supporters in Congress interpreted the move as an escalation of a Republican-led campaign against a perceived liberal bias in their programming. That effort was initiated by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting's own chairman, Kenneth Y. Tomlinson.

"Americans overwhelmingly see public broadcasting as an unbiased information source," Rep. David Obey (Wis.), the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, said in a statement. "Perhaps that's what the GOP finds so offensive about it. Republican leaders are trying to bring every facet of the federal government under their control. . . . Now they are trying to put their ideological stamp on public broadcasting."

It's not enough when Conservatives want to loosen the rules on private broadcast ownership to give big business more of a voice. No, they want to strengthen such an influence by eliminating news sources who don't provide them with checks, or fairy tale news.

It's Nice

Well, maybe not nice, but somewhat reassuring when you get an email from the Washington Post with their top stories and these are them:

House Members Detail Travel Paid for by Firms, Groups

Exit Strategy on Social Security Is Sought

Bush Is Expected to Address Specifics on Iraq

House Votes To Curb Patriot Act

Frist Stands by Statements on Schiavo

It's lousy none of these stories are necessarily positive, but at the same it shows how absurd the Republican party currently is.

You've got the President's own party trying to sneak out of the Social Security debate, a President who may actually answer some questions about one of the most grievous acts in US History that he committed, a look into paid trips by House members, which related directly back to dirtbag Tom Delay, the House voting to curb the Patriot Act that the President wants to expand, and finally Senator Frist and the Republicans on the defensive about Terri Schiavo, an embarrassment wash off their shoulders as quickly as possible.

Things have to get worse before they get better, and things are certainly not good. Things still need to get even worse. Much worse for people to realize their leaders aren't good for them, or the country.

Nice Work by TNR

While the Wall Street Journal continues to bring us "The Good News" in the War on Terror, The New Republic is now bringing us the news from the world's worst regimes.

Take note, WSJ Editorial Page, it's called "news that matters."

However, if I was TNR, I wouldn't archive any of the material in order to avoid a future President using the information 15-20 years later as the basis to attack another country.

Sheeesh

Remember how she used to look at her parents, and smile? Yeah, that happened:

An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband's contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind, the medical examiner's office said Wednesday. It also found no evidence that she was strangled or otherwise abused.

Yet I'd still take her over Jeb in a battle of brains.

He's Soooo Right

Don Rumsfeld's thoughts on Guantanamo:

The detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, will be needed for years to come, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld suggested on Tuesday.

Mr. Rumsfeld said at a news conference at the Pentagon that there was no alternative site to hold and question the suspected terrorists there.

"I don't know any place where we have infrastructure that's appropriate for that sizable group of people," he said. "The United States government, let alone the U.S. military, does not want to be in the position of holding suspected terrorists any longer than is absolutely necessary. But as long as there remains a need to keep terrorists from striking again, a facility will continue to be needed."

In other words, the United States doesn't have another option when it comes to a lawless island outside the jurisdiction of every nation, including the host nation itself.

Isn't it sorta funny that we keep prisoners in Cuba, claim they don't have to be treated specifically under US or Cuban Law, and at the same time denounce Fidel Castro for not treating his citizens fairly? Then again, what would a Republican Administration be without hypocrisy?

No Policy

That's the US policy on North Korea: We have no policy.

What's it going to take to realize that's the case? Believe it or not I think it's actually better that the Bush Administration has no policy on North Korea. I'm also pretty confident Senators Biden and Hagel have no policy either, but they certainly have the ability to disagree with the nonexistant policy of the Bush Administration.

I think the reason we have no policy is because we really have no game plan to deal with it. Team Bush keeps saying, "we're not going to war with North Korea", so if that's the case why should North Korea not build nuclear weapons? We're not going to stop them, and it seems only countries who have them get anywhere when it comes to negotiating.

The Bush Administration hated Clinton's Agreed Framework simply because it was Clinton's, and they have never seen a carrot worth using. Had there been no Iraq War things with N. Korea would certainly be different. There are Hawks a plenty who favor a military solution now, but that would never fly, and Republicans could kiss their congressional gains goodbye if they did it.

So again, the plan is no plan. At best they'll start negotiating on some level after the 2006 elections, having done nothing for 6 years except watch a nuke buildup and ask for 6 party talks.

6 party talks are extremely important. The US has no real economic hand to play because China and other Asian countries would never pull the economic plug on them, so it'd be a one-sided move. However, this is a perfect time for the United States to actually work with China in order to find a solution.

The Chinese and the United States are destined for war. At least I feel we are, and so many others agree. China certainly holds more sway over North Korea than we do, so it's true that multi-party talks are necessary. We need to work with China now, create alliances, and hopefully move both countries toward similar goals. This is precisely why I'm satisfied with Team Bush doing nothing for is they do get involved you can be sure they will FUCK IT UP!

When hasn't the Bush Administration fucked up an international situation? You want to say that Libya is now nuke-free as a good example? That's a joke. Libya got lucky, and for years was working to change its imagine. We used them as an example, but anyone with a brain knew it was a farce. There's really been zero US success since Bush came to office, and to think for a second these people can actually fix the crisis in Asia is absurd.

Our best bet is having someone who's willing to negotiate without preconceived notions of what needs to happen. We need someone with an open mind dealing with China and North Korea. Whomever the next administration is you can rest assured they'll be more honest, and trusted by others than this one.

North Korea has nukes, and the fear isn't that they'll hit the US with an ICBM, but that they'll sell one to an outlaw regime, or group. Even then it's not going to strike us, but if it strikes someone there will be war. North Korea supposedly uses fertilizer for crops given to them by the UN to grow drugs that they sell. I wouldn't put selling a missile past them, in fact, I almost expect it.
Nevertheless, I'd rather wait out the storm.

The best thing Team Bush can do is give the North economic aid, and buy some time for the next group. Passing the buck is going to be the legacy of this White House, but I'm all for it in this scarnio. I'd rather see it passed them spent unwisely, which they'll surely do, especially since they have no acceptable plan.

Allies in Terror

But not so much in Human Rights.

Remember Those Tasty "Freedom Fries?"

Well, the guy who brought us that name isn't sure we've served enough of them:

Meanwhile, Representative Walter B. Jones of North Carolina, a Republican and member of the Armed Services Committee who had fervently backed the war in Iraq, said today that it was time to set a date for withdrawal from that country.

"We've done about as much as we can do," he said on the ABC News program "This Week." Mr. Jones, who had backed the renaming in a congressional cafeteria of french fries as "freedom fries" to express disdain for France's war opposition, plans to introduce legislation this week calling for a withdrawal date.

After a month in which 80 American troops and more than 700 Iraqis died in bombings and attacks in Iraq, opinion polls have found rising public doubts that the Iraq war has made Americans safer, or has been worth its costs.

Ahhh, the beginning of the withdrawal, not from a quagmire, but from a place where a "few terrorists" have caused a major problem for the largest fighting force in the world.

Speaking of "freedom fries" were you aware they had nothing on "honey-glazed chicken?"

But Representative Duncan Hunter, Republican of California and chairman of the Armed Services Committee, forcefully defended detainee treatment at Guantánamo.

"Not one person has been killed in Guantánamo," he said on "Fox News Sunday." "We have people complaining because he had a dog bark at him in Guantánamo."

He made a point of reading from today's menu for detainees, which he said included honey-glazed chicken and rice pilaf.

"We have the legend that there is so-called gulag-like treatment," he said, referring to an Amnesty International critique of United States detention practices, "and we have the reality, which is honey-glazed chicken."

There ya go. I feel so much better know they're eating "honey-glazed chicken", and maybe they even get to wash it down with some warm "guard urine."

Maybe someone should explain to Mr. Hunter the way news works. People don't care about planes that land, but rather the planes that crash.

Right Before He Went to the UN

Actually, before he was even elected:

HOUSTON -- Two years before the September 11 attacks, presidential candidate George W. Bush was already talking privately about the political benefits of attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer, who held many conversations with then-Texas Governor Bush in preparation for a planned autobiography.

"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said to me: 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He said, 'If I have a chance to invade·.if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency." Herskowitz said that Bush expressed frustration at a lifetime as an underachiever in the shadow of an accomplished father. In aggressive military action, he saw the opportunity to emerge from his father's shadow. The moment, Herskowitz said, came in the wake of the September 11 attacks. "Suddenly, he's at 91 percent in the polls, and he'd barely crawled out of the bunker."

That President Bush and his advisers had Iraq on their minds long before weapons inspectors had finished their work - and long before alleged Iraqi ties with terrorists became a central rationale for war - has been raised elsewhere, including in a book based on recollections of former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill. However, Herskowitz was in a unique position to hear Bush's unguarded and unfiltered views on Iraq, war and other matters - well before he became president.

Isn't is nice to know that President Bush wanted to kill innocent civilians, pretty much anywhere, so he could get out of his father's shadow, and be seen as a strong leader? Isn't that so great? A man who values human life, right?

Isn't it nice to know he would puppet whatever Iraqi war plan was on the table just so he could get more judges elected here in America? And cut taxes for the wealthiest? And dismantle Social Security? Isn't it nice to know this?

Afterall, this isn't just a funny set of questions, but a reality!

McCain/Bush 2008?

God I hope so:

McCain-Bush in 2008?

That would be John and Jeb, the most logical Republican ticket if the party remains in the polling doldrums. If President Bush and his political maestro, Karl Rove, decide that the only way to create a political legacy is to nod toward the Arizona senator with whom they have battled and feuded, they will go for the guy who can win.


This scenario was outlined to me recently by a shrewd and loyally Democratic political operative with personal ties to the McCain camp before Mark McKinnon, one of the president's top media advisers, publicly confirmed that he would help a McCain presidential run if it materialized.

McCain's not getting any younger, and I don't think the Bush name is going to be that impressive by then. Not that is now, according to polls.

Just wondering if Bush is still reviewing Reagan's papers that he took off the shelves in 2000. Will we have to wait through another Bush campaign to find out what was going on?

Wow

I can't believe MJ got off on all 10 counts. Granted, I haven't followed the trial AT ALL, but hey, is it so wrong that I wanted someone to goto prison for killing Nicole Brown Simpson?

I guess he'll go home and "Beat it."

All I want to know is who the legions of fucking zeroes are who have been hanging outside the courthouse? It's time to go back to your tents outside Neverland.

Prosecutor: So, you don’t think Michael Jackson is guilty?
Dave Chappelle: No, man. He made “Thriller”.
[pause]
Dave Chappelle: Thriller.

We Await

The Michael Jackson verdict.

I have a feeling he'll soon be fitted with a new type of glove.

Debt Relief

The first thing that popped into my head when I heard the news on debt relief was: Greaaat, that'll do a lot.

I often feel that way when it comes to news like this. It's very important the 18 countries involved do receive debt relief, but what's the larger picture here? Is it going to help these countries at all?

On a very small scale debt relief will help individual families who had to pay to send children to school in African nations. That's definitely important. Overall, I don't see it doing much to help the plight of Third World nations. Regardless, it was the right thing to do.

If you read about the difficulties nations had paying down their debts you'll see how ridiculous the situations were. Countries were borrowing IMF & World Bank dollars to pay back loans. That makes sense, especially since the World Bank is supposed to do cost assessments, and give out money based on a country's ability to pay back the loans. How in the world did all this happen?

Remember, the World Bank didn't want to give money to Iraq because there was no plan to pay it back, and because money going to Iraq wouldn't help alleviate poverty and pain throughout the rest of the world. Iraq was already getting enough cash assistance from the "coalition of the willing", and the US was doing everything possible to get their debts erased.

Funny thing about debts is how they're looked at by the US. I once read a quote that went something like this, "When the United States thinks a debt is illegitmate, as is the case with Iraq, it gets erased. When human rights groups think a debt is illegitmate it gets ignored." That's why it is nice to see some debt relief, regardless of the results.

Focussing on the debt relief program in the works, one should be asking how in the world we can actually fix Africa rather than just dumping cash into the continent. Seems to me the problem takes a long term outlook, and that's something Americans are really bad at. Unfortunately for the world, that flaw will result in stagnation.

The ultimate paradox: the selfishness drives America to the top, which enables us to help the most, but the selfishness is also the reason we don't help Americans, let alone Africans. The lack of a longterm outlook on anything also results directly to the selfishness of Americans.

Oddly enough, President Bush can actually be moved to support debt relief because a large portion of the religious fundamentalists support helping people. I know, sounds crazy, but it's true. Even Senator Rick Santorum has a record of wanting to help eliminte poverty, etc. Part of their religious beliefs actually does guide them to help others. Granted, you won't see a condom shipped to Africa, but you'll see some debt relief. There are some religious rightists who actually do believe Bush is honest because of his devotion to Jesus, and some of those people do believe in charity. The last few years may have tricked you into believing that's not true. It'd be nice if Santorum made more noise about those things than he does.

The point of all of this is what can we actually do to make Africa, or any third world nation, a place that thrives? And will we do it? The answer, of course, is no.

The only way to truly change problems in other countries is through free trade and education. Free trade has obvious benefits, but America is so willing to exploit that we turn the other cheek when it comes to poor labor practices, etc.

Education is the other way, and I'm not talking about Third World education. I'm talking about AMERICAN education. The only way to ever change the problems going on around the world is educate the immigrants, and those caring enough to make change, here in America. Certainly, other countries are ahead of us in education, but we're the country that makes the money. In the same way affirmative action programs help to educate minorities, who you then hope go back to their communities and help them thrive, the same thing needs to be done for immigrants.

Immigrants send money back to their native homes as quickly as they make it. They feel an attachment to their families and communities. If we actually educated poorer people in this country they would eventually go back to their home countries and bring what they've learned with them. They'd also be willing to invest real, hard earned dollars back into their countries once they made it here.

Some urban development is spurred by corporations/hospitals, etc. who take over entire areas and remake them, displacing the people who live there. Then there's people who invest in their communities to make a difference. Magic Johnson does this sorta thing. The only way to make real change is when people who understand and care about something get involved it. It doesn't happen when huge companies take over assets and try to make cash. When American companies bring jobs overseas they usually end up destroying American jobs in favor of cheap labor. They certainly bring jobs wherever they go, but it's not because they care about the place they're going, but solely because they can make more cash. You need people who truly care about the place they're investing in. These people need to be educated in places that have the ability to do so, and we are such a place.

It takes education to really build up the urban centers of this country, and it takes education to do that in the foreign places investors truly don't care about. It takes education because only educated people make decisions and laws in this country, and unless you educate the minorities the interests they have will never be seriously addressed. This is pretty much why the conservative Republicans don't care to educate anyone in this country, I would suspect (aside from their live for today and selfish attitudes).

So when I look at Africa, and others, I do marvel at their inability to create a single product that changes the world, but I also know they're forever going to be in ths positions they're in unless we take the necesssary steps. Poor American neighborhoods are microcosms of larger African and Latin American nations. We're not enacting change enough in those places, so for me to believe change is coming elsewhere I'd have to be seriously brainwashed, or see one example of true success.

If we've ever been truly succesful in any Third World nation I'd like to know where it is. I'm not talking about an auto plant. That's not enough. Success is supposed to breed success, and inside Third World nations I don't see much breeding going on outside of families of 13. Then again, big business will say success is breeding success since the GUYS on top are making more cash than ever.

I'm glad I live during the period of time before the world is doomed because in the long run it sure is.

------------------
For a real assessment on the issue check this.

Tonight

The Capitol Years at the Bowery Ballroom.

Go!

Lack of Planning

I guess it's official:

The memo also said American planning, in the eyes of Mr. Blair's aides, was "virtually silent" on the problems of a postwar occupation.

"A postwar occupation of Iraq could lead to a protracted and costly nation-building exercise," warned the memorandum, prepared July 21 for a meeting with Mr. Blair a few days later. It also appeared to take as a given the presence of illicit weapons in Iraq - an assumption that later proved almost entirely wrong - and warned that merely removing Saddam Hussein from power would not guarantee that those weapons could be secured.

I used to think there was no post-war planning because the administration truly believed in the ridiculous theory that "because people love freedom, and hate Saddam, they will welcome us with open arms." I still believe this was the post-war plan regardless of how insanely naive and stupid it is.

I've not come to another conclusion: there was no plan because had there been one it would only register one more failure for the Bush Administration.

They had no idea how long the war was going to last, or what could happen, so had they created a post-war plan, and it became public, after the first year Americans would be asking "Why isn't the post-war plan working?" This is something they never wanted to answer, so if there's no plan you don't have to worry about that.

The post-war plan now is to stretch this thing out as long as possible and pass it off to another Administration. Cheney and Bush can both be heard saying, "This will last a few years..." The next candidates will blame Bush and Cheney, so no one will ever be responsible for the actions taken once they're out of office.

America, a free nation. Free of responsibility.

It's Laaaate

But I thought I'd throw this out before bed.

I don't really consider my stuff to be that good. It brings a serious smile to my face when people tell me they like it, and send me emails telling me the same. I also appreciate the hatred, probably more, so thank you too, Jackoffs.

The only time I realize at all that I've written some good stuff is when the really smart people I know tell me they read the site. There's no greater compliment.

Many of the things I write get pushed to the bottom of the page as more news makes it's way to the top. Therefore, I've decided to create an archive of what I think my best takes are. The things that matter most to me are the reasons I even do this, so if you're not reading the things that matter most to me I think you're missing the point I'm trying to make. Hence, the archives.

I want people to spit these arguments into the faces of others. If I can help make that happen, perfect.

Thanks for reading.

You Win Some, You Lose Some...

Check out this story by Josh Marshall.

Vice Douche Speaks

He no likey Howard Dean:

Howard Dean is "over the top,'' Vice President Dick Cheney says, calling the Democrats' chairman "not the kind of individual you want to have representing your political party.''

"I've never been able to understand his appeal. Maybe his mother loved him, but I've never met anybody who does. He's never won anything, as best I can tell,'' Cheney said in an interview to be aired Monday on Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes.''

Did you know that the whole thing about Dean being a 5 term Governor was just a joke? No, really, it was!

Dean responds:

"My view is FOX News is a propaganda outlet for the Republican Party and I don't comment on FOX News," Dean said

There ya go.

I think other democrats should take the same view. Don't comment on FOX NEWS, and don't answer questions from FOX reporters. Don't go on their shows, and the whole concept of "fair and balanced" won't exist! They won't have any balance at all. Will Republicans then boycott all the other news outlets? Who cares? Republicans watch FOX NEWS because it gives them reinforcement, and answers, to respond to questions people with brains will ask them.

There's no reason a democrat should do an interview on FOX NEWS, or respond to a question. Those who watch FOX and take it seriously are never going to vote Democrat. Those who watch it for the comedy, or are seriously looking for news, but also enjoy the FOX style will have to goto other networks to get real news, or the newspapers. It will hurt FOX's bottomline.

Will it give the Republicans an echo chamber? No more than the one that already exists for them.

Let Al Colmes sit their with his thumb up his ass, fetching Diet Cokes for the staff, while nobody watches him.

Politicians should boycott FOX. That's how you put someone out of business. Try it.

I Often Wonder

How High School history books are going to tell the story of the War in Iraq in 25 years, or so:

MINISTERS were warned in July 2002 that Britain was committed to taking part in an American-led invasion of Iraq and they had no choice but to find a way of making it legal.

The warning, in a leaked Cabinet Office briefing paper, said Tony Blair had already agreed to back military action to get rid of Saddam Hussein at a summit at the Texas ranch of President George W Bush three months earlier.

The briefing paper, for participants at a meeting of Blair’s inner circle on July 23, 2002, said that since regime change was illegal it was “necessary to create the conditions” which would make it legal.

Order Restored

This is normal to these folks:

Four Palestinian men convicted of murder were executed by hanging and firing squad in the Gaza Strip today, the Palestinian Interior Ministry said.

The executions marked the first time in about three years that the death penalty has been implemented by the Palestinian Authority, which says it is trying to restore order in the territories under its control.