So Different than Vietnam

Riiiight:

PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Jan. 13 - American planes crossed from Afghanistan into Pakistan's Bajaur tribal region and fired on residential compounds in a Pakistani village early this morning, killing 18 people and wounding 6 others, Pakistani officials and eyewitnesses said.

Villagers and security officials said that four American aircraft entered the Pakistani tribal region that borders Afghanistan's eastern Kunar province at about 3.15 a.m. Pakistan Time. The planes targeted residential buildings in the Berkandi area of Damadola, about 25 miles from the border inside Pakistan, they said.

Because that never happened in Vietnam...

Bob Herbert

Unfortunately you can't read NYTIMES columnists for free anymore because you miss out on Bob Herbert. I caught this one yesterday. The guy is truly the best:

January 12, 2006
Op-Ed Columnist
The Lawbreaker in the Oval Office
By BOB HERBERT

The country has set the bar so low for the performance of George W.
Bush as president that it is effectively on the ground.


No one expects very much from Mr. Bush. He's currently breaking the law
by spying on Americans in America without getting warrants, but for a
lot of people that's just George being George. Forget the complexities
of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or even the Fourth
Amendment's safeguards against unwarranted (pun intended) government
intrusion into matters that we have a right to keep private.


On his frequent trips home to his ranch in Texas, the president likes
to ride his bicycle. He's not studying the Constitution.


"People are changing phone numbers and phone calls, and they're moving
quick," said Mr. Bush, as he defended his authorization of warrantless
eavesdropping by the National Security Agency on phone calls and e-mail
into and out of the U.S.


As the president put it, "If somebody from Al Qaeda is calling you,
we'd like to know why."


Well, that's true, Mr. President. But Congress and the Constitution
have spoken as clearly as a bright sun on a cloudless afternoon about
these matters: if you're going to eavesdrop on Americans in the U.S.,
you'd better run out and get a warrant.


You have to act fast? O.K., do what you have to do - but you then have
to apply for a warrant within 72 hours. If, after three days, you can't
explain to a court - a secret court, at that - why you need to be
spying on somebody, then you need to stop that spying.


It has become fashionable to say that this controversy is about the
always difficult problem of balancing civil liberties and national
security. But I think the issue is starker than that. The real issue is
President Bush's apparent belief - stoked at every opportunity by that
zealot of zealots, Dick Cheney - that he can do just about anything he
wants (mistreat prisoners, lock people up forever without filing
charges), and justify it in the name of fighting terror.


"There's an enemy out there," said Mr. Bush.


That's also true. But this is not China or the old Soviet Union. The
United States should be the one place on the planet where even a
devastating terror strike by Al Qaeda is unable to shake the
foundations of the government, which is grounded in the rule of law,
the separation of powers and a constitution that guarantees the
fundamental rights of the citizenry.


A group of former government officials and law professors from some of
the nation's most distinguished universities sent a letter to
Congressional leaders on Monday expressing their deep concern about the
president's domestic spying program. They said:


"Although the program's secrecy prevents us from being privy to all of
its details, the Justice Department's defense of what it concedes was
secret and warrantless electronic surveillance of persons within the
United States fails to identify any plausible legal authority for such
surveillance. Accordingly, the program appears on its face to violate
existing law."


Among those who signed the letter were William Sessions, the former
F.B.I. director, and Philip Heymann, a former deputy attorney general
who is now a professor at Harvard Law School.


The Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan arm of Congress, also
took issue with the administration's defense of the warrantless
eavesdropping. Its analysts searched diligently but apparently in vain
for a legal justification of the spying authorized by the president.
Their detailed report on the constitutional and statutory issues raised
by the program said, "It appears unlikely that a court would hold that
Congress has expressly or impliedly authorized the N.S.A.
electronic-surveillance operations here under discussion."


The administration's attempt to justify the program, the analysts said,
"does not seem to be as well grounded" as the administration seems to
believe.


President Bush and others in the administration have repeatedly argued
that the president's wartime powers trump some of the important
constitutional guarantees and civil liberties that Americans had
previously taken for granted. They don't seem to see the irony of
fighting on behalf of liberty in Afghanistan and Iraq while curtailing
precious liberties here at home.


The administration should not be allowed to use war as an excuse. The
U.S. is a very special place in large part because no one, not even the
president, is above the law.

The Act

It's great when Republicans like Bush appoint people like Alito to the bench, and so much of the hearing/media coverage revolves around his upbringing. In fact, on the news within 2-3 sentences you'll hear, "Well, Judge Alito does come from modest beginnings. His parents..."

If Republicans were truly upfront and straightforward they'd choose people who actually represent who they are now, instead of having to make the hearing about who the nominee once was.

For Democrats it's okay since the people they more so represent are the people who are currently living the lifestyle Alito's family lived when he was younger; it's not disingenuous.

But I expect nothing less from the party of inclusion.

Love this Guy

Ri-goddamn-diculous!

The Circle is Complete

Fame in America.

Do something good, and then go on Oprah.

Have every newspaper and person talk about what you did.

Then get caught doing something wrong.

Then go on Larry King.

In defense of Frey, even if he embellished parts of his book dealing with how he was treated by law enforcement, or how he treated them, who cares? Even if parts of the book are false, the central theme/message of it is true. The parts that stick in my craw are true.

I was thoroughly entertained by this book, and would recommend it to anyone, especially if you have addiction issues (which I don't, and never have).

During an interview (which I can't find) Frey commented he wanted to be the "best fucking writer" around, and to be considered along side Kerouac, Hemingway, and the rest. Once I saw that I asked myself whether or not the guy took some literary freedoms when he wrote his "memoir." The thing is, I didn't care either way because I knew the gist of what he was saying was true, and the message was as well. I think that's all that matters, at least for me.

Besides, if he actually did make this story up, I'm even MORE IMPRESSED.

The Hearing

I'm trying to figure out in which order I'd place these men as far as who is the largest jackass goes: Senators Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy, Orrin Hatch.

Let me tell you, this is a neck and neck race to the end.

I watched a good hour of the hearings last night on CSPAN, and it was truly a sight to see. Democracy in action.

Joe Biden just talks and talks and talks and talks. The man doesn't shut the fuck up for a second, and the things he says, not even relevant. This guy's going to run for President? C'mon, stop it. Mark Warner, meet the first guy you have to beat. Biden talks so much that's he's bound to say something so stupid in the near future which will hurt his run. But in all seriousness, the guy doesn't care who's sitting across from him. He just wants to hear himself. He needs to speak at least 25 sentences before a question comes up, and when it does, you're not even sure if it's a question, and neither is he. But he's smiling, that you can be sure of.

Then there's Ted Kennedy. I give the guy some credit for trying to discredit Alito; forcing him to prove himself. But Ted doesn't realize one thing: Alito just doens't remember! He doesn't remember if he joined this group, or that group, or when it happened, or if it even happened. All he remembers is the reason he might have joined this group, or that group, or when it may have happened, if it happened.

Kennedy was pressing Alito as to whether he could comment about a conservative group he joined while at Princeton. Of course, he couldn't remember. Even though he touted his membership when he joined the Reagan Administration, he just can't remember. He blames the Reagan Administration for controlling his brain during those years, which may very well be the reason he forgot.

In other words, the guy is a bald-faced liar, who can't even take credit for the beliefs he has. Why? It's a job interview; Everyone lies on job interviews!!! But Kennedy will press and press, but get nothing. I mean, at least he's trying. Still, there's something about when Kennedy does it that makes him seem more guilty of something than Alito. Therefore, he's a jackass for not prodding another Senator to take the lead. Then again, it's sorta hypocritical for me to say Kennedy shouldn't fall on the sword. However, it's high time someone else did it. Unless Kennedy wants to make the ultimate sacrifice, be completely over the top, and fillibuster this guy endlessly until get the point: he's a liar.

Not saying Alito doesn't have a distinguished career, and isn't a good person. I'm sure he does, and I'm sure he is. This doesn't mean he's not sitting up there lying. The smartest men in the world, can't remember their own pasts. Great stuff.

I'm placing Ted third. It's his history that gets him on the list, and his lack of action by not pressing some other Senator to take the lead.

Orrin Hatch. Just a huge douchebag. Putting Tom Delay, Bush, Cheney, and Condi Rice on the side, there's probably no other politician I'd want to punch in the face than this guy. Maybe Santorum. Actually Coburn would be nice. But then there's Frist. Hmmm...there's just so many. Giuliani. Okay, forget I said that. Hatch is just a douchebag, period.

He sits on the stand, all smarmy, asking softball questions. When he's not asking the questions, he's answering them!

Typical Hatch Q & A:

"Judge Alito, you were a Justice on the Third Circuit Appeals Court, and you had cases come before you where you voted what was right because that's what the law told you do. Right?"

"Right."

"Right. Because you're a good judge, and that's what good judges do. Right?"

Alito head nod.

"Because you're a good judge, you did the right thing, like a good judge does. There was a case in New Jersey based on racial profiling. The police said two nihg...uhh, black youths driving a sport utility vehicle committed a crime, and the police pulled them over. But you sided with the defendants, isn't that right?"

"Yes."

"Any why did you decide with the defendants in this case?"

Alito, "Because..."

"BECAUSE YOU'RE A GOOD JUDGE! And you follow the letter of the law. You don't push your own agenda. Right?"

"Right."

"I just have one more question, Judge Ah-lee-TOH. You were in the ROTC, correct?"

"Yes, I was."

"You're a good man. Good men join the ROTC."

Head nod.

"Did you enjoy your time in the ROTC and in the Army afterward?"

"I did."

"Thank you. No more questions."

Winner, by UNANIMOUS DECISION:

ORRIN HATCH!!!!!!

1. Hatch
2. Biden
3. Kennedy

As annoying as Biden is, Hatch is so far ahead. John Kyl did some good work, but not nearly enough.

Time to Cut Taxes!

HEADLINE: Wall Street Bonuses to Hit Record $21.5 Billion in 2005

Wall Street bonuses are expected to have hit a record $21.5 billion in 2005 from $18.6 billion in 2004 as investment banks reaped record earnings, New York State Comptroller Alan Hevesi said Wednesday.

Last year's bonuses beat the record of $19.5 billion set in 2000 at the peak of the equities boom, Hevesi said during a conference call with reporters.

Booming merger and underwriting activity, as well as a stock market rebound, helped revenues rise by almost 50 percent in the first three quarters of last year.

"2000 was the peak of the greatest boom in our modern history. It was a remarkable time, so this is very good news," Hevesi said.

One Day Democrats Will Get It

When that happens there'll be at least 4 parties, so it won't matter as much. It'll take THAT long.

Here's the problem I have with Democrats these days. Wait, I can't frame it like that because I have so many.

Here's a problem I have with Democrats these days: They're not willing to be fired!

If Senate Democrats had set out to portray Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. as extreme on issues ranging from abortion to government surveillance of citizens, they ran up against an elusive target on Tuesday: Samuel A. Alito Jr. For nearly eight hours, Judge Alito was placid, monochromatic and, it seemed, mostly untouchable.

Unlike the testimony of John G. Roberts Jr., who had often declined to answer questions on various grounds, among them that certain issues might come before him as chief justice or that his older writings did not necessarily reflect his current views, Judge Alito's default impulse frequently seemed to be to try to give a direct response to the senators' often rambling questions.

Failing that, he offered what he presented as clarifications of earlier statements or writing, sanded of any rough edges, or said he simply could not recall details about some past chapter of his life that had raised concern among senators. Only in one exchange did he appear rattled, refusing to give a direct answer when Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York asked him if he still held a view, expressed in 1985, that there was no constitutional right to abortion.

For the most part, his handling of questions from Democrats had the effect of leaving his questioner shuffling through papers in search of the next question...

Yes, he said, he once believed that there was no constitutional right to abortion, but at the time he was merely a "a line attorney in the Department of Justice in the Reagan administration," and he would keep an open mind should abortion come before him at the Supreme Court.

Where to begin, where to begin...

When I say, "Willing to be fired" what I mean is these guys always dance around issues, and never truly say what they want to say. Either they're too politically correct, or scared to be ostracized. Thankfully there's Howard Dean. Like him or not he tells it like it is. The rest of these characters, with an occassional blast from Nancy Pelosi, say nothing.

I wonder which one of them has ever been fired, or lost a job over conduct detrimental to something. I bet none of them. Government lawyers, corporate nodders, family connections, you name it, they've done it. Both sides. However, the other side at least throws the racist barb, or the inconsiderate comment about one group or another. But not Democrats. They don't do that. They play it safe.

The not-so-safe play is why Republicans, or should I say Neo-Cons can get away with pushing a right-wing agenda at every turn. They're lining the government with individuals who think like them, and use each other as a support group. Every time a conservative makes some stupid comment they've got talking points spread across the media. You've got Wolf Blitzer accusing Democrats of the same Abramoff issues as Republicans. They've got the system down pat. When a Republican makes a quip he/she gets media attention out the ass, and three extra days to "clarify" their position. Not Democrats. They rarely do this.

Rather than let Alito get to the Senate without having gone through a vigorous grilling before hand was a big mistake. Whether or not this guy is or isn't a good, fair, qualified judge isn't the issue. The issue is whether or not he represents mainstream values, and whether he severely shifts the balance of the court in the wrong (right) direction. There's a good chance he will.

If the Democrats truly believed in something, one or two of them would be willing to take the microphone and go off about why he's the wrong judge at the wrong time. If one of them was willing to be FIRED, that is. But they're not. They don't know what it means to stand by their convictions. They're scared to LOSE an election, or face harsh criticism; be deemed "out of touch." Who fucking cares? Have some guts. Do what's right. Say what needs to be said. Get up on the podium and speak for a majority of the people you represent. But this is the problem with people who don't have the guts to lose their high place in life.

In a way this all gets back to publicly financed elections. Maybe if we didn't have these same-type people running for office with billions of dollars we'd get real people, with guts, and conviction, willing to lose everything in order to gain something.

Heck, I'm willing to do it, which is why I'm announcing my candidacy for Governor of New Jersey in 2024!!! :)

Yes, I'll admit that I both sold and did drugs.

(not editing)

-----
Also, I'm tired of the excuse that so and so was "just doing my job" as an excuse for specific writings, or reasonings. In this case we're dealing with both Roberts and Alito using the Reagan White House as an excuse for thoughts.

Did Ronald Reagan ask, "Hey, Sam, will you figure me out a way to get all vaginas sewn up?"

"Sure, Hondo, whatever you want, as long I'm not credited."

Since when do people work in high level government jobs but not want credit for their own thoughts? I mean, you take those jobs in order to advance. You prove your worth, and then you move up.

Are all these JUDGES dishonest, and just saying what someone else wants to hear? Is that what we want from judges? People who can't standby their own words? People who don't have the guts to write, or say, what is right? What they believe? Give me a fucking break already.

Yeah, I get it, working for someone else. But please, that's hardly an excuse for government employees/judges, especially when government is supposed to be neutral in the sense that lawyers working for Presidents shouldn't be actively trying to change the laws of the country. Again, I know, interpretation, but it's really all bullshit.

These people said these things, wrote things, penned these things. Someone call them out. Call these people liars, or gutless.

It's unbelievable that the excuse for the highest judges in the land is, "Oh, that wasn't really me thinking that. I was writing for someone else."

"Works for me! You're dismissed!"

Limey Bastard

God, I'm so fucking jealous.

On Wednesday Alex Tew, a 21-year-old entrepreneur from Wiltshire, was due to sell the final 1,000 pixels on his site, reaching his goal of earning a million dollars. With just three hours to go until the eBay auction closed, the bids for the remaining pixels stood at $140,300 – a handsome increase on the starting price of $1,000.

Mr Tew created milliondollarhomepage.com in August 2005 to cover his fees for a course in business management.

“Yes, my site was launched due to the fact I needed money for university, and that’s exactly what my aim was,” he writes in his blog. “I thought, if I aim high – $1m – and only get a small percentage of that figure, that would still help me out a great deal.”

Million Dollar Homepage.

Nice Work, Jews

Keep voting conservative:

JERUSALEM - Israel won't do business with Pat Robertson after the evangelical leader suggested Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's massive stroke was divine punishment, a tourism official said Wednesday, putting into doubt plans to develop a large Christian tourism center in northern Israel.

Avi Hartuv, spokesman for Israel's tourism minister, said officials are furious with Robertson's suggestion that the stroke was retribution for Sharon's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip last summer. "We can't accept this kind of statement," Hartuv said.

Robertson is leading a group of evangelicals who have pledged to raise $50 million to build the Christian Heritage Center in Israel's northern Galilee region, where tradition says Jesus lived and taught.

Yeah, they like the Jews...and the niggers too.

The Israelis will learn a lesson, right? No, they won't:

"We will not do business with him, only with other evangelicals who don't back these comments," Hartuv said. "We will do business with other evangelical leaders, friends of Israel, but not with him."

Good times, good times.

Gotta Get Worse

You know how I always say, "things have to get really bad before people start to pull their heads from their asses?" Well, I do say that, always.

If Alito tries to overturn Roe, and Roberts does too, and Scalia, and the black dude, and Kennedy (even though he's not on board), then things will officially gotten worse.

The news media, if we're too believe in their liberal leanings, will show countless stories of backroom abortions. The internet will be strewn with vial images which will be shot right into peoples' homes. Once people recognize how horrible these images are then they'll recognize just why this is an issue that does deserve serious consideration.

On the optimistic side, Bush rarely gets anything right the first time, so we have to assume he's going to miss wildly with at least one of his justices, and quite possibly two.

Joe Pa?

Joe Paterno has won the AFCA Coach of the Year Award, even though Mack Brown should have. However, he's taking a beating because of his inappropriate comments:

A day before the Orange Bowl, Paterno was asked about Nicholson and replied by talking about past suspensions of Penn State players. He then added: "There's so many people gravitating to these kids. He may not have even known what he was getting into, Nicholson. They knock on the door; somebody may knock on the door; a cute girl knocks on the door. What do you do? Geez. I hope - thank God they don't knock on my door because I'd refer them to a couple of other rooms.''

Obviously you don't do what Kobe Bryant did.

It's a joke. Relax. He's from a different age, and a different time. If he made those comments at a dinner table with a bunch of couples no one would even flinch. And yes, he does get a free pass since he is Joe Paterno. A coach who gives more money back to Penn State that they named the library after him.

I appreciate NOW's message, but only half as much as I appreciate this one.

I keeeed.

Whoa!

There's another reason?

President Bush issued an unusually stark warning to Democrats today about how to conduct the debate on Iraq as midterm elections approach, declaring that Americans know the difference "between honest critics" and those "who claim that we acted in Iraq because of oil, or because of Israel, or because we misled the American people."

Love to hear it.

Best part:

Mr. Bush added that "a country that divides into factions and dwells on old grievances cannot move forward and risks sliding back into tyranny."

Which country is he talking about?

Had Bush not been given the script this would be the speech: Please stop saying bad things about me. I had nothing to do with this.

I won't lie. People may think my stories are shit, but I assure you, the police records won't be expunged.

James Frey, he supposedly did lie, but frankly, I don't give a shit because he kept me glued to the pages for 48 hours.

3/5

Great stuff in the office today.

First off, the Office Manager told us we sorta have off for Martin Luther King day; that it'd be a half day.

"What's the point of that?"

Manager, "What do you mean?"

"I mean, I don't understand why you'd acknowledge the holiday, but not really?"

"Well, it's not a full holiday for us. It's a half day."

I reply, "But there are so few businesses open there's almost no point."

"I'll see what Alan says."

"Hey, if you want to really stay true to the holiday you'd give us 3/5ths of a day off..."

Too Funny

After yesterday's post on coal miners, I come across this today:

At the same time, under the Bush administration, the MSHA has lost some clout. The agency has switched from strict punishment of violations to what is called compliance assistance. Inspectors are supposed to talk with mine operators about improving conditions rather than forcing changes, according to Ellen Smith, owner and managing editor of the Mine Safety and Health News, a magazine that monitors MSHA. Nonetheless, the non-fatal injury rate has declined over the last decade, from 9.95 injuries per 200,000 working hours in 1995 to 5.66 in 2004.

In MSHA's first public statement on Sago last week, a top official said he believed the mine hadn't moved quickly enough to correct problems. "Evidently, their action plan hadn't matured where they were ahead of that type of issue," Ray McKinney, the agency's administrator for coal mine safety and health, told a West Virginia radio show.

Of course.

Reform

Read the WaPo article about how Americans feel about lobbying and politicians. There's not a whole lot of trust going around. This makes me wonder about campaign finance reform. Certainly John McCain is going to bring this back up when he runs for President, assuming he doesn't die before 2008.

You'll have politicians and talking heads arguing that spending money is a form of free speech. Mostly, these will be Republicans since their party relies completely on the spending of huge amounts of money to overshadow any countervailing message. Not that Democrats don't have, or spend, money, they do. But it's not the same. So for Republicans, spending money on campaigns and having lobbyists spend/influence is free speech.

There's an old saying I've mentioned before, and I'll say it again: Lobbyists give to Republicans because they want to. They give to Democrats because they have to.

I wonder why someone can't make this argument: Publicly financed elections save Americans money. Yes, taxpayer dollars will be spent on financing elections, but the savings Americans will receive in the form of lower costs in healthcare, drugs, retirement benefits, legal fees, you name it, will CLEARLY make up for any tax dollars lost to finance elections. If bit business spends and spends at the expense of ordinary Americans you can be sure they're making excess coin on our backs. Publicly financed elections would help slow their weighted influence, and give more power back to regular people.

People don't trust lobbyists, insurance companies, and certain aspects of big business, so why isn't this being made?

Seriously

No one cares about the Samuel Alito hearings. All minds are already made up regardless of what this guy does or says. There's the chance he'll tilt to the left and rip ass mid-hearing. At which point he would receive my support hands down, but that's not likely to happen.

All decisions have been made by anyone who really cares about this issue one way, or the other. Afterall, are you going to sit home this evening and watch the rerun on C-Span? Of course not. Do you know who watches C-Span for an extended period of time? Retired people, people bored on weekends watching BookTv, people who like Washington Journal (me), and the writers of the Daily Show. Sure, maybe you devote 5 minutes a week to the station, but overall, no one gives a crap. You may read the headlines in the morning paper about Alito, but you're not going to sit there and listen to what he has to say, and that's because our minds are already made up.

Which actually brings me to my point. One of the biggest issues regarding Alito is his take on Presidential power, and that's because the current President (and his staff) believe there are few checks on what the Executive Branch can do, especially during a time of war. Much of the current debate rests on these two points:

Justice Jackson's second category was "a zone of twilight" in which Congress has taken no action. In that case, he said, "any actual test of power is likely to depend on the imperatives of events and contemporary imponderables rather than on abstract theories of law."

The third category is where the president takes action at odds with the will of Congress. A 1978 law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, appears to require court approval before monitoring of the sort the administration has acknowledged.

In this third area, Justice Jackson said, the president's power is "at its lowest

I look at these two issues and think to myself just how retarded this country is to be debating these things. What happened to common sense law, or just common sense?

With regards to the first issue, "a zone of twlight," it's common sense that during a time of necessity Americans expect their President to act immediately. In fact, the Constitution even mandates that he do so if Congress doesn't have the time to act. This is why Americans are cool with what David Palmer and Jack Bauer do. It's all good! When there's no time, and we're understand, we have the common sense enough to understand that someone has to make a decision. Unfortunately, it's a moron, but it is what it is.

Senator Graham of South Carolina was seemed a bit worried yesterday that limiting Executive power would put his "family" at risk. Lets be realistic, pal. It's not going to happen. Why is this even an issue?

The second point, with regard to the FISA Court is obviously being discussed because of President Bush's recent disregard for the law. It's a good political tactic for Democrats to go down this road so this issue can be brought to light again.

Where will Alito stand on this? I mean, if he stands with Bush that puts him so far out of touch with the law that it's scary. But if he disagrees then President Bush is going to be scrutinized even further. Ahh haa, but if he agrees with Bush then you'll just have all those people whose minds are already made up nodding with approval; thinking Bush was right in what he did. This would surely be bad because we'd be giving away our rights to the President, and in essence we'd be allowing a judge to make law during his confirmation hearing!

The whole thing is totally fucked up.

In the end, no one really cares. Regarding these two aforementioned points, the first is common sense, and the second is wholly political. Alito's confirmation shouldn't be about this President, per se, but should be about who Alito represents. Does he favor big business over everything else? Is he against union organization? Will corporations continue to get every break under the sun? Is using public money for religious institutions legal? These are the things I want to know about.

But again, decisions are made, nothing ever matters, nothing ever changes, until something changes, like on 9/11. Then people will start asking questions, when something drastic happens. Even then people will fall back to their corners and won't even blame those who are truly responsible, so why expect anyone to change their thoughts over something like a judge's confirmation?

I could go on all day, and in a week or two, I plan to...

And Then There Were Two

Now we have two morons who can't ride bikes.

Moron 1.

Moron 2.

Miners Trapped

In a shitty life.

I really do feel for the miners who were trapped, especially since being buried alive is my biggest fear. But when's enough enough? And why is this story the biggest deal going? Is it the fact they had to suffer for a long period of time? Guess what, they're coalminers; they've been suffering for a real real real long time, and there's a solid chance they were going to die of some lung-related problem from working in the damn mines in the first place.

What kind of health plan did the miners have? Did they have a nice pension waiting for them? How many of them have been laid off in recent years? Would things have been worse had their not been an OSHA, which of course, Republicans hate? Of course they'd be worse.

We care about people when they die, and why? We hardly care when they live. So many rail about the fetus not living, but once it becomes a child, they stop caring.

Life or death TV, that's what sells. The news, well, that's not really important. Missing idiot blondes who get drunk and wonder off on a tropical island with guys she doens't know, well, that matters. Men in a well, that matters. Underperforming schools? Not so important.

The reality of Katrina, and the way people live in New Orleans, that was good for a few days. Now we don't give a shit.

You want real news, a real tv show, that's about life or death? Put some cameras inside a high school in Hartford Connecticut for a few weeks. Then you'll see life or death TV that matters. You'll see people who never even got a chance to be die a miner. They just die as minors.

Quote of the Year (as of now)

So Howard Stern is on Sirius and both XM and Sirius have seen subscriber growth since he signed in 2004. This quote from and executive of XM is just too rich:

"Our content has not changed," said Eric Logan, XM's executive vice president of programming. "We have a platform targeted at mainstream America. There are more and more people who find Howard Stern repulsive and offensive and will go away from anywhere he is."

Right. This from the company that has Opie & Anthony on the air every day. The same O & A who were thrown off Infinity's airwaves for giving away prizes to people who would have sex in St. Patrick's Cathedral.

Targeting mainstream America...

Exasperation

Wolf Blitzer, wishing he could drag some Democrats through the slime, but Howard Dean just won't let it happen.

"...speaking bluntly..." unlike the rest of the shitbags.