Boston Globe / Daschle opts out of presidential race
Thomas A. Daschle decided yesterday to skip a campaign for president to remain as the Democrats' leader in the Senate, only hours after telling his staff he planned to form a presidential exploratory committee and just days before he was to make his first campaign trip.
Daschle was my least favorite possible candidate. He does not have a good image on television and he has compromised too much.
Both Senator Bob Graham of Florida and former general Wesley Clark of Arkansas, once NATO supreme allied commander, met yesterday with Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, to discuss the possibility of campaigns. Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware is also said to be weighing a candidacy.
Wesley Clark is an unusual choice, I don't think a general who is not very famous would do well in the primaries. I am impressed by Graham.
Wednesday, January 08, 2003
PBS: Lance Loud - A death in An American Family
Before there was reality TV there was An American Family on PBS. Two documentary film makers thought there was an important story taken place in the American family in the late sixties and early seventies and managed to convince the Loud family in California to film them for over six months. The family was sure that this would show them as an example of the all-American triumph of family values. They were wrong.
By the time the show aired the parents were divorced and their eldest son had come out as gay on national television. This was at a time when homosexuality was a topic never mentioned.
PBS has just aired the final chapter in the American Family story. Lance Loud, with terminal hepatitis C in a hospice, decided to let the crew back to film his final days.
LA Weekly: Loud and Proud
Earlier stories about Lance.
Rob Sheiffele (television producer): Last summer I took him to a hospital, and the nurse was running through her list of questions as she admitted him. She asked him if he had any religious beliefs, and he replied, "Baked goods." The nurse said "What?" And he said, "Yes, baked goods. When I got off drugs, I didn't turn to God, I turned to baked goods." The nurse immediately loved him.
LATimes Obit.
Can a Documentary Be Made of Real Life is a look at the media reception.
Before there was reality TV there was An American Family on PBS. Two documentary film makers thought there was an important story taken place in the American family in the late sixties and early seventies and managed to convince the Loud family in California to film them for over six months. The family was sure that this would show them as an example of the all-American triumph of family values. They were wrong.
By the time the show aired the parents were divorced and their eldest son had come out as gay on national television. This was at a time when homosexuality was a topic never mentioned.
PBS has just aired the final chapter in the American Family story. Lance Loud, with terminal hepatitis C in a hospice, decided to let the crew back to film his final days.
LA Weekly: Loud and Proud
Earlier stories about Lance.
Rob Sheiffele (television producer): Last summer I took him to a hospital, and the nurse was running through her list of questions as she admitted him. She asked him if he had any religious beliefs, and he replied, "Baked goods." The nurse said "What?" And he said, "Yes, baked goods. When I got off drugs, I didn't turn to God, I turned to baked goods." The nurse immediately loved him.
LATimes Obit.
Can a Documentary Be Made of Real Life is a look at the media reception.
Tuesday, January 07, 2003
The watch notes that Democracy Now has it that the two dead protesters in Venezuela were pro-Chavez shot by Caracas police. Reuter's caption implied they were part of the opposition strike protest.
She also posted that General Gomez, who led the April coup is organizing an armed resistance group. They're operating out of Florida.
In the United States, working to overthrow the government is a crime punishable by death.
She also posted that General Gomez, who led the April coup is organizing an armed resistance group. They're operating out of Florida.
In the United States, working to overthrow the government is a crime punishable by death.
Slate -- Trick or Treatment - Teen drug programs turn curious teens into crackheads. By Maia Szalavitz
A 1998 study of nearly 150 teenagers treated in dozens of centers across the country found that there was 202 percent more crack abuse following treatment and a 13 percent increase in alcohol abuse. In other words, recent research suggests that parents and schools may be sending binge-drinking/social marijuana smokers off to treatment and getting back crackheads in their stead.
Do parents really want their pot-smoking, experimenting binge-drinkers (who are actually typically more moderate than their own parents were at their age) tossed into "therapy" with heroin injectors and told that they are powerless to resist?
We know the rich kids are getting out of jail time but do the programs they are placed in help them? Would a looser policy toward experimentation help?
A 1998 study of nearly 150 teenagers treated in dozens of centers across the country found that there was 202 percent more crack abuse following treatment and a 13 percent increase in alcohol abuse. In other words, recent research suggests that parents and schools may be sending binge-drinking/social marijuana smokers off to treatment and getting back crackheads in their stead.
Do parents really want their pot-smoking, experimenting binge-drinkers (who are actually typically more moderate than their own parents were at their age) tossed into "therapy" with heroin injectors and told that they are powerless to resist?
We know the rich kids are getting out of jail time but do the programs they are placed in help them? Would a looser policy toward experimentation help?
ABCNEWS.com : N. Korea Warns 'Sanctions Mean a War'
A defiant North Korea warned that sanctions against it would "mean a war," as thousands of people rallied Tuesday in the communist capital to support the country's military.
Bush refuses to take North Korea seriously - could this lead to a miscommunication war as in the latest Weber Honor Harrington novel War of Honor?
A defiant North Korea warned that sanctions against it would "mean a war," as thousands of people rallied Tuesday in the communist capital to support the country's military.
Bush refuses to take North Korea seriously - could this lead to a miscommunication war as in the latest Weber Honor Harrington novel War of Honor?
ABCNEWS.com : Venezuela Opposition Heralds Tax Revolt with March
Venezuela's opposition, stepping up an economic war against President Hugo Chavez's government, planned to kick off a national tax revolt on Tuesday by holding a protest march to two revenue collection offices in Caracas.
More than five weeks into an opposition strike that is still throttling oil output and shipments in the world's No. 5 petroleum exporter, foes of the leftist president have added a refusal to pay taxes to their grueling protest campaign.
It is worth noting that the lockouts started when Chavez announced he was collecting taxes this year.
Thousands of people marched with the coffins of two men of a fatal shooting that occurred during an opposition strike protest against President Hugo Chavez two days ago.
I almost missed this in the photo caption. I had noted the speculation that the opposition would use some possibly trumped up violence against it as the next step. See if this violence by the government angle starts to get more play.
Venezuela's opposition, stepping up an economic war against President Hugo Chavez's government, planned to kick off a national tax revolt on Tuesday by holding a protest march to two revenue collection offices in Caracas.
More than five weeks into an opposition strike that is still throttling oil output and shipments in the world's No. 5 petroleum exporter, foes of the leftist president have added a refusal to pay taxes to their grueling protest campaign.
It is worth noting that the lockouts started when Chavez announced he was collecting taxes this year.
Thousands of people marched with the coffins of two men of a fatal shooting that occurred during an opposition strike protest against President Hugo Chavez two days ago.
I almost missed this in the photo caption. I had noted the speculation that the opposition would use some possibly trumped up violence against it as the next step. See if this violence by the government angle starts to get more play.
CNN.com - Chirac braces troops for Iraq war
There is a lot of speculation on a brief remark when France has been very vocal about opposition to military force without Security Council approval.
In a New Year's address to France's armed forces on Tuesday, Chirac told troops: "To be ready for all eventualities is at the heart of the soldier's job that you've chosen.
"In particular, we have to be attentive to the manner in which the United Nations Security Council resolution 1441 is applied by Iraq."
It should be noted that this speculation started with the AP, which often has a conservative Republican agenda.
There is a lot of speculation on a brief remark when France has been very vocal about opposition to military force without Security Council approval.
In a New Year's address to France's armed forces on Tuesday, Chirac told troops: "To be ready for all eventualities is at the heart of the soldier's job that you've chosen.
"In particular, we have to be attentive to the manner in which the United Nations Security Council resolution 1441 is applied by Iraq."
It should be noted that this speculation started with the AP, which often has a conservative Republican agenda.
Wanted: A talking head to rival Rush -- The Washington Times
The Moonie Press on the search for an Angry Liberal for radio.
The Moonie Press on the search for an Angry Liberal for radio.
DesMoinesRegister.com -- Iowa ties could give Gephardt advantage
Gephardt has always received strong support from organized labor and blue-collar families, and his record with those two groups will be the keys to a victory for him in Iowa, Myers said.
"It's actually a good news/bad news situation with him in Iowa," said Gordon Fischer, chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party. "The good news is he won the Iowa caucus before. The bad news is it was 14 years ago."
He is mainly on the right spot on the issues but he is like so yesterday is the typical Democrat response.
Gephardt has always received strong support from organized labor and blue-collar families, and his record with those two groups will be the keys to a victory for him in Iowa, Myers said.
"It's actually a good news/bad news situation with him in Iowa," said Gordon Fischer, chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party. "The good news is he won the Iowa caucus before. The bad news is it was 14 years ago."
He is mainly on the right spot on the issues but he is like so yesterday is the typical Democrat response.
Analysis Finds Little Gain in Tax-Cut Plan (washingtonpost.com)
Eliminating taxes on dividends paid to individuals, the centerpiece of President Bush's stimulus package, would do little to spur economic growth or reduce the nation's jobless rate, according to an analysis this weekend by two prominent economists.
Eliminating taxes on dividends paid to individuals, the centerpiece of President Bush's stimulus package, would do little to spur economic growth or reduce the nation's jobless rate, according to an analysis this weekend by two prominent economists.
Democrats Counter With Own Plan for The Economy (washingtonpost.com)
House Democrats yesterday unveiled a $136 billion, 10-year economic stimulus package that would extend unemployment benefits for more than six months and provide every taxpayer with a $300 tax credit.
The proposal is much smaller than a plan President Bush will introduce today in Chicago that would cost nearly $674 billion over the same 10 years.
An analysis by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center of the effects of eliminating dividend taxation found that the average benefit for those making less than $10,000 would be $6, and the average benefit for those making more than $1 million would be $45,098.
Bush doesn't have $674 billion of your money to spend. he is going to run up the credit card and see who has to pay. The debt also creates justification for cutting everything but defense.
House Democrats yesterday unveiled a $136 billion, 10-year economic stimulus package that would extend unemployment benefits for more than six months and provide every taxpayer with a $300 tax credit.
The proposal is much smaller than a plan President Bush will introduce today in Chicago that would cost nearly $674 billion over the same 10 years.
An analysis by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center of the effects of eliminating dividend taxation found that the average benefit for those making less than $10,000 would be $6, and the average benefit for those making more than $1 million would be $45,098.
Bush doesn't have $674 billion of your money to spend. he is going to run up the credit card and see who has to pay. The debt also creates justification for cutting everything but defense.
An Election Season Done, Another Just Begun (washingtonpost.com)
A mere 60 days after the last election, the president and his political seer have been busily assembling a Republican lineup for the next.
"The question floating around Democratic Senate circles is why the president and his aides are more concerned with recruiting a challenger to assistant Democratic leader Harry Reid than paying attention to North Korea, Iraq and the war on terrorism," said one adviser to Reid.
With Iraq and North Korea vying to be the most evil member of the axis, things can get complicated. Last Thursday, a reporter began a question to Bush by asking: "If we do have to go to war "
The president interrupted for a clarification. "With which country?" he inquired.
After having a relatively successful mid-term Rove has started the campaign for 04. Foreign affairs are not on schedule.
A mere 60 days after the last election, the president and his political seer have been busily assembling a Republican lineup for the next.
"The question floating around Democratic Senate circles is why the president and his aides are more concerned with recruiting a challenger to assistant Democratic leader Harry Reid than paying attention to North Korea, Iraq and the war on terrorism," said one adviser to Reid.
With Iraq and North Korea vying to be the most evil member of the axis, things can get complicated. Last Thursday, a reporter began a question to Bush by asking: "If we do have to go to war "
The president interrupted for a clarification. "With which country?" he inquired.
After having a relatively successful mid-term Rove has started the campaign for 04. Foreign affairs are not on schedule.
History News Network REPUBLICANS, THE PARTY OF FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY
also blogged the Washington Post editorial and added -
Once again, W and the boys are proving they're incapable of basic math or are too dishonest to admit they've done the math but don't give a damn. As I've said many times before, the Republicans are the party of fiscal irresponsibility billing itself as the party of fiscal responsibility. It's this party that gives you the deficits that the Democrats will then, dutifully, try to get rid of in a few years.
also blogged the Washington Post editorial and added -
Once again, W and the boys are proving they're incapable of basic math or are too dishonest to admit they've done the math but don't give a damn. As I've said many times before, the Republicans are the party of fiscal irresponsibility billing itself as the party of fiscal responsibility. It's this party that gives you the deficits that the Democrats will then, dutifully, try to get rid of in a few years.
washingtonpost.com: The Tax Cut Trap
LET'S SEE IF we have this right. President Bush plans to propose a stimulus plan the centerpiece of which will have little or no stimulative effect. At a time when some people badly could use help, Mr. Bush's tax cut mostly will help those who need it least. And while the president is warning Congress to restrain its spending on basics such as education and aid to the poor, the tax cuts will further inflate his growing budget deficit. No wonder that Mr. Bush, even before officially unveiling the plan tomorrow, waved his magic "class warfare" amulet, seeking to obscure the obvious -- another tax cut for the rich -- by preemptively accusing his accusers.
Link by BuzzFlash
LET'S SEE IF we have this right. President Bush plans to propose a stimulus plan the centerpiece of which will have little or no stimulative effect. At a time when some people badly could use help, Mr. Bush's tax cut mostly will help those who need it least. And while the president is warning Congress to restrain its spending on basics such as education and aid to the poor, the tax cuts will further inflate his growing budget deficit. No wonder that Mr. Bush, even before officially unveiling the plan tomorrow, waved his magic "class warfare" amulet, seeking to obscure the obvious -- another tax cut for the rich -- by preemptively accusing his accusers.
Link by BuzzFlash
Not a rubber-stamp Congress | csmonitor.com
Mr. Bush, while holding the political high ground, will not find a rubber stamp at the end of every gavel on Capitol Hill.
Sen. John McCain (R) of Arizona plans to chair hearings on a sweeping proposal to address global warming by mandating reductions in US greenhouse-gas emissions, something the White House opposes.
Another chairman with a strong record of independence is Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, an outspoken critic of executive branch efforts to keep information from Congress and the public.
A lot of hopes rest with moderate Republicans
Mr. Bush, while holding the political high ground, will not find a rubber stamp at the end of every gavel on Capitol Hill.
Sen. John McCain (R) of Arizona plans to chair hearings on a sweeping proposal to address global warming by mandating reductions in US greenhouse-gas emissions, something the White House opposes.
Another chairman with a strong record of independence is Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, an outspoken critic of executive branch efforts to keep information from Congress and the public.
A lot of hopes rest with moderate Republicans
Penn, of Penn and Teller, has an experience with the new airport security. If you object to a search call the regular police and charge assault.
History News Network - The Nixon Shadow that Hovers Over the Bush White House -- By John Dean
Mr. Dean served as White House counsel under Richard Nixon and has been tarred by Republicans as the man who brought down Nixon.
Not since Richard Nixon's presidency have the powers of Congress been in greater jeopardy. Not only is the Bush White House seeking to expand presidential powers at the expense of Congress, but the conservative gang of five on the U.S. Supreme Court are busy trimming congressional powers directly.
Clearly, Vice President Dick Cheney is the force behind the White House's effort to enhance presidential power, and limit the powers of those on Capitol Hill. This is evident because President Bush simply does not possess the mental acumen, or experience, to play the game his White House has instituted; but Cheney does. This is not to say Bush doesn't embrace the undertaking, for he obviously does, but simply that Cheney is almost certainly the moving force behind it.
Indeed, Cheney has all but admitted the point. "In thirty-four years, I have repeatedly seen an erosion of the powers and the ability of the president of the United States to do his job," Cheney told ABC's "This Week" in January 2002.
He continues with Cheney's history in this article. A follow-up on the Supreme Court is coming.
Mr. Dean served as White House counsel under Richard Nixon and has been tarred by Republicans as the man who brought down Nixon.
Not since Richard Nixon's presidency have the powers of Congress been in greater jeopardy. Not only is the Bush White House seeking to expand presidential powers at the expense of Congress, but the conservative gang of five on the U.S. Supreme Court are busy trimming congressional powers directly.
Clearly, Vice President Dick Cheney is the force behind the White House's effort to enhance presidential power, and limit the powers of those on Capitol Hill. This is evident because President Bush simply does not possess the mental acumen, or experience, to play the game his White House has instituted; but Cheney does. This is not to say Bush doesn't embrace the undertaking, for he obviously does, but simply that Cheney is almost certainly the moving force behind it.
Indeed, Cheney has all but admitted the point. "In thirty-four years, I have repeatedly seen an erosion of the powers and the ability of the president of the United States to do his job," Cheney told ABC's "This Week" in January 2002.
He continues with Cheney's history in this article. A follow-up on the Supreme Court is coming.
NYTimes -- Venezuela Plans to Split State Oil Company
The lockout may have permanently reduced some of Venezuala's oil production due to the nature of it's oilfields. A new Chavez plan would give him more control over the oil and punish the executives who walked off but may further reduce production.
The lockout may have permanently reduced some of Venezuala's oil production due to the nature of it's oilfields. A new Chavez plan would give him more control over the oil and punish the executives who walked off but may further reduce production.
Philadelphia Inquirer |War's toll: 158,000 Iraqis and a researcher's position
What happened to one government official doing her job reporting the truth during the last Bush administration.
What happened to one government official doing her job reporting the truth during the last Bush administration.
NYTimes -- The Politics of Portfolios
How do the benefits distribute for eliminating a tax on dividends?
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal research group, cited an analysis of Federal Reserve data today showing that 85 percent of the value of stocks and bonds was held by the top 10 percent of the income spectrum in 1998, the latest year for which comprehensive data is available. Citing I.R.S. data from 2000, the group said 22 percent of taxpayers with incomes under $100,000 reported any dividend income, while 72 percent of filers between $100,000 and $1 million and nearly all filers above $1 million reported dividend income.
A dividend tax cut is not an economic stimulant. It leads to some reshuffling of very large portfolios and may reward more investments in established companies and utilities. The US tax code recently had a limited tax exemption on dividends. The analysis was it had no meaningful effects. It does provide a reward to the very rich and to old established companies and their owners.
How do the benefits distribute for eliminating a tax on dividends?
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal research group, cited an analysis of Federal Reserve data today showing that 85 percent of the value of stocks and bonds was held by the top 10 percent of the income spectrum in 1998, the latest year for which comprehensive data is available. Citing I.R.S. data from 2000, the group said 22 percent of taxpayers with incomes under $100,000 reported any dividend income, while 72 percent of filers between $100,000 and $1 million and nearly all filers above $1 million reported dividend income.
A dividend tax cut is not an economic stimulant. It leads to some reshuffling of very large portfolios and may reward more investments in established companies and utilities. The US tax code recently had a limited tax exemption on dividends. The analysis was it had no meaningful effects. It does provide a reward to the very rich and to old established companies and their owners.
NY Daily News -Exclusive: U.S. disaster plans include cloned icons
Experts are rushing 3-D digital scans of historical monuments to have plans ready in order to repair or replace in the event of an attack.
Experts are rushing 3-D digital scans of historical monuments to have plans ready in order to repair or replace in the event of an attack.
Guardian UK --Jesus 'healed using cannabis'
Jesus was almost certainly a cannabis user and an early proponent of the medicinal properties of the drug, according to a study of scriptural texts published this month. The study suggests that Jesus and his disciples used the drug to carry out miraculous healings.
The anointing oil used by Jesus and his disciples contained an ingredient called kaneh-bosem which has since been identified as cannabis extract, according to an article by Chris Bennett in the drugs magazine, High Times, entitled Was Jesus a Stoner? The incense used by Jesus in ceremonies also contained a cannabis extract, suggests Mr Bennett, who quotes scholars to back his claims.
Reminds me of the Jesus Freaks, "High on Jesus."
Jesus was almost certainly a cannabis user and an early proponent of the medicinal properties of the drug, according to a study of scriptural texts published this month. The study suggests that Jesus and his disciples used the drug to carry out miraculous healings.
The anointing oil used by Jesus and his disciples contained an ingredient called kaneh-bosem which has since been identified as cannabis extract, according to an article by Chris Bennett in the drugs magazine, High Times, entitled Was Jesus a Stoner? The incense used by Jesus in ceremonies also contained a cannabis extract, suggests Mr Bennett, who quotes scholars to back his claims.
Reminds me of the Jesus Freaks, "High on Jesus."
After the War - What?
NYTimes -- U.S. Is Completing Plan to Promote a Democratic Iraq
President Bush's national security team is assembling final plans for administering and democratizing Iraq after the expected ouster of Saddam Hussein. Those plans call for a heavy American military presence in the country for at least 18 months, military trials of only the most senior Iraqi leaders and quick takeover of the country's oil fields to pay for reconstruction.
"We know one thing," said a diplomat involved in the planning. "Things will have to come together a lot faster than they have in Afghanistan."
18 months is insufficient time for anything but a dictatorship or a weak undemocratic pawn.
NYTimes -- U.S. Is Completing Plan to Promote a Democratic Iraq
President Bush's national security team is assembling final plans for administering and democratizing Iraq after the expected ouster of Saddam Hussein. Those plans call for a heavy American military presence in the country for at least 18 months, military trials of only the most senior Iraqi leaders and quick takeover of the country's oil fields to pay for reconstruction.
"We know one thing," said a diplomat involved in the planning. "Things will have to come together a lot faster than they have in Afghanistan."
18 months is insufficient time for anything but a dictatorship or a weak undemocratic pawn.
NYTimes - Krugman -- An Irrelevant Proposal
The latest Krugman column blasts Bush's new tax proposal. It reads in part:
Even the administration's economists barely pretend that this proposal has anything to do with short-run stimulus. Instead they sell it as the answer to various other problems. (It slices! It dices! It purées!) Above all, it's supposed to end the evil of "double taxation."
Now lots of income faces double taxation, in the sense that the same dollar gets taxed more than once along the way. For example, most of us pay income and payroll taxes when we earn our salary, then pay sales taxes when we spend it. So why has it suddenly become urgent to ensure that dividends, in particular, never be taxed more than once?
That is, if they're taxed at all. In practice, the Bush plan would exempt a lot of income — rich people's income — from all taxes. Thanks to the efforts of lobbyists, today's corporate tax code has as many holes in it as a piece of Swiss cheese, and today's corporations take full advantage. Case in point: Between 1998 and 2001 CSX Corporation, the company run by the incoming Treasury secretary, John Snow, made $900 million in profits, but paid no net taxes — in fact, it received $164 million in rebates. This wasn't exceptional; the average tax rate on profits has fallen to a nearly 60-year low.
Anyway, even to debate the pros and cons of dividend taxation is to play the administration's game, which is to change the subject. Weren't we supposed to be talking about emergency economic stimulus?
The latest Krugman column blasts Bush's new tax proposal. It reads in part:
Even the administration's economists barely pretend that this proposal has anything to do with short-run stimulus. Instead they sell it as the answer to various other problems. (It slices! It dices! It purées!) Above all, it's supposed to end the evil of "double taxation."
Now lots of income faces double taxation, in the sense that the same dollar gets taxed more than once along the way. For example, most of us pay income and payroll taxes when we earn our salary, then pay sales taxes when we spend it. So why has it suddenly become urgent to ensure that dividends, in particular, never be taxed more than once?
That is, if they're taxed at all. In practice, the Bush plan would exempt a lot of income — rich people's income — from all taxes. Thanks to the efforts of lobbyists, today's corporate tax code has as many holes in it as a piece of Swiss cheese, and today's corporations take full advantage. Case in point: Between 1998 and 2001 CSX Corporation, the company run by the incoming Treasury secretary, John Snow, made $900 million in profits, but paid no net taxes — in fact, it received $164 million in rebates. This wasn't exceptional; the average tax rate on profits has fallen to a nearly 60-year low.
Anyway, even to debate the pros and cons of dividend taxation is to play the administration's game, which is to change the subject. Weren't we supposed to be talking about emergency economic stimulus?
Sunday, January 05, 2003
NYTimes -- When a Kleptocratic, Megalomaniacal Dictator Goes Bad
A long article on ''Beloved Leader Saparmurat Turkmenbashi the Great,'' our main ally in the Afghan War. Remember Afghanistan?
Last summer, Turkmenistan's nominal Legislature passed the president's request to change some of the names of the days of the week and the months to his first name, his new last name and words associated with his name. (In an act of filial generosity, he ordered April to be renamed for his mother.)
Western diplomats estimate that Niyazov [Turkmenbashi's real name] has spirited between $1.4 billion and $2 billion from the national treasury into foreign accounts.
Official corruption, the suppression of moderate forms of Islam and a sense that social problems like drug use are beyond the control of the government have led people in neighboring countries to embrace a harsh political Islam. It's hard to say whether Turkmenistan will follow a similar path.
Based on Afghanistan and Bush's favorite allies, who would believe that we will bring democracy to Iraq?
A long article on ''Beloved Leader Saparmurat Turkmenbashi the Great,'' our main ally in the Afghan War. Remember Afghanistan?
Last summer, Turkmenistan's nominal Legislature passed the president's request to change some of the names of the days of the week and the months to his first name, his new last name and words associated with his name. (In an act of filial generosity, he ordered April to be renamed for his mother.)
Western diplomats estimate that Niyazov [Turkmenbashi's real name] has spirited between $1.4 billion and $2 billion from the national treasury into foreign accounts.
Official corruption, the suppression of moderate forms of Islam and a sense that social problems like drug use are beyond the control of the government have led people in neighboring countries to embrace a harsh political Islam. It's hard to say whether Turkmenistan will follow a similar path.
Based on Afghanistan and Bush's favorite allies, who would believe that we will bring democracy to Iraq?
NYTimes -- The Burden
Is American endangering itself by becoming an empire?
As the Iraqi operation looms, it is worth keeping Vietnam in mind. Vietnam was a titanic clash between two nation-building strategies, the Americans in support of the South Vietnamese versus the Communists in the north. Yet it proved impossible for foreigners to build stability in a divided country against resistance from a Communist elite fighting in the name of the Vietnamese nation. Vietnam is now one country, its civil war over and its long-term stability assured. An American operation in Iraq will not face a competing nationalist project, but across the Islamic world it will rouse the nationalist passions of people who want to rule themselves and worship as they please. As Vietnam shows, empire is no match, long-term, for nationalism.
Questions on being an Empire.
Is American endangering itself by becoming an empire?
As the Iraqi operation looms, it is worth keeping Vietnam in mind. Vietnam was a titanic clash between two nation-building strategies, the Americans in support of the South Vietnamese versus the Communists in the north. Yet it proved impossible for foreigners to build stability in a divided country against resistance from a Communist elite fighting in the name of the Vietnamese nation. Vietnam is now one country, its civil war over and its long-term stability assured. An American operation in Iraq will not face a competing nationalist project, but across the Islamic world it will rouse the nationalist passions of people who want to rule themselves and worship as they please. As Vietnam shows, empire is no match, long-term, for nationalism.
Questions on being an Empire.
NYTimes - Friedman -- A War for Oil?
Is the war that the Bush team is preparing to launch in Iraq really a war for oil?
My short answer is yes. Any war we launch in Iraq will certainly be — in part — about oil. To deny that is laughable. But whether it is seen to be only about oil will depend on how we behave before an invasion and what we try to build once we're there.
I say this possible Iraq war is partly about oil because it is impossible to explain the Bush team's behavior otherwise.
I don't see any American concensus on what should be our foreign policy, particularly one concerning the Middle East.
Is the war that the Bush team is preparing to launch in Iraq really a war for oil?
My short answer is yes. Any war we launch in Iraq will certainly be — in part — about oil. To deny that is laughable. But whether it is seen to be only about oil will depend on how we behave before an invasion and what we try to build once we're there.
I say this possible Iraq war is partly about oil because it is impossible to explain the Bush team's behavior otherwise.
I don't see any American concensus on what should be our foreign policy, particularly one concerning the Middle East.
Saturday, January 04, 2003
NYTimes -- Drug Proposal for Medicare Is Welcomed With Wariness
Officials within the insurance industry and at large employers are welcoming the Bush administration's plan for sweeping changes in the Medicare program to accompany a new prescription drug benefit. But executives cautioned yesterday that their enthusiasm for any changes to Medicare hinged on adequate financing.
Republicans have a habit of announcing new programs with great fanfare and then starving them of money.
Officials within the insurance industry and at large employers are welcoming the Bush administration's plan for sweeping changes in the Medicare program to accompany a new prescription drug benefit. But executives cautioned yesterday that their enthusiasm for any changes to Medicare hinged on adequate financing.
Republicans have a habit of announcing new programs with great fanfare and then starving them of money.
Why Most Americans Are Unable To Perceive And Protest America's Slide Into Fascism
A dark criticism of American schools.
Slowing Down
Starting Monday, I will be posting with less frequency because of work and later, hopefully, school. Unlike the watch who is regretably also slowing down due to restarting school, I do not have essays to post here soon. Email me and tell me who you think I should recommend for more of your news fix. One I have not been recommending enough is See The Forest who is connected to the Commonweal Institute.
Starting Monday, I will be posting with less frequency because of work and later, hopefully, school. Unlike the watch who is regretably also slowing down due to restarting school, I do not have essays to post here soon. Email me and tell me who you think I should recommend for more of your news fix. One I have not been recommending enough is See The Forest who is connected to the Commonweal Institute.
PAK Daily Times -
17 reasons why US should not invade Iraq
The Dallas Peace Centre has come out with 17 reasons why the United States should not invade Iraq.
17 reasons why US should not invade Iraq
The Dallas Peace Centre has come out with 17 reasons why the United States should not invade Iraq.
PAK Daily Times - United States is a leading terrorist state: Chomsky
Here’s a partial transcript of the interview that took place between Chomsky, SchNEWS, Mark Thomas and a collection of other British trouble makers.
There was a terrorist act, September 11th, very unusual, a real historic event, the first time in history that the west received the kind of attack that it carries out routinely in the rest of the world. September 11th did change policy undoubtedly, not just for the US, but across the board. Every government in the world saw it as an opportunity to intensify their own repression and atrocities, from Russia and Chechnya, to the West imposing more discipline on their populations.
The National Intelligence Council, which is a collection of various intelligence agencies, published a projection in 2000 called ‘Global Trends 2015.’ They make the interesting prediction that terrorism is going to increase as a result of globalisation. They really say it straight. They say that what they call globalisation is going to lead to a widening economic divide, just the opposite of what economic theory predicts, but they’re realists, and so they say that it’s going to lead to increased disorder, tension and hostility and violence, a lot of it directed against the United States.
They also predict that Persian Gulf oil will be increasingly important for world energy and industrial systems but that the US won’t rely on it. But it’s got to control it. Controlling the oil resources is more of an issue than access. Because control equals power.
Compared with the Vietnam War movement, this movement is just incomparably ahead now. This time there’s protest before the war has even got started. I can’t think of an example in the entire history of Europe, including the United States, when there was ever protest of any substantial level before a war.
The more protest there is the more tightening there’s going to be, that’s routine. When the Vietnam War protests really began to build up, so did the repression.
That Chomsky, he's a troublemaker.
Here’s a partial transcript of the interview that took place between Chomsky, SchNEWS, Mark Thomas and a collection of other British trouble makers.
There was a terrorist act, September 11th, very unusual, a real historic event, the first time in history that the west received the kind of attack that it carries out routinely in the rest of the world. September 11th did change policy undoubtedly, not just for the US, but across the board. Every government in the world saw it as an opportunity to intensify their own repression and atrocities, from Russia and Chechnya, to the West imposing more discipline on their populations.
The National Intelligence Council, which is a collection of various intelligence agencies, published a projection in 2000 called ‘Global Trends 2015.’ They make the interesting prediction that terrorism is going to increase as a result of globalisation. They really say it straight. They say that what they call globalisation is going to lead to a widening economic divide, just the opposite of what economic theory predicts, but they’re realists, and so they say that it’s going to lead to increased disorder, tension and hostility and violence, a lot of it directed against the United States.
They also predict that Persian Gulf oil will be increasingly important for world energy and industrial systems but that the US won’t rely on it. But it’s got to control it. Controlling the oil resources is more of an issue than access. Because control equals power.
Compared with the Vietnam War movement, this movement is just incomparably ahead now. This time there’s protest before the war has even got started. I can’t think of an example in the entire history of Europe, including the United States, when there was ever protest of any substantial level before a war.
The more protest there is the more tightening there’s going to be, that’s routine. When the Vietnam War protests really began to build up, so did the repression.
That Chomsky, he's a troublemaker.
albawaba.com: Bush: America ready for war in Iraq; Britain to send more than 20,000 troops to Gulf region
In London, The Telegraph reported Saturday that the British Government would order more than 20,000 troops to the Gulf and the mobilization of around 7,000 reservists next week in preparation for a war in Iraq.
Defense chiefs were given plans Friday for the deployment, which includes a Royal Navy force led by the aircraft carrier Ark Royal and a reduced-strength 1 (UK) Armoured Division.
Anti-war protests are being planned for London and Europe. Scattered protests have been breaking out in Arab states.
In London, The Telegraph reported Saturday that the British Government would order more than 20,000 troops to the Gulf and the mobilization of around 7,000 reservists next week in preparation for a war in Iraq.
Defense chiefs were given plans Friday for the deployment, which includes a Royal Navy force led by the aircraft carrier Ark Royal and a reduced-strength 1 (UK) Armoured Division.
Anti-war protests are being planned for London and Europe. Scattered protests have been breaking out in Arab states.
Scoop: Not Happy, Nor New Year By Firas Al-Atraqchi
He is one of a few people who suspect that this year marks the start of a world wide religious war and 2002 was the last year of relative peace.
No, be optimistic. Most of my readers live in the US. Just think, you will be masters of the world!
Just be careful of terrorist attacks and all pervasive government spying and control.
Think happy and correct thoughts and all will be well.
He is one of a few people who suspect that this year marks the start of a world wide religious war and 2002 was the last year of relative peace.
No, be optimistic. Most of my readers live in the US. Just think, you will be masters of the world!
Just be careful of terrorist attacks and all pervasive government spying and control.
Think happy and correct thoughts and all will be well.
Reinstate the Draft -- Bill Berkowitz --
WorkingForChange
Liberal support building for universal draft. Opposition, both liberal and conservative, is also building.
WorkingForChange
Liberal support building for universal draft. Opposition, both liberal and conservative, is also building.
Scoop: Top Ten Conspiracy Theories of 2002
1. Great Game in the Caspian Sea.
Among the theories about the administration's real reasons for bombing and occupying Afghanistan, the one with the most traction argues that Afghanistan provides the best real estate for an oil and natural gas pipeline.
2. The Afghanistan/Enron Connection.
3. The Magic Passport Theory and other planted terrorist evidence.
4. Hijacker Oddities I. How quickly determined.
5. Hijacker Oddities II. Training at US bases.
6. Insider Trades before 9/11. Traced to the CIA?
7. The New World Order Will Not Be Televised. The concentration of US media and the reports of news slanting.
8. Iran/Contra Redux. The conspiracy past of the reinstated Reaganites.
9. The Reichstag Fire and Operation Northwoods. The US intelligence community is willing to commit acts against American citizens to get support for an action.
10. Things to Come. Autocratic rule and scramble for oil and other resources is because oil is becoming scarce and there are too many people.
Honorable mention conspiracy theories:
1. The Mel Carnahan and Paul Wellstone plane crashes.
2. Jeb Bush's 7 September 2001 martial law declaration in Florida (Executive Order 01-261).
3. The Flight 93 debris patterns and the ease with which the Flight 93 story that circulated in the major media fits into an archetypal "hero" narrative.
4. Warren Buffett, who – among with several other World Trade Center executives – went to Offutt AFB before the attacks on the morning of September 11. This is where Bush went after the attacks began.
5. Potential CIA links to the coup in Venezuela.
6. Cynthia McKinney's insinuation of possible government complicity in September 11 on the floor of Congress.
7. The Phoenix memo and the curious case of the FBI whistleblowers.
8. The idea that the anti-aircraft missiles used when Bush visited Genoa, Italy, we intended to thwart a kamikaze attack.
9. The Bin Laden family's clandestine flight out of the United States in the days after September 11.
10. Bush's 6 August 2001, comprehensive briefing, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US." Mentions hijacking planes.
Internet searches on terms mentioned here are instructive, but not if you want to sleep easily.
1. Great Game in the Caspian Sea.
Among the theories about the administration's real reasons for bombing and occupying Afghanistan, the one with the most traction argues that Afghanistan provides the best real estate for an oil and natural gas pipeline.
2. The Afghanistan/Enron Connection.
3. The Magic Passport Theory and other planted terrorist evidence.
4. Hijacker Oddities I. How quickly determined.
5. Hijacker Oddities II. Training at US bases.
6. Insider Trades before 9/11. Traced to the CIA?
7. The New World Order Will Not Be Televised. The concentration of US media and the reports of news slanting.
8. Iran/Contra Redux. The conspiracy past of the reinstated Reaganites.
9. The Reichstag Fire and Operation Northwoods. The US intelligence community is willing to commit acts against American citizens to get support for an action.
10. Things to Come. Autocratic rule and scramble for oil and other resources is because oil is becoming scarce and there are too many people.
Honorable mention conspiracy theories:
1. The Mel Carnahan and Paul Wellstone plane crashes.
2. Jeb Bush's 7 September 2001 martial law declaration in Florida (Executive Order 01-261).
3. The Flight 93 debris patterns and the ease with which the Flight 93 story that circulated in the major media fits into an archetypal "hero" narrative.
4. Warren Buffett, who – among with several other World Trade Center executives – went to Offutt AFB before the attacks on the morning of September 11. This is where Bush went after the attacks began.
5. Potential CIA links to the coup in Venezuela.
6. Cynthia McKinney's insinuation of possible government complicity in September 11 on the floor of Congress.
7. The Phoenix memo and the curious case of the FBI whistleblowers.
8. The idea that the anti-aircraft missiles used when Bush visited Genoa, Italy, we intended to thwart a kamikaze attack.
9. The Bin Laden family's clandestine flight out of the United States in the days after September 11.
10. Bush's 6 August 2001, comprehensive briefing, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US." Mentions hijacking planes.
Internet searches on terms mentioned here are instructive, but not if you want to sleep easily.
Scoop: Enron and the Dodgy $8 million Army Fortress Scam
Army Secretary Thomas White sold more than $20 million in Enron stock after talking to the company before all the bad news was released. Weak Senate Democrats refuse to investigate.
Army Secretary Thomas White sold more than $20 million in Enron stock after talking to the company before all the bad news was released. Weak Senate Democrats refuse to investigate.
NYTimes - Krugman -- Games Nations Play
Deterrence requires a credible commitment to punish bad behavior and reward good behavior.
I know, it sounds obvious. Yet the Bush administration's Korea policy has systematically violated that simple principle.
So put yourself in Kim Jong Il's shoes. The Bush administration has denounced you. It broke off negotiations as soon as it came into office. Last year, though you were no nastier than you had been the year before, George W. Bush declared you part of the "axis of evil." A few months later Mr. Bush called you a "pygmy," saying: "I loathe Kim Jong Il — I've got a visceral reaction to this guy. . . . They tell me, well we may not need to move too fast, because the financial burdens on people will be so immense if this guy were to topple — I just don't buy that."
Moreover, there's every reason to take Mr. Bush's viscera seriously. Under his doctrine of pre-emption, the U.S. can attack countries it thinks might support terrorism, whether or not they have actually done so. And who decides whether we attack? Here's what Mr. Bush says: "You said we're headed to war in Iraq. I don't know why you say that. I'm the person who gets to decide, not you." L'état, c'est moi.
So Mr. Bush thinks you're a bad guy — and that makes you a potential target, no matter what you do.
The incentives for North Korea are clear. There's no point in playing nice — it will bring neither aid nor security. It needn't worry about American efforts to isolate it economically — North Korea hardly has any trade except with China, and China isn't cooperating. The best self-preservation strategy for Mr. Kim is to be dangerous. So while America is busy with Iraq, the North Koreans should cook up some plutonium and build themselves some bombs.
Interesting that Krugman uses a simple process that conservatives never use - put yourself in the other guys shoes. That in fact is one of the distinquishing dangerous markings of conservatives, most of the time they can't see the other guys viewpoint. When asked they often say why does it matter? It matters because you cannot conduct politics and diplomacy without knowing the other person's viewpoint.
Deterrence requires a credible commitment to punish bad behavior and reward good behavior.
I know, it sounds obvious. Yet the Bush administration's Korea policy has systematically violated that simple principle.
So put yourself in Kim Jong Il's shoes. The Bush administration has denounced you. It broke off negotiations as soon as it came into office. Last year, though you were no nastier than you had been the year before, George W. Bush declared you part of the "axis of evil." A few months later Mr. Bush called you a "pygmy," saying: "I loathe Kim Jong Il — I've got a visceral reaction to this guy. . . . They tell me, well we may not need to move too fast, because the financial burdens on people will be so immense if this guy were to topple — I just don't buy that."
Moreover, there's every reason to take Mr. Bush's viscera seriously. Under his doctrine of pre-emption, the U.S. can attack countries it thinks might support terrorism, whether or not they have actually done so. And who decides whether we attack? Here's what Mr. Bush says: "You said we're headed to war in Iraq. I don't know why you say that. I'm the person who gets to decide, not you." L'état, c'est moi.
So Mr. Bush thinks you're a bad guy — and that makes you a potential target, no matter what you do.
The incentives for North Korea are clear. There's no point in playing nice — it will bring neither aid nor security. It needn't worry about American efforts to isolate it economically — North Korea hardly has any trade except with China, and China isn't cooperating. The best self-preservation strategy for Mr. Kim is to be dangerous. So while America is busy with Iraq, the North Koreans should cook up some plutonium and build themselves some bombs.
Interesting that Krugman uses a simple process that conservatives never use - put yourself in the other guys shoes. That in fact is one of the distinquishing dangerous markings of conservatives, most of the time they can't see the other guys viewpoint. When asked they often say why does it matter? It matters because you cannot conduct politics and diplomacy without knowing the other person's viewpoint.
The Weekly Dish -- The Washington Times
Andrew Sullivan is a radical idiot. In attacking statements he feels are overblown from last year he did include two conservatives, however.
Andrew Sullivan is a radical idiot. In attacking statements he feels are overblown from last year he did include two conservatives, however.
ajc.com The GOP's Southern exposure by Kevin Phillips
A good analysis of GOP political history in the South as it applies to Presidential elections except for ignoring the Civil Rights Act.
The GOP is dependent on carrying nearly all of the South to get the Presidency now and caters to white, rural, Southern voters.
The South is now the Republicans' core region. Lott, with his foolish fantasizing over Strom Thurmond -- and before that, his rhapsodies over Jefferson Davis -- didn't build the coalition and his departure won't undercut it. If anything, Lott's willingness to be a sacrificial lamb and step aside has spared the White House and the rest of the congressional GOP from examinations of their own positions on race.
Republican transformation over the past two decades has led from political acceptance of the South to what amounts to Southern GOP domination and a politics of over-Southernization. First George H.W. Bush and then his son George W. worked hard to woo the religious right, where Ronald Reagan really hadn't needed to. Then both in turn successfully relied on the presidential primaries of their home region as Dixie firewalls against nomination rivals Bob Dole in 1988 and John McCain in 2000.
...The Republicans have become much more focused on economic policies that, in the name of business and the markets, have favored the top 1 percent income group. Second, use of the race issue by GOP presidential nominees has had less to do with real racial policy (as in the '60s and '70s) and more to do with gratuitously raising convenient themes and prejudices -- Willie Horton in 1988, the visit to Bob Jones University in 2000 and the various flag incidents.
The importance of the second circumstance lies in the political requirement of a third. During the Bush Era, the Republican presidential nominee got 53 percent of the popular vote in 1988 but won less than a majority in 1992, 1996 and 2000. Non-white voters are becoming more numerous, pro-rich economic policies are a poor draw and in the Northern states so is the GOP's increasing over-Southernization.
A good analysis of GOP political history in the South as it applies to Presidential elections except for ignoring the Civil Rights Act.
The GOP is dependent on carrying nearly all of the South to get the Presidency now and caters to white, rural, Southern voters.
The South is now the Republicans' core region. Lott, with his foolish fantasizing over Strom Thurmond -- and before that, his rhapsodies over Jefferson Davis -- didn't build the coalition and his departure won't undercut it. If anything, Lott's willingness to be a sacrificial lamb and step aside has spared the White House and the rest of the congressional GOP from examinations of their own positions on race.
Republican transformation over the past two decades has led from political acceptance of the South to what amounts to Southern GOP domination and a politics of over-Southernization. First George H.W. Bush and then his son George W. worked hard to woo the religious right, where Ronald Reagan really hadn't needed to. Then both in turn successfully relied on the presidential primaries of their home region as Dixie firewalls against nomination rivals Bob Dole in 1988 and John McCain in 2000.
...The Republicans have become much more focused on economic policies that, in the name of business and the markets, have favored the top 1 percent income group. Second, use of the race issue by GOP presidential nominees has had less to do with real racial policy (as in the '60s and '70s) and more to do with gratuitously raising convenient themes and prejudices -- Willie Horton in 1988, the visit to Bob Jones University in 2000 and the various flag incidents.
The importance of the second circumstance lies in the political requirement of a third. During the Bush Era, the Republican presidential nominee got 53 percent of the popular vote in 1988 but won less than a majority in 1992, 1996 and 2000. Non-white voters are becoming more numerous, pro-rich economic policies are a poor draw and in the Northern states so is the GOP's increasing over-Southernization.
Friday, January 03, 2003
beliefnet : Who's Who Among Atheists in 2002
It was a fairly big year for atheists, who do you remember?
It was a fairly big year for atheists, who do you remember?
HoustonChronicle.com - Thomas: Whose side are you on, Mr. President?
THE Bush administration has it in for trial lawyers and is planning a big push for "tort reform."
Bush's war on the trial lawyers can only please those from the consumer-be-damned school of corporate wrongdoing. In President Bush's "compassionate conservatism," just whom does he feel compassion for?
I fear I know the answer.
Interesting that Drudge Report also has this link.
THE Bush administration has it in for trial lawyers and is planning a big push for "tort reform."
Bush's war on the trial lawyers can only please those from the consumer-be-damned school of corporate wrongdoing. In President Bush's "compassionate conservatism," just whom does he feel compassion for?
I fear I know the answer.
Interesting that Drudge Report also has this link.
Salon | Time for one thing
A classic Susie Bright article - WHY I SHOULD USE MY VIBRATOR MORE OFTEN. Enough blogging, I seem to keep coming back to one topic.
A classic Susie Bright article - WHY I SHOULD USE MY VIBRATOR MORE OFTEN. Enough blogging, I seem to keep coming back to one topic.
UK Guardian -- Call Off the War
Making his first public statement since Christmas, the US president said he was determined to avoid new conflicts. "This government will continue to lead the world toward more peace," he said. "And we hope to resolve all the situations in which we find ourselves in a peaceful way. That's my commitment."
Mr Bush has a history of dithering. The "axis of angst" that may have disturbed his holiday break comprises Iraq, North Korea and Israel-Palestine. On the latter issue, the Bush administration has gone back and forth repeatedly but has little to show for its efforts.
He has failed to persuade Americans, let alone the wider world, that Iraq poses a significant military threat to the region or to the US. The UN inspections have not been impeded, as Mr Bush predicted they would be, and no evidence has yet been found that Iraq has lied about its weapons programs. In short, Mr Bush lacks just cause. If he means what he says about peace, and if he wants to show brave and decisive leadership, he should persevere with the UN process and call off the war.
Making his first public statement since Christmas, the US president said he was determined to avoid new conflicts. "This government will continue to lead the world toward more peace," he said. "And we hope to resolve all the situations in which we find ourselves in a peaceful way. That's my commitment."
Mr Bush has a history of dithering. The "axis of angst" that may have disturbed his holiday break comprises Iraq, North Korea and Israel-Palestine. On the latter issue, the Bush administration has gone back and forth repeatedly but has little to show for its efforts.
He has failed to persuade Americans, let alone the wider world, that Iraq poses a significant military threat to the region or to the US. The UN inspections have not been impeded, as Mr Bush predicted they would be, and no evidence has yet been found that Iraq has lied about its weapons programs. In short, Mr Bush lacks just cause. If he means what he says about peace, and if he wants to show brave and decisive leadership, he should persevere with the UN process and call off the war.
Salon.com -- Sex toys on review
From the Fukuoku 9000 to a Hello Kitty vibrator, gals test-drive the newest bedroom playthings and report the results.
From the Fukuoku 9000 to a Hello Kitty vibrator, gals test-drive the newest bedroom playthings and report the results.
The Village Voice: Pucker Up: The Best & Worst of Sex in 2002 by Tristan Taormino
Most Clever Accidental Sex Toy: Supposedly a children's toy, the Harry Potter Nimbus 2000 Broom is long, built to go between your legs, and vibrates. No wonder it garnered rave reviews from young girls everywhere.
Most Inappropriate Sex (Kitten) Toy: Mattel released "Lingerie Barbie," tramped up in see-through nightie, garters, and stockings, then claimed it was meant for grown-ups, even though it was available at FAO Schwarz.
Strangest Sex Product You Didn't Even Know You Needed: Sphincterine Ass-stringent is what it sounds like; think mouthwash for your butt. A stimulating, refreshing anal astringent created by Mintyass.com, it promises to cleanse and help you "feel fresh all over, even back there."
Best Queer Moment (or Most Likely to Make a Right-Wing Conservative's Head Explode): Two girls were named cutest couple by their classmates at an Illinois high school.
Sexiest Man: Andrew, the carpenter from the Learning Channel's addictive While You Were Out, is tall, strapping, and h-o-t. The way he handles a drill says one thing: He'll hammer into you with skill and aplomb and hang shelves for you in the morning.
and many more.
Most Clever Accidental Sex Toy: Supposedly a children's toy, the Harry Potter Nimbus 2000 Broom is long, built to go between your legs, and vibrates. No wonder it garnered rave reviews from young girls everywhere.
Most Inappropriate Sex (Kitten) Toy: Mattel released "Lingerie Barbie," tramped up in see-through nightie, garters, and stockings, then claimed it was meant for grown-ups, even though it was available at FAO Schwarz.
Strangest Sex Product You Didn't Even Know You Needed: Sphincterine Ass-stringent is what it sounds like; think mouthwash for your butt. A stimulating, refreshing anal astringent created by Mintyass.com, it promises to cleanse and help you "feel fresh all over, even back there."
Best Queer Moment (or Most Likely to Make a Right-Wing Conservative's Head Explode): Two girls were named cutest couple by their classmates at an Illinois high school.
Sexiest Man: Andrew, the carpenter from the Learning Channel's addictive While You Were Out, is tall, strapping, and h-o-t. The way he handles a drill says one thing: He'll hammer into you with skill and aplomb and hang shelves for you in the morning.
and many more.
A New Year's Baby With an Additional Difference: 2 Moms (washingtonpost.com)
DC's first baby was to a lesbian couple.
"Can we get a picture of the baby with its mother?" someone from the media pack asked.
"Sure -- which mother would you like?" Bare responded.
"She has a traditional family," said Howard Rubin, proud grandfather. "There are grandparents on both sides. . . . Their decision to have a child was a great boost for us. We just consider ourselves to be grandparents just as much as our friends who have grandchildren."
When it was getting close to midnight, people were talking about it," Rubin said. "But I really hoped it wouldn't take that long. It just so happened that it did."
Someone at the National Review was saying that the first child born in DC was to lesbians and the first in New York was to a black single mother - conservatives were losing the cultural war.
DC's first baby was to a lesbian couple.
"Can we get a picture of the baby with its mother?" someone from the media pack asked.
"Sure -- which mother would you like?" Bare responded.
"She has a traditional family," said Howard Rubin, proud grandfather. "There are grandparents on both sides. . . . Their decision to have a child was a great boost for us. We just consider ourselves to be grandparents just as much as our friends who have grandchildren."
When it was getting close to midnight, people were talking about it," Rubin said. "But I really hoped it wouldn't take that long. It just so happened that it did."
Someone at the National Review was saying that the first child born in DC was to lesbians and the first in New York was to a black single mother - conservatives were losing the cultural war.
The Village Voice: A Citizen Shorn of All Rights by Nat Hentoff
The government has taken the position that with no meaningful judicial review, an American citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant could be detained indefinitely without charges or counsel on the government's say-so. —American Bar Association Task Force on Treatment of Enemy Combatants, Preliminary Report, August 8, 2002
The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. —James Madison, Federalist Papers, 47
Yaser Esam Hamdi, born in Louisiana of Saudi parents, was captured by Northern Alliance forces in Afghanistan. He was transferred to Camp X-Ray in the Guantánamo Naval Base in Cuba. When his American captors realized Hamdi is an American citizen, he was taken, in April 2002, to a naval station brig in Norfolk, Virginia, where he has since been held without any charges or trial, without access to his public defender, and without being able to see his family or anyone else. This American citizen, incommunicado and stripped of his constitutional rights, has been put in this condition by direct order of the president of the United States.
On October 24, the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, Human Rights Watch, and 18 other human rights groups, plus a coalition of 139 law professors, submitted an amicus brief to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals charging that "the detention of American citizen Yaser Esam Hamdi is unconstitutional."
Reading the brief, keep in mind that the Bush administration has plans to set up "enemy combatant" detention facilities for other American citizens (Wall Street Journal, August 8, 2002).
In stark language, the brief goes on to say that "the government's position is that the president has complete discretion to suspend the application of the Bill of Rights and the writ of habeas corpus [which requires the government to prove the legality of a person's imprisonment] to American citizens on American soil, without the authority of Congress or the courts."
The Bush administration has stated this position in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (Fourth Circuit, July 12, 2002). The government also maintains that this American citizen, Hamdi, can be held indefinitely.
This case appears to be the first in American jurisprudence where an American citizen has been held incommunicado and subjected to an indefinite detention in the continental United States without charges . . . and without access to a lawyer." A George Bush contribution to American history!
Anytime a citizen's rights are taken away it means they are closer to taking your rights away.
The government has taken the position that with no meaningful judicial review, an American citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant could be detained indefinitely without charges or counsel on the government's say-so. —American Bar Association Task Force on Treatment of Enemy Combatants, Preliminary Report, August 8, 2002
The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. —James Madison, Federalist Papers, 47
Yaser Esam Hamdi, born in Louisiana of Saudi parents, was captured by Northern Alliance forces in Afghanistan. He was transferred to Camp X-Ray in the Guantánamo Naval Base in Cuba. When his American captors realized Hamdi is an American citizen, he was taken, in April 2002, to a naval station brig in Norfolk, Virginia, where he has since been held without any charges or trial, without access to his public defender, and without being able to see his family or anyone else. This American citizen, incommunicado and stripped of his constitutional rights, has been put in this condition by direct order of the president of the United States.
On October 24, the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, Human Rights Watch, and 18 other human rights groups, plus a coalition of 139 law professors, submitted an amicus brief to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals charging that "the detention of American citizen Yaser Esam Hamdi is unconstitutional."
Reading the brief, keep in mind that the Bush administration has plans to set up "enemy combatant" detention facilities for other American citizens (Wall Street Journal, August 8, 2002).
In stark language, the brief goes on to say that "the government's position is that the president has complete discretion to suspend the application of the Bill of Rights and the writ of habeas corpus [which requires the government to prove the legality of a person's imprisonment] to American citizens on American soil, without the authority of Congress or the courts."
The Bush administration has stated this position in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (Fourth Circuit, July 12, 2002). The government also maintains that this American citizen, Hamdi, can be held indefinitely.
This case appears to be the first in American jurisprudence where an American citizen has been held incommunicado and subjected to an indefinite detention in the continental United States without charges . . . and without access to a lawyer." A George Bush contribution to American history!
Anytime a citizen's rights are taken away it means they are closer to taking your rights away.
Metroactive | Vital Signs
Looking for a new way to spread goodwill to all this holiday season? All we are saying is give peace your pants.
The original nude peace protest.
Note the later one was march larger and another one is planned.
Looking for a new way to spread goodwill to all this holiday season? All we are saying is give peace your pants.
The original nude peace protest.
Note the later one was march larger and another one is planned.
San Francisco Nude women for peace -- SF Indymedia
There are more nude women for peace protests - seems related to my earlier post on bare breast shaming.
There are more nude women for peace protests - seems related to my earlier post on bare breast shaming.
NYTimes -- Venezuela's Chief Proposes Global Effort to End Strike
Venezuela's embattled president, Hugo Chávez, said today that he favored the creation of a group of "Friends of Venezuela" to lead an international diplomatic effort to end the monthlong general strike that has crippled oil production and brought normal activity to a halt in his country.
Also in the Times:
Venezuela Outlook: Up and Down
With his visit to Brazil, a radiant President Hugo Chávez assured the world today that he would survive a month-old strike aimed at forcing him from power. But back home, Venezuelans were left to wonder if their country, as they know it, might not.
Mr. Chávez may not only survive this latest challenge to his presidency, analysts and some of his opponents are beginning to concede, but he may also emerge with new strength, even if his country emerges more polarized and economically hobbled than before.
In April, after a brief coup against him, Mr. Chávez said that as a gesture of reconciliation, he would not dismiss oil company executives accused of taking part. He has vowed not to be so forgiving this time.
Two weeks ago, the president, who has long wanted to tighten his control over the state-owned oil company, announced the suspension of nearly 100 executives and managers whom he charged with supporting or taking part in the strike.
On one side, Mr. Chávez, a former paratrooper who considers himself a champion of the poor, has refused to make concessions in negotiations with his opponents, calling their leaders "terrorists" and "coup plotters." Meanwhile, calls for violence, once an undercurrent of the crisis, now come openly in the opposition-controlled media and opposition rallies.
Still, even as Venezuela faces a grim prospects for 2003, Mr. Chávez beams with strength. He boasts that neighboring countries have rallied to his aid, sending shipments of food and gasoline that have helped the government meet nation's most pressing needs. He said he would seek foreign oil experts to restart wells and refineries. He has pledged to normalize the oil industry within the month.
Larry Birns, director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, said the opposition's strategy might backfire.
"The opposition was counting on people getting tired of President Chávez," he said. "But the opposition caused this crisis, and Chávez has every right to try to go out and fix it."
The lockout has backfired but rich people are used to getting their way. There are elements in the opposition as well that are not afraid of turning to violence. Added to that is a CIA with a skull and bones Republican administration with their control of all parts of US government...
Venezuela's embattled president, Hugo Chávez, said today that he favored the creation of a group of "Friends of Venezuela" to lead an international diplomatic effort to end the monthlong general strike that has crippled oil production and brought normal activity to a halt in his country.
Also in the Times:
Venezuela Outlook: Up and Down
With his visit to Brazil, a radiant President Hugo Chávez assured the world today that he would survive a month-old strike aimed at forcing him from power. But back home, Venezuelans were left to wonder if their country, as they know it, might not.
Mr. Chávez may not only survive this latest challenge to his presidency, analysts and some of his opponents are beginning to concede, but he may also emerge with new strength, even if his country emerges more polarized and economically hobbled than before.
In April, after a brief coup against him, Mr. Chávez said that as a gesture of reconciliation, he would not dismiss oil company executives accused of taking part. He has vowed not to be so forgiving this time.
Two weeks ago, the president, who has long wanted to tighten his control over the state-owned oil company, announced the suspension of nearly 100 executives and managers whom he charged with supporting or taking part in the strike.
On one side, Mr. Chávez, a former paratrooper who considers himself a champion of the poor, has refused to make concessions in negotiations with his opponents, calling their leaders "terrorists" and "coup plotters." Meanwhile, calls for violence, once an undercurrent of the crisis, now come openly in the opposition-controlled media and opposition rallies.
Still, even as Venezuela faces a grim prospects for 2003, Mr. Chávez beams with strength. He boasts that neighboring countries have rallied to his aid, sending shipments of food and gasoline that have helped the government meet nation's most pressing needs. He said he would seek foreign oil experts to restart wells and refineries. He has pledged to normalize the oil industry within the month.
Larry Birns, director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, said the opposition's strategy might backfire.
"The opposition was counting on people getting tired of President Chávez," he said. "But the opposition caused this crisis, and Chávez has every right to try to go out and fix it."
The lockout has backfired but rich people are used to getting their way. There are elements in the opposition as well that are not afraid of turning to violence. Added to that is a CIA with a skull and bones Republican administration with their control of all parts of US government...
TheMilwaukeeChannel.com - Helen Thomas - New Year Brings Long List Of Wishes
Bush Needs To Control Rumsfeld, Ashcroft; Intelligence Groups Need To Get Along
First, I hope that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's boast that we can fight a war on two fronts -- Iraq and North Korea -- in addition to our war on terrorism was simply part of his typical braggadocio posturing and that wiser heads will prevail.
It would also be nice if President George W. Bush would call a halt to Attorney General John Ashcroft's rampaging drive to curtail civil liberties, particularly of those caught up in his dragnet sweep-searches for terror suspects.
Of course, that may be too much to ask for since Ashcroft would not be doing what he is doing without a green light from the White House.
I also hope that our key intelligence services -- the FBI, CIA, and National Security Agency -- will drop their territorial rivalries and share more information. Why should they keep battling one another?
In foreign policy I hope we will win back the respect we once enjoyed around the world. But we can touch the hearts and minds of the disenchanted only by doing the right thing, becoming more aware of the sensitivities of others and once again displaying our traditional tolerance.
We have lost much of our shine as a beacon of freedom and have not asked ourselves why.
Helen Thomas - a wise woman who says we live "from hope to hope." And sometimes we can achieve what we hope for if the people care enough. That's what democracy is all about...
Bush Needs To Control Rumsfeld, Ashcroft; Intelligence Groups Need To Get Along
First, I hope that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's boast that we can fight a war on two fronts -- Iraq and North Korea -- in addition to our war on terrorism was simply part of his typical braggadocio posturing and that wiser heads will prevail.
It would also be nice if President George W. Bush would call a halt to Attorney General John Ashcroft's rampaging drive to curtail civil liberties, particularly of those caught up in his dragnet sweep-searches for terror suspects.
Of course, that may be too much to ask for since Ashcroft would not be doing what he is doing without a green light from the White House.
I also hope that our key intelligence services -- the FBI, CIA, and National Security Agency -- will drop their territorial rivalries and share more information. Why should they keep battling one another?
In foreign policy I hope we will win back the respect we once enjoyed around the world. But we can touch the hearts and minds of the disenchanted only by doing the right thing, becoming more aware of the sensitivities of others and once again displaying our traditional tolerance.
We have lost much of our shine as a beacon of freedom and have not asked ourselves why.
Helen Thomas - a wise woman who says we live "from hope to hope." And sometimes we can achieve what we hope for if the people care enough. That's what democracy is all about...
A Leftist Takes Over in Brazil and Pledges a 'New Path'
Latin America's largest nation embarked on an ambitious political and social experiment today, as Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, leader of the left-wing Workers Party and a former lathe operator and labor union leader, was inaugurated here as president of Brazil, promising "a new style of government" and a crusade against hunger, injustice and corruption.
Progressives gain power in Latin America as democracy spreads and economies tumble.
Chavez Touts Oil Sector Rebound (washingtonpost.com)
President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela said today that his country's oil industry, crippled by a month-long general strike, is recovering and will reach its pre-strike capacity in 45 days. Domestic opponents said the claim was false.
Chavez met with Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who was sworn in as Brazil's president Wednesday, and asked him to send experts from Brazil's state-owned oil company to replace some of the 40,000 Venezuelan state oil company workers who have walked off the job.
Chavez is in control or he would have never left the country. There is also a sense that the lockout has lost unless they arrange a big incident.
President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela said today that his country's oil industry, crippled by a month-long general strike, is recovering and will reach its pre-strike capacity in 45 days. Domestic opponents said the claim was false.
Chavez met with Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who was sworn in as Brazil's president Wednesday, and asked him to send experts from Brazil's state-owned oil company to replace some of the 40,000 Venezuelan state oil company workers who have walked off the job.
Chavez is in control or he would have never left the country. There is also a sense that the lockout has lost unless they arrange a big incident.
NYTimes -- We Don't Invade Iraq. Then What?
What about the day after a non-war?
Even if Saddam Hussein were ousted, the Iraq problem is unlikely to disappear. Iraq would still have a volatile domestic situation, long-standing border disputes with neighbors, a rivalry with Iran and a drive to acquire nonconventional weapons.
Failure to offer practical ideas for what should happen if war does not occur will only make war more likely — either now or when the next crisis is upon us.
Now this is a problem to address, how to not have a war and have a better Iraq.
What about the day after a non-war?
Even if Saddam Hussein were ousted, the Iraq problem is unlikely to disappear. Iraq would still have a volatile domestic situation, long-standing border disputes with neighbors, a rivalry with Iran and a drive to acquire nonconventional weapons.
Failure to offer practical ideas for what should happen if war does not occur will only make war more likely — either now or when the next crisis is upon us.
Now this is a problem to address, how to not have a war and have a better Iraq.
BuzzFlash has an interview with the liberal who is beating Rush Limbaugh in the ratings.
Randi Rhodes, Liberal Talk Show Host - A BuzzFlash Interview
BUZZFLASH: Randi, recently you interviewed Oliver North on your radio show. He stormed off in the middle of the interview. Why?
RANDI RHODES: Well, you'll have to ask him, but when I brought up Iran Contra and the fact that he had been on trial and convicted for crimes against the U.S., he denied that any of it happened. He said that I did not love the Constitution.
He said I was just another liberal liar actually, so I pointed out that he had been tried and convicted for "Altering and destroying documents, accepting an illegal gratuity, and aiding and abetting in obstruction of Congress". He denied that it ever happened. I had in front of us a copy of Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh's Executive Summary on Iran-Contra as well as a copy of Mr. Walsh's book Firewall, which is a must read for those who need a refresher course on Iran Contra. A conspiracy against Congress. He called Mr. Walsh a liar as well. Just for the record I have spoken to Mr. Walsh often because I have a skulking feeling that history is repeating itself with the reappearance of John Negroponte, Elliot Abrams, and Poindexter, all in heavy government jobs. Mr. Walsh is a proud Republican.
Some will remember that Oliver North's conviction was overturned on appeal because immunized testimony had been used against him. The appeal clearly stated, and Mr. Walsh confirmed, that this in no way had any bearing or effect on Oliver North's factual guilt.
BUZZFLASH: What's the broadcast range of your program? How can readers listen to your show on the Internet?
RHODES: It's a big show in a smallish town. I mean Palm Beach County is well known and well visited, but it's not New York, Chicago, or Boston. So it's a local legend. The great new thing is our website (TheRandiRhodesShow.com). It's free and it's got real streaming audio.
Sometimes I wonder if there are two distinct parties anymore. I know that the Bush administration is about as Republican as I am. Seriously, they are not Republicans. They are globalists. I wish more Republicans realized that. The Bush Boys, The Cheneys, The Rumsfelds, well they are as comfortably at home in Riyadh as they are in Crawford or Cheyenne.
Please dear God let there be a Democratic Party . . . and if there is, my early favorite is never mentioned, but it's Senator Bob Graham. He's on the Intelligence Committee, chaired it up until the 108th and knows everything about 9/11. He has integrity, he's smart, compassionate, and craves the truth. Plus, he has an everyman quality that people will feel comfortable with. I think he would be surprised to know that I feel this way about him, but I do. His are presidential qualities you won't see often. I think Bob Graham may be the real thing.
In two separate meetings I was told "The Rush story." Additionally, I should never expect to be syndicated by Clear Channel because Rush had said he'd just do what advertisers do. He'd go somewhere else.
Randi Rhodes, Liberal Talk Show Host - A BuzzFlash Interview
BUZZFLASH: Randi, recently you interviewed Oliver North on your radio show. He stormed off in the middle of the interview. Why?
RANDI RHODES: Well, you'll have to ask him, but when I brought up Iran Contra and the fact that he had been on trial and convicted for crimes against the U.S., he denied that any of it happened. He said that I did not love the Constitution.
He said I was just another liberal liar actually, so I pointed out that he had been tried and convicted for "Altering and destroying documents, accepting an illegal gratuity, and aiding and abetting in obstruction of Congress". He denied that it ever happened. I had in front of us a copy of Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh's Executive Summary on Iran-Contra as well as a copy of Mr. Walsh's book Firewall, which is a must read for those who need a refresher course on Iran Contra. A conspiracy against Congress. He called Mr. Walsh a liar as well. Just for the record I have spoken to Mr. Walsh often because I have a skulking feeling that history is repeating itself with the reappearance of John Negroponte, Elliot Abrams, and Poindexter, all in heavy government jobs. Mr. Walsh is a proud Republican.
Some will remember that Oliver North's conviction was overturned on appeal because immunized testimony had been used against him. The appeal clearly stated, and Mr. Walsh confirmed, that this in no way had any bearing or effect on Oliver North's factual guilt.
BUZZFLASH: What's the broadcast range of your program? How can readers listen to your show on the Internet?
RHODES: It's a big show in a smallish town. I mean Palm Beach County is well known and well visited, but it's not New York, Chicago, or Boston. So it's a local legend. The great new thing is our website (TheRandiRhodesShow.com). It's free and it's got real streaming audio.
Sometimes I wonder if there are two distinct parties anymore. I know that the Bush administration is about as Republican as I am. Seriously, they are not Republicans. They are globalists. I wish more Republicans realized that. The Bush Boys, The Cheneys, The Rumsfelds, well they are as comfortably at home in Riyadh as they are in Crawford or Cheyenne.
Please dear God let there be a Democratic Party . . . and if there is, my early favorite is never mentioned, but it's Senator Bob Graham. He's on the Intelligence Committee, chaired it up until the 108th and knows everything about 9/11. He has integrity, he's smart, compassionate, and craves the truth. Plus, he has an everyman quality that people will feel comfortable with. I think he would be surprised to know that I feel this way about him, but I do. His are presidential qualities you won't see often. I think Bob Graham may be the real thing.
In two separate meetings I was told "The Rush story." Additionally, I should never expect to be syndicated by Clear Channel because Rush had said he'd just do what advertisers do. He'd go somewhere else.
Don't Bet on Bipartisan Niceties (washingtonpost.com)
Reporters who have covered Congress over several decades know from their daily experience that with almost every session, they have found fewer moderates or progressives on the Republican side and fewer conservatives among the Democrats -- especially when it comes to fundamental economic and social policy questions and the role of government in American life.
In the 1970s, on the partisan roll calls, the average member of Congress backed the party position 65 percent of the time. In the 1980s, the average degree of partisan loyalty rose to 73 percent; and in the 1990s, to 81 percent. In these past two years, it has been 87 percent.
In the Senate, the new majority leader, Bill Frist of Tennessee, often described as "a healer," was every bit as loyal a partisan last year as the man he replaces, Trent Lott of Mississippi. Lott was a 98 percenter; Frist, 97 percent, and the new Republican whip, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, also voted the party line 97 percent of the time.
The only surprise is on the Democratic side of the Senate. Democratic Leader Tom Daschle agreed with his party majority only 80 percent of the time -- a remarkably low figure for a man often described by Republicans as a partisan obstructionist. His deputy, Harry Reid of Nevada, was more partisan, toeing the Democratic line 94 percent of the time.
Damn, that's part of Daschle's problem - he's 20% Republican!
Reporters who have covered Congress over several decades know from their daily experience that with almost every session, they have found fewer moderates or progressives on the Republican side and fewer conservatives among the Democrats -- especially when it comes to fundamental economic and social policy questions and the role of government in American life.
In the 1970s, on the partisan roll calls, the average member of Congress backed the party position 65 percent of the time. In the 1980s, the average degree of partisan loyalty rose to 73 percent; and in the 1990s, to 81 percent. In these past two years, it has been 87 percent.
In the Senate, the new majority leader, Bill Frist of Tennessee, often described as "a healer," was every bit as loyal a partisan last year as the man he replaces, Trent Lott of Mississippi. Lott was a 98 percenter; Frist, 97 percent, and the new Republican whip, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, also voted the party line 97 percent of the time.
The only surprise is on the Democratic side of the Senate. Democratic Leader Tom Daschle agreed with his party majority only 80 percent of the time -- a remarkably low figure for a man often described by Republicans as a partisan obstructionist. His deputy, Harry Reid of Nevada, was more partisan, toeing the Democratic line 94 percent of the time.
Damn, that's part of Daschle's problem - he's 20% Republican!
I am going to follow natasha of the watch in linking this:
the bitter shack of resentment -- Of Oil and Selective Tyranthood
Last year, I wrote of the negotiations between Unocal (with the approval and assistance of the State Department) and the Taliban which had been quietly going on in the mid-1990s, despite the fact that the Taliban was not a diplomatically recognized regime. Back then, when I wondered if our attack on Afghanistan might have a secondary motive -- to mow down the last barriers to the pipeline -- people called me a liberal conspiracy theorist. Then Bush et al installed Hamid Kharzai, a former Unocal consultant on the pipeline project and one of those who lobbied for the project in the region, as the president of the "new" Afghanistan. I hated to say I told you so ...
And with further comments and links on zany and dictatorial Turkmenbashi.
the bitter shack of resentment -- Of Oil and Selective Tyranthood
Last year, I wrote of the negotiations between Unocal (with the approval and assistance of the State Department) and the Taliban which had been quietly going on in the mid-1990s, despite the fact that the Taliban was not a diplomatically recognized regime. Back then, when I wondered if our attack on Afghanistan might have a secondary motive -- to mow down the last barriers to the pipeline -- people called me a liberal conspiracy theorist. Then Bush et al installed Hamid Kharzai, a former Unocal consultant on the pipeline project and one of those who lobbied for the project in the region, as the president of the "new" Afghanistan. I hated to say I told you so ...
And with further comments and links on zany and dictatorial Turkmenbashi.
ens -- Hundreds of Species Pressured by Global Warming
"Birds are laying eggs earlier than usual, plants are flowering earlier and mammals are breaking hibernation sooner," said Terry Root, a senior fellow with Stanford University's Institute for International Studies (IIS) and lead author of the article published in today's issue of the journal "Nature."
Root and her colleagues analyzed 143 scientific studies involving a total of 1,473 species of animals and plants for the article, "Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants."
After analyzing all 143 studies, the Stanford team concluded that global warming is having a statistically significant impact on animal and plant populations around the world.
Here in Houston about half the men I run into don't believe in global warming - its an environmental pinko plot.
"Birds are laying eggs earlier than usual, plants are flowering earlier and mammals are breaking hibernation sooner," said Terry Root, a senior fellow with Stanford University's Institute for International Studies (IIS) and lead author of the article published in today's issue of the journal "Nature."
Root and her colleagues analyzed 143 scientific studies involving a total of 1,473 species of animals and plants for the article, "Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants."
After analyzing all 143 studies, the Stanford team concluded that global warming is having a statistically significant impact on animal and plant populations around the world.
Here in Houston about half the men I run into don't believe in global warming - its an environmental pinko plot.
PBS NewsHour: Abortion Politics -- January 2, 2003
Bush actively supporting anti-abortion position. In new regulations embryos are classified as human subjects, to be protected in medical and scientific research. In other new regulations the definition of children was expanded to include the unborn.
Example number three involves the naming of Dr. W. David Hager, along with other pro-life physicians, to a Food and Drug Administration panel on reproductive health.
He ... worked with pro-life groups on this petition, filed earlier this year. It calls on the FDA to rescind approval of the abortion-inducing drug Mifeprex, formerly known as RU-486. The drug was approved by the FDA in 2000, and has been used safely by more than 100,000 U.S. women to induce abortions in the early stages of pregnancy.
In one book he co-wrote with his wife, Linda, he advises women suffering from premenstrual syndrome to "ask the Holy Spirit to show you how to access his supernatural grace and strength on your worst PMS days." In another, he assures women trying to conceive that "Jesus values you enough to be concerned about your fertility."
Ann Stone is a Republican who voted for President Bush. But she also heads Republicans for Choice, a group fighting to protect abortion rights. She says Hager is the wrong man for the FDA job.
He believes in Jesus as a source of healing and the power of prayer and all that, and as a Christian, I can certainly understand that. But I don't think we'd see Jesus on earth advocating that the FDA be out there praying over people to heal them.
Meanwhile, several other newly announced appointees to the same FDA panel also have drawn the wrath of pro- choice advocates.
One has been a member of the board of a pro-life physician's group, while another advocates only natural family planning, or the so-called rhythm method, and opposes all other forms of contraception on pro-life grounds.
These are supposed to be scientific panels not crazy religious debating societies. By the way Jesus as a rabbi of his time, would have believed the soul entered the body with the first breath. No breath - no soul.
Bush actively supporting anti-abortion position. In new regulations embryos are classified as human subjects, to be protected in medical and scientific research. In other new regulations the definition of children was expanded to include the unborn.
Example number three involves the naming of Dr. W. David Hager, along with other pro-life physicians, to a Food and Drug Administration panel on reproductive health.
He ... worked with pro-life groups on this petition, filed earlier this year. It calls on the FDA to rescind approval of the abortion-inducing drug Mifeprex, formerly known as RU-486. The drug was approved by the FDA in 2000, and has been used safely by more than 100,000 U.S. women to induce abortions in the early stages of pregnancy.
In one book he co-wrote with his wife, Linda, he advises women suffering from premenstrual syndrome to "ask the Holy Spirit to show you how to access his supernatural grace and strength on your worst PMS days." In another, he assures women trying to conceive that "Jesus values you enough to be concerned about your fertility."
Ann Stone is a Republican who voted for President Bush. But she also heads Republicans for Choice, a group fighting to protect abortion rights. She says Hager is the wrong man for the FDA job.
He believes in Jesus as a source of healing and the power of prayer and all that, and as a Christian, I can certainly understand that. But I don't think we'd see Jesus on earth advocating that the FDA be out there praying over people to heal them.
Meanwhile, several other newly announced appointees to the same FDA panel also have drawn the wrath of pro- choice advocates.
One has been a member of the board of a pro-life physician's group, while another advocates only natural family planning, or the so-called rhythm method, and opposes all other forms of contraception on pro-life grounds.
These are supposed to be scientific panels not crazy religious debating societies. By the way Jesus as a rabbi of his time, would have believed the soul entered the body with the first breath. No breath - no soul.
digbysblog -- Hullabaloo over shaming by breast baring
I propose that the women of America go to Washington and shame those men. Yes, let's go there and bare our breasts at President Bush's State of the Union address. Shame on him for diverting attention away from the health-care crisis, the pension crisis, the education crisis; shame on him for stomping on environmental protection regulations; shame on him for bombing innocent people any minute now in Baghdad; shame on him for promoting the use of oil and thus a war, rather than promoting alternative methods of energy production; shame on him for all the young Americans who are totally unmotivated to vote, yet have already died in Afghanistan or will soon die in Iraq. Women of America, let's bare our breasts for peace and democracy!
Carolyn Rios [in LA Times letter]
I hadn't actually thought of it before, but this could be the radical new form of political discourse we Democrats have been looking for. digby
I could second that.
I propose that the women of America go to Washington and shame those men. Yes, let's go there and bare our breasts at President Bush's State of the Union address. Shame on him for diverting attention away from the health-care crisis, the pension crisis, the education crisis; shame on him for stomping on environmental protection regulations; shame on him for bombing innocent people any minute now in Baghdad; shame on him for promoting the use of oil and thus a war, rather than promoting alternative methods of energy production; shame on him for all the young Americans who are totally unmotivated to vote, yet have already died in Afghanistan or will soon die in Iraq. Women of America, let's bare our breasts for peace and democracy!
Carolyn Rios [in LA Times letter]
I hadn't actually thought of it before, but this could be the radical new form of political discourse we Democrats have been looking for. digby
I could second that.
CounterPunch -- Dr. Werther: George Will and the Collapse of Historical Knowledge
It is not surprising that crackpot analogies like Mr. Will's have gained traction in the United States anno 2002. A recent National Geographic survey found that in the dumbed-down post-literate age "only about one in seven--13 percent--of Americans between the age of 18 and 24, the prime age for military warriors, could find Iraq" on a world map. (3) The adage says that in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king. Accordingly, a half-educated discourse on the Weimar Republic by a kennel-fed establishment literatus like George Will sounds like real erudition to people who can barely find Canada on a map.
Will comparing Iraq to Weimar Germany is less accurate than comparing Will to Goebbels. "Goebbels and George Will never served in the military, and both wrote tirelessly in favor of war, and both practiced the lower forms of journalism"
It is not surprising that crackpot analogies like Mr. Will's have gained traction in the United States anno 2002. A recent National Geographic survey found that in the dumbed-down post-literate age "only about one in seven--13 percent--of Americans between the age of 18 and 24, the prime age for military warriors, could find Iraq" on a world map. (3) The adage says that in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king. Accordingly, a half-educated discourse on the Weimar Republic by a kennel-fed establishment literatus like George Will sounds like real erudition to people who can barely find Canada on a map.
Will comparing Iraq to Weimar Germany is less accurate than comparing Will to Goebbels. "Goebbels and George Will never served in the military, and both wrote tirelessly in favor of war, and both practiced the lower forms of journalism"
Salon.com -- Bush's illogical foreign policy
The nuclear threat from North Korea reveals the limits of the Bush administration's preemption doctrine.
Forward air bases, Army infantry units, a hospital ship and docile yet combat-trained reporters are all being readied for a "regime change" war against Iraq promoted as a way to rid the world of an arsenal Saddam Hussein doesn't seem to have.
Under the Bush doctrine, North Korea should have been preemptively attacked by now because it actually has weapons of mass destruction, including two nuclear weapons by CIA estimates, and is a rogue outlaw state. Does Bush have a yellow streak or, more sensibly, does he not believe his own words?
Feeling safe yet? You shouldn't be.
Washington's foreign policy is now less logical than that of Pyongyang. A starving dictatorship's clumsy blackmail attempts at least make some twisted sense, in that the Bush administration has refused, from its very first days, to even discuss North Korea's persistent request for a nonaggression pact with the United States.
The administration plan is to isolate this paranoid excuse for a nation, as if it isn't already the most isolated place on earth. If we can't make peace with an utterly defeated nation like North Korea, we're in trouble. From Columbine to Weimar Germany, humiliating those with nothing to lose is always a recipe for disaster.
The nuclear threat from North Korea reveals the limits of the Bush administration's preemption doctrine.
Forward air bases, Army infantry units, a hospital ship and docile yet combat-trained reporters are all being readied for a "regime change" war against Iraq promoted as a way to rid the world of an arsenal Saddam Hussein doesn't seem to have.
Under the Bush doctrine, North Korea should have been preemptively attacked by now because it actually has weapons of mass destruction, including two nuclear weapons by CIA estimates, and is a rogue outlaw state. Does Bush have a yellow streak or, more sensibly, does he not believe his own words?
Feeling safe yet? You shouldn't be.
Washington's foreign policy is now less logical than that of Pyongyang. A starving dictatorship's clumsy blackmail attempts at least make some twisted sense, in that the Bush administration has refused, from its very first days, to even discuss North Korea's persistent request for a nonaggression pact with the United States.
The administration plan is to isolate this paranoid excuse for a nation, as if it isn't already the most isolated place on earth. If we can't make peace with an utterly defeated nation like North Korea, we're in trouble. From Columbine to Weimar Germany, humiliating those with nothing to lose is always a recipe for disaster.
Now Corporations Claim The "Right To Lie"
While Nike was conducting a huge and expensive PR blitz to tell people that it had cleaned up its subcontractors' sweatshop labor practices, an alert consumer advocate and activist in California named Marc Kasky caught them in what he alleges are a number of specific deceptions. Citing a California law that forbids corporations from intentionally deceiving people in their commercial statements, Kasky sued the multi-billion-dollar corporation.
Instead of refuting Kasky's charge by proving in court that they didn't lie, however, Nike instead chose to argue that corporations should enjoy the same "free speech" right to deceive that individual human citizens have in their personal lives. If people have the constitutionally protected right to say, "The check is in the mail," or, "That looks great on you," then, Nike's reasoning goes, a corporation should have the same right to say whatever they want in their corporate PR campaigns.
They took this argument all the way to the California Supreme Court, where they lost. The next stop may be the U.S. Supreme Court in early January, and the battle lines are already forming.
At the end of the article it is pointed out that Chief Justice Rehnquist actually disagreed with the preamble to the 1886 Santa Clara decision that is the illegal precedent to defining a corporation as a "person." In the 1978 Boston v. Bellotti decision he wrote:
"Early in our history, Mr. Chief Justice Marshall described the status of a corporation in the eyes of federal law:
"'A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law. Being the mere creature of law, it possesses only those properties which the charter of creation confers upon it, either expressly, or as incidental to its very existence. These are such as are supposed best calculated to effect the object for which it was created.'..."
In the 1978 Boston v. Bellotti decision, the Court agreed, by a one vote majority, that corporations were "persons" and thus entitled to the free speech right to give huge quantities of money to political causes. Chief Justice Rehnquist, believing this to be an error, argued that corporations should be restrained from political activity and wrote the dissent.
Those are the two basic "corporate civil rights" cases and both should be overturned. I am shocked and hopeful to find that Rehnquist agrees with me on that.
Thom Hartmann is the author of "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights." www.unequalprotection.com The entire article is copyright by Thom Hartmann, but permission is granted for reprint in print, email, or web media so long as this credit is attached.
While Nike was conducting a huge and expensive PR blitz to tell people that it had cleaned up its subcontractors' sweatshop labor practices, an alert consumer advocate and activist in California named Marc Kasky caught them in what he alleges are a number of specific deceptions. Citing a California law that forbids corporations from intentionally deceiving people in their commercial statements, Kasky sued the multi-billion-dollar corporation.
Instead of refuting Kasky's charge by proving in court that they didn't lie, however, Nike instead chose to argue that corporations should enjoy the same "free speech" right to deceive that individual human citizens have in their personal lives. If people have the constitutionally protected right to say, "The check is in the mail," or, "That looks great on you," then, Nike's reasoning goes, a corporation should have the same right to say whatever they want in their corporate PR campaigns.
They took this argument all the way to the California Supreme Court, where they lost. The next stop may be the U.S. Supreme Court in early January, and the battle lines are already forming.
At the end of the article it is pointed out that Chief Justice Rehnquist actually disagreed with the preamble to the 1886 Santa Clara decision that is the illegal precedent to defining a corporation as a "person." In the 1978 Boston v. Bellotti decision he wrote:
"Early in our history, Mr. Chief Justice Marshall described the status of a corporation in the eyes of federal law:
"'A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law. Being the mere creature of law, it possesses only those properties which the charter of creation confers upon it, either expressly, or as incidental to its very existence. These are such as are supposed best calculated to effect the object for which it was created.'..."
In the 1978 Boston v. Bellotti decision, the Court agreed, by a one vote majority, that corporations were "persons" and thus entitled to the free speech right to give huge quantities of money to political causes. Chief Justice Rehnquist, believing this to be an error, argued that corporations should be restrained from political activity and wrote the dissent.
Those are the two basic "corporate civil rights" cases and both should be overturned. I am shocked and hopeful to find that Rehnquist agrees with me on that.
Thom Hartmann is the author of "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights." www.unequalprotection.com The entire article is copyright by Thom Hartmann, but permission is granted for reprint in print, email, or web media so long as this credit is attached.
Wired News: Bush's Year of U.S. Surveillance
The executive branch's attempts in 2002 to peer into the lives of Americans were more than a little similar to the exploits of Middle Earth's would-be rulers.
For J.R.R. Tolkien fans, the scheme sounds eerily familiar.
"Concealed in his fortress (Sauron) sees all. His gaze pierces cloud, shadow, earth and flesh," says Saruman, the evil wizard allied with Sauron, in The Fellowship of the Ring.
The executive branch's attempts in 2002 to peer into the lives of Americans were more than a little similar to the exploits of Middle Earth's would-be rulers.
For J.R.R. Tolkien fans, the scheme sounds eerily familiar.
"Concealed in his fortress (Sauron) sees all. His gaze pierces cloud, shadow, earth and flesh," says Saruman, the evil wizard allied with Sauron, in The Fellowship of the Ring.
Thursday, January 02, 2003
NYTimes -- Outflanked Democrats Wonder How to Catch Up in Media Wars
Worried that their party has been outgunned in the political propaganda wars by conservative radio and television personalities, influential Democrats are scouring the nation for a liberal answer to Rush Limbaugh and the many others on the deep bench of Republican friends.
For his part, Mr. Podesta is discussing with the Internet entrepreneur Steven T. Kirsch and others the creation of a liberal version of the Heritage Foundation, the conservative research group that, along with others of its kind, is credited with helping start the modern conservative movement.
The foundation is part of a circuit of influential conservative groups that are credited with helping to hone a singular message, bolstered each Wednesday at back-to-back meetings held by Grover Norquist, the head of Americans for Tax Reform, and the conservative activist Paul Weyrich. Those meetings are monitored and at times attended by some conservative commentators, columnists and Internet writers.
Democrats have long claimed that the circuit has corralled conservative thinkers, and more important, conservative media, into a disciplined message of the week that gets repeated attention from Web sites like the Drudge Report, Mr. Limbaugh's radio show, Fox News's prime-time talk shows and the editorial pages of The Washington Times and The Wall Street Journal.
Conservatives have Mr. Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Reagan and Neal Boortz, who collectively draw an audience of at least 30 million people per week with a strictly conservative message.
They are led, of course, by Mr. Limbaugh, with an estimated audience of up to 20 million people a week, and Mr. Hannity, with nearly 10 million. Democrats, most recently Al Gore, have also complained that the Fox News Channel, overseen by the former Republican strategist Roger E. Ailes, slants its coverage against Democrats, a charge Mr. Ailes denies. Its average nightly audience of about 1.3 million people is the largest in cable news.
The Consortium News was Editorializing about this:
Gore & the Need for a 'Counter-Media'
Editorial
December 19, 2002
So what can be done now?
Our view for years has been that Americans concerned about the growing right-wing dominance of the national news media must invest in a “counter-media” that will not treat the Bush family like royalty and will give American voters important information on other topics.
Like his father, George W. Bush has gotten the kid-gloves treatment. In part, that’s because the Bushes are protected by two powerful elements within the news media: the red-meat conservatives and the blue-blood establishment. This double layer of protection makes the Bushes almost unique in American politics, shielded both by aggressive right-wing activists and by the Georgetown social set.
The “counter-media” must challenge that, by taking a hard look at Bush’s mistakes while giving the American people the context for understanding the risks of his domestic and foreign policies. The “counter-media” also must counteract the kinds of media fabrications and distortions that were directed against Gore in Campaign 2000, effectively deciding the election.
In recent weeks, there has been some stirring of interest about creating syndicated content for radio stations that realize the market for conservative talk radio is saturated and that there is an untapped liberal market. The “counter-media” also could take the form of a television outlet on satellite or cable – giving the American people a station they could tune in to hear directly what Gore and other embattled liberals are saying, not just what comes through the media filter.
For a list of some journalists who could become a core of talent for the “counter-media,” look at the “Media in Exile” list maintained at the Web site, mediawhoresonline.com.
In short, today's crisis in American politics calls for nothing less than a Marshall Plan for building a strong “counter-media.” There must be both adequate resources and great energy invested in this enterprise.
Though this new media infrastructure would not come cheap, the cost of doing nothing – both to the future of democracy and to the future of the planet – would certainly be far greater.
Much more is in the editorial than this digest can present. I know that for relatively unbiased national news now in major media I am often having to go to Canada's CBC. BBC is a conservative business British source which is more informative and unbiased than US networks. Our own PBS usually has moderates outnumbered by conservative commentators and analysts. Without the internet and the beginnings of a liberal blogging or support community liberals would be information starved.
Worried that their party has been outgunned in the political propaganda wars by conservative radio and television personalities, influential Democrats are scouring the nation for a liberal answer to Rush Limbaugh and the many others on the deep bench of Republican friends.
For his part, Mr. Podesta is discussing with the Internet entrepreneur Steven T. Kirsch and others the creation of a liberal version of the Heritage Foundation, the conservative research group that, along with others of its kind, is credited with helping start the modern conservative movement.
The foundation is part of a circuit of influential conservative groups that are credited with helping to hone a singular message, bolstered each Wednesday at back-to-back meetings held by Grover Norquist, the head of Americans for Tax Reform, and the conservative activist Paul Weyrich. Those meetings are monitored and at times attended by some conservative commentators, columnists and Internet writers.
Democrats have long claimed that the circuit has corralled conservative thinkers, and more important, conservative media, into a disciplined message of the week that gets repeated attention from Web sites like the Drudge Report, Mr. Limbaugh's radio show, Fox News's prime-time talk shows and the editorial pages of The Washington Times and The Wall Street Journal.
Conservatives have Mr. Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Reagan and Neal Boortz, who collectively draw an audience of at least 30 million people per week with a strictly conservative message.
They are led, of course, by Mr. Limbaugh, with an estimated audience of up to 20 million people a week, and Mr. Hannity, with nearly 10 million. Democrats, most recently Al Gore, have also complained that the Fox News Channel, overseen by the former Republican strategist Roger E. Ailes, slants its coverage against Democrats, a charge Mr. Ailes denies. Its average nightly audience of about 1.3 million people is the largest in cable news.
The Consortium News was Editorializing about this:
Gore & the Need for a 'Counter-Media'
Editorial
December 19, 2002
So what can be done now?
Our view for years has been that Americans concerned about the growing right-wing dominance of the national news media must invest in a “counter-media” that will not treat the Bush family like royalty and will give American voters important information on other topics.
Like his father, George W. Bush has gotten the kid-gloves treatment. In part, that’s because the Bushes are protected by two powerful elements within the news media: the red-meat conservatives and the blue-blood establishment. This double layer of protection makes the Bushes almost unique in American politics, shielded both by aggressive right-wing activists and by the Georgetown social set.
The “counter-media” must challenge that, by taking a hard look at Bush’s mistakes while giving the American people the context for understanding the risks of his domestic and foreign policies. The “counter-media” also must counteract the kinds of media fabrications and distortions that were directed against Gore in Campaign 2000, effectively deciding the election.
In recent weeks, there has been some stirring of interest about creating syndicated content for radio stations that realize the market for conservative talk radio is saturated and that there is an untapped liberal market. The “counter-media” also could take the form of a television outlet on satellite or cable – giving the American people a station they could tune in to hear directly what Gore and other embattled liberals are saying, not just what comes through the media filter.
For a list of some journalists who could become a core of talent for the “counter-media,” look at the “Media in Exile” list maintained at the Web site, mediawhoresonline.com.
In short, today's crisis in American politics calls for nothing less than a Marshall Plan for building a strong “counter-media.” There must be both adequate resources and great energy invested in this enterprise.
Though this new media infrastructure would not come cheap, the cost of doing nothing – both to the future of democracy and to the future of the planet – would certainly be far greater.
Much more is in the editorial than this digest can present. I know that for relatively unbiased national news now in major media I am often having to go to Canada's CBC. BBC is a conservative business British source which is more informative and unbiased than US networks. Our own PBS usually has moderates outnumbered by conservative commentators and analysts. Without the internet and the beginnings of a liberal blogging or support community liberals would be information starved.
Democrats face crunch time for '04 | csmonitor.com
Strategists agree that the public won't start paying attention until late next fall, in the run-up to the first primaries. So this early stage of the campaign will be conducted largely within inner circles of the Democratic Party - among contributors, political professionals, and operatives in key states, as well as the media.
"All these candidates are going to spend the next nine months going around talking to the same 40,000 people," said Craig Smith, a top adviser to Senator Lieberman, at a recent panel discussion.
But the first priority is generating cash: In every presidential contest since 1980, the candidate who raised the most money in the year before the election won the nomination.
Strategists agree that the public won't start paying attention until late next fall, in the run-up to the first primaries. So this early stage of the campaign will be conducted largely within inner circles of the Democratic Party - among contributors, political professionals, and operatives in key states, as well as the media.
"All these candidates are going to spend the next nine months going around talking to the same 40,000 people," said Craig Smith, a top adviser to Senator Lieberman, at a recent panel discussion.
But the first priority is generating cash: In every presidential contest since 1980, the candidate who raised the most money in the year before the election won the nomination.
The Consortiumnews.com -- Price of the 'Liberal Media' Myth by Robert Parry.
This is such an important story and such a prevailing myth that I am excerpting large amounts of this article and posting some of the links below. People should read the full article and not my digest if they have time. Italics will be mine below.
On one hand, the Right’s long-held conviction that the media is the enemy helps explain the chip-on-the-shoulder attitude of many conservatives, plus their motivation for investing billions of dollars to build a dedicated conservative media. That well-oiled media machine now stretches from TV networks to talk radio to newspapers to magazines to books to the Internet – and helps set the U.S. political agenda.
On the other hand, the endless repetition of the “liberal media” myth has sedated liberals who have avoided a commitment to develop a comparable media infrastructure, apparently out of a hope that one is not needed.
Whatever the answer, the “liberal media” myth has proved so useful to conservatives that they continue to promote it even after mainstream news organizations – including the New York Times and the Washington Post – joined in “press riots” over Bill Clinton’s Whitewater real estate investment and Al Gore’s supposed exaggerations, trivial issues that paved the way for Clinton’s impeachment in 1998 and Gore’s loss of the White House in 2000, respectively.
One view is that the durability of the “liberal media” myth is a testament to today's conservative media power – that simple repetition from a wide enough circle of voices will convince a gullible portion of any population that a lie is the truth. That’s especially the case when there are few voices arguing to the contrary.
A survey conducted before Election 2000 by the industry magazine, Editor & Publisher, found a strong bias in favor of George W. Bush among top editorial decision-makers nationwide.
Newspaper editors and publishers favored Bush by a 2-to-1 margin, according to the survey of nearly 200 editors and publishers. Publishers, who are at the pinnacle of power within news organizations, were even more pro-Bush, favoring the then-Texas governor by a 3-to-1 margin, E&P reported. Gazing through the rose colors of their pro-Bush glasses, the news executives incorrectly predicted a Bush electoral landslide in November 2000.
Right-wing media magnate Murdoch owns the conservative Weekly Standard, the New York Post and the national cable network Fox News, which he’s staffed with prominent conservative journalists, such as Brit Hume and Tony Snow, and star commentators, such as Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity.
At the helm of Fox News, Murdoch put Republican political strategist Roger Ailes, who became famous in the 1988 presidential race for advising George H.W. Bush to use tough-on-crime rhetoric to paint Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis as soft on violent criminals.
General Electric Co.’s Chairman Welch revealed a similar favoritism for Bush while visiting the election desk of GE’s NBC News subsidiary on Election Night 2000. In front of the NBC staff, Welch rooted for a Bush victory, asking apparently in jest, "how much would I have to pay you to call the race for Bush?" according to witnesses.
Later, after Fox News declared Bush the winner, Welch allegedly asked the chief of the NBC election desk why NBC was not doing the same, a choice NBC did make and then retracted. Though premature, the pro-Bush calls colored the public impression of Bush's entitlement to the presidency during the month-long Florida recount battle.
Welch and Murdoch are far from the only network chieftains to be ardent Republicans, as columnist Joe Conason has noted. “So was Larry Tisch when he owned CBS. So are Richard Parsons and Steve Case of CNN (and Time Warner AOL),” Conason wrote at Salon.com. “Michael Eisner (Disney ABC) gave to Bill Bradley and Al Gore, but he gave more to Bush and McCain – and he supported Rick Lazio for the Senate against Hillary Clinton.”
Rev. Moon is another media mogul whose publications have backed Bush and Republicans while attacking Democrats, including printing an accusation in 2000 that Gore was “delusional.”
Given the conservative bias among senior news executives, lower-level editorial employees also understand that critical articles about Bush and other favored Republicans carry extra risk.
By the late 1970s, the cumulative impact of those three examples of “liberal bias” – the battle against segregation, the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal – became the catalyst for an extraordinary historical reaction. Conservatives, led by former Treasury Secretary William Simon and financed by major conservative foundations, began investing first tens of millions of dollars and later billions of dollars in building their own media, think tanks and attack groups. [For a brief history of the modern conservative media machine, see Consortiumnews.com's "Democrats' Dilemma."]
[For details on the disparity in coverage [of Bush and Gore in the 2000 election], see Consortiumnews.com's "Protecting Bush-Cheney."]
Ironically, the Bush campaign had been geared up, prior to the election, for the potential of an opposite result, with Bush winning the popular vote and trailing in the Electoral College. In that case, Bush aides planned to activate the conservative media, especially talk radio, to challenge Gore’s legitimacy and demand that Bush be accepted as the people’s president. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com's "The GOP's Popular-Vote Hypocrisy."]
Gore was blamed for an effort to exclude military absentee ballots, though months later it was disclosed that the Bush forces had engineered a two-tier approach, letting questionable military absentee ballots be counted in predominately Republican counties and excluding them in heavily Democratic counties, where many black voters resided. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com "The Media Is the Mess."]
With Bush installed in the White House, after five Republicans on the U.S. Supreme Court stopped a state-court-ordered recount, the national media rallied around him again, apparently out of concern that his fragile claim to legitimacy might undermine American prestige in the world. In marked contrast to the harsh reporting that confronted Clinton even before he was sworn in, the national news media treated Bush with kid gloves.
That deference deepened after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, eight months into his presidency. The media held off on any searing examination of Bush’s failure to recognize the growing danger from al Qaeda terrorists despite warnings that his incoming administration had received from Clinton’s national security aides. As the dangers had mounted and missed signals accumulated in summer 2001, Bush retreated to his Texas ranch for a month-long vacation.
Rather than meting out tough criticism, the national media couldn't get enough of Bush's decisive leadership and his skill as a wartime president. Again, the press corps seemed worried that critical coverage would undermine the U.S. government at a time of crisis and might open the press corps to the old charge of "liberal bias."
In this post-Sept. 11 climate, leading news organizations chose to play down the most dramatic finding of their own recount of Florida’s ballots – that Al Gore won Florida regardless of what standard of chad was used, whether dimpled, perforated or fully punched through. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com’s “So Bush Did Steal the White House.”]
After Gore announced that he would not seek the Democratic nomination, some media executives began acknowledging the obvious: that the national press corps had operated with a deep-seated bias against Gore.
“Somewhere along the line,” said Mark Halperin, ABC’s political director, “the dominant political reporters for most dominant news organizations decided they didn’t like him, and they thought the story line on any given day was about his being a phony or a liar or a waffler. Within the subculture of political reporting, there was almost peer pressure not to say something neutral, let alone nice, about his ideas, his political skills, his motivations.” [Washington Post, Dec. 23, 2002]
For Democrats and liberals,... the political message should be clear: only by countering the powerful conservative media machine can they hope to change this dynamic. There is no reason to believe that simply complaining about the situation will do much to alter the behavior of the national press corps.
On the other hand, for Republicans and conservatives, the secret to their continued success will be, in part, to keep the “myth of the liberal media” alive.
This is such an important story and such a prevailing myth that I am excerpting large amounts of this article and posting some of the links below. People should read the full article and not my digest if they have time. Italics will be mine below.
On one hand, the Right’s long-held conviction that the media is the enemy helps explain the chip-on-the-shoulder attitude of many conservatives, plus their motivation for investing billions of dollars to build a dedicated conservative media. That well-oiled media machine now stretches from TV networks to talk radio to newspapers to magazines to books to the Internet – and helps set the U.S. political agenda.
On the other hand, the endless repetition of the “liberal media” myth has sedated liberals who have avoided a commitment to develop a comparable media infrastructure, apparently out of a hope that one is not needed.
Whatever the answer, the “liberal media” myth has proved so useful to conservatives that they continue to promote it even after mainstream news organizations – including the New York Times and the Washington Post – joined in “press riots” over Bill Clinton’s Whitewater real estate investment and Al Gore’s supposed exaggerations, trivial issues that paved the way for Clinton’s impeachment in 1998 and Gore’s loss of the White House in 2000, respectively.
One view is that the durability of the “liberal media” myth is a testament to today's conservative media power – that simple repetition from a wide enough circle of voices will convince a gullible portion of any population that a lie is the truth. That’s especially the case when there are few voices arguing to the contrary.
A survey conducted before Election 2000 by the industry magazine, Editor & Publisher, found a strong bias in favor of George W. Bush among top editorial decision-makers nationwide.
Newspaper editors and publishers favored Bush by a 2-to-1 margin, according to the survey of nearly 200 editors and publishers. Publishers, who are at the pinnacle of power within news organizations, were even more pro-Bush, favoring the then-Texas governor by a 3-to-1 margin, E&P reported. Gazing through the rose colors of their pro-Bush glasses, the news executives incorrectly predicted a Bush electoral landslide in November 2000.
Right-wing media magnate Murdoch owns the conservative Weekly Standard, the New York Post and the national cable network Fox News, which he’s staffed with prominent conservative journalists, such as Brit Hume and Tony Snow, and star commentators, such as Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity.
At the helm of Fox News, Murdoch put Republican political strategist Roger Ailes, who became famous in the 1988 presidential race for advising George H.W. Bush to use tough-on-crime rhetoric to paint Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis as soft on violent criminals.
General Electric Co.’s Chairman Welch revealed a similar favoritism for Bush while visiting the election desk of GE’s NBC News subsidiary on Election Night 2000. In front of the NBC staff, Welch rooted for a Bush victory, asking apparently in jest, "how much would I have to pay you to call the race for Bush?" according to witnesses.
Later, after Fox News declared Bush the winner, Welch allegedly asked the chief of the NBC election desk why NBC was not doing the same, a choice NBC did make and then retracted. Though premature, the pro-Bush calls colored the public impression of Bush's entitlement to the presidency during the month-long Florida recount battle.
Welch and Murdoch are far from the only network chieftains to be ardent Republicans, as columnist Joe Conason has noted. “So was Larry Tisch when he owned CBS. So are Richard Parsons and Steve Case of CNN (and Time Warner AOL),” Conason wrote at Salon.com. “Michael Eisner (Disney ABC) gave to Bill Bradley and Al Gore, but he gave more to Bush and McCain – and he supported Rick Lazio for the Senate against Hillary Clinton.”
Rev. Moon is another media mogul whose publications have backed Bush and Republicans while attacking Democrats, including printing an accusation in 2000 that Gore was “delusional.”
Given the conservative bias among senior news executives, lower-level editorial employees also understand that critical articles about Bush and other favored Republicans carry extra risk.
By the late 1970s, the cumulative impact of those three examples of “liberal bias” – the battle against segregation, the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal – became the catalyst for an extraordinary historical reaction. Conservatives, led by former Treasury Secretary William Simon and financed by major conservative foundations, began investing first tens of millions of dollars and later billions of dollars in building their own media, think tanks and attack groups. [For a brief history of the modern conservative media machine, see Consortiumnews.com's "Democrats' Dilemma."]
[For details on the disparity in coverage [of Bush and Gore in the 2000 election], see Consortiumnews.com's "Protecting Bush-Cheney."]
Ironically, the Bush campaign had been geared up, prior to the election, for the potential of an opposite result, with Bush winning the popular vote and trailing in the Electoral College. In that case, Bush aides planned to activate the conservative media, especially talk radio, to challenge Gore’s legitimacy and demand that Bush be accepted as the people’s president. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com's "The GOP's Popular-Vote Hypocrisy."]
Gore was blamed for an effort to exclude military absentee ballots, though months later it was disclosed that the Bush forces had engineered a two-tier approach, letting questionable military absentee ballots be counted in predominately Republican counties and excluding them in heavily Democratic counties, where many black voters resided. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com "The Media Is the Mess."]
With Bush installed in the White House, after five Republicans on the U.S. Supreme Court stopped a state-court-ordered recount, the national media rallied around him again, apparently out of concern that his fragile claim to legitimacy might undermine American prestige in the world. In marked contrast to the harsh reporting that confronted Clinton even before he was sworn in, the national news media treated Bush with kid gloves.
That deference deepened after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, eight months into his presidency. The media held off on any searing examination of Bush’s failure to recognize the growing danger from al Qaeda terrorists despite warnings that his incoming administration had received from Clinton’s national security aides. As the dangers had mounted and missed signals accumulated in summer 2001, Bush retreated to his Texas ranch for a month-long vacation.
Rather than meting out tough criticism, the national media couldn't get enough of Bush's decisive leadership and his skill as a wartime president. Again, the press corps seemed worried that critical coverage would undermine the U.S. government at a time of crisis and might open the press corps to the old charge of "liberal bias."
In this post-Sept. 11 climate, leading news organizations chose to play down the most dramatic finding of their own recount of Florida’s ballots – that Al Gore won Florida regardless of what standard of chad was used, whether dimpled, perforated or fully punched through. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com’s “So Bush Did Steal the White House.”]
After Gore announced that he would not seek the Democratic nomination, some media executives began acknowledging the obvious: that the national press corps had operated with a deep-seated bias against Gore.
“Somewhere along the line,” said Mark Halperin, ABC’s political director, “the dominant political reporters for most dominant news organizations decided they didn’t like him, and they thought the story line on any given day was about his being a phony or a liar or a waffler. Within the subculture of political reporting, there was almost peer pressure not to say something neutral, let alone nice, about his ideas, his political skills, his motivations.” [Washington Post, Dec. 23, 2002]
For Democrats and liberals,... the political message should be clear: only by countering the powerful conservative media machine can they hope to change this dynamic. There is no reason to believe that simply complaining about the situation will do much to alter the behavior of the national press corps.
On the other hand, for Republicans and conservatives, the secret to their continued success will be, in part, to keep the “myth of the liberal media” alive.
USATODAY.com - Sen. Edwards enters Democratic race for president
Edwards is the third Democrat to formalize his White House ambitions by creating a committee to raise money for a presidential run. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and outgoing Vermont Gov. Howard Dean already are running.
Missouri Rep. Richard Gephardt is expected to set up a fundraising committee next week, followed by Sens. Tom Daschle of South Dakota and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut the week after. The field could grow even more. Retired Gen. Wesley Clark of Arkansas is among those assessing their odds in Iowa and other states with early primaries.
Edwards, 49, has been on the Democratic Party's rising-star roster since he defeated Sen. Lauch Faircloth, R-N.C., in 1998. He says he offers a stark alternative to President Bush: "Somebody who comes from regular people and has spent his entire life fighting for them, in contrast with an administration largely run by insiders and too often for insiders. It's a dramatic choice and a dramatic difference."
2004 Democratic hopefuls' list likely to grow quickly
The Rev. Al Sharpton plans to file papers for an exploratory committee on Jan. 21, aides say.
Sen. Bob Graham of Florida is expected to announce his intentions later this month. Delaware Sen. Joe Biden and Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd are considering bids, too.
In Iowa, site of the Democrats' first 2004 presidential contest, Edwards, Dean and Gephardt have made an impression with their early work, though party activists say the state still is open.
And in South Carolina, which holds a primary a week after New Hampshire, Edwards would seem to have an advantage, being born in upstate South Carolina and raised in North Carolina.
In New Hampshire, site of the nation's first presidential primary, Kerry has an early advantage because he is from neighboring Massachusetts. But that could add a risk, too, by raising expectations.
Money is going to be a big factor for the primary season as well as getting a fast start in a crowded field.
Edwards is the third Democrat to formalize his White House ambitions by creating a committee to raise money for a presidential run. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and outgoing Vermont Gov. Howard Dean already are running.
Missouri Rep. Richard Gephardt is expected to set up a fundraising committee next week, followed by Sens. Tom Daschle of South Dakota and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut the week after. The field could grow even more. Retired Gen. Wesley Clark of Arkansas is among those assessing their odds in Iowa and other states with early primaries.
Edwards, 49, has been on the Democratic Party's rising-star roster since he defeated Sen. Lauch Faircloth, R-N.C., in 1998. He says he offers a stark alternative to President Bush: "Somebody who comes from regular people and has spent his entire life fighting for them, in contrast with an administration largely run by insiders and too often for insiders. It's a dramatic choice and a dramatic difference."
2004 Democratic hopefuls' list likely to grow quickly
The Rev. Al Sharpton plans to file papers for an exploratory committee on Jan. 21, aides say.
Sen. Bob Graham of Florida is expected to announce his intentions later this month. Delaware Sen. Joe Biden and Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd are considering bids, too.
In Iowa, site of the Democrats' first 2004 presidential contest, Edwards, Dean and Gephardt have made an impression with their early work, though party activists say the state still is open.
And in South Carolina, which holds a primary a week after New Hampshire, Edwards would seem to have an advantage, being born in upstate South Carolina and raised in North Carolina.
In New Hampshire, site of the nation's first presidential primary, Kerry has an early advantage because he is from neighboring Massachusetts. But that could add a risk, too, by raising expectations.
Money is going to be a big factor for the primary season as well as getting a fast start in a crowded field.
An Economic Recovery No One Buys | csmonitor.com
The US economy enters 2003 in a peculiar pinch - with its growth prospects squeezed by excesses of the past and burdens of the future.
But don't try to persuade ordinary Americans - people who work, save in retirement accounts, and drive cars - that hard times are over.
"Households are finally facing up to the fact they are poorer for three years running," says Paul Kasriel, an economist at Northern Trust Co. in Chicago. Burdened with debt and shrunken investments, many consumers are starting to make a greater effort to save. The personal savings rate rose from 2.3 percent in 2001 to 3.9 percent in the first 11 months of 2002.
"If you want to retire before you expire, you have to save more," says Mr. Kasriel.
In addition to the stagnant stock market, many families aren't so sure that home values will rise as much as in the past.
As a market research analyst, I can say you will not get good forecasts until they have time to digest December performance. Lower interest rates have kept the housing and car markets up and military and security spending is benefiting some companies but everything else is very bleak.
The US economy enters 2003 in a peculiar pinch - with its growth prospects squeezed by excesses of the past and burdens of the future.
But don't try to persuade ordinary Americans - people who work, save in retirement accounts, and drive cars - that hard times are over.
"Households are finally facing up to the fact they are poorer for three years running," says Paul Kasriel, an economist at Northern Trust Co. in Chicago. Burdened with debt and shrunken investments, many consumers are starting to make a greater effort to save. The personal savings rate rose from 2.3 percent in 2001 to 3.9 percent in the first 11 months of 2002.
"If you want to retire before you expire, you have to save more," says Mr. Kasriel.
In addition to the stagnant stock market, many families aren't so sure that home values will rise as much as in the past.
As a market research analyst, I can say you will not get good forecasts until they have time to digest December performance. Lower interest rates have kept the housing and car markets up and military and security spending is benefiting some companies but everything else is very bleak.
Wednesday, January 01, 2003
MotherJones.com Decoding Bush
Nearly every statement that comes from this administration includes the phrase "The American people." Every time I hear that phrase I just substitute "industrial interests."
-- Robert Redford in The New York Times Magazine, December 8, 2002.
Wow, so simple and so true.
Nearly every statement that comes from this administration includes the phrase "The American people." Every time I hear that phrase I just substitute "industrial interests."
-- Robert Redford in The New York Times Magazine, December 8, 2002.
Wow, so simple and so true.
MotherJones.- Barry C. Lynn: Venezuela, Dissatisfaction and Disorder
MJ: So what is your best guess at what will happen in the next few months?
BL: At this point, my guess is that Chávez is kind of just standing there taking a bunch of punches -- I don't know if you remember Mohammed Ali's rope-a-dope. He's kind of just standing there, with his arms over his head taking these punches. And, these are pretty hard punches, but it's a matter of -- as Ali used to do -- just wearing out your opponent. They punch and punch and punch, and you stand there, and eventually they get tired, and I think that 's what he's doing. And it's starting to work, perhaps. You're seeing that the strike -- the lock-out -- is starting to fall apart. A lot of stores are starting to reopen. Restaurants are starting to reopen... The one exception is the oil industry, which is a very complicated thing.
It's very hard to run. So, on one hand, the strike is starting to fall apart, but then if the government is really unable to [resolve the oil problem], and if Caracas really starts to run out of food, then we could have a very bad situation. There could be very bad riots. But, I think that if the situation doesn't explode -- because of food shortages or if Chávez is knocked out violently -- I think that slowly the opposition will calm down and we'll move towards a pacific, democratic solution to the problem.
MJ: So what is your best guess at what will happen in the next few months?
BL: At this point, my guess is that Chávez is kind of just standing there taking a bunch of punches -- I don't know if you remember Mohammed Ali's rope-a-dope. He's kind of just standing there, with his arms over his head taking these punches. And, these are pretty hard punches, but it's a matter of -- as Ali used to do -- just wearing out your opponent. They punch and punch and punch, and you stand there, and eventually they get tired, and I think that 's what he's doing. And it's starting to work, perhaps. You're seeing that the strike -- the lock-out -- is starting to fall apart. A lot of stores are starting to reopen. Restaurants are starting to reopen... The one exception is the oil industry, which is a very complicated thing.
It's very hard to run. So, on one hand, the strike is starting to fall apart, but then if the government is really unable to [resolve the oil problem], and if Caracas really starts to run out of food, then we could have a very bad situation. There could be very bad riots. But, I think that if the situation doesn't explode -- because of food shortages or if Chávez is knocked out violently -- I think that slowly the opposition will calm down and we'll move towards a pacific, democratic solution to the problem.
Foreign Policy Loses Its Logic by Robert Scheer
Feeling safe yet? You shouldn't be.
Washington's foreign policy is now less logical than Pyongyang's. A starving dictatorship's clumsy blackmail attempts at least make some twisted sense in that the Bush administration has refused, from its very first days, to even discuss North Korea's persistent request for a nonaggression pact with the United States.
The administration plan is to isolate this paranoid excuse for a nation, as if it isn't already the most isolated place on Earth.
If we can't make peace with an utterly defeated nation like North Korea, we're in trouble. From Columbine to Weimar Germany, humiliating those with nothing to lose is always a recipe for disaster.
Feeling safe yet? You shouldn't be.
Washington's foreign policy is now less logical than Pyongyang's. A starving dictatorship's clumsy blackmail attempts at least make some twisted sense in that the Bush administration has refused, from its very first days, to even discuss North Korea's persistent request for a nonaggression pact with the United States.
The administration plan is to isolate this paranoid excuse for a nation, as if it isn't already the most isolated place on Earth.
If we can't make peace with an utterly defeated nation like North Korea, we're in trouble. From Columbine to Weimar Germany, humiliating those with nothing to lose is always a recipe for disaster.
SFGate - AP -- Venezuelans ring in the new year protesting the old one
"I say let's go," said Carlos Ortega, head of Venezuela's largest labor confederation. "And if they are going to kill us, let them kill us once and for all."
Nineteen people were killed in the opposition's last march on the palace, which prompted a failed two-day coup last April.
There has been speculation that a march on the palace will have casaulties which will build support for a US supported coup like last April's. The attempt to bring down Chavez by protest is failing and an opposition plot blaming Chavez could be next.
"I say let's go," said Carlos Ortega, head of Venezuela's largest labor confederation. "And if they are going to kill us, let them kill us once and for all."
Nineteen people were killed in the opposition's last march on the palace, which prompted a failed two-day coup last April.
There has been speculation that a march on the palace will have casaulties which will build support for a US supported coup like last April's. The attempt to bring down Chavez by protest is failing and an opposition plot blaming Chavez could be next.
CNN.com - Hart coy about presidential bid
Frustrated because people didn't listen to his warnings about terrorist attacks and worried about the future of the nation, Hart has done nothing to turn away attention generated when he hinted that he may seek the Democratic presidential nomination again.
Refusing to comment about his political future, he declined to say when he will make a decision.
"You're either on the field or you're on the sidelines, and the only way you get on the field is either to be appointed to office or to run for office," Hart said from the 18th floor of his downtown law office.
Frustrated because people didn't listen to his warnings about terrorist attacks and worried about the future of the nation, Hart has done nothing to turn away attention generated when he hinted that he may seek the Democratic presidential nomination again.
Refusing to comment about his political future, he declined to say when he will make a decision.
"You're either on the field or you're on the sidelines, and the only way you get on the field is either to be appointed to office or to run for office," Hart said from the 18th floor of his downtown law office.
Times UK -- Dean -- An outsider worth backing
With Al Gore's decision not to challenge George Bush in 2004, the smart money is on little-known Vermont governor Howard Dean. But political obscurity may not be as big a problem as his liberal beliefs
Despite being the longest-serving Democrat governor — he is coming to the end of his fifth two-year term, and served a year before that when the previous governor died in office — Dr Dean barely registers in the polls. On Monday a survey of caucus voters in Iowa put him at one per cent, with Richard Gephardt at 26 per cent and Kerry on 16 per cent. Last month a poll in The Washington Post produced similar figures.
“I am not in the least bit worried by the polls,” Dr Dean says. “I have 13 months to fix that. I have made 16 visits to Iowa and 20 to New Hampshire, and gradually the word will spread. I suspect I have more name recognition than Bill Clinton did at the same point in his presidential campaign.”
What sets Dr Dean apart from the other hopefuls is that his agenda is clear, unequivocal and backed by an enviable economic record during his 11 years in charge of Vermont’s budget, achieved with policies so fiscally prudent as to make [LP MP Chancellor of the exchequer] Gordon Brown liverish with envy.
With Al Gore's decision not to challenge George Bush in 2004, the smart money is on little-known Vermont governor Howard Dean. But political obscurity may not be as big a problem as his liberal beliefs
Despite being the longest-serving Democrat governor — he is coming to the end of his fifth two-year term, and served a year before that when the previous governor died in office — Dr Dean barely registers in the polls. On Monday a survey of caucus voters in Iowa put him at one per cent, with Richard Gephardt at 26 per cent and Kerry on 16 per cent. Last month a poll in The Washington Post produced similar figures.
“I am not in the least bit worried by the polls,” Dr Dean says. “I have 13 months to fix that. I have made 16 visits to Iowa and 20 to New Hampshire, and gradually the word will spread. I suspect I have more name recognition than Bill Clinton did at the same point in his presidential campaign.”
What sets Dr Dean apart from the other hopefuls is that his agenda is clear, unequivocal and backed by an enviable economic record during his 11 years in charge of Vermont’s budget, achieved with policies so fiscally prudent as to make [LP MP Chancellor of the exchequer] Gordon Brown liverish with envy.
BBC -- Iraq crisis reflects global US strategy
The Bush doctrine - wage war on weak enemies, secure the oil, and expand US military reach and might. This is the opinion from a conservative news source from America's main ally.
In the Bush military doctrine, pre-emptive action has been elevated to a cardinal principle. The three strands of the global strategy intertwine.
To take one example, American military bases set up to fight al-Qaeda in central Asia may also serve to safeguard oil supplies, to back up the commercial exploitation of the Caspian basin.
Then there is the military training the Americans are giving to the Georgian armed forces - to help them fight terrorists, yes, but it is not coincidental that a new oil pipeline is planned through Georgia.
George W Bush himself, it should be said, has in practice been cautious up to now. But the picture of Iraqis dancing in the streets as the Americans liberate Baghdad is a beguiling one.
That might indeed be the first reaction. But would it last? Do the visionaries in Washington really believe that a democratic Saudi Arabia would love America more?
The Bush doctrine - wage war on weak enemies, secure the oil, and expand US military reach and might. This is the opinion from a conservative news source from America's main ally.
In the Bush military doctrine, pre-emptive action has been elevated to a cardinal principle. The three strands of the global strategy intertwine.
To take one example, American military bases set up to fight al-Qaeda in central Asia may also serve to safeguard oil supplies, to back up the commercial exploitation of the Caspian basin.
Then there is the military training the Americans are giving to the Georgian armed forces - to help them fight terrorists, yes, but it is not coincidental that a new oil pipeline is planned through Georgia.
George W Bush himself, it should be said, has in practice been cautious up to now. But the picture of Iraqis dancing in the streets as the Americans liberate Baghdad is a beguiling one.
That might indeed be the first reaction. But would it last? Do the visionaries in Washington really believe that a democratic Saudi Arabia would love America more?
U.S. Reports Clash With Pakistani Border Unit (washingtonpost.com)
Afghan War Heating Up, US exchanging fire with "ally" Pakistan
Afghan War Heating Up, US exchanging fire with "ally" Pakistan
If It's Not About Shut-Ins, the President Is Otherwise Engaged (washingtonpost.com)
The Engaging Mr Bush
Bush, even when hidden from view and clearing endless brush, continues to work the phones and do his day job. Still, his aides feel compelled to remind the public of this. "The president immediately engaged on this issue," Powell told Tim Russert on Sunday regarding North Korea. "President Bush has been engaged from the very beginning."
The administration has found it useful to provide such reminders, at regular intervals, that the president is paying attention to the issues of the day.
International environmental concerns? "The president has already been very engaged in these issues and plans to be engaged," Paula Dobriansky, undersecretary of state for global affairs, said in August. The India-Pakistan standoff? "The president is fully engaged," White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said in June. The review of military resources? "The president has been engaged," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld attested last year. The China spy plane crisis? "He has been very engaged," said a senior Bush aide, briefing reporters.
This president, it would seem, has been engaged more often than Elizabeth Taylor.
The attestations of Bush's private engagement appear to be proffered in inverse proportion to Bush's public engagement in a subject. Administration officials have rarely, for example, found it necessary to stipulate that Bush has been engaged on Iraq or tax cuts.
Bush's engagement is most frequently noted on the Middle East, an area in which Bush's interest is routinely questioned. "The president is heavily engaged," Vice President Cheney said in August. "The president is deeply engaged," Powell said in March. "We have been engaged in the Middle East ever since I got sworn in," Bush himself said in August 2001, while playing golf.
The president's isolation on his ranch and at Camp David may explain his peculiar affinity for citizens he calls the "shut-ins." Probably no group has received more attention in presidential rhetoric this year. Since Jan. 14, when Bush first mentioned those elderly Americans who cannot leave their homes, Bush has urged listeners no fewer than 76 times to love, care for, help or otherwise entertain a shut-in. Even Bush's aides acknowledge they are surprised by his constant reference to shut-ins, and they wonder how many Americans actually know what the term means.
Is it possible that Bush, so often homebound himself, has come to see himself as a shut-in?
The Engaging Mr Bush
Bush, even when hidden from view and clearing endless brush, continues to work the phones and do his day job. Still, his aides feel compelled to remind the public of this. "The president immediately engaged on this issue," Powell told Tim Russert on Sunday regarding North Korea. "President Bush has been engaged from the very beginning."
The administration has found it useful to provide such reminders, at regular intervals, that the president is paying attention to the issues of the day.
International environmental concerns? "The president has already been very engaged in these issues and plans to be engaged," Paula Dobriansky, undersecretary of state for global affairs, said in August. The India-Pakistan standoff? "The president is fully engaged," White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said in June. The review of military resources? "The president has been engaged," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld attested last year. The China spy plane crisis? "He has been very engaged," said a senior Bush aide, briefing reporters.
This president, it would seem, has been engaged more often than Elizabeth Taylor.
The attestations of Bush's private engagement appear to be proffered in inverse proportion to Bush's public engagement in a subject. Administration officials have rarely, for example, found it necessary to stipulate that Bush has been engaged on Iraq or tax cuts.
Bush's engagement is most frequently noted on the Middle East, an area in which Bush's interest is routinely questioned. "The president is heavily engaged," Vice President Cheney said in August. "The president is deeply engaged," Powell said in March. "We have been engaged in the Middle East ever since I got sworn in," Bush himself said in August 2001, while playing golf.
The president's isolation on his ranch and at Camp David may explain his peculiar affinity for citizens he calls the "shut-ins." Probably no group has received more attention in presidential rhetoric this year. Since Jan. 14, when Bush first mentioned those elderly Americans who cannot leave their homes, Bush has urged listeners no fewer than 76 times to love, care for, help or otherwise entertain a shut-in. Even Bush's aides acknowledge they are surprised by his constant reference to shut-ins, and they wonder how many Americans actually know what the term means.
Is it possible that Bush, so often homebound himself, has come to see himself as a shut-in?
Wired News: Did the EPA Try a Sneak Gutting of Clean Air?
The Environmental Protection Agency formally issued major changes to clean air rules for utilities, refineries and manufacturers Tuesday, prompting a court challenge hours later from a coalition of New England and mid-Atlantic states.
"The Bush administration has taken an action that will bring more acid rain, more smog, more asthma and more respiratory disease to millions of Americans," said Eliot Spitzer, New York's attorney general.
But Spitzer said issuing the final regulations on New Year's Eve, when much of the public's attention was diverted, was further evidence the administration "continues to try to hide its domestic agenda under the cloak of darkness."
Environmental groups also planned to join the legal challenge to the administration.
"Our argument is ultimately going to be that these are illegal changes to the Clean Air Act and the EPA has gone beyond its authority in granting loopholes to smokestack industries," said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the Clean Air Trust, an environmental advocacy group.
EPA Administrator Christie Whitman has said the new rules would encourage emissions reductions by giving utilities and refinery operators new flexibility. The old program, she said, "deterred companies from implementing projects that would increase energy efficiency and decrease air pollution."
Rumors in Washington that Whitman wants to quit as she actually had a reasonable environmental record before now.
The Environmental Protection Agency formally issued major changes to clean air rules for utilities, refineries and manufacturers Tuesday, prompting a court challenge hours later from a coalition of New England and mid-Atlantic states.
"The Bush administration has taken an action that will bring more acid rain, more smog, more asthma and more respiratory disease to millions of Americans," said Eliot Spitzer, New York's attorney general.
But Spitzer said issuing the final regulations on New Year's Eve, when much of the public's attention was diverted, was further evidence the administration "continues to try to hide its domestic agenda under the cloak of darkness."
Environmental groups also planned to join the legal challenge to the administration.
"Our argument is ultimately going to be that these are illegal changes to the Clean Air Act and the EPA has gone beyond its authority in granting loopholes to smokestack industries," said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the Clean Air Trust, an environmental advocacy group.
EPA Administrator Christie Whitman has said the new rules would encourage emissions reductions by giving utilities and refinery operators new flexibility. The old program, she said, "deterred companies from implementing projects that would increase energy efficiency and decrease air pollution."
Rumors in Washington that Whitman wants to quit as she actually had a reasonable environmental record before now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)