Bush refuses to pray publically for Oregon
Who's he trying to kid?
Exchange in an Oregon high-school gym, at a Bush campaign stump:
Female citizen: I've heard through the grapevine that Oregon is one of the most unchurched states in the union. And I really feel like it shows up in every walk of our society. Could you take a moment to pray for Oregon, for us, right now?
President Bush: I appreciate that. I think the thing about our country that you must understand is that one of the most valuable aspects of America is that people can choose church or not church, and they're equally American. That is a vital part of our society.
The question was probably no surprise. Bush campaign officials readily say that they carefully screen the crowds by distributing tickets through campaign volunteers. The result, according to campaign reporter Elisabeth Bumiller, is nearly always a "rapt Republican audience" and is often "a love-in with heavily Christian crowds".
The president declined to pray in the school gymnasium.
A bold move for Bush, who must think he's fooling voters (outside his campaign stump venues) by touting religious tolerance while hurling wedge-issues down their throats and supporting General Boykin's insanely fundamentalist comments about the Iraq war when he knows we're in a deadly power struggle with fundamentalist Muslims.
Internet muse.
Daring, bold, never sold.
My daily weblog of politics, humor, philosophy...and a constant and nagging reminder of the existence of universal love....
Monday, August 16, 2004
Thoughts from William Rivers Pitt
Thoughts from William Rivers Pitt
William Rivers Pitt believes the short-term purpose of the most recent terror alert is to "dissipate the building energy that is being directed at New York City by hundreds of thousands of protesters who intend to surround the Republican convention in a ring of rage."
*The FBI has been canvassing our communities and questioning political demonstrators across the country, and in rare cases even subpoenaing them, in an aggressive effort to forestall what officials say could be violent and disruptive protests at the Republican National Convention in New York.
Is this the free America you wish for..dream about??*
________
I recommend that you read the section titled "Killing the Buddha" at the same article by William Rivers Pitt. (Read the whole thing if you have time). Mr. Pitt says that progressives (whose political action groups have created a splinter-effect based on the respective Democratic candidates they'd supported this year) need to "leave aside the candidate they were following with such devout energy and hope. They need to remember that they, the people, are the point of the exercise, the power players, and not the candidates they followed."
As Mr. Pitt said in February of this year (as many progessives working for various Democratic candidates were becoming disillusioned as their candidates fell away):
The one you've been waiting for has always been here. The one you've been waiting for pressured these candidates to fight the onslaught of the Bush administration. The one you've been waiting for took to the streets before the Iraq invasion, worked for the campaign which most inspired, agitated against the PATRIOT Act, spoke to friend and neighbor and family about what has gone wrong.
This final truth is self-evident. You are the one you've been waiting for. You drive the agenda. You make or break this political season. You are the hero. You've been here the whole time.
[LINK]
William Rivers Pitt believes the short-term purpose of the most recent terror alert is to "dissipate the building energy that is being directed at New York City by hundreds of thousands of protesters who intend to surround the Republican convention in a ring of rage."
*The FBI has been canvassing our communities and questioning political demonstrators across the country, and in rare cases even subpoenaing them, in an aggressive effort to forestall what officials say could be violent and disruptive protests at the Republican National Convention in New York.
Is this the free America you wish for..dream about??*
I recommend that you read the section titled "Killing the Buddha" at the same article by William Rivers Pitt. (Read the whole thing if you have time). Mr. Pitt says that progressives (whose political action groups have created a splinter-effect based on the respective Democratic candidates they'd supported this year) need to "leave aside the candidate they were following with such devout energy and hope. They need to remember that they, the people, are the point of the exercise, the power players, and not the candidates they followed."
As Mr. Pitt said in February of this year (as many progessives working for various Democratic candidates were becoming disillusioned as their candidates fell away):
The one you've been waiting for has always been here. The one you've been waiting for pressured these candidates to fight the onslaught of the Bush administration. The one you've been waiting for took to the streets before the Iraq invasion, worked for the campaign which most inspired, agitated against the PATRIOT Act, spoke to friend and neighbor and family about what has gone wrong.
This final truth is self-evident. You are the one you've been waiting for. You drive the agenda. You make or break this political season. You are the hero. You've been here the whole time.
[LINK]
Educate Yourself About Iraq Today
Educate Yourself About Iraq Today
..before it's too late.
How can two reporters see the same thing so differently? Who is a realist? Who is an idealist? You decide.
Juan Cole raises the stark contrasts in the reporting of the recent meeting of the Iraqi Congress by John Burns ofthe N.Y. Times and Rajiv Chandrasekaran of the Washington Post. While Chandrasekaran presents an almost panglossian story of the triumph of democracy, Burns says that the convention was a mess, disrupted by repeated mortar fire and by angry delegates who stormed the stage to denounce the Allawi government and demand it cease military operations in Najaf.
Who is Grand Ayatollah Muhammed Husain Fadlallah?
Shiite leader Grand Ayatollah Muhammad Husain Fadlallah (born in Najaf in 1935) granted al-Jazeerah an interview recently. The interview's subtext was basically: "Why isn't anyone doing anything about what those awful Americans are doing to the holy city of Najaf, which is an Arab as well as a Shiite issue?"
The issue came up of calls for the absent al-Sistani to resign, and Fadlallah (correctly) pointed out that high Shiite authorities don't resign, it isn't that kind of position. Fadlallah confirmed that he had called for the Iraqis to rise up and use all available means to force the Americans back out of Iraq. During the interview, he reaffirmed his opposition to Iraq's occupation and alliance with all who work for an end to it. He holds sway with a political party in Iraq, the Shiite al-Da`wa Party, who is currently averring to be cooperative with the U.S.
Who is Grand Ayatollah Kadhim al-Haeri?
Al-Jazeerah's crawl is saying that Grand Ayatollah Kadhim al-Haeri (the elder Sadr’s designated successor), based in Qom (Iran), has issued a fatwa or ruling that no Iraqi Muslim may fight another Muslim on behalf of the current regime in Iraq and its American backers. Al-Haeri is sometimes called the "fifth" grand ayatollah of Najaf.
President Bush has embroiled our nation in a Holy War
How many of my readers understand that President Bush has embroiled us in a Holy War, whether or not the war we've waged is religion-based? If one side clearly and successfully hypes the war as a Holy War, how do we, on the "other side", convince them that it is not a new crusade?
What does democracy mean to them?
What do we mean when we say we want to spread democracy? A stupid question, you say? Well, think about it. We see democracy as we have come to understand it here in America. The democracy we are promoting in Iraq is different from ours and the extremely powerful Fundamentalist leaders in the Muslim nations are calling us holy warriors who threaten their age-old customs.
Saddam was just a tin-pot dictator abusing Muslims
I'm not insinuating who's right and who's wrong here. I'm always on the side of freedom for all people. I'm simply pointing out that they have an incredibly different point of view about the pre-emptive attack on Iraq. Religion has an almost magical power over people and it's nearly impossible to separate the religious mind from the culture in the Muslim world. Attacking them certainly wasn't the way to convince them. Remember that the non-fundamentalist Saddam has been gone since last December and Iraq is still in chaos. The problem obviously is ages and ages old and Saddam was just a tin-pot dictator abusing Muslims to keep them under his thumb.
From where will our help come? Where are the brightest minds?
I'd like anyone who can successfully and convincingly argue with these Fundamentalists to step forward. No one in the Bush administration has been smart enough to convince them. Bombs won't convince them. Bombs will only kill them.
As sensitive as the Bush administration is trying to wage war in the holy city of Najaf right now, it seems that bombs are their only option.
What did the Bush administration get us into?
If they didn't have a convincing or desired idea to sway the people of Iraq, I believe the Bush administration has done Iraq, the U.S., and the Muslim world an incredible injustice. The Middle East has become an American-hating toilet of terror because we fell into Osama bin Laden's trap. Even if we catch him, he can still rejoice in seeing that his jihad is alive and well.
Frankly, I'm sickened at the thought.
..before it's too late.
How can two reporters see the same thing so differently? Who is a realist? Who is an idealist? You decide.
Juan Cole raises the stark contrasts in the reporting of the recent meeting of the Iraqi Congress by John Burns ofthe N.Y. Times and Rajiv Chandrasekaran of the Washington Post. While Chandrasekaran presents an almost panglossian story of the triumph of democracy, Burns says that the convention was a mess, disrupted by repeated mortar fire and by angry delegates who stormed the stage to denounce the Allawi government and demand it cease military operations in Najaf.
Who is Grand Ayatollah Muhammed Husain Fadlallah?
Shiite leader Grand Ayatollah Muhammad Husain Fadlallah (born in Najaf in 1935) granted al-Jazeerah an interview recently. The interview's subtext was basically: "Why isn't anyone doing anything about what those awful Americans are doing to the holy city of Najaf, which is an Arab as well as a Shiite issue?"
The issue came up of calls for the absent al-Sistani to resign, and Fadlallah (correctly) pointed out that high Shiite authorities don't resign, it isn't that kind of position. Fadlallah confirmed that he had called for the Iraqis to rise up and use all available means to force the Americans back out of Iraq. During the interview, he reaffirmed his opposition to Iraq's occupation and alliance with all who work for an end to it. He holds sway with a political party in Iraq, the Shiite al-Da`wa Party, who is currently averring to be cooperative with the U.S.
Who is Grand Ayatollah Kadhim al-Haeri?
Al-Jazeerah's crawl is saying that Grand Ayatollah Kadhim al-Haeri (the elder Sadr’s designated successor), based in Qom (Iran), has issued a fatwa or ruling that no Iraqi Muslim may fight another Muslim on behalf of the current regime in Iraq and its American backers. Al-Haeri is sometimes called the "fifth" grand ayatollah of Najaf.
President Bush has embroiled our nation in a Holy War
How many of my readers understand that President Bush has embroiled us in a Holy War, whether or not the war we've waged is religion-based? If one side clearly and successfully hypes the war as a Holy War, how do we, on the "other side", convince them that it is not a new crusade?
What does democracy mean to them?
What do we mean when we say we want to spread democracy? A stupid question, you say? Well, think about it. We see democracy as we have come to understand it here in America. The democracy we are promoting in Iraq is different from ours and the extremely powerful Fundamentalist leaders in the Muslim nations are calling us holy warriors who threaten their age-old customs.
Saddam was just a tin-pot dictator abusing Muslims
I'm not insinuating who's right and who's wrong here. I'm always on the side of freedom for all people. I'm simply pointing out that they have an incredibly different point of view about the pre-emptive attack on Iraq. Religion has an almost magical power over people and it's nearly impossible to separate the religious mind from the culture in the Muslim world. Attacking them certainly wasn't the way to convince them. Remember that the non-fundamentalist Saddam has been gone since last December and Iraq is still in chaos. The problem obviously is ages and ages old and Saddam was just a tin-pot dictator abusing Muslims to keep them under his thumb.
From where will our help come? Where are the brightest minds?
I'd like anyone who can successfully and convincingly argue with these Fundamentalists to step forward. No one in the Bush administration has been smart enough to convince them. Bombs won't convince them. Bombs will only kill them.
As sensitive as the Bush administration is trying to wage war in the holy city of Najaf right now, it seems that bombs are their only option.
What did the Bush administration get us into?
If they didn't have a convincing or desired idea to sway the people of Iraq, I believe the Bush administration has done Iraq, the U.S., and the Muslim world an incredible injustice. The Middle East has become an American-hating toilet of terror because we fell into Osama bin Laden's trap. Even if we catch him, he can still rejoice in seeing that his jihad is alive and well.
Frankly, I'm sickened at the thought.
Bush likely to lose election
Bush likely to lose election
Matthew Gross cites a Josh Marshall commentary about a recent David Broder column.
Bottom line, Broder believes the odds are against Bush being re-elected. Mr Broder states that, if you go by conventional ways of reading the numbers, both nationwide and in key swing states, President Bush is on the way to losing the presidential race. Sheer accountability for economic and foreign policy failures will be a prime factor for voters who decide to go against the Bush ticket.
Convention theme: "Let's dance the last dance..."?
Matthew Gross believes that pundits trying hard to find a bounce in early September (post-convention) for Bush, but he predicts it won't be there. He believes then, and only then, will the conventional wisdom intimated by Broder's column solidify.
I hope this is true. I do not have resounding faith in the mainstream media. If Kerry doesn't win by a landslide (by all that is sane, he should), I believe it's only because those in media have not done a proper job of reporting the truth. For example, I've seen one too many staged Bush rallies without news reporters pointing out the fact that they were limited to only those who were "friendly" to the Bush campaign. (CBS is the only news network I can credit for revealing the truth about these campaign stumps--and the word is spreading). I can't tell you how many times I've muttered "propaganda" under my breath when an audience-controlled Bush speech has been aired and the reporter never tells you the audience was practically hand-picked and that free speech was banned.
I credit organizations such as FAIR and Media Matters for exposing the dangerous cracks in the media. Disinformation leads to unnecessary wars and presidents (without a mandate) who push radical agendas down the throats of citizens.
Bush-supporters are well aware that the president is in danger of losing in November. They are blaming 527s and organizations such as America Coming Together for the incredibly successful voter-registration movement. Watch for the right-wing movement to end 527s (thus limiting free speech and the flow of new voters). I assure you that movement is coming. Strange bedfellows like Mitch McConnell and the ACLU would not approve.
Speaking of strange bedfellows, here's one last suggestion:
Do not 'misunderestimate' the power of Bruce Springsteen and Howard Stern.
Matthew Gross cites a Josh Marshall commentary about a recent David Broder column.
Bottom line, Broder believes the odds are against Bush being re-elected. Mr Broder states that, if you go by conventional ways of reading the numbers, both nationwide and in key swing states, President Bush is on the way to losing the presidential race. Sheer accountability for economic and foreign policy failures will be a prime factor for voters who decide to go against the Bush ticket.
Convention theme: "Let's dance the last dance..."?
Matthew Gross believes that pundits trying hard to find a bounce in early September (post-convention) for Bush, but he predicts it won't be there. He believes then, and only then, will the conventional wisdom intimated by Broder's column solidify.
I hope this is true. I do not have resounding faith in the mainstream media. If Kerry doesn't win by a landslide (by all that is sane, he should), I believe it's only because those in media have not done a proper job of reporting the truth. For example, I've seen one too many staged Bush rallies without news reporters pointing out the fact that they were limited to only those who were "friendly" to the Bush campaign. (CBS is the only news network I can credit for revealing the truth about these campaign stumps--and the word is spreading). I can't tell you how many times I've muttered "propaganda" under my breath when an audience-controlled Bush speech has been aired and the reporter never tells you the audience was practically hand-picked and that free speech was banned.
I credit organizations such as FAIR and Media Matters for exposing the dangerous cracks in the media. Disinformation leads to unnecessary wars and presidents (without a mandate) who push radical agendas down the throats of citizens.
Bush-supporters are well aware that the president is in danger of losing in November. They are blaming 527s and organizations such as America Coming Together for the incredibly successful voter-registration movement. Watch for the right-wing movement to end 527s (thus limiting free speech and the flow of new voters). I assure you that movement is coming. Strange bedfellows like Mitch McConnell and the ACLU would not approve.
Speaking of strange bedfellows, here's one last suggestion:
Do not 'misunderestimate' the power of Bruce Springsteen and Howard Stern.
Piedmont Bloggers Conference Aug 28th
Piedmont Bloggers Conference- August 28th
Blogger Ed Cone has written an article about political blogging at the Greensboro News & Record.
Ed Cone also makes us aware of the upcoming Piedmont Bloggers Conference August 28th in Greensboro. (For you bloggers in the South and anyone else who can make it). Moderators will include Matthew Gross, Ruby Sinreich, David Hoggard, and Ed Cone.
For a listing of NC blogs, see:
NC blogs
North State Blogs
Erskine Bowles for Senate
Blogger Ed Cone has written an article about political blogging at the Greensboro News & Record.
Ed Cone also makes us aware of the upcoming Piedmont Bloggers Conference August 28th in Greensboro. (For you bloggers in the South and anyone else who can make it). Moderators will include Matthew Gross, Ruby Sinreich, David Hoggard, and Ed Cone.
For a listing of NC blogs, see:
NC blogs
North State Blogs
Erskine Bowles for Senate
Sunday, August 15, 2004
Presidential Debate Schedule
Presidential Debate Schedule
It's here.
No times listed yet; only dates and locations.
First debate- Sept. 30 at the University of Miami, moderator Jim Lehrer, anchor of PBS' "NewsHour.
Second debate- Oct. 8, town hall-style meeting format at Washington University in St. Louis. Undecided voters, picked by the Gallup Organization, will question the candidates. Moderator: Charlie Gibson, co-anchor of ABC's "Good Morning America".
Third debate- Oct 13, Foreign policy will be the focus of the third and final debate at Arizona State University in Tempe. Bush and Kerry will again sit around a table, and CBS "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer will be the moderator.
VP Debate- Oct 5, at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, moderated by "NewsHour" correspondent Gwen Ifill. It will feature Vice President Dick Cheney and his Democratic opponent, Sen. John Edwards, sitting around a table and discussing a wide range of topics. There also will be a question-and-answer period.
It's here.
No times listed yet; only dates and locations.
First debate- Sept. 30 at the University of Miami, moderator Jim Lehrer, anchor of PBS' "NewsHour.
Second debate- Oct. 8, town hall-style meeting format at Washington University in St. Louis. Undecided voters, picked by the Gallup Organization, will question the candidates. Moderator: Charlie Gibson, co-anchor of ABC's "Good Morning America".
Third debate- Oct 13, Foreign policy will be the focus of the third and final debate at Arizona State University in Tempe. Bush and Kerry will again sit around a table, and CBS "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer will be the moderator.
VP Debate- Oct 5, at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, moderated by "NewsHour" correspondent Gwen Ifill. It will feature Vice President Dick Cheney and his Democratic opponent, Sen. John Edwards, sitting around a table and discussing a wide range of topics. There also will be a question-and-answer period.
Know Your Bushisms?
Know Your Bushisms?
Part Three is here. If you haven't tried Parts One and Two yet, there's a link at the site. Take the quiz. Tell me how you do!
Part Three is here. If you haven't tried Parts One and Two yet, there's a link at the site. Take the quiz. Tell me how you do!
Wacky Andy Martin Attempts to Defame Obama
Wacky Andy Martin attempts to defame Barack Obama
Freepers rejoice at the odd news
The 51-year-old wacko conservative with addresses in Florida nd Illinois named Andy Martin -aka Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona- (who ran an ad in 2000 accusing GW Bush of taking cocaine) is now actually trying to make people believe Barack Obama is a "threat to the Jewish community" because of his name's Muslim roots. That's a laugh, people. Now I've heard everything. Barack was actually named for one of the most beautiful words in the Arabic language, "Baraka". Baraka means "blessed", as Baruch means in Hebrew. Obama is an avowed Christian, regardless of the roots of his name.
If you met a man named Da'ud, Arabic for the Hebrew name David, would you run and hide? Gee, I hope not. That might be called extreme prejudice and irrational fear.
Isn't this whole thing incredibly stupid? Are you insulted that this would even make any form of news?
I saw the sick puppy-Freepers getting all excited about it at FreeRepublic.com.
I ask again: Why does this crap rate as news?
This is the same Andy Martin -aka Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona- that the Illinois Supreme Court refused to admit to the bar because of a military psychiatric exam that allegedly found him to have personality defects that include delusions involving both paranoia and grandeur.
Stranger yet, Martin's Obama-attacking press conference will be held at Temple Emanu-El in London, England!
Freepers rejoice at the odd news
The 51-year-old wacko conservative with addresses in Florida nd Illinois named Andy Martin -aka Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona- (who ran an ad in 2000 accusing GW Bush of taking cocaine) is now actually trying to make people believe Barack Obama is a "threat to the Jewish community" because of his name's Muslim roots. That's a laugh, people. Now I've heard everything. Barack was actually named for one of the most beautiful words in the Arabic language, "Baraka". Baraka means "blessed", as Baruch means in Hebrew. Obama is an avowed Christian, regardless of the roots of his name.
If you met a man named Da'ud, Arabic for the Hebrew name David, would you run and hide? Gee, I hope not. That might be called extreme prejudice and irrational fear.
Isn't this whole thing incredibly stupid? Are you insulted that this would even make any form of news?
I saw the sick puppy-Freepers getting all excited about it at FreeRepublic.com.
I ask again: Why does this crap rate as news?
This is the same Andy Martin -aka Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona- that the Illinois Supreme Court refused to admit to the bar because of a military psychiatric exam that allegedly found him to have personality defects that include delusions involving both paranoia and grandeur.
Stranger yet, Martin's Obama-attacking press conference will be held at Temple Emanu-El in London, England!
Blogger becomes infamous media star
Blogger becomes infamous media star
The Washington Post magazine has Washingtonienne (Jessica Cutler) on its front page.
As a female political blogger, I am rendered speechless, which is out of character for me, as anyone who knows me will tell you.
Media always seems to go for the tawdry and sensational, especially when it comes to women.
Pandering to gossip-mentality may be the reason we have Bush in the Oval Office (ie: 'Gore says he invented the internet') and it may be why bloggers will not be properly credited for our (largely unpaid/unrewarded) hard work and dedication.
When media wises up, perhaps our democracy will spring back to an intelligent, sane and healthy life.
Until then, I'll be blogging and I definitely will not be holding my breath.
The Washington Post magazine has Washingtonienne (Jessica Cutler) on its front page.
As a female political blogger, I am rendered speechless, which is out of character for me, as anyone who knows me will tell you.
Media always seems to go for the tawdry and sensational, especially when it comes to women.
Pandering to gossip-mentality may be the reason we have Bush in the Oval Office (ie: 'Gore says he invented the internet') and it may be why bloggers will not be properly credited for our (largely unpaid/unrewarded) hard work and dedication.
When media wises up, perhaps our democracy will spring back to an intelligent, sane and healthy life.
Until then, I'll be blogging and I definitely will not be holding my breath.
Mr. Kerry, please write the N.Y. Times
Mr. Kerry, please write the N.Y. Times
In today's editorial, the N.Y. Times believes the public may not be comfortably settled with John Kerry's explanation that he authorized an invasion of Iraq in October, 2002 under the presumption it would not happen. They say that, "after nearly two years of working with the Bush administration, Congress had a very good idea of how Mr. Bush viewed the world".
This is an echo of my own previous writings.
George Will wrote about it in the summer of 2002. Mr. Will said, at that time:
It was common knowlege that Mr. Bush planned to take us toward this pre-emptive war, and it was obvious he was doing it firmly and without sincere regard to further U.N. inspections.
Last week I recommended that Mr. Kerry write a piece for the N.Y. Times to clarify his position. Today, the Times advises that they would like to hear from Mr. Kerry as to how the events of the last year have changed his own thinking.
It's time, Mr. Kerry.
There could be no better time.
Write the New York Times.
The election is yours to win or lose.
In today's editorial, the N.Y. Times believes the public may not be comfortably settled with John Kerry's explanation that he authorized an invasion of Iraq in October, 2002 under the presumption it would not happen. They say that, "after nearly two years of working with the Bush administration, Congress had a very good idea of how Mr. Bush viewed the world".
This is an echo of my own previous writings.
George Will wrote about it in the summer of 2002. Mr. Will said, at that time:
"What is under way is without precedent in U.S. history. It is a methodical and semi-public preparation for a massive military operation to achieve an aim frequently proclaimed at the highest levels of government. The aim is to compel a change of regime in a nation that is intensely and increasingly menacing as it strains to achieve the capacity for attacking American interests."
It was common knowlege that Mr. Bush planned to take us toward this pre-emptive war, and it was obvious he was doing it firmly and without sincere regard to further U.N. inspections.
Last week I recommended that Mr. Kerry write a piece for the N.Y. Times to clarify his position. Today, the Times advises that they would like to hear from Mr. Kerry as to how the events of the last year have changed his own thinking.
It's time, Mr. Kerry.
There could be no better time.
Write the New York Times.
The election is yours to win or lose.
Did Second String al Qaeda Outsmart Us?
Did Second String al Qaeda Outsmart Us?
This is new information from TIME. A newly revealed terror-summit occurred under our investigative noses in Pakistan in March, 2004. Radicals from around the globe attended. TIME writes that the summit occurred in a "lawless" region of Pakistan.
Four years after 9/11, why is any part of Pakistan still "lawless"? Is the war in Iraq making our nation economically and militarily incapable of outsmarting al Qaeda and their worldwide allies?
Florida's own Wahhabist el-Shukrijumah (who's been compared to Elvis due to his elusive nature) is our newest known 'homegrown terrorist'.
The Bush Administration is boasting that they arrested 12 of these people. Do we think that is the mark of booming success? Really?
I'm not sure I'd be boasting, knowing that a summit took place right under our noses a mere four months ago and most of the ringleaders are still at large.
We've seen the horror of which the first string was capable.
Where goes a second string, so goes a third.
Officials have said that the radicals' computer files were heavily encrypted, indicating significant sophistication within their network. It seems that the digital intelligence the terrorists possess is constantly traveling out ahead of our nation's own abilities. The knowledge helps to facilitate their overflowing funding from clandestine sources.
Will this be the aftermath of our nation falling so far behind in the educational fields of math, engineering and science?
Have we ever entertained the thought that pointing our children in the direction of an engineering degree (while strengthening our priority on improvement of the funding and quality of education) might be patriotic when considering the potential of the much-needed improvement of America's intelligence capabilities? When will we put our government money where our mouths are and put as much money into education as we put into the military?
We need intelligence to fight al Qaeda. Force alone will never, never do the trick.
We need the Bush administration (and Kerry's, if applicable in November) to get on the stick in the field of Education, Foreign Policy, and especially Homeland Security.
There are gaping opportunity areas. They are bleeding like open wounds.
Those 9/11 Commission recommendations are looming larger than ever.
It seems that the digital intelligence the terrorists possess is constantly traveling out ahead of our nation's own abilities. The knowledge helps to facilitate their overflowing funding from clandestine sources.
Will this be the aftermath of our nation falling so far behind in the educational fields of math, engineering and science?
This is new information from TIME. A newly revealed terror-summit occurred under our investigative noses in Pakistan in March, 2004. Radicals from around the globe attended. TIME writes that the summit occurred in a "lawless" region of Pakistan.
Four years after 9/11, why is any part of Pakistan still "lawless"? Is the war in Iraq making our nation economically and militarily incapable of outsmarting al Qaeda and their worldwide allies?
Florida's own Wahhabist el-Shukrijumah (who's been compared to Elvis due to his elusive nature) is our newest known 'homegrown terrorist'.
The Bush Administration is boasting that they arrested 12 of these people. Do we think that is the mark of booming success? Really?
I'm not sure I'd be boasting, knowing that a summit took place right under our noses a mere four months ago and most of the ringleaders are still at large.
We've seen the horror of which the first string was capable.
Where goes a second string, so goes a third.
Officials have said that the radicals' computer files were heavily encrypted, indicating significant sophistication within their network. It seems that the digital intelligence the terrorists possess is constantly traveling out ahead of our nation's own abilities. The knowledge helps to facilitate their overflowing funding from clandestine sources.
Will this be the aftermath of our nation falling so far behind in the educational fields of math, engineering and science?
Have we ever entertained the thought that pointing our children in the direction of an engineering degree (while strengthening our priority on improvement of the funding and quality of education) might be patriotic when considering the potential of the much-needed improvement of America's intelligence capabilities? When will we put our government money where our mouths are and put as much money into education as we put into the military?
We need intelligence to fight al Qaeda. Force alone will never, never do the trick.
We need the Bush administration (and Kerry's, if applicable in November) to get on the stick in the field of Education, Foreign Policy, and especially Homeland Security.
There are gaping opportunity areas. They are bleeding like open wounds.
Those 9/11 Commission recommendations are looming larger than ever.
Friday, August 13, 2004
Dear George-Do you hate me for my freedom?
Dear George-Do you hate me for my freedom?
Dear Mr. Bush, you are very easy to "see through". You told Larry King you wanted to do away with '527s' because people have said "bad things" about you with money coming from them.
Are the "bad things" they've said about you untrue, Mr. Bush? If so, why haven't your high-powered attorneys filed suit against those nasty people? (They did you "justice" when you needed them in the 2000 election, didn't they?) Could it be you could never prove that they were hurling untruths at all?
Why is money fine as "free speech" when it comes from your ultra-rich "base", (as I heard you affably call the 'have-mores' in Michael Moore's movie) and not when little 'have-nots' like me have something to say and choose to give to the folks I believe will speak well for me?
You refused to condemn the "bad things" the Swift Boat defamers are claiming about your opponent John Kerry. If you're such a decent and affable fellow with respect for our veterans, how is it that you can't reach down inside your soul and condemn the nasty things they're saying about Mr. Kerry? I'm thinking you are harboring a sadistic liking of the situation. Am I wrong?
Doing away with free speech isn't the answer, George.
No matter how rough the free speech gets.
Freedom, like a Purple Heart veteran, should always be given the benefit of doubt. When you're being asked to condemn the ads, as John McCain readily did, you're flinching, George.
It doesn't say much about your character; especially since your wartime service record is rather pathetic in comparison. (Sorry, bud, I know it hurts, but it's my opinion and I believe it's true.)
I know you, though, George. You're success is all "theatre". I know you like to carefully control the crowd at your campaign stumps. I am allowed to see the staged 300 people or so who gaze at you dreamily, gush over you, and ask you soft questions while thousands are outside the arena door loudly protesting you and your policies. I see the laughing Scarboroughs sitting in the crowd behind you with brainwashed love in their eyes.
I can separate fact from fiction, even though the cable news networks love the drama and often overlook reality--playing along with the fantasy that you have strong support. John Kerry doesn't ban free speech from his campaign stumps. I'm thinking he respects freedom a whole lot more than you do, George. I think freedom scares and threatens you.
Truth to tell, I think you're the quintessential emperor without any clothes.
There's a difference between you and me, George. You would do anything to shut your detractors up and out. On the other hand, I would do anything to protect the right of free speech for those Swift Boat defamers.
If the men in the anti-Kerry Swift Boat ads are liars, we have a justice system to hold them to their statements. If they are malicious or reckless with their statements, they should be dragged to court for all the nation to scrutinize while they watch Court TV. This is a healthy thing for an informed citizenry. Extracting truth is healthy.
I know you, George. You don't think much of the rule of law. I don't think you care that much about the truth, either, judging from all you told us during the lead-up phase to the Iraq war.
I'm surprised though, George---really surprised--- to hear you say you don't support free speech. You're always telling us terrorists "hate us for our freedoms". Why am I getting the distinct impression you hate many of us for our freedoms, George?
Dear Mr. Bush, you are very easy to "see through". You told Larry King you wanted to do away with '527s' because people have said "bad things" about you with money coming from them.
Are the "bad things" they've said about you untrue, Mr. Bush? If so, why haven't your high-powered attorneys filed suit against those nasty people? (They did you "justice" when you needed them in the 2000 election, didn't they?) Could it be you could never prove that they were hurling untruths at all?
Why is money fine as "free speech" when it comes from your ultra-rich "base", (as I heard you affably call the 'have-mores' in Michael Moore's movie) and not when little 'have-nots' like me have something to say and choose to give to the folks I believe will speak well for me?
You refused to condemn the "bad things" the Swift Boat defamers are claiming about your opponent John Kerry. If you're such a decent and affable fellow with respect for our veterans, how is it that you can't reach down inside your soul and condemn the nasty things they're saying about Mr. Kerry? I'm thinking you are harboring a sadistic liking of the situation. Am I wrong?
Doing away with free speech isn't the answer, George.
No matter how rough the free speech gets.
Freedom, like a Purple Heart veteran, should always be given the benefit of doubt. When you're being asked to condemn the ads, as John McCain readily did, you're flinching, George.
It doesn't say much about your character; especially since your wartime service record is rather pathetic in comparison. (Sorry, bud, I know it hurts, but it's my opinion and I believe it's true.)
I know you, though, George. You're success is all "theatre". I know you like to carefully control the crowd at your campaign stumps. I am allowed to see the staged 300 people or so who gaze at you dreamily, gush over you, and ask you soft questions while thousands are outside the arena door loudly protesting you and your policies. I see the laughing Scarboroughs sitting in the crowd behind you with brainwashed love in their eyes.
I can separate fact from fiction, even though the cable news networks love the drama and often overlook reality--playing along with the fantasy that you have strong support. John Kerry doesn't ban free speech from his campaign stumps. I'm thinking he respects freedom a whole lot more than you do, George. I think freedom scares and threatens you.
Truth to tell, I think you're the quintessential emperor without any clothes.
There's a difference between you and me, George. You would do anything to shut your detractors up and out. On the other hand, I would do anything to protect the right of free speech for those Swift Boat defamers.
If the men in the anti-Kerry Swift Boat ads are liars, we have a justice system to hold them to their statements. If they are malicious or reckless with their statements, they should be dragged to court for all the nation to scrutinize while they watch Court TV. This is a healthy thing for an informed citizenry. Extracting truth is healthy.
I know you, George. You don't think much of the rule of law. I don't think you care that much about the truth, either, judging from all you told us during the lead-up phase to the Iraq war.
I'm surprised though, George---really surprised--- to hear you say you don't support free speech. You're always telling us terrorists "hate us for our freedoms". Why am I getting the distinct impression you hate many of us for our freedoms, George?
We shall miss Julia Child
We've lost Julia
We shall miss Julia Child
O Julia, Julia, Cook and nifty wench,
Whose unsurpassed quenelles and hot soufflés,
Whose English, Norse and German, and whose French,
Are all beyond my piteous powers to praise-
Whose sweetly-rounded bottom and whose legs,
Whose gracious face, whose nature temperate,
Are only equaled by her scrambled eggs:
Accept from me, your ever-loving mate,
This acclamation shaped in fourteen lines
Whose inner truth belies its outer sight;
For never were there foods, nor were there wines,
Whose flavor equals yours for sheer delight.
O luscious dish! O gustatory pleasure!
You satisfy my taste-buds beyond measure.
- Paul Child, Birthday 1961
Drudge has debate scoop
Drudge has debate scoop
Matt Drudge has posted early presidential debate schedule information. Official announcements will be announced this afternoon.
First Presidential Debate: Jim Lehrer (PBS)
Second Presidential Debate: Charlie Gibson (ABC)
Third Presidential Debate: Bob Schieffer (CBS)
Vice Presidential Debate: Gwen Ifill (PBS)
Matt Drudge has posted early presidential debate schedule information. Official announcements will be announced this afternoon.
First Presidential Debate: Jim Lehrer (PBS)
Second Presidential Debate: Charlie Gibson (ABC)
Third Presidential Debate: Bob Schieffer (CBS)
Vice Presidential Debate: Gwen Ifill (PBS)
Rudy Guiliani doesn't need Michael Moore
Rudy Guiliani doesn't need Michael Moore
It's a foregone conclusion that Michael Moore doesn't need to tell Rudy Guiliani about 9/11, even though I saw that headline all over the front pages at news stands while I was on vacation last week.
When it comes to criticizing Bush for those seven minutes in that classroom when Bush was informed that America was under attack, Rudy says he thinks John Kerry is "armchair quarterbacking" based on cues from Michael Moore.
I didn't need Mr. Moore to give me any cues, and neither does John Kerry. We knew about the seven minutes long before "Fahrenheit 9/11" was in the can-- or anywhere near the can.
Matter of fact, Mr. Moore may have gotten his cues from the same place I did.
From real life.
The reality that proved to me that Rudy Guiliani was a brave, intelligent, and decisive man on the morning of 9/11 is the same reality that informed me, on that same morning, that my president looked more frightened and frozen as any typical terrified American.
Reality informed me that Bush was conspicuous by his long absence that morning. Peter Jennings informed me that Bush took off for some cave in East Fumbuck that morning, while people jumped to their deaths or burned alive..while my own brother ran from the Financial district (with thousands of others) in the chaotic streets of NYC.
While we watched..horrified..
while we waited.
Leaders were born that morning.
I think Rudy was the prime example.
Bush dropped out of the 'contestants for glory' early on..within the first seven minutes.
If Chic Hecht had been choking in front of Bush, I imagine he may have heard the child-soothing strains of "My Pet Goat" as he slipped smothering into his final sleep.
It's a foregone conclusion that Michael Moore doesn't need to tell Rudy Guiliani about 9/11, even though I saw that headline all over the front pages at news stands while I was on vacation last week.
When it comes to criticizing Bush for those seven minutes in that classroom when Bush was informed that America was under attack, Rudy says he thinks John Kerry is "armchair quarterbacking" based on cues from Michael Moore.
I didn't need Mr. Moore to give me any cues, and neither does John Kerry. We knew about the seven minutes long before "Fahrenheit 9/11" was in the can-- or anywhere near the can.
Matter of fact, Mr. Moore may have gotten his cues from the same place I did.
From real life.
The reality that proved to me that Rudy Guiliani was a brave, intelligent, and decisive man on the morning of 9/11 is the same reality that informed me, on that same morning, that my president looked more frightened and frozen as any typical terrified American.
Reality informed me that Bush was conspicuous by his long absence that morning. Peter Jennings informed me that Bush took off for some cave in East Fumbuck that morning, while people jumped to their deaths or burned alive..while my own brother ran from the Financial district (with thousands of others) in the chaotic streets of NYC.
While we watched..horrified..
while we waited.
Leaders were born that morning.
I think Rudy was the prime example.
Bush dropped out of the 'contestants for glory' early on..within the first seven minutes.
If Chic Hecht had been choking in front of Bush, I imagine he may have heard the child-soothing strains of "My Pet Goat" as he slipped smothering into his final sleep.
Sudan Genocide-Frist Makes Public Plea
Sudan Genocide-Frist Makes Public Plea
Bill Frist has made a plea in the Washington Post for international involvement and action to stop genocide and assist the suffering and the needlessly dying in the Darfur region of Sudan.
I saw a moving piece on the plight of the citizens of Darfur last night on PBS' Jim Lehrer News Hour. You can watch the segment by going here.
We watch. We weep. We talk about it. Hopefully, we don't have to scream about it before action is taken. Here's a worthy cause to immediately act for the good of mankind. There is no reason or sense involved when an 18-month-old is buried due to disease or starvation. Not in this world.
A fellow Syracuse resident-blogger, NYCO, did an excellent job of breaking down the history of another African genocide--the one in Rwanda. Titled "100 Days in Rwanda", NYCO dedicated her effort and time to helping us understand the effects of genocide and the startling reality when no one cares enough to act to stop it while it's happening in front of our eyes. We truly embolden terror when we let these crimes go unchecked.
The ghosts of Rwanda should haunt us all and wake us up to the reality of what's happening in the Western region of Sudan today.
Cut terror down in its tracks wherever it rears its head.
Here's an opportunity for the world to come squarely together on the struggle against terror.
Bill Frist has made a plea in the Washington Post for international involvement and action to stop genocide and assist the suffering and the needlessly dying in the Darfur region of Sudan.
I saw a moving piece on the plight of the citizens of Darfur last night on PBS' Jim Lehrer News Hour. You can watch the segment by going here.
We watch. We weep. We talk about it. Hopefully, we don't have to scream about it before action is taken. Here's a worthy cause to immediately act for the good of mankind. There is no reason or sense involved when an 18-month-old is buried due to disease or starvation. Not in this world.
A fellow Syracuse resident-blogger, NYCO, did an excellent job of breaking down the history of another African genocide--the one in Rwanda. Titled "100 Days in Rwanda", NYCO dedicated her effort and time to helping us understand the effects of genocide and the startling reality when no one cares enough to act to stop it while it's happening in front of our eyes. We truly embolden terror when we let these crimes go unchecked.
The ghosts of Rwanda should haunt us all and wake us up to the reality of what's happening in the Western region of Sudan today.
Cut terror down in its tracks wherever it rears its head.
Here's an opportunity for the world to come squarely together on the struggle against terror.
McGreevey can only be one of the "G"s in America
McGreevey can only be one of the "G"s in America
"At a point in every person's life, one has to look deeply into the mirror of one's soul and decide one's unique truth in the world, not as we may want to see it or hope to see it, but as it is."
So true.
I'm sorry Jim McGreevey can't be 'gay' and 'governor' at the same time.
I mean.....I know it's physically possible to be both at one time.
So ask yourself why he's going to be only the 'gay' part as of November.
Hmmm....the pursuit of happiness?...freedom?....opportunity?
No, no.
Not for gays in America.
The land where our "role models" in politics refer to their opponents as "girlie-men" and mock others' reference to the word "sensitive". A land where a man or woman can offer their life for their country, but they can't talk about who they are and they can't hope to marry the person to whom they've committed their love.
It's all related.
It's got to be all or nothing here. Until we stop lying to ourselves, we are not the land of great freedom and opportunity. We are the land of silent persecution, mockery, and exclusion.
"At a point in every person's life, one has to look deeply into the mirror of one's soul and decide one's unique truth in the world, not as we may want to see it or hope to see it, but as it is."
So true.
I'm sorry Jim McGreevey can't be 'gay' and 'governor' at the same time.
I mean.....I know it's physically possible to be both at one time.
So ask yourself why he's going to be only the 'gay' part as of November.
Hmmm....the pursuit of happiness?...freedom?....opportunity?
No, no.
Not for gays in America.
The land where our "role models" in politics refer to their opponents as "girlie-men" and mock others' reference to the word "sensitive". A land where a man or woman can offer their life for their country, but they can't talk about who they are and they can't hope to marry the person to whom they've committed their love.
It's all related.
It's got to be all or nothing here. Until we stop lying to ourselves, we are not the land of great freedom and opportunity. We are the land of silent persecution, mockery, and exclusion.
Thursday, August 12, 2004
Cheney insinuating Kerry's a 'girlie-man'?
Cheney insinuating Kerry's
a 'girlie-man'?
"Ugh! Me real man--me not sensitive!"
Faux-macho chickenhawk Dick Cheney thinks it's hilarious that John Kerry used the word "sensitive" in connection with the war on terror.
Dick's longing to be cool like Governor Arnold, perhaps?
I'd bet Dick would have just loved to have scored some major chortles from the brainless he-men in America by calling Kerry a 'girlie-man'.
The difference is that it actually worked for the star-powered Guvnah Arnold. (Well, let's just say it worked out for Guvnah Ahnold. Let's face it, the comment was incredibly goofy -note I didn't say insensitive-).
Knowing that our troops are over in Najaf fighting Iraq's ever-blossoming disaster of a civil war and that we Americans were lied to while he kept a terribly straight face, Cheney just looked like a desperate, unpopular, and incredibly insensitive vice-president by mocking "not-so-curious" George's opponent.
It doesn't take a cave man or an animal to intelligently lead a war.
It takes a great military. We have that.
It takes a leader who's not afraid to place humble reliance and trust in his subordinate military commanders when they advise him that they need a certain number of troops. Listening is an important form of sensitivity.
It takes intuitive perception to know when it's the right war and the right time. Perceiving is a form of sensitivity.
It takes moral and intellectual sensitivity when it comes to a Commander in chief securing and maintaining the trust of his own citizens as well as that of leaders from other nations. Respect and compassion are forms of sensitivity.
Who knew?
Certainly no one in the Bush administration.
a 'girlie-man'?
"Ugh! Me real man--me not sensitive!"
Faux-macho chickenhawk Dick Cheney thinks it's hilarious that John Kerry used the word "sensitive" in connection with the war on terror.
Dick's longing to be cool like Governor Arnold, perhaps?
I'd bet Dick would have just loved to have scored some major chortles from the brainless he-men in America by calling Kerry a 'girlie-man'.
The difference is that it actually worked for the star-powered Guvnah Arnold. (Well, let's just say it worked out for Guvnah Ahnold. Let's face it, the comment was incredibly goofy -note I didn't say insensitive-).
Knowing that our troops are over in Najaf fighting Iraq's ever-blossoming disaster of a civil war and that we Americans were lied to while he kept a terribly straight face, Cheney just looked like a desperate, unpopular, and incredibly insensitive vice-president by mocking "not-so-curious" George's opponent.
It doesn't take a cave man or an animal to intelligently lead a war.
It takes a great military. We have that.
It takes a leader who's not afraid to place humble reliance and trust in his subordinate military commanders when they advise him that they need a certain number of troops. Listening is an important form of sensitivity.
It takes intuitive perception to know when it's the right war and the right time. Perceiving is a form of sensitivity.
It takes moral and intellectual sensitivity when it comes to a Commander in chief securing and maintaining the trust of his own citizens as well as that of leaders from other nations. Respect and compassion are forms of sensitivity.
Who knew?
Certainly no one in the Bush administration.
Washington Post Mea Culpa on Iraq reporting
Washington Post Mea Culpa on Iraq reporting
They deliberately hid what they knew.
Days before the Iraq war began, veteran Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus put together a story questioning whether the Bush administration had proof that Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
But he ran into resistance from the paper's editors, and his piece ran only after assistant managing editor Bob Woodward, who was researching a book about the drive toward war, "helped sell the story," Pincus recalled. "Without him, it would have had a tough time getting into the paper."
Even so, the article was relegated to Page A17.
"We did our job but we didn't do enough, and I blame myself mightily for not pushing harder," Woodward said in an interview. "We should have warned readers we had information that the basis for this was shakier" than widely believed. "Those are exactly the kind of statements that should be published on the front page."
[LINK]
For whatever it's worth, I alerted you to Mr. Pincus' reporting here at Iddybud.
See my own thoughts about the sad state of the media before the war.
See my thoughts about Bush virtually abandoning the UN before the war.
They deliberately hid what they knew.
Days before the Iraq war began, veteran Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus put together a story questioning whether the Bush administration had proof that Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
But he ran into resistance from the paper's editors, and his piece ran only after assistant managing editor Bob Woodward, who was researching a book about the drive toward war, "helped sell the story," Pincus recalled. "Without him, it would have had a tough time getting into the paper."
Even so, the article was relegated to Page A17.
"We did our job but we didn't do enough, and I blame myself mightily for not pushing harder," Woodward said in an interview. "We should have warned readers we had information that the basis for this was shakier" than widely believed. "Those are exactly the kind of statements that should be published on the front page."
[LINK]
For whatever it's worth, I alerted you to Mr. Pincus' reporting here at Iddybud.
See my own thoughts about the sad state of the media before the war.
See my thoughts about Bush virtually abandoning the UN before the war.
No nuance = No imagination
No Nuance = No imagination
Suzanne Fields just can't imagine how a man might be anti-war hero and war hero at the same time.
She, like many others in her ideological set, can't imagine how a man could kill an opponent for his country (in Vietnam) and save an opponent (Sen. Hecht with the Heimlich maneuver) for his country.
She can't imagine a man who could win three purple hearts and then throw some ribbons over a fence to conscientiously show his nation that something was dreadfully wrong.
The 9/11 Commission report made a lack of American imagination the main theme-point of their conclusions.
Suzanne Fields lacks imagination. We must forgive her. She's a lot like our president, who's never killed a man for his country...who's never saved a life for his country..who's never won a medal for wartime service..who's never seen what war does to real people.
I've never killed or saved anyone myself..(unless saving a choking cat counts).
I've never seen war while actually amidst the exploding bombs, bleeding bodies, and firing guns. I've never had to be that afraid or that brave.
Yet, I can imagine.....
Calling Senator Kerry tasteless and vulgar for talking about his wartime service, as Ms. Fields suggests is, on its face, vulgar in itself and void in its insistence.
Suzanne Fields just can't imagine how a man might be anti-war hero and war hero at the same time.
She, like many others in her ideological set, can't imagine how a man could kill an opponent for his country (in Vietnam) and save an opponent (Sen. Hecht with the Heimlich maneuver) for his country.
She can't imagine a man who could win three purple hearts and then throw some ribbons over a fence to conscientiously show his nation that something was dreadfully wrong.
The 9/11 Commission report made a lack of American imagination the main theme-point of their conclusions.
Suzanne Fields lacks imagination. We must forgive her. She's a lot like our president, who's never killed a man for his country...who's never saved a life for his country..who's never won a medal for wartime service..who's never seen what war does to real people.
I've never killed or saved anyone myself..(unless saving a choking cat counts).
I've never seen war while actually amidst the exploding bombs, bleeding bodies, and firing guns. I've never had to be that afraid or that brave.
Yet, I can imagine.....
Calling Senator Kerry tasteless and vulgar for talking about his wartime service, as Ms. Fields suggests is, on its face, vulgar in itself and void in its insistence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)