Elwood's Diatribes

My thoughts on politics, foreign policy, sports, America, and anything else I come up with.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
 
Cool Looking Mars Image



The JPL description: "Right Panoramic Camera Non-linearized Full frame EDR acquired on Sol 288 of Opportunity's mission to Meridiani Planum at approximately 12:36:18 Mars local solar time, camera commanded to use Filter 1 (436 nm). NASA/JPL/Cornell"


| Permalink | |


Saturday, November 13, 2004
 
I Don't Feel Like Writing, So Here's Where I've Been

I found a little page on a friend's LiveJournal, where you can make a map of states you've visited. Kinda cool. I've covered the literal "Red States" pretty well, more so than the "Blue States."



Create your own visited states map
or
check out these Google Hacks.


| Permalink | |


Wednesday, October 27, 2004
 
"Let America Be America Again"
by Langston Hughes

Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.

(America never was America to me.)

Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed--
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.

(It was never America to me.)

O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.

(There never has been equality for me,
Nor freedom in the "homeland of the free.")

I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery's scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek--
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.

I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one's own greed!

I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean--
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today--O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.

Yet I'm the one who dreamt our basic dream
In that Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every birck and stone, in every furrow turned
That's made America the land it has become.
O, I'm the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home--
For I'm the one who left dark Ireland's shore,
And Poland's plain, and England's grassy lea,
And from Black Africa's strand I came
To build a "homeland of the free."

The free?

Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we've dreamed
And all the songs we've sung
And all the hopes we've held
And all the flags we've hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay--
Except the dream that's almost dead today.

O, let, America be America again--
The land that never has been yet--
And yet must be--the land where every man is free.
The land that's mine--the poor man's, Indian's, Negro's, ME--
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.

Sure, call me any ugly name you choose--
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people's lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!

O, yes,
I say it plain,
America was never America to me,
And yet I swear this oath--
America will be!

Out of the rack of ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain--
All, all the stretch of these great green states--
And make America again!


| Permalink | |


Sunday, October 10, 2004
 
President Bush Distracted by Pretty Ladies, Shiny Things at Debate

How many of you out there did a double take on something President George W. Bush said during Friday night's debate? Well, if you were paying close attention, you probably did that several times. Here the best Bush quote from the second presidential debate.

Senator John Kerry had just finished answering the question about promising to not raise the tax burden on the middle class.
GIBSON: Mr. President, 90 seconds.

BUSH: He's just not credible when he talks about being fiscally conservative. He's just not credible. If you look at his record in the Senate, he voted to break the caps -- the spending caps -- over 200 times.

And here he says he's going to be a fiscal conservative, all of a sudden. It's just not credible. You cannot believe it.

And of course he's going to raise your taxes. You see, he's proposed $2.2 trillion of new spending. And you say: Well, how are you going to pay for it? He says, well, he's going to raise the taxes on the rich -- that's what he said -- the top two brackets. That raises, he says $800 billion; we say $600 billion.

We've got battling green eye shades.

Somewhere in between those numbers -- and so there's a difference, what he's promised and what he can raise.

Now, either he's going to break all these wonderful promises he's told you about or he's going to raise taxes. And I suspect, given his record, he's going to raise taxes.

Is my time up yet?

GIBSON: No, you can keep going.

(LAUGHTER)

BUSH: Good. You looked at me like my clock was up.

Yes Mr. President, your clock is up. But that's not the point in question. I was just dumbfounded when I saw Bush look at a couple ladies in the left side of the crowd, and in the middle of answering a debate question, he commented on the similar eye shades of these two women in the crowd.

WTF?! Is the President that easily distracted? How can anyone who has a brain with as much damage from cocaine use as George W. Bush be president?

Idiots: I like him, he's not much smarter than me. I can relate to him. (drool)

But don't you people expect more from a president? I hate ignorance, but I despise ignorance by choice. Damn, this country is full of morons!

| Permalink | |


Thursday, October 07, 2004
 
Phone Banking for Kerry & Feingold

So tonight I went into the local county Democratic Coordinated Campaign HQ, and called a list of people who we have been unable to pindown thus far as to their vote for president this year. We also asked whether they planned on voting for Senator Russ Feingold for another term, or the Republican challenger Tim Michels.

I was actually not that surprised at the number of people who were voting for Bush and Feingold. That shows the level of support Feingold has in this state. Russ Feingold must run, or be drafted to run for president in 2008 or 2012! I can think of no one else in this entire nation that I would want to be president ahead of Feingold. He has a reputation for being one of the few honest, thoughtful voices in Congress. And he would make one hell of a president. This country needs someone like him at the helm.

Back to phone banking, screw that. It was a group of people all chattering away on phones in the back room of a store front in downtown Janesville, WI. I simply could not hear the person talking to me on the phone, or my own thoughts! I know my hearing is getting worse and worse. The background is becoming more and more amplified, while the close noises I am trying to pay attention to are completely overpowered. I'm a little worried, but I'll go to one of those free hearing screenings, and then the doctor.

So it back to my personal favorite, door-to-door canvassing. Knocking on doors, delivering a short spiel, and handing them some pamphlets. I'm much better at the door than on the phone anyways. Right away tomorrow, 4:00 PM in Janesville. The added benefit of exercise is a big plus. So I'll report back on how that goes tomorrow.


| Permalink | |


Wednesday, October 06, 2004
 


Rodney Dangerfield (1921-2004)

Few people have ever made me laugh harder than Rodney did in Caddyshack. He will be missed, but never forgotten.





"Hey! You scratched my anchor!"




| Permalink | |


 
28 Days Later...

This month last year I placed all my hopes behind the Chicago Cubs, and I was served up with one of the most crushing of defeats. Only Red Sox fans have seen worse. This year the Cubs decided to spread mythic collapse over the entire final week, rather than one half-inning of one playoff game.

But this year, there's a whole lot more on the line than ending a 95 year-old championship drought. At the very least the economic, legislative, and Supreme Court futures. Quite possibly the fate of thousands of men and women in the U.S. armed forces. And the further development of the place America holds in the world. At the extreme, maybe the expansion of war in the Middle East, a conflict with North Korea, and a nuclear exchange in either region. And maybe the very existence of the United States of America, as we know it, or at all.

28 days from now, it will be around 1:00 AM CST on the day after Election Day. Hopefully a winner will be known for sure by then. I know I didn't get any sleep on Election Night four years ago. Those of us hoping for - well hope, will have voted for John Kerry and John Edwards for President and Vice-President. What will our emotions be at that time? Will I be partying like it's Mardi Gras and Katie Holmes is on my arm? (Hey, a man needs fantasies.) Or will we be starting our survival kit checklists, and working on our excuses out of a draft? (I feel pretty solid in my medical excuses.) I for one just want the whole fucking thing to be over with, as I'm sure many of us do.



157 days ago, I made last post here. I have a lot of reasons for not posting. Maybe my thoughts were just scattered, the election coverage was starting to get under my skin to where I didn't want to talk about, I was burned out on writing, or I was just burned out period. This whole medium has me a little perplexed sometimes. I'm not a journalist, but writing about the news is what I feel most comfortable doing here. Some people use it more as a journal, but I've never been that much of an open book.

I will tell you that a damn good friend of mine got married this summer, to a wonderful girl. Am I being chauvinistic, or God forbid un-PC, by referring to a woman in her 20s or 30s as a girl? Fuck it, I know it has no demeaning connotation. I may have just turned 30, but I still think of myself as quite young. Anyways, the two of them are out in L.A. now. And the wedding was completed with anyone punching the groom's father. Oh he deserved it, but discretion was exercised by all.

I explored once more my feelings for an old friend of mine, Stephanie. I had pushed the romantic feelings aside for a few years, but I had it bad for her again this summer. She's a great listener, a very caring person, and I think a match for me in a lot of ways. She reminded me of what great friends we are, and that despite she having some similar feelings for me on the romantic front, it just isn't meant to be now. There's a chance that we may find out paths cross again, when I am at a better place and things are different, but I will be happy as hell to continue to have her as a close friend, for years to come I hope. It did feel nice to tell someone I love them as more than a friend, for the first time in a few years.

We spent a really fun week hanging out a month ago, and that actually got me feeling that we may be best as just friends. It's so nice to talk to someone who can understand you, is of high intellect, and very thoughtful. When you can talk about the mysteries of the cosmos, or just stare at a fire together. I've probably thought it before, but never put it into words. She has the most soothing voice. So yeah, we left the summer better than we started it.

So this shows how eager I am to talk about politics. I ended up making this mostly a journal entry. I'll be adding more of each in the days to come.



| Permalink | |


Sunday, May 02, 2004
 
Bravo, Ted Koppel!

Part of Ted Koppel's closing remarks, after reading the names of our war dead on Friday night's "The Fallen" on ABC:
The reading tonight of those 721 names was neither intended to provoke opposition to the war, nor was it meant as an endorsement. Some of you doubt that. You are convinced that I am opposed to the war. I'm not. But that's beside the point.

I am opposed to sustaining the illusion that war can be waged by the sacrifice of a few, without burdening the rest of us in any way. I oppose the notion that to be at war is to forfeit the right to question, criticize, or debate our leaders' policies. Or for that matter the policies of those who would like to become our leaders.

Right on target.

| Permalink | |


Friday, April 30, 2004
 
Ted Koppel To Read Names Of All U.S. Soldiers Killed In Iraq, On Friday's Nightline
Conservative attack dogs already calling it tantamount to treason.

On Friday, April 30, 2004, the nightly edition of ABC's "Nightline" will be extended to 40 minutes in length, and Ted Koppel will read off the names of every American soldier who has died in Iraq since we started the war in March 2003. On the screen, the name, age, and hometown will appear with a photo of each deceased serviceman.

I am not really amazed, but I am certain appalled at the reaction of some of the conservative press and certain government officials to this simple act of honoring those who have fought and died for their country. They have called it a ploy of the liberal media, an act that only serves to aid and abet the enemy, something that cannot be tolerated during a time of war, claiming that the mere reading of names is a political act of treason.

Here's the message on the website of Sinclair Broadcasting, which plans to keep Nightline off the air on all of its ABC affiliates this Friday night:

ABC Nightline Pre-emption


The ABC Television Network announced on Tuesday that the Friday, April 30 edition of "Nightline" will consist entirely of Ted Koppel reading aloud the names of U.S. servicemen and women killed in action in Iraq. Despite the denials by a spokeswoman for the show, the action appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq.

There is no organization that holds the members of our military and those soldiers who have sacrificed their lives in service of our country in higher regard than Sinclair Broadcast Group. While Sinclair would support an honest effort to honor the memory of these brave soldiers, we do not believe that is what "Nightline" is doing. Rather, Mr. Koppel and "Nightline" are hiding behind this so-called tribute in an effort to highlight only one aspect of the war effort and in doing so to influence public opinion against the military action in Iraq. Based on published reports, we are aware of the spouse of one soldier who died in Iraq who opposes the reading of her husband's name to oppose our military action. We suspect she is not alone in this viewpoint. As a result, we have decided to preempt the broadcast of "Nightline' this Friday on each of our stations which air ABC programming.

We understand that our decision in this matter may be questioned by some. Before you judge our decision, however, we would ask that you first question Mr. Koppel as to why he chose to read the names of 523 troops killed in combat in Iraq, rather than the names of the thousands of private citizens killed in terrorist attacks since and including the events of September 11, 2001. In his answer, we believe you will find the real motivation behind his action scheduled for this Friday. Unfortunately, we may never know for sure because Mr. Koppel has refused repeated requests from Sinclair's News Central news organization to comment on this Friday's program.


Here's the excellent finish to David Pepin's blog entry on the matter:
The fact is, we've wasted far too many American lives on pumping up George W. Bush's sense of masculinity, and the people who bring you this conflict don't like to be reminded our people are dying over there. This is why they made such an issue of photos of caskets being flown back home. And they will come after Koppel with Uzis blazing, even if he simply reads names off a list.

You don't even have to actively antagonize the hate machine any more. Simple facts will do it. Why use a bazooka when you can hit the target cleanly and efficiently with a peashooter?

God I hate these bastards in power! If you're out there reading this and at all considering voting for Bush, you'd better explain yourself. Better yet, you'd better re-examine yourself, because you are choosing to be an ignorant drone. God help us, the nation, and the world if George W. Bush is re-elected. We may have to get out the Ouija board to contact the spirit of Tecumseh, and ask him if his curse is still in place. And if so, could he please get working on that, the sooner the better.

| Permalink | |


Thursday, April 29, 2004
 
Four Percent

Here's a great little blog entry from Kevin Drum at Washington Monthly:
4%....This year, about 50% of the voting age population will vote in the presidential election.

However, only 30% of the population lives in contested states.

And according to the latest New York Times poll, only 25% of the people they surveyed are still undecided about who they're going to vote for.

Do the arithmetic and that adds up to 4% of the electorate. Everything you see for the next six months from George Bush and John Kerry — every ad, every dollar, every speech, every prerecorded telephone call — is aimed at trying to convert about 4% of the total voting age population. The other 96% of us are basically spectators — either we're not going to vote, we live in states that are foregone conclusions, or we've already made up our minds.

Do you know anyone who's part of the 4%? If you do, get to work on them!


| Permalink | |


Wednesday, April 28, 2004
 
Things That Are Really Pissing Me Off Right Now

Blind, ignorant allegiance to the government.

George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, et al., for presenting a case built on a mountain of falsehoods for the unprovoked invasion of a country that had not attacked us and did not pose any imminent threat to us or our allies whatsoever.

The United States Congress, for abdicating its Constitutional authority as the only body that can declare war on another nation, by passing an un-Constitutional resolution in October 2002 that gave President Bush the individual authority to decide whether or not to invade Iraq.

A majority of the American public, who form their opinions about the actions of their government based only on what they see on TV, and sometimes from only one slanted channel. They are content to be blissfully ignorant, and feel critical thinking is a waste of time. They are content with minimized public debate about the actions of America, as said debate would only serve to confuse people. And we need to be "united."

People who question the patriotism of those individuals who speak out against the actions of their government, and people who say that those individuals are "aiding and abetting" the enemy.

People who think that an Iraqi who fights the American Occupation is a "terrorist." One is not a terrorist who fights against an invading army in his own country. He is an insurgent, and is more within his rights to fight in Iraq than the American army is.

People who think that the role of the press is to "support the troops," rather than to report the facts of the day, clearly and without jingoism.

People who are content with any curtailment of guaranteed civil liberties that the government can come up with, as long as they are told that security will be increased.

People who are content with the holding of American citizens on American soil as "enemy combatants, something clearly un-Constitutional under Amendments IV, V, and VI. They have no problem with these people being held in complete isolation, without access to a lawyer or any judicial hearing of any kind, until the mythical end of a war that was never declared.

People who believe Creationism is science, and should thusly be taught in the science classes of public schools. They also insist the enormously discredited idea that physical evolution has not been proven.

| Permalink | |


Thursday, April 22, 2004
 
Israel Has Few Choices For Peace

In March of this year, before the killing of the latest Hamas leader with a missile to his car, Israel shot a missile at a wheelchair and killed the founder of Hamas. A resolution came before the UN Security Council which would have condemned Israel for yet another targeted killing, and this time of an immobile, old man, who easily could have been arrested. Per usual, America vetoed the resolution, because in the eyes of the neoconservatives pulling the strings in the Bush administration, Israel did nothing other than defend itself against terrorism. Both Democratic and Republican presidents have almost never found a UN Security Resolution against Israel that they couldn't veto.

This got me thinking about how I have perceived over the years, the Israel-Palestinian conflict. I posted the following to Madfam Forums on March 25, 2004:
"I used to not give a damn about the Palestinians. I figured you send suicide bombers, you get what you asked for. But it's gotten to the point where neither side has any respect for human life. And because the Israeli Defense Force has all the tanks, aircraft, and heavy weaponry, they're the ones killing the most people indiscriminately.

Just read reports from reporters who have spent time in the West Bank, and you will hear about how randomly and indiscriminately Palestinians are killed. And now Israel builds this wall, not on the 1967 cease fire line, but well into Palestinian territory at many points. And the people who lose their land, their crops, their livelihood? Well, it's a big fuck you to them.

How can Israel continue to occupy a land of essentially imprisoned people? A people who they keep under a dusk to dawn curfew. A people who have no representation, and no future.

There are only a few ways this can all end. (1) If Israel intends to kill all the terrorists in the Occupied Territories, they will have to kill every last Palestinian. Because with every terrorist they kill, two or more will sprout up and vow revenge. (2) Israel can expel, i.e. ethnically cleanse the Occupied Territories of all Palestinians. (3) Israel can annex these territories and their people as part of Israel. But with current demographics, that would make Israel a majority Palestinian state by the end of the decade. And they were founded on the idea that they shall always be a Jewish state. (4) Or they can evacuate the settlements, remove all personnel from the territories, and allow Palestine to be a free state.

(1) and (2) are quite simply crimes against humanity. (3) is unacceptable to the Israeli people. That leaves only (4). It is the only end result that can result in peace.

But they continue to take great amounts of land to establish Jewish settlements. They take more land to extend fortified, settler-only highways. They continue their practice of demolishing the homes of the relatives of all suicide bombers. They continue to hate, and will receive only hate in return.

And every day the United States stands by silently while Israel continues its own campaign of terror, we as a country lose even more of what little moral authority we have left in the international community. We keep sending billions to Israel every year, with no strings attached, no requirements of humane behavior on their part. Only when the United States turns its back on Israel will they come to the conclusion that Palestinian sovereignty is their only choice."


| Permalink | |


Thursday, April 15, 2004
 
Feeling a Draft?

While neither the President nor the Defense Department will admit it, the generals who testified before Congress were right. We should have brought in a force of 200,000-300,000 military personnel for the War with Iraq. And now we hear out President and Secretary of Defense saying they will "supply the commanders in the field with all the men they need." Where have we heard that before? Well, it was before my time, but yes, Vietnam.

The Pentagon has hinted at adding 30,000 troops to the Iraqi theater. But we are already stretched as far as we can right now. The temporary answer is that a new rotation of troops will continue to come into Iraq, but those who have served a year in Iraq and were expecting their tour to be over, they got a 120 extension to their stay in Iraq. I can tell you that is not going to win any votes amongst military personnel or their families.

But what if these attacks from Shiite insurgents turn into a general Shiite uprising. We would need a large number of troops added to the field. And the only realistic way to accomplish that is to reinstate the draft. It would obviously not happen before the election, but it could be a reality in 2005. These draftees would of course be months away from being able to enter combat. But the Pentagon could take a number of National Guard units and incorporate them permanently into the active duty forces. The draftees would then take the posts vacated by those former National Guard troops.

I don't think the policy makers in Washington understand the backlash that reinstating the draft would bring about. Americans, especially young Americans, have come to believe that the draft was a tool of the past that those in Washington would almost never dare use again. And if they did, it would be because the United States territory was itself threatened, or that of Western Europe. If the President and the Congress thought they saw protests before the war started, they have no idea what an instant movement of constant protest a new draft would precipitate. These are of course just my projections, based on the attitudes of draft-age men and women that I know.

I believe the only way to proceed in Iraq is to take whatever option the United Nations suggests for the turnover of sovereignty on June 30th. Let the United Nations take over the whole political operation if they wish. If our stated goal is a our real goal - to establish democracy in Iraq - I believe we can trust the U.N. to do as good or better of a job than the United States could. For one thing, having a body other than the occupying Coalition serve as a facilitator in establishing Iraqi government would probably go a lot smoother. The U.N. has not attacked Iraq (except in 1991), and they voted down the U.N. resolution to proceed with this foolish war.

But if the Bush administration continues to try to do everything themselves, and in their usual arrogant way, that draft could become more and more of a possibility next year. And God help the President who asks Congress to reinstate the draft. If it's George W. Bush, we just may find out if Tecumseh's Curse really was broken by Ronald Reagan. Or will being elected in a year ending in "0" continue to be a death sentence.

| Permalink | |


 
The Power to Declassify

From Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo:
A quick question. In the last six weeks, how many documents has the Bush administration declassified for the exclusive and explicit purpose of attacking a political enemy?


| Permalink | |


Friday, April 09, 2004
 
Iraq in Chaos at One-Year Anniversary of Fall of Saddam Hussein

Here's a map of battles and hostages taken in the last three days. The dates at the top are wrong ( I believe that should be April 7-9), unless it's a forecast or goal for the insurgents. I highly doubt that. Regardless, it gives you a good idea of the widespread nature of this two-front uprising, including the cities in danger, the Coalition nation's troops in the area, and the place taken and nationality of those kidnapped.



| Permalink | |


 
SpaceWeather.com's Aurora Gallery

I encourage everyone to visit SpaceWeather.com, and go to their pages of submitted aurora borealis photos. They are simply awe-inspiring! Here's a couple to whet your appetite:


Hinton, Alberta, 9 March 2004


Big Bay, Ontario, 9 March 2004

| Permalink | |


 
Space Station Flyby, In Front of Saturn



This is an amazing image. From SpaceWeather.com:
"This is no April Fool's joke," says Edelmann, who recorded the event using a Celestron C9.25 telescope and a Phillips Toucam digital camera. "The two frames showing the ISS are just 1/15s apart! I processed the image of Saturn separately to enhance the planet's faint moons."


| Permalink | |


 
Our War President



This is a mosaic composed of the photos of the American service men and women who have died in Iraq. No photograph is used more than three times. A quick count by me showed a 30x47 matrix containing 1410 images. The images were found at the following blog:

American Left - War President

Medium size image (800 x 935 pixels)
Large size image (1890 x 2209 pixels)

| Permalink | |


Tuesday, April 06, 2004
 
Bush's Approval Ratings Falling Across the Board

From the Pew Research Center:



| Permalink | |


Monday, April 05, 2004
 
American "civilian" security personnel killed in Fallujah were illegal combatants

Four American security guards were killed, and their mutilated bodies subsequently dragged through the streets of Fallujah, Iraq this past weekend. It was a brutal attack, and a horrific photo op for the Iraqi insurgency. No man deserves to meet the end that these men met. But let's examine their role as security in Iraq.

From Warblogging:
The men killed and mutilated in Fallujah were armed, were acting as combatants and were not subject to the military chain of command or military discipline. They were not part of the armed forces of the United States. They were instead employees of Blackwater Security Consulting, a North Carolina-based company that provides "security training" and "defense services".

While in Iraq employees of Blackwater provide training to Iraqi security services, security to American proconsul L. Paul Bremer and also "provide security for food shipments", including, apparently, food shipments through Fallujah. Blackwater employees dress in plain clothes but carry heavy weapons and, presumably, engage in combat against Iraqi resistors who could be considered part of a "national liberation movement."

...the Blackwater employees do share one thing in common with their murderers, and with the men languishing in the cages of Guantanamo Bay: They were illegal combatants.

This is because the Blackwater "security guards" do not wear uniforms clearly identifying them as combatants. They instead wear civilian clothes while engaging in combat. The photograph [to the right], of a Blackwater USA security guard serving in L. Paul Bremer's bodyguard force, makes this clear. The man is carrying an assault rifle while wearing civilian clothes.

He is, therefore, an illegal combatant -- just like the un-uniformed Afghans and Arabs "detained" at Gitmo.

Note, however, that being an illegal combatant does not make you subject to death and mutilation. It simply makes you a criminal who may be punished according to local laws for engaging in hostilities. It also makes those who employ you -- those that hold "enemy combatants" and "illegal combatants" indefinitely and refuse to extend to them the rights of POWs -- hypocrites.

Hypocrisy perpetrated by the U.S. Department of Defense, and the Bush administration in general, should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention throughout this Iraq fiasco. But the fact that the Coalition Authority is employing private U.S. security guards, who are paid at a much higher rate than U.S. military personnel, and who are most definitely "illegal combatants," should come as a great surprise to Americans back home.

| Permalink | |


Tuesday, March 30, 2004
 
Methane on Mars could signal life

From a 29 March 2004 BBC News article:
Methane has been found in the Martian atmosphere which scientists say could be a sign that life exists today on Mars.

It was detected by telescopes on Earth and has recently been confirmed by instruments onboard the European Space Agency's orbiting Mars Express craft.

Methane lives for a short time in the Martian atmosphere so it must be being constantly replenished.

There are two possible sources: either active volcanoes, none of which have been found yet on Mars, or microbes.

I have not followed up on my last post before this morning, which was four long weeks ago. The big NASA news conference on past water on Mars turned out to be a bit of a dud. More findings since then have added to the picture however. NASA scientists believe that the Spirit rover site was once under sea water, and that the rocky outcroppings at the edge of the crater in which Spirit landed were created by this water.

But this finding of methane is a true lightning bolt. In the absence of recent volcanic activity, the presence of this methane leads us closer to the day when we will finally proclaim "There is life in the solar system on a planetary body other than the Earth!"

These are truly heady times. Nasa still needs a kick in the ass and an increase in funding for more missions to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere. The kick in the ass is because the beaurocrats are still in charge, making decisions like allowing the Hubble Space Telescope to die an early death. If, and hopefully when John Kerry is elected President, I hope he will use the bully pulpit to get the American public behind a return to manned missions outside lower Earth orbit.

| Permalink | |


 
Federal Court: Warrants Not Needed For Searches

One article I read that detailed all the shit that the conservatives have tried to pull or push through during Bush's term in office asked the question, "Are you pissed off yet?" Well check this out!
NEW ORLEANS -- It's a groundbreaking court decision that legal experts say will affect everyone: Police officers in Louisiana no longer need a search or arrest warrant to conduct a brief search of your home or business.

Leaders in law enforcement say it will keep officers safe, but others argue it's a privilege that could be abused.

The decision in United States v. Kelly Gould, No. 0230629cr0, was made March 24 by the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals...

One judge, Judge Grady Jolly, said he concurred in part and dissented in part with the majority opinion. Judge Jerry Smith, however, completely disagreed with the majority ruling, saying: "I have no doubt that the deputy sheriffs believed that they were acting reasonably and with good intentions. But the old adage warns us that 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions.'"

What in the holy hell? Isn't the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution pretty clear on this one?

Fourth Amendment
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

This is why the Democrats filibuster those extremist judges that Bush nominates to federal benches. They are lifetime appointments, and if you get enough police state lovers in the courts, we are indeed on "the road to hell," as was stated in the dissenting opinion.

When will Americans start to get pissed off? Do they give a flying fuck about their rights? Do they think the Bill of Rights is just plain old and out of date, and we should say fuck it to the whole thing? The last I recalled, no law can be made that is in anyway contradictory to the United States Constitution. But that's just me and my silly notions of constitutional law, separation of powers, and guaranteed freedoms.

| Permalink | |


Tuesday, March 02, 2004
 
NASA to Announce 'Significant Findings' of Water on Mars Tuesday

NASA will hold a press conference on Tuesday, March 2nd at 2:00 PM EST, to announce "significant findings" about water on Mars based on evidence from its Opportunity Mars rover. This could be some big news. Everyone in the scientific community (and the Coast to Coast AM wackos) is trying to figure out what the announcement could be about. The Opportunity rover is the second of two rovers delivered to the Martian surface via NASA landers during January of this year. The rover apparently hit a scientific "bullseye" by landing in the small crater that it did, an impact crater that may have been a lake in the past.


Here's more from the Space.com article on the upcoming announcement:
"It's going to be the most significant science results that we've had from the rovers, and it's bearing on their primary mission," NASA spokesperson Don Savage told SPACE.com . That mission is to find signs of water that might support life.

Will the announcement change how we think about Mars?

"Anything of a significant nature has that possibility," Savage said. "Sure."

If there is liquid water presently at the surface of Mars, as several lines of rover evidence have hinted, then most scientists agree there is the possibility that life could exist. Water does not mean life, but it is the key ingredient that makes life possible.

Few scientists doubt that Mars was once warmer and wet. And tremendous amounts of water are locked up as ice in the polar regions. The main question is whether any of that water remains at the surface in liquid form. Opportunity and its twin, Spirit, are exploring opposite sides of the planet near the equator.

Speculation that the announcement might involve any discussion of biology has not been confirmed.

However, there have been repeated observations at the Opportunity site that have puzzled the Mars rover scientists. Using the rover's Microscopic Imager, the strange spherules, thread-like features and even a larger object detected in rock outcrop have sparked scientific discussion -- both inside and outside of the Mars rover team -- as to whether they are tied to biology...

Opportunity has been investigating the soil and a rock outcropping in a shallow depression at its Meridiani Planum landing site, which may once have been the site of a giant lake or ocean. The rocks are layered and may have formed as sediments settled in the bottom of an ancient lake or ocean, or as part of a river bed, but that is only one hypothesis.

Both Opportunity and Spirit have found sticky, clumping soil that scientists already said could contain water. Only small amounts of water, perhaps sucked from the atmosphere, would be needed to mix with salt in the soil and create a brine, which could exist in liquid form even in the frigid environment of Mars.

Opportunity also appears to sit amid a field of hematite, a mineral that typically -- but not always -- forms in the presence of water. The rover has also found countless BB-sized beads. The spherical objects might have formed in a water environment, the scientists have said before, but there could also be other explanations, including volcanism and meteor impacts.

Image of those BB-sizes spheres:



A cool pic of the blue, dusty sunset on Mars:



| Permalink | |


Monday, March 01, 2004
 
A Nifty Demonstration of Hand-Foot Coordination

Sit down, and stick your right leg straight out. Rotate your right foot in a clockwise direction, and then while rotating your foot, draw the number six in the air with your right hand. You’ll find that your foot magically changes direction to rotate counterclockwise.

I tried again and again, but was unable to stop my foot from changing direction. It might have more of an effect on right-handed people, but I'm not sure. It is certifiably freaky though!

| Permalink | |


Wednesday, February 25, 2004
 
If You're State Attorney General, Make Sure You Don't Drive Drunk

I shouldn't talk, because I have been pulled over in the past, and gotten away with a couple other driving incidents without police involvement. Lucky for me the one time I was pulled over, I blew a 0.09 back in the days of the 0.10 cutoff. I was lucky, and incredibly stupid. But then again, I'm not the chief law enforcement official in the state of Wisconsin! That's right, Wisconsin Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager was arrested near Columbus, after being found in the ditch of northbound USH 151.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
A preliminary breath test showed her blood-alcohol level to be 0.12, or 0.04 above the state's legal limit of 0.08, according to the Dodge County Sheriff's Department...

...She took a preliminary breath test, the results of which generally are not admissible in court. But she refused a blood test three times, saying she wanted to talk to an attorney. She later offered to take a blood test, but the deputy told her it was too late.

State law says that when someone refuses to take a test to determine whether they are intoxicated, it triggers the suspension of a driver's license for a year. That is separate from the mandatory suspension of six to nine months for a conviction of a first-offense drunken driving. That conviction also carries a forfeiture of $784.

If convicted and if her license is suspended, Lautenschlager could still apply for and obtain a permit that would allow her to drive to and from work.

She was arrested at 12:15 a.m. Tuesday, handcuffed and placed in the rear of a squad car. At 1:10 a.m., she was released to her husband, William Rippl, a retired Neenah police officer.

Sheriff's Department Arrest Report

Way to go, Peg! At least you have two years until that reelection campaign. Dumbass.

| Permalink | |


Tuesday, February 24, 2004
 
Earth Almost Put on Impact Alert

From the BBC:
Astronomers have revealed how they came within minutes of alerting the world to a potential asteroid strike last month.

Some scientists believed on 13 January that a 30m object, later designated 2004 AS1, had a one-in-four chance of hitting the planet within 36 hours.

It could have caused local devastation and the researchers contemplated a call to President Bush before new data finally showed there was no danger.

The procedures for raising the alarm in such circumstances are now being revised...

...Fortunately for all concerned, shortly after the ominous Chesley e-mail, an amateur astronomer managed to dodge the clouds and take a picture of a blank patch of sky.

This was significant because if 2004 AS1 really was going to hit the Earth, it would have been in the amateur's sights. The fact that it was absent meant the rock would not strike us.

But Chapman says in his presentation that if it had been cloudy, and no more observations could have been obtained at the time, he would have raised the alarm.

Marsden disagrees. "If it had been cloudy and the call had been made to the President it would have been disastrous."

Yeah, I think it would have been pretty disastrous. And we thought people went ape shit buying up plastic sheeting and duct tape last year. I shutter to think of the compressed chaos that an announcement of an asteroid impact in 36 hours would create. Again, there's times when I'm glad I live in a small town.

| Permalink | |


 
Country Wisdom on Dubya

I got this in an email from a long-time friend of mine yesterday:
While suturing a laceration on the hand of a 70-year-old Texas rancher (whose hand had caught in a gate while working cattle), a doctor and the old rancher were talking about George W. Bush being in the White House. The old Texan said, "Well, ya know, Bush is a 'post turtle'."

Not knowing what the old man meant, the doctor asked him what a post turtle was.

The old man said, "When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a post turtle." The old man saw a puzzled look on the doctor's face, so he continued to explain, "You know he didn't get there by himself, he doesn't belong there, he can't get anything done while he's up there, and you just want to help the poor stupid bastard get down."

This friend of mine is one of those Americans out there, who almost always votes Republican, but now cannot imagine ever voting for any member of the Bush administration again. There is hope for this election, my friends.

| Permalink | |


Monday, February 23, 2004
 
Bush Campaign Chairman Caught in Lie About Bush's Service

As Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo wrote this morning, "Just when you start debating how much or whether the president's military service record should be an issue in this campaign, you realize that the main reason it's an issue is that the president and his surrogates just won't stop lying about it."

Bush campaign chairman Marc Racicot had this to say this morning on NPR:
"He (i.e. the president) signed up for dangerous duty. He volunteered to go to Vietnam. He wasn’t selected to go, but nonetheless served his country very well."

But wait, Calpundit has this from Bush's military service records:



Josh Marshall has more here.

| Permalink | |


 
Ralph Nader, You Self-Aggrandizing, Arrogant Prick!

Why is Ralph Nader running for president this year? What does he hope to gain this time around? What is he going to do with the votes he receives? He's not representing any party trying to reach that magic number of 5% of the popular vote, the cutoff to receive federal matching funds in the next election. He'll have a hard time just getting on the ballot in every state. We all know that the majority of votes that he'll receive would have gone to the Democratic nominee. This is all about Ralph, and Ralph knows it, but he doesn't care.

Unity against a reckless and dangerous Bush administration is the furthest thing from his mind. As I've said before, the defeat of George W. Bush in 2004 is more important than who defeats him. And Ralph? There's misguided idealism - and then there's just being an asshole.

New Mexico Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson had this to say Sunday morning about Ralph Nader:
"It’s his personal vanity because he has no movement. Nobody’s backing him," New Mexico Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson said Sunday in advance of Nader’s announcement.

"The Greens aren’t backing him. His friends urge him not to do it. It’s all about himself," Richardson told "Fox News Sunday."

"Now, Ralph’s made some great contributions to consumer issues over the years, but clearly it’s not going to help us," he said. "I don’t think he’ll have a sizable impact, but it’s terrible if he goes ahead because it’s about him. It’s about his ego. It’s about his vanity and not about a movement that supposedly he headed for many years very effectively."


| Permalink | |


Saturday, February 21, 2004
 
My Favorite Rumsfeld Quote, Winner of the "Foot in Mouth" Award for 2003
"Reports that say something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know," Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told a news briefing in February 2002.

"We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

And the George W. Bush Quote to Top Them All
"There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee...that says, fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me...you can't get fooled again." [September 17, 2002]


| Permalink | |


Thursday, February 19, 2004
 
Classic Exchanges Yesterday Between White House Press Corps and Press Secretary McClellan

Last week, President Bush issued an economic report to Congress that projected 2.6 million new jobs will be created by the end of 2004. However, the White House now says it will not stand behind those numbers.

From CNN:
The White House backed away Wednesday from its own prediction that the economy will add 2.6 million new jobs before the end of this year, saying the forecast was the work of number-crunchers and that President Bush was not a statistician.

Oh, I believe them when they say the president is not a statistician. For more on the backtracking of the White House on this jobs prediction, a good display of how this administration will never admit to anything negative, and a fine example of the level of animosity between The White House press corps and Press Secretary Scott McClellan, check out this section of the noon press briefing from Wednesday, 2/19/04:

Q: Scott, does the White House stand behind its report issued just nine days ago, the Economic Report, there will be 2.6 million new jobs created this year?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think we went through a little bit of this earlier today. I think that people can debate the numbers all they want; the President is focused on acting on policies to create as robust an environment for job creation as possible so that we can help those who are hurting because they are looking for work and cannot find a job.

The President is encouraged by the direction the economy is moving. It is growing strong -- or growing stronger, I should say -- it is strong and growing stronger. There have been more than 366,000 new jobs created in the last five months. The unemployment rate continues to decline. It is now the lowest point -- at the lowest point it has been in two years, and it is below the average of the '70s, '80s, and '90s. Certainly, productivity continues to be high, and people's disposable incomes are up. There are a lot of good indications about the direction the economy is moving.

But there is more to do. And the President is focused on acting to create as robust an environment as possible. That means acting on his six-point plan for strengthening our economy even more. We live in a changing economy right now, John, and the President has put forward a plan that will help create as robust an environment for job creation as possible. It will help retrain workers who have lost their jobs to meet the jobs of the 21st century -- these jobs that are high-paid, high-skill jobs. And so that's where the President's focus is on.

Q: Well, you say this is a changing economy, and you also said earlier that this report was based on economic data that is now three months old. So would it be wrong for the Democrats, later this year -- if you don't meet this 2.6 million forecast of jobs -- would it be wrong for them to beat you on the head about it?

MR. McCLELLAN: It would be wrong for people to raise taxes at this point in our economy. And there are some -- (laughter) -- well, there are some that are advocating letting the tax cuts that the President worked to pass expire. And what that would be doing is raising taxes on small businesses. Small businesses are the economic engine for our economy and they're at the foundation of creating a strong and growing economy. It would raise taxes, if they let these tax cuts expire, on moms and dads who are trying to raise a family. It would raise taxes on married couples by restoring the marriage penalty.

Q: When you dismissed the premise of John's question by saying, people can debate the numbers, let's be realistic here, the debate is going on between your Council of Economic Advisors and Treasury Secretary John Snow. Are there people here in this White House who never believed that forecast?

MR. McCLELLAN: Look, John, I think that the Council of Economic Advisors puts out an annual report on the economy; it's the President's Economic Report. And they do that every year. They've been doing it for some 20 years now. That's based on economic modeling and the data that is available at that point in time. The President is interested in the actual number of jobs being created, and the President is interested in making sure that everybody who is looking for a job can find one. That's where the President's focus is.

That's why I say people can debate the numbers all they want, but the President is going to be looking at the actual numbers of jobs being created. And the number of jobs being created is growing. The number is up. New jobs are being created. The economy is certainly moving in the right direction. And my point to John was that the last thing we need to do right now is raise taxes. And we need to focus on the policy decisions that are being made here in Washington, D.C. to create as robust an environment for job creation as possible. And that's where the debate ought to be focused.

Q: But it would appear, though, that people very high up in this administration didn't have a whole lot of faith in the forecast of the report that went up to Congress just a week ago in terms of the job creation numbers.

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, it's an annual economic report that is put out by the administration based on the economic modeling and the data that's available at that point in time.

Q: Can you answer the specific question, though? Was this report -- was the prediction of this many jobs, 2.6 million jobs, vetted prior to publication by the entire economic team?

MR. McCLELLAN: It's an annual report, David. It goes through the usual -- it goes through the usual --

Q: That's not the question. Was it or was it not vetted by the entire economic team?

MR. McCLELLAN: It's an annual report. It goes through the usual --

Q: So you don't know, or it was, or it wasn't?

MR. McCLELLAN: Can I get -- can I finish that sentence?

Q: When you answer the question. Let's hear it. What's the answer?

MR. McCLELLAN: The answer was, it is an annual economic report and it goes through the normal vetting process. And if you would let me get to that, I would answer your question.

Q: -- the full economic team vetted the prediction --

MR. McCLELLAN: It's an annual economic report. It's the President's Economic Report. But again, the President --

Q: Just say yes or no --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- it goes through the normal -- it goes through the normal vetting process.

Q: So the answer is, yes. I'm not done yet, I've got another one.

MR. McCLELLAN: Okay.

Q: Why -- if you're suggesting that people will debate the numbers, that's kind of a backhanded way to say, oh, who cares about the numbers. Well, apparently, the President's top economic advisors do, because that's why they wrote a very large report and sent it to Congress. So why was the prediction made in the first place, if the President and you and his Treasury Secretary were going to just back away from it?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, I disagree with the premise of the way you stated that. This is the annual Economic Report of the President and the economic modeling is done this way every year. It's been done this way for 20-some years.

Q: So why not -- why aren't you standing behind it?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think what the President stands behind is the policies that he is implementing, the policies that he is advocating. That's what's important.

Q: That's not in dispute. The number is the question.

MR. McCLELLAN: I know, but the President's concern is on the number of jobs being created --

Q: My question is, why was the prediction made --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and the President's focus is on making sure that people who are hurting because they cannot find work have a job. That's where the President's focus is.

Q: Then why predict a number? Why was the number predicted? Why was the number predicted? You can't get away with not -- just answer the question. Why was that number predicted?

MR. McCLELLAN: I've been asked this, and I've asked -- I've been asked, and I've answered.

Q: No, you have not answered. And everybody watching knows you haven't answered.

MR. McCLELLAN: I disagree.

Here's a humorous exchange later in the press briefing:

Q: Two questions, please. The Democratic candidates for the nomination have stopped attacking themselves and have been attacking --

MR. McCLELLAN: People are attacking themselves? (Laughter.)

Q: It's a jungle out there --

MR. McCLELLAN: I wish you would attack yourselves instead of me. (Laughter.)

Q: We love ourselves.


| Permalink | |


Wednesday, February 18, 2004
 
A Great Wrong Has Finally Been Righted

Greg Maddux, one of the greatest pitchers of all time, has signed a three-year contract with the team he played for from 1986-1992, the Chicago Cubs!

The Cubs' letting go of Maddux after the 1992 season over a money dispute has gone down as one of the worst transactions in the history of professional sports. It's up there with the Red Sox trading Babe Ruth to the Yankees for cash. Of course, this was familiar territory for the Chicago Cubs. In 1964 the Chicago Cubs sent a young outfielder named Lou Brock and two other players to St. Louis for veteran pitcher Ernie Broglio and two throw-ins. Ernie Broglio turned out to be nothing, while Lou Brock went on to be the great base-stealing Hall of Famer. It is undoubtedly the most lopsided trade in baseball history.

But back to the present. I still try not to think about Game 6 of the 2003 National League Championship Series. The Cubs led the Marlins 3-0, with one out and no one on base in the top of the 8th inning. Mark Prior was five outs away from a brilliant shutout, which would have sent the Cubs to their first World Series since 1945. I really had not gotten that emotionally invested in a sporting event, or maybe anything, in a long time. I was ready to explode with tears of joy, and release the frustration of watching the Cubs stink almost every year of my life...and my parents' lives!

And then 1060 West Addison Street, in the wonderful city of Chicago, Illinois - well, all of a sudden it was over the Hellmouth from "Buffy, the Vampire Slayer." Yes, the Hellmouth pulled up its roots from Sunnydale, California and headed east on I-80. It took up residence under venerable Wrigley Field, and waited until victory seemed certain for the Cubs, to then open up and swallow the hopes of millions of Cub fans. The series of events I saw transpire were worse than any nightmare of which a Cub fan could conceive. But once I saw the fly ball miss Alou's glove and deflect back into the crowd, I almost knew something horrible had started that could not be stopped. The fact that the Marlins got eight runs in the inning was just an exclamation point on the event. Of course we all know the Cubs went on to lose Game 7 as well, and the Florida Marlins advanced to their second World Series in seven years, and in only eleven years of team existence. And they won their second World Series title.

In some form of sick cosmic symmetry, the Boston Red Sox led the New York Yankees by three runs, with one out and no one on base, in the 8th inning of Game 6 of the American League Championship Series. Both the Cubs and Red Sox led their LCS in games 3-2, led by three runs with the opponent batting in the eighth inning, with one out and no one on base. They both went on to lose Game 6 and then Game 7. Cubs and Red Sox fans are truly brothers in pain. The two teams have gone a combined 184 years without a World Series title.

----------

But I have a good feeling about 2004! The Cubs have a front office finally that is not afraid to spend some of the Tribune Company's money to improve the team in the off-season. The Cubs have without a doubt the most formidable starting rotation in the National League. And this off-season they have added LaTroy Hawkins and Kent Mercker to the bullpen, traded for Gold Glove first baseman Derrek Lee, and added Todd Walker and Todd Hollandsworth for some bench strength. And almost all the key pieces from last year's success remain in place.

I will not boldly make a prediction that the Chicago Cubs will repeat as National League Central Division champions in 2004, and will once again advance to the NLCS. I will not forecast a World Series appearance ever again. With the confident arrogance of a fan who believes his beloved team has reached the promised land, I proclaimed the Chicago Cubs to be National League Champions...early in the day before the start of Game 6. Bad mojo. But 2004 will be a great year for the Cubs!

| Permalink | |


Tuesday, February 17, 2004
 
Today is the big Wisconsin Presidential Primary! I voted at 11:00 AM in my small city, a city of about 5400. There's a lot of families with children in town, so I don't know how big the voting age population is. But I was voter No. 250, and there was parking overflowing out of the parking lots at the public library/city hall building. I think it's the most people I've ever seen voting in this city, including presidential elections. It's a good sign!

And we don't even have any casino referendum on the ballot, just a county judgeship, other than the presidential preference primary.

| Permalink | |


Sunday, February 15, 2004
 
Wisconsin Presidential Debate, 2/15/04 - Transcript

Here's a gem of an exchange between reporter Lester Holt and candidate Rev. Al Sharpton:
LESTER HOLT: I'd actually like to let Reverend Sharpton follow up on that very question. Do you think that the president knowingly lied, and if so, why?

REV. AL SHARPTON: Well, first of all, I think that if he didn't know he was lying and was lying, that's even worse.

(LAUGHTER)

Clearly, he lied. Now if he is an unconscious liar, and doesn't realize when he's lying, then we're really in trouble.

(LAUGHTER)

Because, absolutely, it was a lie. They said they knew the weapons were there. He had members of the administration say they knew where the weapons were. So we're not just talking about something passing here. We're talking about 500 lives. We're talking about billions of dollars.

So I hope he knew he was lying, because if he didn't, and just went in some kind of crazy, psychological breakdown, then we are really in trouble.

Clearly, you know, I'm a minister. Why do people lie? Because they're liars. He lied in Florida; he's lied several times. I believe he lied in Iraq.

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)


HOLT: And Reverend, you'll recognize, obviously, calling someone a liar is a very serious charge. So it does lead to that question...

SHARPTON: I think he lied.

HOLT: So it does lead to the question: Why would he lie?

SHARPTON: Why do people lie? I mean, if in my judgment...

HOLT: I mean, knowing he would be in the position that you're putting him in now, why would he...

SHARPTON: Well, first of all, Lester, let us look at the facts. The facts are that what they presented to the United Nations, what they presented to the world was not so. You can only assume that they had to know if they said that they knew where the weapons were, that they knew they didn't know where they were.

And now to come back and tell us that Saddam Hussein is a cruel, despicable person, which we all agree, but we believed him when he told us he had them. Can you imagine me telling you that I believe somebody that you should never believe, and I brought 500 people to their deaths believing in a man that was as despicable as Hussein, and this is who we're going to have over the troops' lives in this country?

I think that this is absolutely outrageous. Why he lied? I think we should give him the rest of his retirement to figure that out and explain to us.

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)


| Permalink | |


Saturday, February 14, 2004
 
The Unwritten Rules of Pseudo-Christian Fundamentalism

  1. "I'm right and you are wrong."


  2. Never admit that you are wrong, even if you really are.


  3. When you have nothing to say, hurl insults.


  4. Regard and portray your own violence, whether physical, psychological, or verbal, at all times as defensive.


  5. Specific example for No. 4: Cry for "freedom of religion," but whenever followers of other faiths want the same freedom and courts agree, scream "Persecution!"


  6. Be prepared at all times to lie and bluster, particularly when backed into a corner in an argument.


  7. When caught lying, always accuse the opposition of lying rather than be honest and admit the obvious.


  8. Never accept responsibility for any mess you have personally caused.


  9. When you are forced to admit to an error, regard the whole process of error and correction as part of God's personal plan for you and not as a something for which you should apologize retract or make amends except verbally and secretly to God himself.


  10. Always see yourself and you personal actions as part of God's plans for the world. Recognize that even your errors are just part of Gods will for the betterment of mankind.


  11. Profess humility but avoid the actual experience of it.


  12. Refuse to take in information that differs from your own view and oppose all such information through classification of such information in a derogatory and simplistic manner (e.g. by categorizing it as left wing propaganda).


  13. Refuse to accept that truth is not black and white; that reality is complex and there are shades of grey.


  14. Refuse to forgive anyone else for anything unless you purport to forgive on behalf of other people unconnected with you for whom you don't have that right anyhow.


| Permalink | |


Thursday, February 12, 2004
 
Well, this here blog of mine, I'm gonna let it shine.

I don't know where that came from, but this blog has sat dormant for far too long. I'm seriously pumped up about the election this year, as well, anyone with a conscience and time to volunteer should be. And I have a lot of things to say, which have been confined to a few internet forums and message boards. Well, I am back online!

And now, your daily advice from Ty Webb:
Advice from Ty Webb

| Permalink | |