Money's Thicker Than Blood

Bush: We stand with Iraq
BY CRAIG GORDON
Newsday Washington Bureau
June 13, 2006

THURMONT, Md. -- Convening his war council here yesterday, President George W. Bush avoided pledging any new financial aid to Iraq but instead urged Iraq's neighbors to share the burden and Iraqis to tap into their oil wealth.

"The message to the Iraqi government is that we stand with you," Bush said at Camp David, pledging to stay in Iraq until the fractured nation could "govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself."

Why is this newsworthy?

After alienating Iraq's neighbors, like Iran, or Syria, does bush seriously think that we're going to see a lot of money flowing into Iraq now? Even Saudi Arabia, which you would think owes us a few favors, is going to be hesitant to help make good on the $13 billion dollars pledged to rebuilding Iraq that regional governments made many years ago. You know, that whole "Wahhabist vs. Shi'ite" thing...

More telling than this is this quote from the article:

Bush sidestepped a question about whether last week's killing of terror chief Abu Musab al-Zarqawi would hasten the departure of 132,000 U.S. troops - a question aides insisted wasn't even formally debated here.

While scrupulously avoiding mentioning any new commitments of funding (the US this year alone has nearly exhausted $18 billion earmarked for rebuilding, which is why Bush is hat-in-hand), Bush made it clear that troops, American blood, would remain in harm's way.

Bush yesterday urged the fledgling Iraqi government to find ways to increase Iraq's oil production, still lagging at pre-war levels, and divide up the revenue "in a fair way" for projects to benefit the nation.

"My own view is that the government ought to use the oil as a way to unite the country, ... so the people have faith in central government," Bush said.

Which of course, would be great, except that divvying up the oil revenues has been one of the, if not the major sticking point in forming a new government and has seen that government, elected months ago, stagger to filling even key security posts. Remember, Shi'ites don't trust Sunnis, Sunnis don't trust Shi'ites, and no one really trusts the Kurds.

You'll recall that Paul Wolfowitz, the long-departed war hawk, claimed before the war that it would cost $87 billion dollars and that we would be repaid out of Iraq oil revenues (which of course was precisely the wrong thing to say as it raised the spectre of war-for-oil).

Bush has now reiterated that point, but it seems an unlikely goal: oil is what divides this country. Further, surrounding nations like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are unlikely to assist in bringing a competitor up to speed, particularly one with such an entrenched Shi'ite population.

This was has been bungled since the beginning. The good news is, its only mismanaged now.

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky

Bush
Iraq

World Cup Recap, Part II

Sunday, 11 June

Netherlands 1 Serbia/Montenegro 0

An early goal in the 18th minute from Arjen Robben off a beautiful feed from Robert van Persie was the only goal in a game that featured some sloppy backline play by the Netherlands and some curious offense by SMT. In the first half, SMT relied on long-ball desperation passing, which was easily corralled by the Dutch midfield and defense. Once SMT began to play short stroke passing, they made an honest threat on the Dutch goal, forcing goal keeper Edwin van der Sar to make some athletic saves and to withstand a pressurized assault on his net.

Mexico 3 Iran 1

In only their third World Cup win on European soil, Mexico took advantage of a late mental error by the Iranian goal-keeper, Ebrahim Mirzapour to grab a quick lead and then sealed it on a third goal by Brazilian-born Zinha less than three minutes later. Two goals were scored by Omar Bravo. The sole Iranian goal was by Yahya Golmohammadi. Easily the most entertaining match of the first weekend until the 79th minute, Iran and Mexico both played aggressive offense and defense, and both keepers, Mirzapour and Oswaldo Sanchez, were tested. This game also contained a game outside the game, as Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had promised to attend the game in Nuremberg, the site of the Nazi war crimes trials. Ahmadinejad had denied the Holocaust had happened. Another unusual game-outside-the-game saw a massive Mexican controversy regarding the importation of a coach and two of the national team's players, replacing two native born Mexicans, coming on the heels of the Mexican outrage at the new wave of anti-immigration feeling in the United States. In addition, keeper Sanchez' father died unexpectedly on Wednesday, and Sanchez had only just arrived back on German soil Saturday morning.

Portugal 1 Angola 0

In what was nearly a repeat of Saturday's England victory, Portugal struck early, three minutes in, on a lovely run by Luis Figo, who then flicked a short pass to Pauletta who dropped the ball into the back of the net. Portugal then sat back and nursed the one goal to victory in what was a very physical game from a fiesty Angolan team, led by their captain Akwa, and striker Mantorras. This is also the first time that Portugal have faced their former colony Angola in World Cup play.

Monday, 12 June

Australia 3 Japan 1

For the first time in 24 years, a team from Oceania is playing in the World Cup (New Zealand, 1982). Australia has a winning history against Japan, but Japan jumped into the lead at 26 minutes in when Nakamura Shunsuke got a bit of an assist from his teammate Takahara Naohiro, who prevented Australian goalkeeper Mark Schwarzer from cleanly fielding the ball Nakamura played into the box. Australia played a desperate, physical second half against a Japanese side that had withdrawn into a defensive shell, aware that their next match is against powerhouse and tournament top-seed Brazil, and finally broke through in the 87th minute to score their first ever World Cup goal and then at the 89th minute, both from Tim Cahill, to secure their first ever World Cup victory and to almost ensure their advancement to the elimination round. A goal from John Aloisi in extra time was icing on the cake. Remember, goal differential (goals scored versus goals given up) will be the first tiebreaker in detemining who advances, so Australia was smart to pile up another score.

Czech Republic 3 United States 0

In what was a must-win for US hopes to advance to the elimination round, the US didn't and quite spectacularly, despite being seeded fifth in the tournament. See you in four years!

Italy 1 Ghana 0

What should have been a cakewalk for the Italians (ranked #13 to Ghana's #48) saw a valiant effort by Ghana. Italy jumped out to a lead in the 40th minute, as Andrea Pirlo deflected a short corner kick just past the goal keeper's reach in the low left corner. This match featured many near misses and could just as easily have been a blowout for either team. Vicenzo Iaquinta iced the game in the 83rd minute, intercepting a horribly short-sighted pass by defender Samuel Kuffour and faked goal keeper Richard Kingston out of his boots.

tags technorati : United States Czech Republic Japan Australia Netherlands Serbia & Montenegro Mexico Iran Portugal Angola Italy Ghana World Cup

The Nexus Of Two Societal Issues

What do you get when you cross LGBT baby boomers reaching the age where they need assisted-living facilities?

Aging gays fuel specialized housing market

By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer
Sat Jun 10, 6:28 PM ET

SAN FRANCISCO - Like other gay men in their golden years, Jack Norris and Seymour Sirota had heard the horror stories.

An elderly lesbian couple is housed on separate floors of a nursing home and kept from seeing each other. A gay retired college professor feels compelled to keep his sexual orientation a secret after his roommate at an assisted living facility asks to be transferred.

"I thought, 'We are not going to be in that situation,'" the 67-year-old Norris says crisply. "This is not going to happen to us in our final days."

That's how the two New Yorkers, partners for 14 years, landed at Rainbow Vision, a just-completed senior community in Santa Fe, N.M. From the private dining room named after Truman Capote to the cabaret where '60s teen icon Lesley "It's My Party" Gore was scheduled to appear this weekend, everything about the 146-unit retirement village was designed with the comfort of graying gays and lesbians in mind.

Isn't it sad, though, that this couple, along with countless hundreds (perhaps thousands) of others have to find a "special" place to be who they are?

Isn't sad that we live in a society so intolerant that people just can't be and still live among us? That we have to herd them off to "camps" (to put it bluntly), no matter how nice and how appreciative those places might be?

Or, to put it another way:

In such senior-heavy locales as California, Arizona and Florida, as well as less traditionally gay-friendly places like North Carolina and Texas, builders have found a market in a segment of the gay population that worries getting old will mean going back in the closet.

Just in case you were a FReeper wondering why gay rights is still such an issue in this country.

Whoa! Finally some GOOD News!

Beer Ingredient May Fight Prostate Cancer

June 12, 2006, 7:50 AM EDT

CORVALLIS, Ore. -- A main ingredient in beer may help prevent prostate cancer and enlargement, according to a new study. But researchers say don't rush out to stock the refrigerator because the ingredient is present in such small amounts that a person would have to drink more than 17 beers to benefit.

Oregon State University researchers say the compound xanthohumol, found in hops, inhibits a specific protein in the cells along the surface of the prostate gland.

HA! So I've spent 25 years in preventive therapy!

Of course, this totally ignores the fact that most American beers are pastuerized and preserved beyond any recognition to your average internation beer drinker, which may explain why foreign beers taste so odd.

They're full of "ingredients". EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky
beer
prostate cancer

A Pretty Gutsy Speech For A Republican

Bloomberg: Criticizing government can be patriotic

The Associated Press
June 10, 2006

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg suggested to college graduates Saturday that nothing is more patriotic than questioning the government and "challenging it to live up to the democratic ideals."

During a graduation speech at the University of Chicago, the Republican mayor said there is a "spirit of intolerance" for people with opposing views, who often are accused of being unpatriotic. A transcript of the speech was provided to reporters at City Hall in New York.

"We all have to get together in this country and stop this right now and stand up to those who would demagogue," he said. "There is nothing - absolutely nothing - wrong with criticizing our government, on any topic, and challenging it to live up to the democratic ideals. It is not unpatriotic. In fact, what could be more patriotic?"

Wow. I mean, wow.

Granted that Bloomberg, up until 2001, was a member of the party that protects the rights of individuals, you have to give a guy credit: he's worked with Bush as a Republican and can still say this. He's not running for higher office, and this is likely his last term in public service, but he still has three years left, at least two of which will be working to get funds from a Republican president and possibly a Republican Congress. And he's taking on those DC fascists and the minions across this land that would stifle criticism, people like Rush Limbaugh and Ann "Furball" Coulter, and he's really throttling them about the throat, and he's taking Cheney down a notch, too!

This is a bold kick in the....

Aides say Bloomberg was not referring to a specific leader or issue, but rather an overall atmosphere where dissenting opinions are shut out.

...oh.

Um, nevermind. Still, the allusion is pretty clear, especially when you take this last quote into consideration:

"It may be lonely standing up front," he told the graduates. "It may be dangerous to your career at times, and occasionally you can be proved wrong. But it is the essence of independence - something, I hope, the public is beginning to understand more and more."

Full transcript here.

tags technorati : Rush Limbaugh Ann Coulter Bush Mike Bloomberg

World Cup Recap, Part I

Well, the first two days of the 2006 FIFA World Cup are in the books, and so let's take a quick review:

Germany 4 Costa Rica 2

A surprising result. Not that Germany won, they'd have to be considered the favorites in the tournament, but that they gave up two goals to Costa Rica. Germany has a reputation for stellar defense....ya,hullo, this IS Germany, after all...but Paulo Wanchope, who had a spectacular tournament in 2002 in Japan, made it a much more exciting game than it had any reason to be, leading into the biggest upset so far in this tournament...

Ecuador 2 Poland 0

Make no mistake, this was no "lucky win". The Ecuadorans played gritty defense and tough attacking football close into the Polish goal. This was a must-win for Poland as they are in the same group as host Germany, who should walk through the group easily. As two teams from each group advance, Poland will now need two wins to guarantee advancement to the next round. Four points, meaning a win and a tie, would not necessarily guarantee a place in the elimination round. Ecuador need only a tie against Costa Rica or Germany to give themselves a 50-50 shot at the next round, and a win against either (most probably Costa Rica) would pave the way for them.

England 1 Paraguay 0

England practically disappeared in this game, and the side must be concerned about their lack of attack and spotty. ragged and selfish play. Their sole goal came about three minutes in and even that was an "own goal" by Carlos Gamarra of Paraguay, whose head magically appeared just under a David Beckham free kick, deflecting the ball just out of goalie Justo Villar's diving reach. Villar left the game five minutes later with what appeared to be a pulled muscle in his lower leg. This game had some firsts: the earliest replacement of a goal-keeper, and the first 1-0 World Cup game ever decided by an own goal. Wayne Rooney, the player England looks to for the offensive spark (and a real hooligan to boot) was listed as a possible substitute, but did not play, still smarting from the broken metatarsal in his foot, suffered at the end of the EPL season at Manchester United.

Sweden 0 Trinidad & Tobago 0

This was about as big an upset as Poland losing to Ecuador. T&T is the smallest nation ever to field a World Cup team and this was its first World Cup appearance, qualifying out of the Americas on what was basically a backdoor opening after only securing one tie in their first three matches, changing coaches and winning the next three and then crossing fingers. Faced with this enormous challenge of Sweden and having only one or two real bona fide international level players, one of whom, Marvin Andrews, was shelved with an injury, Trinidad & Tobago lost their primary goal keeper Kelvin Jack in warm ups to an injury, and had to bring on West Ham legend Shaka Hislop, the oldest goal keeper to ever play in the World Cup.

As if that wasn't enough work cut out for them, shortly after halftime star midfielder Avery John was sent off after two yellow cards, forcing T&T to play ten men for more than half the game. Freddie Ljundberg and his mates struggled hard, and were active and attacking, but somehow T&T, led by the incomparable Dwight Yorke in a showdown of two of Arsenal's heroes from recent history, kept the ball out of harm's way for the full 90 minutes.

Incredible story. Incredible match.

Argentina 2 Ivory Coast 1

The Ivory Coast team is quite the story: the country was divided by an extremely nasty civil war because of a militarey junta in 1999 and rigged elections in 2000 (gee...why does that sound familiar?). Rebels claimed the northern provinces. But now that the country has qualified for the World Cup, a truce has been called. One hopes that they will take the hint and take the next month to work out a permanent cease fire and solution.

Despite an aggressive defensive posture taken by Ivory Coast, led by the Arsenal star, Kolo Touré, Argentina slapped home a goal at 24 minutes (Hernan Crespo) on a marvelous rebound off a free kick that was blocked off. The Ivory Coast counterattack, led by Didier Drogba stormed on goal time and time again, but Argentina put away another goal on a beautiful feed from Juan Riquelme to Javier Saviola in the 38th minute. Saviola had about a mile on any side of him when he slid the ball under the goal keeper. Saviola then ruined the beauty of his goal by taking a yellow card.

Drogba drove home a ball in the 82 minute off a pass from Karay Kone. Chelsea of the English Premier League thus accounted for two of the three goals (Crespo is a Chelsea striker). Ivory Coast earned, but didn't not score, at least a point for this massive effort, particularly in the closing minutes when they threw everything they could at a far more talented Argentine side.

tags technorati : England Sweden Germany Poland Ecuador Trinidad & Tobago Paraguay Costa Rica Ivory Coast Argentina World Cup

So What Do You Do, If...

What if your homeowners insurer calls it quits?

After collecting your premiums year after year, a homeowners insurance company can decide it doesn't want to do business with you -- or, for that matter, anyone in your community--anymore. This is a situation facing thousands of New York metro-area homeowners who learned in early February that they may be getting the heave-ho from the "good hands" of Allstate Insurance.

Allstate stopped writing new homeowners insurance policies in the eight-county region covering New York City, Long Island, and Westchester on Jan. 1. Now the company says it will also step up the pace of policy nonrenewals in the region.

Allstate, the largest home insurer in New York, cited its "catastrophic exposure" to losses if a severe hurricane were to hit New York's coastal areas. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) says the claim is "bogus," citing National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) statistics predicting that a category 4 hurricane or higher will hit New York City only once every 500 years and Montauk, Long Island once every 130 years. He thinks Allstate's move is nothing more than a political ploy to create a "false crisis" that will trigger public outcry for a taxpayer-financed fund indemnifying insurers from catastrophic losses produced by hurricanes and other major disasters.

What is insurance if not financial protection from a loss, even a disastrous one?

Keep in mind that Allstate (this article was written in February) is only one insurance company, and that only MetLife soon followed suit, but this tactic can spread quickly. It won't be easy to go to another insurer, mostly because insurer's don't like "exposure," or large areas of risk where they can lose money quickly. Think of it as spreading your chips around a reverse roulette table. If your number comes up, you lose 8-to-1, but all your other bets are returned to you with interest.

You'd want to put as little on the losing number as possible, so you place as little money on each bet as possible, keeping in mind that you earn interest on those bets that you win. Meaning you aren't going to sit on your stake, but go all-in on each spin. Similarly, insurance companies make their money in two ways: taking in premiums with the bet they'll never have to pay them out and then investing those premiums.

Now, you've owned a home on Long Island for ten, fifteen, twenty years, say. The last major hurricane to hit Long Island directly was Category 1 Gloria, back in 1985. Damage to most of Long Island? Minimal. Flooding along the shorelines, and into towns on the barrier islands, towns like Long Beach. Other than that, it was pretty much business as usual.

The last devastating hurricane to hit Long Island was in 1938, the legendary Long Island Express, an estimated Category 3.

Nearly 70 years ago, violent hurricane ripped across the south shore of Long Island, then largely farmland. The storm, locally dubbed the Long Island Express, sent 30- to 50-foot waves surging ashore, killing 50 people and 750,000 chickens in the Long Island counties of Nassau and Suffolk.

Too, in 1938, Long Island was mostly chicken and potato farms, whereas now some of the richest real estate sits on those sites.

Hmmmmm....rich real estate...blue state...no comprehensive Federal protection, even in the areas of highest risk, like Long Beach, where people have taken to paying off their mortgages faster, rather than move (see...you need insurance in order to carry a mortgage. No insurance, and the bank forecloses), or:

"There are very few insurance companies that are willing to write homeowners' policies right now," says Denis Miller, a Long Beach insurance agent. He says he recently placed one customer with another major insurer, but for an extra $350 annually, almost a third of the prior premium.[....]

[Michael] Charles, now 55 years old, already feels the impact of living in a storm-prone area. For a single-story house with three bedrooms and an attic but no basement, he pays $2,350 for homeowners' insurance, including hurricane coverage. He also has flood insurance through the federal government. But federal flood-insurance figures suggest many Long Islanders aren't prepared for the worst. In Long Beach, only about 40% of households are covered by the federally backed flood-insurance program. That's a much lower percentage than in much of New Orleans at the time of Hurricane Katrina; in many parishes in the metropolitan area, more than 60% of households had federal flood insurance when the storm hit.

What do YOU think is going on? Could it be that, oh, I don't know, the government is waiting for homes to drop in value so that their cronies, big real estate developers, can snap them up and then force zoning law changes, thus making enormous profits on major developments? Right now, there is only one high rise property on Long Island, and even that is right outside the city lines.

This could change as insurance becomes a lottery that only people who can absorb these high rates can afford. And the only way an individual can afford them is to pool his or her risk with a few other people, per square foot of residence. And the only way to spread that enough is through communal residences: apartments, and condos of sufficient density so that the individual exposure is minimal.

In other words, a city. Which is precisely why many people moved to Long Island to escape.

Clearly, this is not news to everyone who reads this blog, in particular Floridians and others in Hurricane Alley and perhaps Southern Californians in the earthquake belt, but make no mistake: as insurers whittle their risks ahead of the perceived dangers of global warming, they will look to as many places as possible to pull this stunt.

They ought to be called on it, now.

Jon Stewart Laying The Smacketh Down....

...on Bill Bennett over gay marriage...

Some BackGround On Zarqawi

Mr. Doggity and Katrina in my comments section below raised some interesting issues regarding Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, that we in America seem to have either forgotten or not reported. I wanted to thank them at the top here, because I want to do a quick summary of who he is:

First off, make no bones about this. Al-Zarqawi was no friend to Iraq, nor was he a friend to the United States (at least not openly. But more on that later.):

Al-Zarqawi declares war on Iraqi Shia
Wednesday 14 September 2005, 22:37 Makka Time, 19:37 GMT

Iraq's al-Qaida leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has declared "all-out war" on Shia Muslims in Iraq in response to a US-Iraqi offensive on the town of Tal Afar, according to an audio clip posted on the internet.

"The al-Qaeda Organisation in the Land of Two Rivers (Iraq) is declaring all-out war on the Rafidha (a pejorative term for Shia), wherever they are in Iraq," said the voice which could not be immediately verified but sounded like previous recordings attributed to al-Zarqawi.

"As for the government, servants of the crusaders headed by Ibrahim al-Jaafari, they have declared a war on Sunnis in Tal Afar," the clip added.

His sole objective was to protect Sunni Muslims, and to foment rebellion and turmoil in a contentious land.

Prior to 2003, Al-Zarqawi had little interest in Iraq or Iran, or in fact any issue outside of the Jordanian monarchy. In 1989, he travelled to Afghanistan to assist in the remnants of the resistance against the Soviet Union's invasion. Here, he met Osama bin Laden (whom you'll recall was at this point receiving funding from the CIA.) In 1992, he was arrested in Jordan for trying to overthrow the king, and served seven years. Shortly after his release from prison, he attempted to blow up a Radisson Hotel in Amman, Jordan which housed many Americans and Israelis. Fleeing Jordan, he ends up in Pakistan, where OBL gives him $200,000 to start Jund Al-Sham, a Jordanian movement designed to set up a caliphate in place of the monarchy.

After September 11, Zarqawi received a minor injury in Afghanistan and fled to Iraq where he received treatment in a hospital run by Uday Hussein, Saddam's son. Here is the only direct pre-war connection between Saddam and Al-Zarqawi: a band-aid.

Zarqawi settled in the northern regions of Iraq, where he was engaged in the anti-Kurd skirmishes there. Now, while that sounds like it would be in support of Saddam, Saddam is a wholly-secular figure, while Ansar al-Islam is an Islamist group. Further, Osama bin Laden had, in the past, denounced Saddam Hussein for not being an Islamist, and vowed fatwa against him (during Gulf War I.)

As I noted below, it wasn't until the February 2003 speech to the United Nations, where Colin Powell claimed Zarqawi was working hand-in-hand with Osama bin Laden AND Saddam Hussein (half right is still wrong on issues like this) that a connection between Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein was made, using Zarqawi.

Curiously, Zarqawi and bin Laden seemed to be more rivals, and not-too-friendly ones, up to and shortly after this.

In 2004, the jig was up:

CIA Review Finds No Evidence Saddam Had Ties to Islamic Terrorists

. You may recall it was about this time that Bush started preaching the "freeing Iraq" trope.

Mr. Doggity points out this article regarding Zarqawi:

Zarqawi owed his rise to the US in two ways. His name was unknown until he was denounced on 5 February 2003 by Colin Powell, who was the US Secretary of State, before the UN Security Council as the link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qa'ida. There turned out to be no evidence for this connection and Zarqawi did not at this time belong to al-Qa'ida. But Mr Powell's denunciation made him a symbol of resistance to the US across the Muslim world. It also fitted with Washington's political agenda that attacking Iraq was part of the war on terror.[....]

No sooner was Saddam captured than the US spokesmen began to mention Zarqawi's name in every sentence. "If the weather is bad they will blame it on Zarqawi," an Iraqi journalist once said to me. It emerged earlier this year that the US emphasis on Zarqawi as the prime leader of the Iraqi resistance was part of a carefully calculated propaganda programme. A dubious letter from Zarqawi was conveniently discovered. One internal briefing document quoted by The Washington Post records Brigadier General Kimmitt, the chief US military spokesman at the time, as saying: "The Zarqawi psy-op programme is the most successful information campaign to date." The US campaign was largely geared towards the American public and above all the American voter. It was geared to proving that the invasion of Iraq was a reasonable response to the 9/11 attacks. This meant it was necessary to show al-Qa'ida was strong in Iraq and play down the fact that this had only happened after the invasion.

"The Zarqawi psy-op programme is the most successful information campaign to date."

Can't make it much plainer than that, now can you?

UPDATE: Mr Doggity points out that Greg Palast thinks the Bushies picked a fight with Zarqawi.

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky

Bush
Iraq
Al-Zarqawi
Osama bin Laden

Good news! Really?

Yea, you've all heard the news already:

Iraq terror leader al-Zarqawi killed

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

June 8, 2006, 9:22 AM EDT


BAGHDAD, Iraq -- Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the most-wanted terrorist in Iraq who waged a bloody campaign of beheadings and suicide bombings, was killed when U.S. warplanes dropped 500-pound bombs on his isolated safehouse, officials said Thursday. His death was a long-sought victory in the war in Iraq.

Al-Zarqawi and several aides, including spiritual adviser Sheik Abdul Rahman, were killed Wednesday evening in a remote area 30 miles from Baghdad in the volatile province of Diyala, just east of the provincial capital of Baqouba, officials said.

I'm going to give credit where credit is due: the Bush administration has its first clear win since May, 2003.

It only took them three years to find a guy who produced more obscene videotapes than Pamela Anderson. AND he wasn't hiding in some non-descript mountain range on the border of Pakistan. He was in country, a country that had 100,000 GIs combing it for him.

Whoopee!

So what does this mean?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. It's a symbolic victory, to be sure, and would only be topped as a symbolic victory if they had actually killed him in a firefight. Something about killing a general in battle seems much more satisfying, but I bet the Bushies will take what they can get at this point.

Will it stop the insurgency? No. It might slow it down a little, but Zarqawi was an outsider, a Jordanian who utilized mostly foreign fighters to do his work, which was primarily to kill Iraqis. He had a particular fondness for those he viewed as collaborators, but he mostly stirred up the shit.

I doubt that's going to stop anytime soon, no matter what little bandaid of a government we put in place temporarily until the country blows itself up, merely to give us cover to get out first.

There are already rumours rampant that Al Qaeda in Iraq was no longer run by Zarqawi, that Abu al-Masri had already taken the day to day operations of the group, and Zarqawi was more of a propaganda figurehead.

Didn't seem to slow them down, that transition, which I feel may have taken place earlier this year, when there had been a definite lull in action.

Be that as it may, if I was President, I'd take this opportunity to get the hell out. Politically speaking, it's a chance to say, "Well, our job here is finished, we killed Al Qaeda in Iraq, so buhbye! Don't forget to write!" and move the hell out, ASAP.

They won't. Pity we're governed by idiots.

But, Abu? Good riddance.

UPDATE: Anybody remember this trope, one of Bush's greatest hits?

In Colin Powell's famous February 2003 speech to the United Nations urging war against Iraq, Zarqawi was cited as an example of Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism. In his speech, Powell mistakenly referred to Zarqawi as a Palestinian, but Powell and the Bush administration continued to stand by statements that Zarqawi linked Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda.

I wonder which member of the White House Press Corps will make note of it...probably none, altho my money is on David Gregory. (Katrina, who reminded me of this and thus gets a tip of my straw boater, picks Helen Thomas)

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky

Bush
Iraq
al-Zarqawi
Al Qaeda

Democrats Work For Solutions...

At the top of my blog, I have one of my favorite quotes of all time:

Democrats Work For Solutions; Republicans Pray The Problem Will Go Away.

It's never been more true than during this, the fifth Bush year, and barring a turnaround in Congress, I don't see it ending anytime soon.

Take a look at the world around you, take a look at the big challenges and problems we face: Iraq, global warming, diseases, terrorism, Iran, China, Russia. Look at this administration's response to these problems.

Now look at what has their knickers in a twist: gay marriage and illegal immigration.

These are the issues the Republicans choose to focus on: non-problems. And boy, do they ever plow an enormous fount of energy into these suckers! Bill after bill after bill, all designed to eliminate a non-problem.

Gay marriage, for example. Who cares? My slick answer when asked about gay marriage is, "Sure, why should they get special treatment, let them be as miserable as the rest of us," but in truth, my feelings run pretty deep on this. Jesus tells us to accept people for who they are, and so long as there is love, we really don't have much to say in someone else's private affairs (Absenting children, of course, as Jesus was pretty clear how he felt about kids.)

Apparently, for Republicans, gay marriage ranks right after nuclear holocaust as a force that will destroy America. Using some bizarre calculus based on disparate Biblical passages, they actually have Jesus attacking homosexual behavior.

That's not the Jesus I know.

Illegal immigration is such a non-starter of an issue, I'm surprised someone hasn't cogently made the point that it deals with less than 4% of the population taking less than half a percent of the GDP, and that's based on the WORST estimates of services they use.

If a beggar came to me, and I had a hundred dollars in my pocket, would I give him 50 cents? You bet. Why should I care? That fifty cents will do him a lot more good than me, and maybe one day, he'll do something of fifty cents worth of value for me.

Yet here again, using this same "Republicalculus," Jesus is shunning these poor people.

That's not the Jesus I know.

Meanwhile, we have real issues to look at: Iraq, particularly in light of Haditha, has become a morass of a spider's web, so badly twisted and tangled that I'm not sure we can ever get out easily.

The right wing response to Haditha has been curious. "Let's not jump to conclusions, let the facts come out."

Yea, but think of Haditha in terms of members of the Bloods busting into four homes in Compton and killing 24 people, and you tell me what the reaction on the right would be? Because, in effect, that's what we have fighting in Iraq: not trained soldiers, but unsupported packs of the "Greens". Kilo Company, the band whose unit committed this atrocity, is 160 men patrolling a city of 90,000 civilians, many of whom it's fair to say look at the US troops as an occupation force, and who look upon their fellow citizens with suspicion and mistrust.

And this is their second (and for some, third) tour of duty in Iraq.

The Republican response to all this going on in Iraq? Nothing. "Stay the course."

Pray the problem goes away.

Global warming. Right now we are poised to be the hottest this planet has been in hundreds of millions of years, according to deep sea core samples taken and analyzed in the last five years. All this, when the planet should be heading towards a new Ice Age (sometime in the next three thousand years).

The Democrat response? Let's sign a worldwide treaty to limit emissions, and work with developing nations like India and China to leapfrog fossil fuel use to renewable energy sources.

The Republican response appears to be, "Let's wait for the Ice Age to fix things.

Pray the problem goes away.

Terrorism. The Democrat response was the appropriate one: hunt down the terrorists and bring them to justice (Canada seems to have taken the hint, as has the UK.) On President Clinton's watch, terrorists were caught, captured, tried, convicted and jailed, and even provided information regarding following attacks, including September 11.

The Republican response? Cut terror funding to the only cities hit by terrorists, while larding pork to small cities and towns that are crucial to their re-election efforts.

And pray the problem goes away.

And problems that I see, that others see, on the horizon: the showdown with China, the showdown with Russia, are being totally ignored by the "Ad hoc-licans" running this country now with their situational defensive efforts to fix shadows like Iran's nuclear capability. Make no mistake: unless we start to defuse the situation now, Russia and China will shortly confront us, the bully of the world, and there will be war.

"The West Wing" touched on this in its final season, having the US intervene in Kahzakstan between Russian and Chinese forces fighting over the oil fields, but let's take this one step further and realize that America is the single largest consumer of petroleum in the world, and we've been aggressively securing our supply from the Middle East.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out this *might* threaten the world's fastest growing petroleum consumer and one of its largest producers.

I hope George Bush is prayin' hard right now.

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky

Bush
Iraq
Iran
China
Russia
Haditha
global warming
same-sex marriage

tags technorati : Top 50

Comikng Soon To A Survivalist Near You

The Halliburton Survivaball

Oh yea. This will work:

Halliburton Solves Global Warming
SurvivaBalls save managers from abrupt climate change

An advanced new technology will keep corporate managers safe even when climate change makes life as we know it impossible.

"The SurvivaBall is designed to protect the corporate manager no matter what Mother Nature throws his or her way," said Fred Wolf, a Halliburton representative who spoke today at the Catastrophic Loss conference held at the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Amelia Island, Florida. "This technology is the only rational response to abrupt climate change," he said to an attentive and appreciative audience.

Most scientists believe global warming is certain to cause an accelerating onslaught of hurricanes, floods, droughts, tornadoes, etc. and that a world-destroying disaster is increasingly possible. For example, Arctic melt has slowed the Gulf Stream by 30% in just the last decade; if the Gulf Stream stops, Europe will suddenly become just as cold as Alaska. Global heat and flooding events are also increasingly possible.

In order to head off such catastrophic scenarios, scientists agree we must reduce our carbon emissions by 70% within the next few years. Doing that would seriously undermine corporate profits, however, and so a more forward-thinking solution is needed.

At today's conference, Wolf and a colleague demonstrated three SurvivaBall mockups, and described how the units will sustainably protect managers from natural or cultural disturbances of any intensity or duration. The devices - looking like huge inflatable orbs - will include sophisticated communications systems, nutrient gathering capacities, onboard medical facilities, and a daunting defense infrastructure to ensure that the corporate mission will not go unfulfilled even when most human life is rendered impossible by catastrophes or the consequent epidemics and armed conflicts.

"It's essentially a gated community for one," said Wolf.

Dr. Northrop Goody, the head of Halliburton's Emergency Products Development Unit, showed diagrams and videos describing the SurvivaBall's many features. "Much as amoebas link up into slime molds when threatened, SurvivaBalls also fulfill a community function. After all, people need people," noted Goody as he showed an artist's rendition of numerous SurvivaBalls linking up to form a managerial aggregate with functional differentiation, metaphorically dancing through the streets of Houston, Texas.

The conference attendees peppered the duo with questions. One asked how the device would fare against terrorism, another whether the array of embedded technologies might make the unit too cumbersome; a third brought up the issue of the unit's cost feasibility. Wolf and Goody assured the audience that these problems and others were being addressed.

"The SurvivaBall builds on Halliburton's reputation as a disaster and conflict industry innovator," said Wolf. "Just as the Black Plague led to the Renaissance and the Great Deluge gave Noah a monopoly of the animals, so tomorrow's catastrophes could well lead to good - and industry must be ready to seize that good."

Goody also noted that Jean-Michel Cousteau's Ocean Futures Society was set to employ the SurvivaBall as part of its Corporate Sustenance (R) program. Another of Cousteau's CSR programs involves accepting a generous sponsorship from the Dow Chemical Corporation, whose general shareholder meeting is May 11.

No mention anywhere on the site about disgruntled employees or ex-spouses seeking alimony.

(NOTE: Heavy satirical content above)

Republican Bimbos

I have a theory about these obviously deluded broads. They're tolerated by the people who should most certainly despise them: opinionated and self-reliant women who (though they preach a gospel I have no reason to want to hear) speak their minds.

Take a close look at these pictures. What's the common point to all of them.

Sex.

It's a pity these chicks don't realize that the only reason they're at all known is that guys can jerk off without changing channels from Fox News. The sum total of their existence can be measured in wet Kleenexes hitting the carpeting.

You'd think they'd be insulted by that degradation of being wholly objectified, but check out the photos. They clearly aren't. I mean the alternative is that they are cynically manipulating men to make money by using their bodies. And goodness knows we could never accuse the wholesome Ann "Clinton molests the help" Coulter of shaking her moneymaker at the boys, could we?

They have my pity. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Ann Coulter
Michelle Malkin
Laura Ingraham

Legislative Unfairness

One reason I am for the line-item veto for Presidents is stories like this:

Schumer changes tune on bioterror cuts

BY GLENN THRUSH
Newsday Washington Bureau

June 6, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Charles Schumer, who has likened $7 million in federal cuts to New York's bioterrorism programs to "rubbing salt in an open wound," voted to cut those programs by 10.4 percent last year, according to Senate records.

Schumer (D-N.Y.) is pressuring Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Julie Gerberding to recalculate a new funding formula that disproportionately reduces aid to the state. Schumer, who red-flagged the issue during a news conference Sunday, will take his case directly to Gerberding today.

Sounds pretty horrible, right? Schumer sounds like a hypocrite and he ought to be strung up for changing his heart in such a cynical fashion now that he's up for re-election.

Except...

In December, Schumer didn't object to a unanimous voice vote approving a huge bipartisan spending bill that included $95 million in CDC bioterrorism cuts, largely because the measure also included restorations to student loan cuts and other domestic programs.

"There was 7 billion dollars in that bill, restoring student loans, health care, necessary things - every Democrat voted for it," Schumer said yesterday.

Oh. Well. Yea. I mean, terrorism happens, and we should be prepared for that eventuality, but you know, colleges cost a lot of money, and we could use some more infrastructure repairs.

So a vote that sounds, on the face of it, harsh and inconsistent actually comes down to a Hobson's Choice on the Senator's part: vote for it, and get a bundle of bucks to people who really need it, or oppose it, and watch them struggle even more.

And there's a clue there as to why the American legislative system is fraught with corruption and "pork": that any Congresscritter can amend any bill to add anything he or she wants, basically.

And it happens all the time and in theory, it should work like this: I have a bill that's sure to pass. Let's call it the "Feed Kids First" bill and provides funding for hot meals in schools.

OK, I introduce this bill on the floor of Congress, and talk it up a bit, how kids in Dubuque don't get a good breakfast because they're up early helping around the house, and how we ought to give them a chance to eat at school, take a little pressure off mom and dad, that sort of thing. No one has any real objection, but a Congresscritter rises and while lauding this bill, suggests a possible amendment to it, attaching some additional spending for research into why kids have to be up at four to help out around the farm, is there some way we can fix that problem, and eventually phase out this program.

I have no objection. The bill passes.

Here's how it works: I have a bill that might not pass, let's call it "Food For Inner City Kids", and I want your vote. You say, "well, I represent Dubuque, and we don't have too many inner city kids there, but tell you what. If you agree to attach to this bill an amendment to study wind farms, I'll vote for your bill."

So far, not so bad. But now let's vary the circumstances slightly. I really need this bill to pass because I'm up for re-election and my district is just finding out about my affair with a guy at the car wash and I need to pump a lot of money into the district, fast. In the gym lockerroom, I speak with a delegation from the "Congressional Llama Coalition." They refuse to vote for my bill, and their votes could persuade the "Buffalo Concordance" that my bill is worthwhile.

The "CLC" has a pet project of building a bridge to drive llamas over the Colorado at the head of the Grand Canyon. Ought to cost about a billion dollars, but it will go nowhere unless they can trade votes. The project is politically unpopular outside of the Llama Belt, and it would make a really embarassing headline in the papers if it passed alone. So they've attached that bill to a tax cut for people making $200,000 a year or more, which basically covers the editorial board of any media outlet of note. That bill *might* pass, or might not, depending on how big a fuss people can make over it. Obviously, that bill will be rammed through before anyone can read about it.

My co-sponsors hold their noses and agree that the bridge will be the main amendment to the tax cut bill, but that for our votes, they have to agree to include an amendment that allows 50% of the funding that I originally wanted, which may be enough (I've factored all this in when calculating my request, of course...the extra money would have gone to political payoffs).

So what happens is, a worthy program, feeding kids, gets buried in a legislative morass, rather than be passed on its merits. Why? Because the Llama Coalition is the party in power, and not my guys.

Thus ends today's civic lesson.

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky

Charles Schumer

Trudging Through A Storm

When I was a boy, perhaps eight or nine, New York City was inundated with a blizzard. It was the first one I could recall in my too-short life to that point, and so I was determined to get out in it and have some fun.

I built a fort, threw some snowballs at passing buses (in case anyone wants to know how I built my arm strength up to throw a football, that's how), and on the spur of the moment and to delay the inevitable march back upstairs to the warmth of the apartment, I decided to take a walk around the block and to feel what a blizzard really felt like.

Some of you have experienced blizzards first hand, so you know what it feels like. 35 mile-per-hour winds (or more), snow falling sideways, and in NYC, this is a wet snow, coming in off the seas, so it's icy and it stings, and has a vague salt taste to it.

I remember turning one corner, from Second Avenue down towards my home, and walking directly into the teeth of the wind. I was tired, cold, and all alone, but I trudged onward, knowing I only had a hundred yards or so to go. There was one other person sort of on the block: the doorman to a high rise building, trying to clear a path for people to get out of the building to walk their dogs, quickly.

I mention this trudging, cold and alone, because yesterday, my daughter's international award winning cat died. Not a pedigree, far from it, but a cat filled with personality and beauty that was almost instantly recognizable. Friendly to a fault with everyone, except maybe other cats, he was a "very fine cat indeed," as Samuel Johnson would say.

I was both the first and last person this cat came to, as we adopted him into our family twelve years ago as a four month old "adult" (that's what North Shore classified him as, and even had him in the old fogies section). My daughter had been bugging her mom and I for a cat, as we only had the one, and so one day, fate stepped in in the form of a dead car battery ahead of a three hour drive one October morning (the first, as I recall). The battery was replaced, but it was way too late to make the trip, so instead, we unpacked and heaed to North Shore Animal League.

Intriguing place, I have to say. They won't release a pet for adoption until they've fully vetted the new owners, including calling references.

We were browsing, when I saw this small black cat amidst a cage full of larger adults. I slid a finger into the cage, and all the cats except this one ignored me. He, on the other hand, came trotting over to me, and sniffed my finger and rubbed against it, marking me as his.

I brought my daughter over and the "old fogey" was still at the front of the cage, peering down at us. I lifted my daughter off the ground and he sniffed her as well. We got the attention of a handler, who opened the cage and carried the cat to a shelf along the wall where we could hold and stroke him.

The handler put him down, but another family had a grey tabby near there, who immediately came over to investigate us. This black cat practically knocked him off the shelf to get between us.

The rest is history.

Our cat (who will remain nameless in order to protect my daughter's privacy, as they are inextricably linked) had been ill for a while now, barely eating, unable to jump up onto the bed any longer.

Yesterday, while my daughter was showering, he came to me, begged to be on the bed. I lifted him up and petted his bony, scrawny body. He lay next to me for a moment, then jumped down to the floor.

I heard him cough, wheeze, and then begin to stir.

In his last moments, he walked into the doorway, looked up at me with terror in his eyes, pupils fully dilated despite the light, and coughed again. He turned a tight turn, and collapsed. He stopped breathing.

So, no snark. I'm mourning heavily, but I wanted to thank my cat (for in truth, he was mine, despite my daughter's ownership). And so here it is:

Thank you, from the bottom of my heart

Touch me
It's so easy to leave me
All alone with the memory
Of my days in the sun
If you touch me
You'll understand what happiness is

Look
A new day has begun

And so, today I trudge.

UPDATE: Today, I heard from the company he was the "spokescat" for, who expressed their deepest sympathy and condolences and even posted a short obit on their website. I was very touched. It's been a while since he retired.

tags technorati : Top 50

It's Been Twenty Five Years

Grim reminders of how it began

BY DELTHIA RICKS
Newsday Staff Writer

June 4, 2006

In Barry Mann's blood flows a secret so ancient, so intricately scripted in his genetic code, that scientists are certain if they can crack it, they may well be on the way to holding back, even reversing the global tidal wave of AIDS.

Such a puzzle is only one of many as the world marks a somber milestone: the 25th anniversary of a report describing a rare pneumonia in five gay men. It was the first evidence of a deadly new disorder, one that irreparably crippled the immune system. Within the last decade, potent drug therapy has transformed the inevitably fatal infection into a manageable disease for a third of patients in the developed world.

Still, in its quarter-century sweep, AIDS has claimed 500,000 lives in the United States, among 25 million worldwide, statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show.

I want to pause here and talk about that.

We all know or know of someone who has died of AIDS. If you're lucky, that person is only as close as Freddie Mercury, a distant celebrity figure whose death brings some amorphous ambiguous sadness to you, along with a charity concert.

For me, the loss was far more personal. I won't embarass his name, family, or memory by mentioning him here, because I'm not sure how out of the closet he was. He was, however, a good friend and a dedicated, serious man who lifted himself out of impoverishment and blue collar roots to have had the opportunity to influence the direction of a substantive chunk of the world, at least for a few years.

But because he was gay, he truly could not live the life he wanted to, openly and honestly, as he was in nearly all other ways. More a diplomat than politician, he persuaded people to his viewpoint, bullying them if needed, but never felt the desire to lie to anyone. Except that this lie, the only one he was compelled by the society and culture he lived in, ultimately may have been responsible to some degree for his death.

He's been dead now somewhere on the order of fifteen years. It's not often that I miss him (curiously, I talked about him yesterday with my daughter), but today, it hits home.

OK, onto some good news on the AIDS front:

Yet the secret harbored in the 65-year-old Manhattan resident's cells could hold tantalizing clues. Mann is among a small but scientifically important group that has been exposed to the human immunodeficiency virus, but who seem surprisingly -- defiantly -- resistant.

In theory, such resistance stems from a defense some scientists suggest may have been passed down from hardy Northern Europeans who escaped the 14th century's Black Death. The trait seems to render a subset of descendants impervious to HIV.

"They think there is this Northern European gene pool that somehow survived the bubonic fleas," said Mann, who traces his ancestry to the British Isles. He is certain of his HIV exposure, having lived intimately with a man for eight years who died of AIDS in the late 1980s.

"I had to be exposed to it by him. And who knows? There were other sexual contacts and sexual partners that I had who were diagnosed as HIV-positive who also died," Mann said. "What they're trying to figure out is what it is that we have and to take it to the part of the population that can't resist it."

Mann is a volunteer in a study at NYU's Center for AIDS Research in Manhattan.

Too little too late, but this is one instance where I'm not sure that all the money we could have put towards research all these years would have brought the science of a cure any closer.

But I know this damned much: On average, a million people died each year worldwide, and we here in America, the richest and arguably brightest nation on the planet, did next to nothing because this was a "queer cancer". Until, of course, Rock Hudson died. Then we started taking notice.

And we have the nerve to wake up in the morning and call ourselves "Christians." Jesus walked with lepers. Jesus healed lepers, Jesus would probably be found today in some AIDS hospice in Africa, yet we turned our backs on 25 million people because we are scared of "them," some nebulous group of people-- who don't even represent the entire 25 million!-- who live a little differently than the rest of us.

Worse still, we have it within our powers to help stop the spread of this disease. We have it within our powers to help treat those already infected with HIV.

And yet, we do next to nothing, preferring to see our "thousand points of light" twinkle over the Africa veldt. The same "thousand points of light" that condemn homosexuality, and anyone who is suspected of being homosexual or condoning homosexuals.

Do we honestly think that, realistically, these groups are giving their best Christian efforts to solving this crisis?

We need to step in and help. Now. I don't want my daughter to ever tell her daughter about her friend who died of AIDS.

Paging Pat Robertson! Wake Up Call For Robertson!

Pat Robertson began the interview asking [Jerry] Falwell what his response has been to the terrorist attacks. Falwell said there had been a massive prayer gathering of members of his congregation along with students from Liberty University. He told the TV audience that they had humbled themselves before God, prayed for President Bush and his advisers and for the victims of the attacks.

Falwell then likened the attacks to Pearl Harbor and that at that time, Hitler wanted to destroy the Jews and conquer the world. Now, "Islamic fundamentalists, radical terrorists, Middle-Eastern monsters" want to destroy Israel and conquer the world.

The two men then talked about religious revival and whether the events of September 11 might spark spiritual renewal in America.

Then Falwell said, "What we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact, God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve."
Robertson replied, "Well, Jerry, that's my feeling. I think we've just seen the antechamber to terror, we haven't begun to see what they can do to the major population."

Falwell said, "The ACLU has got to take a lot of blame for this. And I know I'll hear from them for this, but throwing God...successfully with the help of the federal court system...throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools, the abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked and when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad...I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who try to secularize America...I point the thing in their face and say you helped this happen."

Robertson said, "I totally concur, and the problem is we've adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government, and so we're responsible as a free society for what the top people do, and the top people, of course, is the court system."

Ooooooooooooooooooookay, Pat Robertson believes that God rained two buildings down on New York City because he's angry at evil lesbians, Wiccans, and abortionists and feminists. Now, I know a few lesbians, and I find them to be generally good people except in the throes of PMS, maybe. Next?

ROBERTSON BLAMES HURRICANE ON CHOICE OF ELLEN DEGENERES TO HOST EMMYS
Lesbian is New Orleans native

Hollywood — Pat Robertson on Sunday said that Hurricane Katrina was God’s way of expressing its anger at the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences for its selection of Ellen Degeneres to host this year’s Emmy Awards. ‘By choosing an avowed lesbian for this national event, these Hollywood elites have clearly invited God’s wrath,’ Robertson said on ‘The 700 Club’ on Sunday. ‘Is it any surprise that the Almighty chose to strike at Miss Degeneres’ hometown?’

Poor Ellen. As Robertson pointed out, she was also set to host the Emmys just after September 11 struck. Apparently, she's the Devil in Tennis Shoes incarnate.

Oh. And Robertson also credited God with distracting the American people with Katrina, thus allowing for Chief Justice Roberts confirmation. Now, I know God. God's a pretty good friend to me. Somehow, I think God would have found a slightly less drastic way of distracting America in order to get Roberts confirmed than killing thousands and forcing hundreds of thousands of the poor to live in squalor amidst the Superdome, like say, maybe have Janet Jackson's dress fail again. But that's just me.

Doesn't Pat's God seem just a wee bit angry to you? Yea, me too, but I'm puzzled about this:

Plane Registered to Pat Robertson Crashes

By MATT APUZZO
Associated Press Writer

June 3, 2006, 4:20 AM EDT

GROTON, Conn. -- Two pilots were killed and three passengers suffered minor injuries when a small jet owned by religious broadcast Pat Robertson crashed in Long Island Sound while flying in heavy fog. Robertson was not aboard.

The twin-engine Learjet 35 went down a half-mile short of the runway at Groton-New London Airport on Friday, and officials with the National Transportation Safety Board were expected to arrive at the airport Saturday to begin investigating why.

Well, say this for God: His aim is improving. I hope the pilots weren't lesbians.

An Activism Proposal

A defiant Chertoff won't budge

Says not a penny more to city

BY JAMES GORDON MEEK
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON - Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff was defiant yesterday despite a blistering onslaught of criticism over his order to slash New York City's counterterrorism cash almost in half.
"I will tell you that when people threaten me or yell at me, that's not going to make me change my mind," Chertoff told the Daily News.

The attacks on Chertoff for cutting federal grants to New York City by 40% this year were led by fellow Republicans on Capitol Hill who preside over committees overseeing Chertoff's cabinet agency.

He insisted that pressure from GOP leaders and the entire New York delegation won't sway him to restore $80 million cut from the high-threat urban area security grants awarded to the city this year.

"I'd be a pretty bad secretary if I said, 'Wow, I got attacked, I'm going to change the grants formula,'" Chertoff said after huddling with President Bush and White House political adviser Karl Rove.

"There's a lot of members of Congress. If you ever try to drive down that road, you're going to drive yourself crazy," he added.

But Rep. Pete King (R-L.I.), who is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee and controls the department's purse strings, made clear he's losing faith in Chertoff's leadership.

"The burden is on him. He has to prove why he should keep the job," King said in an interview.

"It's getting tougher and tougher to defend him," he added. "I really had high hopes. It's indefensible how you cut the 40%."

King and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) sent Chertoff postcards of city monuments and landmarks - like the Empire State Building and Statue of Liberty - to complain that his bureaucrats didn't count them in their threat analysis.

"Wish you were here!" they said in a note.

OK, good idea, and Clinton and King (who is running for re-election this year) have urged New Yorkers to follow their lead.

And you should. But you know something. Chertoff says he won't be pressured and that's all fine and dandy, but I have a different and I think more effective idea.

It's tourist season here in New York, which means all those landmarks and the financial centers are all going to be visited by millions (literally!) of people.

Normally, I hate tourism season. I've asked Bloomberg to raise the kill limit from two bucks and five does to three bucks and ten does, figuring those red staters breed like rabbits anyway, just ask any three cousins, so we're probably doing the country a favor.

But I digress.

No, my idea is a bit more subtle than that (but might involve some gunplay anyway...heh heh). I think we native New Yorkers should start picketing our landmarks:

NOTHING TO SEE HERE! MOVE ALONG! MOVE ALONG!

YANKEE GO HOME!

WELCOME TO NEW YORK. PLEASE DONATE SO WE CAN BUILD US SOME LANDMARKS! LEAVE YOUR MONEY AND GET OUT!

WE'RE HELPING KEEP DUBUQUE SAFE FROM TERRORISM!

We could arrange to have protestors in front of the Empire State Building, or Grand Central Station, bullhorns at the ready, as tourists swarm all over our fair streets like ants looking for crumbs at one gigantic picnic! We could have various factions, some dressed in private security uniforms, some dressed as illegal aliens, some dressed as SPACE aliens, some...well, you get the idea.

We'd run an email and text message list that, at the drop of a hat, could arrange dozens, maybe hundreds of people to block tourists from getting into the Met (Opera or Museum, makes no difference), Yankee or Shea Stadium, Ground Zero, Wall Street, The New York Public Library, Fox News (not that this is a landmark, mind you, I just like annoying them), shut down the Brooklyn Bridge, the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels, both of which were terror targets...I'd say the UN but the Bushies don't give a shit about that anyway, so why bother?

We could line up at the busiest ATMs with T-Shirts that read "Please Leave Our Money Alone".

Any more ideas? Anybody want to put me in touch with some activist-types?

Other ways to protect our precious-but-not-landmark icons here, at World-O-Crap.

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky

Bush
New York
Hillary Clinton
Michael Chertoff
protest
Homeland Security

The Machinations Of Politics Works Both Ways

You folks outside of New York probably missed this, so let me post much of the article here:

Hevesi apologizes for 'bullet' comment

BY JAMES T. MADORE
STAFF WRITER

June 2, 2006

State Comptroller Alan Hevesi, who has been expected to cruise to re-election, told an audience of thousands at Queens College yesterday that U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer would "put a bullet between the president's eyes if he could get away with it."

Hevesi apologized at a news conference several hours later, saying he had chosen words that were "stupid and moronic" in an attempt to convey his admiration for fellow Democrat Schumer's unflinching criticism of President George W. Bush, a Republican. Hevesi said he called Schumer to express his regrets.

The gaffe occurred early in Hevesi's comments, which were typically unscripted, at a graduation ceremony. He followed Schumer, who recalled how his life was changed after a long-ago breakup with a girlfriend.

Hevesi said, "I shall carry with me the image of Senator Chuck Schumer getting dumped at the airport. ... We really feel bad for poor Chuck -- United States senator. The man who, uh, now how do I phrase this diplomatically, will put a bullet between the President's eyes if, ah, he could get away with it. The toughest senator, the best representative. A great, great member of the Congress of the United States."

OK, a couple of observations here.

Hevesi apologized quickly for his remarks (possibly upon the realization that the Secret Service would have to investigate them). Marks for that.

Hevesi has a reputation of speaking off-the-cuff. Marks for that. Too many politicians are over-scripted. Just look at Al Gore or John Kerry. One reason I believe Ronald Reagan was so charismatic was he was too stupid to memorize a script so he made up his lines in movies and was able to make up lies on the campaign trail, ad hoc. A good actor can do that.

A great actor, like, say, me, can make the script sound off the cuff, but that's a discussion for a different day.

But it's clear from this transcription that Hevesi's remarks were not as off-the-cuff as one might think, and it occured to me that, if a party wanted to send a message to terrorize its opposition nationally, what better way to do it than to have a low-profile politician (hell, Alan Hevesi is state Comptroller, which is tantamount to dog catcher) at an obscure event (Queens College graduations rarely get any national attention at all) where only the local press is likely to be there spout something inane, clunky, and wholly inappropriate, and then immediately apologize for it. The story would get limited national dissemination immediately, but it would spread like wildfire thru both Blogtopia (© Skippy) and the Blog Reich. I anticipate there will be several outraged articles in the right wing goo factory, fulminating about assassinations and how terrible liberals are, how much hatred they have for Bush, yadayadayada (I suppose calling Bill Clinton a scumbag was a show of love.)

The clue for me was his preceding statement, "how do I put this diplomatically?" and then proceed to raise the assassination imagery. We know he meant "hold Bush's feet to the fire" (which would have been a far better image, I might add), but he went out of his way to use that statement.

I don't like it when FReeper types use violent imagery to get across their point. I don't like it when a man I've voted for and respect, Alan Hevesi, uses it. But to think that there's a chance (and having seen both the comment and the apology, I tend to think it was) that this was calculated is even more disturbing.

I want, badly, to win back the Senate and the House and yes, to hold Bush's and the Republicans' feet to the fire. I just don't need to use guns.

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky

Bush
Alan Hevesi
Chuck Schumer

Why Republicans Are Bawling....

I want you to think of rank and file Republicans this way: you're a housewife, and you've just found out that your husband's been banging your best friend. Again. For the fortieth time, despite the fact that you've done your level best to ignore it, deny it, and "miss" the harshest reality.

But see, this time, they were fucking in your bed. You know the one you just changed the sheets on this morning?

Republicans have held Congress for twelve years. They've held the Presidency for six (you could even say twelve years, since they cuffed Clinton's hands)

The best they can show for it is one quarter of real economic growth.

ONE QUARTER!

No grand military victory. No defeating Osama bin Laden. No subjugating China or Korea or Iran.

No lasting legacy. No overturned Roe v. Wade (altho that's still on the burner).

No candy and flowers as they stroll down Pennsylvania Avenue ahead of an admiring throng of former Democrats singing Hosanna. No weeping soccer moms, grateful at how they stopped the education system from falling apart.

One three-month period of growth. And even that comes as signs that the economy is about to tank (again!) are popping up all over.

Better stock up on Kleenex, if you have any Republicans you care about.

Which of course, means the question must be asked: WHY?!?!?!?

A Bit About Blogging

Sometimes, you don't realize quite how your words will be taken, and sometimes, they get taken precisely how you expect them to.

The prestigious Columbia Journalism Review apparently picked up on my Katie Couric post of yesterday, and used bits of it in a blog that reviews blogs that review, well, journalism (I'll leave the philosophers amongst you to debate what level of self-referential pulchritude this demonstrates)! Specifically, Katie Couric in this case. Here's what my new best friend forever!!!!, Liz Cox Barrett, said:

And finally, Carl at Simply Left Behind asks, "Where Have You Gone, Katie Couric?" and then answers himself --"Katie Couric disappeared years ago, folks." The Couric that Carl "want[s] to remember" is the newswoman who grilled Sen. Bob Dole back in 1996 about his suggestion that smoking might not be any more dangerous than drinking alcohol or milk. Laments Carl: "That Katie Couric disappeared, probably with Lacy Peterson, certainly with Natalee Holloway. Maybe moving to CBS, she'll regrow some stones, but given CBS's corporate 'destoning' policy handed down from Sumner Redstone, I wouldn't bet on it."

In sum: So long, Couric! Know that your work at NBC has inspired at least one Maltese, a Motley Crüe quotation, and a discussion of CBS's supposed corporate castration policy. Only in the blogosphere, baby! Only in the blogosphere.

(Emphasis added, but wholly unnecessary...I just like italic text)

o/~ It's Rainin' "THEM" o/~

Is It Raining Aliens?

Nearly 50 tons of mysterious red particles showered India in 2001. Now the race is on to figure out what the heck they are

By Jebediah Reed | June 2006

As bizarre as it may seem, the sample jars brimming with cloudy, reddish rainwater in Godfrey Louis’s laboratory in southern India may hold, well, aliens. In April, Louis, a solid-state physicist at Mahatma Gandhi University, published a paper in the prestigious peer-reviewed journal Astrophysics and Space Science in which he hypothesizes that the samples—water taken from the mysterious blood-colored showers that fell sporadically across Louis’s home state of Kerala in the summer of 2001—contain microbes from outer space.

Specifically, Louis has isolated strange, thick-walled, red-tinted cell-like structures about 10 microns in size. Stranger still, dozens of his experiments suggest that the particles may lack DNA yet still reproduce plentifully, even in water superheated to nearly 600˚F. (The known upper limit for life in water is about 250˚F.) So how to explain them? Louis speculates that the particles could be extraterrestrial bacteria adapted to the harsh conditions of space and that the microbes hitched a ride on a comet or meteorite that later broke apart in the upper atmosphere and mixed with rain clouds above India. If his theory proves correct, the cells would be the first confirmed evidence of alien life and, as such, could yield tantalizing new clues to the origins of life on Earth.

Naturally, we have earlier documented cases of falling "blood". The most famous of these "blood water" observations is in ancient Egypt:

Exodus 7:19-21 The LORD said to Moses, "Tell Aaron, 'Take your staff and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt—over the streams and canals, over the ponds and all the reservoirs'-and they will turn to blood. Blood will be everywhere in Egypt, even in the wooden buckets and stone jars."

Moses and Aaron did just as the LORD had commanded. He raised his staff in the presence of Pharaoh and his officials and struck the water of the Nile, and all the water was changed into blood. The fish in the Nile died, and the river smelled so bad that the Egyptians could not drink its water. Blood was everywhere in Egypt.

Sorta sounds like Texas in August, frankly.

The conventional explanation is some sort of "red tide" effect, where algae or bacteria have somehow migrated skyward and been carried by high level winds and then deposited. But conventional theories fall apart when confronted by the fact that indications suggest that there is no DNA in these organisms, thus likely cannot be terrestrial life (or we have a LOT of explaining ahead of us, take your pick).

My favorite is that a meteorite struck a flock of high flying bats.

Keep tuned to this station, folks. This ought to be interesting.

red rain

Media Collaboration

I'm getting FAIRly frustrated.

The piece I wrote below about The Per-Kee Kay-teee Couric made me realize something: there is no mass media journalism anymore.

I mean, you know how you know something, but until you're truly reminded of it (you miss your dead cat one day, because it's a bright spring day and a butterfly lands on your knee), you don't really notice it. You've been hangin by your thumbs for months, years, even decades, and you only notice that your thumbs ache a bit.

Take Iraq. I happened to catch (on FreeSpeechTV, and oh, by the way, did you order your DISH yet?) "Weapons of Mass Deception," report by former ABC News producer Danny Schecter about the failures of the mass media, television in particular, to cover the Iraq war honestly. How was the Bush administration able to co-opt the four major networks (along with the major print media, radio networks, and for the most part, the worldwide press) into spinning the story of the Iraq invasion their way?

Schecter shows some interesting facets: embedding, for one thing. What reporter in his/her right mind will criticize the very soldiers who are protecting him/her? Or fear-mongering, where the Army "trained" embedded reporters in the art of putting on a gas mask and injecting themselves with anti-toxins, all for the "WMDs" they were sure to be hit with.

The Pentagon provided the networks with cool graphics and animations of how missiles did their jobs and provided analysts, former generals, who drew on maps of Iraq like football analysts draw on Telestrators: "See, here, Dan, the Third Army knifes off-tackle, I mean, behind the Fifth Cavalry, and *BAM!* take out Tikrit and sack the quarterback...." In fact, there's a cut of a Fox News commentator talking about the "MOAB" (Massive Ordnance Air Blast, but colloquially known as the Mother Of All Bombs) as if it was the ace kicker to an inside straight in Texas Hold 'Em!

A study done by FAIR showed that, of some three thousand journalists, panelist, and analysts to appear on news shows in the run-up and first days of the Iraq invasion, only eight, count 'em, eight, opposed the war.

If this war rang hollow (I know it did to me) from the first days, when we savagely, brutally attacked people who had not even made aggressive moves against our country (OK, maybe they fired a cap pistol or two at planes patrolling the "No Fly Zone"...), there's why: we were SO certain we were right, what with the Al Qaeda connection (debunked), the Weapons of Mass Destruction (debunked), the "45 minutes to nuking New York City" (laughable AND debunked), that we failed to even consider the alternative. Hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians, dead because they happened to live in a country whose leader our President for some bizarre rationalization, didn't like very much.

I'm not defending Saddam Hussein. The man was a butcher and yea, the world might eventually get to be a better place without him in power. But there are tyrants all over the world. Why him? Because he was conveniently located near the Middle East? Then why not another member of that "Axis Of Evil," Iran, which HAD captured and held Americans hostage, thus proving that indeed, they could be a threat?

Tyrants in the Middle East fomenting Islamist anger? If not Iran, why not Dubai and the Arab Emirates? Or for that matter, Saudi Arabia?

Or hell, if you make the case this is about sustaining cheap oil (a real success that one was, if you buy that theory), then why Iraq at all, when you have the Saudis right there, and if not them, there's always Kuwait?

(Note: I'm aware of the interplay between the House of Saud and the House of Bush, but I'd make the case that, eventually, that's going to play itself out, and that an exit strategy has been formulated by both families already. And I wouldn't bet against a family that has ties to Hitler in its past.)

The sham reasoning, the weak excuses, and the poor management of the news divisions all combined to convince most Americans of the rightness of the cause. And they were all wrong.

Oh, I guess I should mention there were a few outlets and media folk that didn't buy into the story wholesale.

Which only makes the failure of the rest of the media that much more disgusting.

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky

Bush
Iraq
media
Weapons of Mass Deception
Danny Schecter
Free Speech TV

tags technorati : Top 50

Where Have You Gone, Katie Couric?

Yea, I know, fifteen years' Today Show host, saying goodbye this morning, yadayadayada...

Katie Couric disappeared years ago, folks, only she was too stupid and per-kee to notice.

This is the Katie Couric I want to remember:

Dole, in an combative interview with NBC's Today co-host Katie Couric, grew testy when pressed about his comments last month questioning whether tobacco use was any more dangerous than drinking alcohol or milk.

Dole's initial comments drew criticism from Koop, a physician, who said Dole "either exposed his abysmal lack of knowledge of nicotine addiction or his blind support of the tobacco industry."

Couric, in an interview taped Sunday but broadcast Tuesday, asked Dole about Koop's statement. Dole said Koop supported his campaign for president.

But he said of Koop, "You know, he watches the liberal media and he probably got carried away."

"He's brainwashed?" Couric asked.

"Probably, a little bit," Dole said.

[...]Dole accused the NBC network and the New York Times of taking the Democrats' side on the issue.

"I'm not in their (tobacco industry's) pockets. My view is as I've said time and time again ... the liberal media crosses that out and goes right back to the Democratic line,"Dole said.

"You can't respond, because the media's already made up their mind. I've said I don't know whether it's addictive. I'm not a doctor. I'm not a scientist," Dole said.

Dole sought to deflect the criticism by contending the use of marijuana has doubled since Clinton took office. "I don't see Al Gore or President Clinton talking about that," he said, accusing the administration of dismantling the anti-drug agency.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the tobacco industry contributed $2.3 million to the Republican Party and $423,962 to the Democratic Party in 1995. The contributions are so-called "soft money" and are not subject to limits on the amount of donations. Individual industry employees contributed $34,750 to Dole and $4,000 to Clinton in 1995 through March 1996. Industry political action companies contributed $23,500 to Dole in the same time period. Clinton's campaign does not accept PAC contributions.

Dole entered the tobacco fray last month when he said, "We know it's not good for kids but a lot of other things aren't good. Drinking's not good. Some would say milk's not good." After Koop criticized Dole, the GOP contender sent him a letter last week, again saying of tobacco "for some people it is addictive, and for others it may not be."

That Katie Couric disappeared, probably with Lacy Peterson, certainly with Natalee Holloway.

Maybe moving to CBS, she'll regrow some stones, but given CBS' corporate "destoning" policy handed down from Sumner Redstone, I wouldn't bet on it.

Leaving A Thankless Job

Source: Treasury Secretary Snow Resigns

By TERENCE HUNT
AP White House Correspondent

May 30, 2006, 8:35 AM EDT

WASHINGTON -- Treasury Secretary John Snow has resigned and will be replaced by Goldman Sachs Chairman Henry M. Paulson Jr., a senior administration official said Tuesday, in another chapter of a White House shake-up to revive President Bush's troubled presidency.

Bush was to announce the changes in a White House ceremony later Tuesday.

Snow, the former head of railroad giant CSX Corp. who has a Ph.D. in economics, has been Treasury secretary since February 2003. His departure has been rumored for more than a year.

OK, quick civics lesson for you "out of touch Hollywood liberal elitist" types (and others who napped during high school history): The United States Secretary of the Treasury is the head of the United States Department of the Treasury, concerned with finance and monetary matters, basically what other countries would call a "finance minister". Nominally, the Treasury Secretary has control over tax policy, the budget and budget deficits, and the currency. He also controlled the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, as well as the Secret and Customs Services until the Department of Homeland Security was established.

You can see why this is a thankless job, especially in this administration.

Snow replaced Paul O'Neill who famously fell out of favor with the Bushistas for....doing. His. Job.

A report commissioned in 2002 by O'Neill while Treasury Secretary suggested the United States faced future federal budget deficits of more than US$ 500 billion. The report also suggested that sharp tax increases, massive spending cuts, or both would be unavoidable if the United States were to meet benefit promises to its future generations. The study estimated that closing the budget gap would require the equivalent of an immediate and permanent 66 percent across-the-board income tax increase. The Bush administration left the findings out of the 2004 annual budget report published in February 2003.

O'Neill's private feuds with Bush's tax cut policies as well as his push to investigate al-Qaeda funding coming from the United Arab Emirates led to his resignation in 2002 and replacement with John W. Snow.

Which is why Snow was placed in a thankless position and handled it admirably by disappearing into the woodwork while Bush's Economic Policy Council (again, nominally chaired by the Treasury Secretary, but de facto, by the White House) screwed up again and again. Not to be confused with the President's Council of Economic Advisers or the National Economic Council, the EPC basically makes projections of tax revenues and budget deficits and PowerPoint presentations for Bush to draw circles and arrows on.

There's a joke in there about too many cooks and what a weak broth it hath wrought.

Compare that with Clinton's three Treasury Secretaries: the recently-deceased Lloyd Bentsen, Robert Rubin, and embattled Harvard president Lawrence H. Summers.

Apparently, the Wimp Factor extends to even within its own confines.

The apparent next knothole to appear out of the Treasury woodwork is one Henry M. Paulson Jr., who at least has the bloodlines as chairman of Goldman Sachs (where Rubin was also once chairman, and who failed upward by succeeding John Corzine when he resigned as chairman to run for and capture the Senate seat in New Jersey) to perhaps know how to run an organization of knotheads and splinter factions.

If his hands will be untied. I wooden count on it.

snarkasm, snarcasm, snarky

Bush
John Snow
Henry M. Paulson, Jr.
Secretary of the Treasury

Facts About Prisons

- Two million people are currently in prison nationwide.

- Two states, Texas and California, account for 3/4 of these prisoners. California is far and away the most populous state, 36 million people. Texas is tied for second, with New York.

- Texas introduced more people INTO its penal system during the 90s than New York State had in toto during that decade.

- Nationwide, a black man in 6 times more likely to be incarcerated nationwide than white men. In Texas, you can triple that statistic and still come up short.

- The town of Tulia, TX has 500 black people. 2/5 of them have felony records, mostly for drug arrests, in a town of 50,000. Estimates indicate that, of those felony convictions, less than 1/2 of one percent were actual crimes committed without duress or entrapment.

Think about this as you celebrate American freedom...and someone remind me WHY Texas is an state in our union?