
Let's finish our business in Iraq and Afghanistan,TAGS: Happy New Year, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran
give the Iranians a good whack,
and then get our people home.
Current news concerning Oaxaca, Mexico as well as Mark's thoughts, for what they are worth, on the world's most pressing issues of the day.
Let's finish our business in Iraq and Afghanistan,TAGS: Happy New Year, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran
give the Iranians a good whack,
and then get our people home.
The thing about drinking is; when I'm feeling bad it makes me feel good and when I'm feeling good it makes me feel better.TAGS: Professor Bainbridge, James Dickey
u seem like an interesting person. ur blog is interesting. mine sux. don't look at it.Lulu thoughtfully does not provide a link to her blog (which apparently sux) thereby saving Mark in Mexico the agony of a visit there. C'mon, now, Lulu, it can't be that bad. Send me a link! If it really, truly sux, which I doubt, I'll be happy to offer some advice to help you spiff it up a bit. Like, liberalism sux, the DNC sux, Howard Dean sux, Kos sux, all lefties suk (with the exception of this one), Congressmen who accept thinly veiled bribes and call them legal because "that's the way business gets done in Washington" suk, the Taleban sux, al Qaeda sux, France sux, Robert Mugabe sux, al Jazeera sux, Putin sux, China sux, North Korea sux, the dear leader of North Korea really sux and the mullahs in Iran really, really suk.
Lulu | 12.29.05 - 3:16 pm | #
Given the widespread admiration for Tony Dungy as a man, not just as a coach — he is reported to be a kind, socially active churchgoer who apparently devoted many hours to being with his son — there is an important lesson to be learned from this tragedy.James Dungy's funeral is being held today in Tampa.
That lesson is this: There are children upon whom parents have had little influence. This is true for some wonderful children, and it is true of some troubled children and even of some who turn out to be evil adults.
And that is why the only reaction any of us should have to the suicide of 18-year-old James Dungy is profound sorrow — for him, his parents and all those who loved him.
From every account of that family, if it happened to them, it could happen to anyone.
. . . less visible, insidious enemies of decency, humanity and civility - the angry offspring of narcissism's quickie marriage to instant gratification.Not guilty. Mark in Mexico remains a very visible and risible insidious enemy of decency, humanity and civility. And I am not angry, goddammit!.
There's something frankly creepy about the explosion we now call the Blogosphere - the big-bang "electroniverse" where recently wired squatters set up new camps each day.I think there's something slightly creepy about any big-time journalist who is so frightened by widdle ol' me, frankly.
I'm also wary of power untempered by restraint and accountability.Guilty. That's me; A sense of power emanating from deep inside my precious bodily fluids, totally unrestrained and accountable to no one except God and Instapundit.
Bloggers persist no matter their contributions or quality, though most would have little to occupy their time were the mainstream media to disappear tomorrow.Hell, I'd do what I was doing before. Go fishin'. It's all the same to me.
Some bloggers also offer superb commentary, but most babble, buzz and blurt like caffeinated adolescents competing for the Ritalin generation's inevitable senior superlative: Most Obsessive-Compulsive.Guilty as to the first count. Not guilty as to the second, third and fourth counts. You can always rely on Mark in Mexico for superlative commentary, or whatever. And certainly no obsessive-compulsive behavior, except for the occasional overuse, of, commas,.
Spoiled and undisciplined, they have grabbed the mike and seized the stage, a privilege granted not by years in the trenches, but by virtue of a three-pronged plug and the miracle of WiFi.What's WiFi?
They play tag team with hyperlinks ("I'll say you're important if you'll say I'm important) and shriek "Gotcha!" when they catch some weary wage earner in a mistake or oversight.Gotcha! I don't ever do that. And Mark in Mexico shows no mercy to weary wage earners who call terrorists, "insurgents" or attempt to pawn off easily identified forgeries as the real thing to support their political bent. What's the frequncy, Kenneth?
Without adult supervision, they organize themselves into rival tribes, learn to hunt and kill, and eventually become murderous barbarians in the absence of a civilizing structure.Not guilty! I was a Boy Scout, Order of the Arrow and everything. It's where I smoked my first cigarette, heard my first dirty joke and learned to masturbate. How's that for a civilizing structure? And, sheesh! Murderous barbarians? She must be talking about Steven "Bad Boy" Bainbridge, Eugene "The Vicious" Volokh, Daniel "The Deadly" Drezner and their ilk, certainly not about Mark "The Meek" in Mexico.
Likewise, many bloggers seek the destruction of others for their own self-aggrandizement.Wrong, again. I seek the destruction of others in order to scatter my enemy and drive him before me. To see his cities reduced to ashes. To see those who love him shrouded and in tears. And to gather to my bosom his wives and daughters.
When a mainstream journalist stumbles, they pile on like so many savages, hoisting his or her head on a bloody stick as Golding's children did the fly-covered head of a butchered sow.I've never contemplated hoisting the fly-covered head of a butchered sow on a bloody stick. Dan Rather's head, however, would do quite nicely.
Incivility is their weapon and humanity their victim.Not guilty! I remain ever civil and humane. Wow, this Kathleen Parker is a real Mongoloid Neanderthal post-menopausal bitch, isn't she?
I mean no disrespect to the many brilliant people out there - professors, lawyers, doctors, philosophers, scientists and other journalists who also happen to blog. Again, they know who they are. But we should beware and resist the rest of the ego-gratifying rabble who contribute only snark, sass and destruction.Well, she may have me there. I am neither a professor, lawyer, doctor, philosopher, scientist or other journalist. So, in Kathleen Parker's mind, such as it functions, if a blogger is not one of the aforementioned "professionals", one should not be granted a voice. And, if one insists on that right of free speech which Ms. Parker so cavalierly tosses into the trash heap here, one is rabble and should be resisted. Hey, Kathy, resist this!
Seventeen days before the war, this page reluctantly urged the president to launch it. We said that every earnest tool of diplomacy with Iraq had failed to improve the world's security, stop the butchery--or rationalize years of UN inaction. We contended that Saddam Hussein, not George W. Bush, had demanded this conflict.A very interesting read subject to nitpicking-to-death, which it probably will be.
Many people of patriotism and integrity disagreed with us and still do. But the totality of what we know now--what this matrix chronicles-- affirms for us our verdict of March 2, 2003. We hope these editorials help Tribune readers assess theirs.
The former (investing in the "hard cases") strikes me as more desirable than the latter (investing in the "easy cases"), especially for people who want to think of themselves as being on the left.My question to Matthew is, "What does 'being on the left', or not, have to do with it?" I don't think that those in the middle or on the right would hesitate for even a nano-second to agree that educating the difficult-to-reach would have far greater long-term effects on the health of our nation than failing to adequately advance those gifted students. And I don't think anyone on any side of the political spectrum would disagree that it is important that we give the proper attention, money and effort to educate all children as well as we possibly can regardless of the degree of difficulty encountered.
Now they have decided to cancel our show here because we played for the troops in Iraq and they have put up some really sad stuff on their web site that says we played for "murderers and idiots."The Vandals official response to the Austrians canceling their scheduled performances was:
As a band with zero political songs, yet 10 about diarrhea, we were pretty amused that the Arena Club in Vienna, Austria found something to rally against in our visit to Iraq to entertain soldiers.
Meanwhile, monitoring radiation levels does absolutely nothing to protect against the use of, say, C-4.Perhaps I can help here, Shakespeare (her maiden name, I would presume). C-4 has the TNT equivalence of 118%. Therefore, the volume of C-4 required to produce a 5 megaton nukyular explosion during the height of visiting hours at the Henry Ford Dearborn Museum would be 84,764,000 lbs of C-4. At the normal 50,000 lb weight limit of cargo delivery trucks in Dearborn, the terrorists would need to deliver, simultaneously, 1,695 fully loaded 48 ft tractor-trailers to the museum and then detonate all of them, simultaneously. I think the FBI would tend to rely on Dearborn traffic cops and the museums parking lot attendants to nip this threat in the bud. Shakespeare also seems not to have read up on the fact that Timmy McVeigh is pretty dead.
Does monitoring radiation levels constitute a "search" that requires a warrant? From Justice Scalia in Kyllo (police used a heat detection device from the sidewalk in front of a house to detect the heat given off by heat lamps inside the house):Mathew "'T' Challenged" Gross says
Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a "search" and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.
Let's just throw out that stupid Constitution.Mathew, if you think civil liberties are being stepped on now, just wait until the government is being run out of a NORAD bunker in Utah after Washington gets reduced to a wasteland. And you want to see civil rights violations, you ain't seen nothing yet.
It's a little technical, but I think pretty important, which is that since the president has a plausible claim that he has inherent authority to do this, that is to monitor communications from threats outside our borders, we should be pretty willing to interpret a Congressional authorization to use force in a way that conforms to the president's possible Constitutional authority. So that is if you put the Constitutional authority together with the statutory authorization, the president's on pretty good ground.Sunstein is referring to the granting of authority to the president by the Congress to take all measures necessary to make war on Al Qaeda. Sunstein's overall point is that surveillance is a necessary part of making war and would have to be seen as being approved by the Congress. Relative to whether or not the president should have used the FISA act to approve his surveillance, Sunstein says;
I think there are a couple of things going on there. It's not the most cumbersome thing in the world, but it is something that the president, when national security is on the line, isn't excited about having to go through a procedure where it's conceivable he's going to lose...unlikely, but conceivable. There's another point in the background, really, which if you were there, you know, which is that the president believes here that these are very sensitive Constitutional prerogatives. And this isn't a Republican or Democratic thing. This is something that cuts across political affiliations of the president. And so the notion that in a case as sensitive as this one, he is under a legal responsibility to go through something that may be more time consuming than appears, may be more leaky than appears. Even if he doesn't think it's likely to be leaky, that's something that a president is not likely to think is necessary.Now, Sunstein says something that I've not heard before. And that is, if the FISA act is construed to prohibit the president from surveillance in time of war, the president would have the duty to challenge FISA's constitutionality. He says;
Yeah. I guess I'd say there are a couple of possibilities. One is that we should interpret FISA conformably with the president's Constitutional authority. So if FISA is ambiguous, or its applicability is in question, the prudent thing to do, as the first President Bush liked to say, is to interpret it so that FISA doesn't compromise the president's Constitutional power. And that's very reasonable, given the fact that there's an authorization to wage war, and you cannot wage war without engaging in surveillance.But, and it's a big one;
If FISA is interpreted as preventing the president from doing what he did here, then the president does have an argument that the FISA so interpreted is unconstitutional. So I don't think any president would relinquish the argument that the Congress lacks the authority to prevent him from acting in a way that protects national security, by engaging in foreign surveillance under the specific circumstances of post-9/11.Now, Hewitt asks Sunstein about interviews in the MSM and the professor says that he has granted a lot of them. He won't name any particular reporters or their media bosses because of promises of confidentiality. But he says that his opinions have yet to be quoted by anyone. I don't understand that. If Professor Sunstein is widely recognized as a constitutional law expert and he has been widely interviewed, why aren't we hearing and reading about those interviews? This exchange is telling;
HH: Let me ask. Have you been quoted in any papers that you've seen?I think that he is being overly generous. What we have are a group of influential MSM outlets and reporters who are well financed who have a knee-jerk reaction against anything that George Bush says or does. And if they have a chance to start bandying around the "I" word, they'll do so with reckless abandon, regardless of how many American citizens, in uniform or not, may die as a result of their shrillness.
CS: I don't think so.
HH: Do you consider the quality of the media coverage here to be good, bad, or in between?
CS: Pretty bad, and I think the reason is we're seeing a kind of libertarian panic a little bit, where what seems at first glance...this might be proved wrong...but where what seems at first glance a pretty modest program is being described as a kind of universal wiretapping, and also being described as depending on a wild claim of presidential authority, which the president, to his credit, has not made any such wild claim. The claims are actually fairly modest, and not unconventional. So the problem with what we've seen from the media is treating this as much more peculiar, and much larger than it actually is. As I recall, by the way, I was quoted in the Los Angeles Times, and they did say that in at least one person's view, the authorization to use military force probably was adequate here.
HH: Do you think the media simply does not understand? Or are they being purposefully ill-informed in your view?
CS: You know what I think it is? It's kind of an echo of Watergate. So when the word wiretapping comes out, a lot of people get really nervous and think this is a rerun of Watergate. I also think there are two different ideas going on here. One is skepticism on the part of many members of the media about judgments by President Bush that threaten, in their view, civil liberties. So it's like they see President Bush and civil liberties, and they get a little more reflexively skeptical than maybe the individual issue warrants. So there's that. Plus, there's, I think, a kind of bipartisan...in the American culture, including the media, streak that is very nervous about intruding on telephone calls and e-mails. And that, in many ways, is healthy. But it can create a misunderstanding of a particular situation.
HH: The libertarian panic that you referred to, I actually believe that that probably did prompt a lot of the original egregiously wrong analysis. But now I'm beginning to be concerned that the media is intentionally ignoring the very strong arguments defending what the president did. Do you believe that's taking place?
CS: I don't like accusing anyone of intentionally ignoring anything. So I believe with respect to people, whatever their political views, you should have charity, and assume until it's proved wrong that they're acting in good faith. It's still early in this, by the way. And I think the tide is turning a little bit in terms of the legal analysis. If it turns out that this goes on for months, and facts don't come out that are worse than the facts we now have, then it looks...then it will look like a continuing panic, which would be worse than what we've seen just in a couple of days.
An Interfaith Christmas SongCONTENT WARNING: Strong Language
From Zoe Brain
Turn out the la-ahts, the parties overrrr.I guess I hadn't thought too much about this, but Tony Moss, NFL Editor for The Sports Channel, is right. After this coming Monday's meaningless game the show moves to ESPN. It's over.
Allll good things, must end some taaahmm.
"Dandy" Don Merideth, MNF, the 70's
When they changed the theme music from da-da-da-da to that supid Hank whats-his-name country shit.
Years ago, one of the Dallas Cowboys was on the sidelines and proceeded to shoot pea soup vomit a foot from his body before he could get his helmet off. Priceless.
Who could ever forget. Giants vs. Redskins. Lawrence Taylor snaps Joe Theismann's leg like a chicken bone. It jumped further and further down that sharks throat with every replay (somewhere around two hundred.)
I think a great moment occured on MNF when some team (I think it was the Houston Oilers) was getting the hell kicked out of them like 40 to nothing and near the end of the game the camera focused on some fan sitting by himself with like nobody else in his section. The camera sat on him for a couple of seconds and the announcers were full of their witty banter and the guy looked straight at the camera and without changing his expression or saying anything, gave the camera the finger.
I think Leslie Vissar (sp?) ruined the show, not because she's a woman, but because she has the worst hair on television. I believe if you're going to be on the television machine, you should try to look as smart as possible. Her shamelessly negligent attitude towards her appearance reflects, I believe, her flippant attitude towards the program itself, and in turn the whole sports world. And the fact that this hairy (get it?) problem has gone undetected by the stuffed shirts at ABC only substantiates my belief that all eyes of that network are closely monitoring the subtle, yet still baffling, flirtations between Al Michaels and the Boomer.
When the brought in No Talent Boomer Esiason as a color commentator..that guy is dumber than a stump and full of himself.
I agree Dierdorf did suck, but he was ten times better than that robot Gifford. One of my favorite Dierdorf one-liners was from a game in San-Diego. They just came back from a commercial, and the camera was focused on a large full moon. Al Michaels says, "There's a full moon over San-Diego tonight." And then Dierdorf says, "Full moon pretty much everywhere, Al." Classic. F the Giff and that b!tch Kathy Lee.
The show is having enough problems trying to recover from the poor dynamic that the broadcast booth has had over the last few years. Now they are considering adding that fat bastard, Rush Limbaugh?!?!? Correct me if I am wrong, but don't you have to have some kind of knowledge of the game to be able to intelligently talk about it. That is all we need is to be in the fourth quarter of yet another stinker game from ABC and have this pumpkin-headed S.O.B. start spouting some political garbage. If I wanted to engage in a political discussion, I'd keep my eye on CNN. I want to watch football. Unless they plan on having him get kicked through the uprights during field goals and extra points, I don't see how this no-talent piece of crap can bring anything even remotely entertaining to the broadcast booth.
The day they canned Frank Gifford was the day I knew there was a TV God. The guy played back when they were using leather helmets for christsakes !! his only line was "great play" and "great player(insert name)"and the classic "great coach(insert name)" remember after they canned him he did the pre game show ? I got about as much information from him as you would on the back of a McDonalds burger bag. Just put him in a chair and stick it in front of a TV and let him watch the rest of those nuts he calls a family (remember Kathie Lee Christmas Special and he sang !!) and for another person on Monday Night Football I vote for Chris Rock. It would be great to see him rip on everybody.
Dennis Miller? Here's a preview...Al: "Eddie George breaks a tackle for a gain of six." Dennis: "What's with this country's obsession on losing and gaining...(6 minute pause)...and go to hell in your laundry basket, Dan." Dan: "Uh..." Al: "And that's the end of the third quarter..." Get used to it.
I was watching the night Cosell referred to a black running back as 'that little monkey.' (Only the classic Dick Vermeil "John Elway on the sidelines getting blown by a fan" was better!) There was around 10 seconds of silence after the remark as Dandy Don, Giff, myself, and around 5000 others thought, "Oh God, it's on the fan now." I think that was Cosell's last year and when Psycho OJ came on after that, the show never recovered.
I remember a classic line that Meredith once used. There was a receiver for the old Cleveland Browns named Fair Hooker (This is true, I am not making the name up). Well Don says, "Fair Hooker" and then after a short pause adds "Never met one".
I'll never forget the night when Simpson made this astute comment about the Jets-Dolphins game: "The only way the Jets are going to beat the Dolphins is if they outscore them!" DUH!!
Eric Dickerson: Can anyone decipher his mumblings? Thankfully someone is working with him because for a time I thought it was some sort of joke. I can understand every word coming across the lovely Melissa Stark's kissable lips ...sooooo cute....but E.D. "?????" Am I wrong people? listen to this guy. "What the %#&* is he saying?"
Dennis Miller is the worst addition to a show in the entire history of television. My favorite Dennis Miller reference was when he mentioned Sylvia Plath. Unless you are a professor of English at Vassar, you have no idea who Sylvia Plath is. (I think she's a poet who killed herself--I looked it up) But, what's worse is he doesn't talk to the guys in the booth or the audience, he makes instead these obscure, unfunny pronouncements. I also didn't like the way they replaced the older woman with the younger one. What kind of anti-woman Taliban-like behavior is that? Granted the younger one is prettier but still.
There are a lot of comments here about Cosell's "Little Monkey" quote, but does anyone remember the following week? Howie deadpanned his "apology" to the camera about how some things are said that are misconstrued blah blah blah (never actually mentioning the incident specifically). Well after he was done, Dandy Don turned to him and said "Well, that's OK you big baboon!"
MNF flinched when Cosell left, but it JUMPED when they hired that dumbass eye candy Melissa Stark. I don't care, call me sexist, but NO WOMAN should be involved in a MAN'S sport. Too bad we can't see the college intern working minimum wage holding the cue cards she's reading every time they go down to those sideline reports. And I don't give a flying f*ck about this player's mom or that player's previous armed forces service or some other bullsh*t feel-good story that she reports on every freaking game. I just watched last night (11-26-01) and she's talking about how Tampa Bay's John Lynch's wife puts a f*cking inspirational note in his bag before he leaves the house on game days for him to read later after he gets to the stadium. Most guys think she's hot and I don't disagree but for criminey's sake, cut the bullsh*t!! It's so bad!! Tell me about the whores John Lynch has on road trips that his inspirational f*cking wife doesn't know about. Now THAT would be a great sideline report.
To be honest I haven't watched in a few years...but someone help refresh my memory.....wasn't it Howard Cosell who once told O.J., after one of O.J.'s insipid remarks, that he had "a firm grasp of the obvious".
Coincidentally this was the same night that Redskins safety Tony Peters was injured and Cosell said "The Redskins will have to play with Peters out".
John Madden is equally as tiresome and retarded as Dennis Miller; the difference is John Madden actually understands the game. But it doesn't mean he'll talk about it. He is just as likely as Dennis Miller or anybody else to go off on a tangent about the amount of steam that pours off a bald man's head in the winter or how a jock will ride up your ass in the 4th quarter.
Is it just me, or has Al Michaels' toupee started growing like a giant spider crawling down his forehead? Every year he gets more and more hair. Scary!
Michelle Tafoya. Gawd is she annoying. She adds absolutely nothing to the sideline reports. She makes John Madden look like some sort of prophet, with her useless commentary.
Napoleon McCallum of the Raiders was injured in anextremely grotesqe fashion(painful looking leg thing)and the DIDN'T SHOW THE REPLAY! SI actually gave the thumbs up to these jokers for not showing the replay because it may have been to sensitve for some viewers. I don't watch football because it is some sensitve crap, I watch it because it is violent, dangerous sport and I want to see the injuries. Pansies
As someone once pointed out in the years following his departure in 1984, "without Howard Cosell, it's not Monday Night Football, it's football on Monday night."
You can imagine if you are 60,000 feet doing mach 1.9 (about 1,400 mph) and these bombs are flying out of your airplane, the swath of hell you can produce going through a country saying "I'll take that target, and that target".
Despite the favorable odds, the F-15s, still one of the world's most capable fighters, are no contest for the fastest radar-evading stealth jet ever built.In spite of its air-to-air superiority, the F-22A is designed to be "especially" efficient in taking out ground-to-air anti-aircraft missiles.
"The F-15 pilots, they are the world's best pilots," said Lt. Col. David Krumm, an F-22A instructor pilot. "When you take them flying against anyone else in the world, they are going to wipe the floor with them. It's a startling moment for them to come down here and get waylaid."
"In any air-to-air fight out there, it is a hopeless mismatch," Krumm said. "What we are more concerned with are countries that want to deny us air space by purchasing surface-to-air missiles and that kind of stuff. Those are very lethal to the way the U.S. deploys."
The Raptor is designed to be especially proficient at taking out such ground-launched missiles because of its speed and stealth. That's something military leaders say could be needed in a fight against potential enemies including Iran or North Korea.
"We want to kick the door down so the air space is clear for any (aircraft) you want to go in," Krumm said. "Someone could come in flying a Cessna 172 with a pistol if you wanted after we're done."
President Bush, working to retool the Republican message for 2006, is trying to shift public attention to something in short supply during his almost five years in office: a run of good economic figures.Followed by a list of the usual suspects: gasoline prices, extra cold winter (what about global warming - how could we possibly have an extra cold winter?), inflation too high, interest rate hikes to halt too high inflation too high - will stall economy, dollar value too high against other currencies, yada, yada, yada.
Hoping to keep a spotlight trained on the economy while Bush mounted a concentrated defense of his Iraq policies . . .
On Monday, it was Snow's turn to Christmas-shop for the cameras.
Suddenly, the president's economic team is getting a measure of respect - something it didn't get much of in his first term.
. . . exuding an optimism not shared by many Democrats.
. . . help shift public attention away from casualties in Iraq.
"But the president has very few things that he can brag about right now."
"Many families are spending the holidays still in tent cities."
Some potential problems that economists see lurking:
Quite simply, Coach Dungy loves being a dad, and says a good friend gave him some very important advice years ago, that he still tries to live by. The advice is this: fathers need to cherish whatever stage their children are in, instead of wishing for the next one to hurry up and get here… because before you know it, that stage will be over, never to return again.TAGS: Tony Dungy, James Dungy, suicide, Indianapolis Colts
A Visit From Old St. HillaryTAGS: Hillary Clinton, Hildabeast
By Lisa Fabrizio
'Twas the night before Christmas, as in days of yore;
Not a liberal was stirring, not even Al Gore;
Our prospects were sinking, we pined in despair,
And prayed that St. Hillary soon would appear.
We Democrats waited, while snug in our beds,
Impeachable articles danced in our heads!
But with Bush in the White House and Cheney as veep,
I'd just settled down to a paranoid sleep.
When out on the Beltway arose such a clatter,
I headed for Hardball to check out the chatter.
I reached for my clicker with partisan glee,
But only to gape at a blacked-out TV.
The moon through the window cast light all about
And showed me quite clearly the plug had come out.
When what did I see on the former dark screen
But the visage of DNC chair Howard Dean!
He introduced someone, with looks that could kill;
I cheered when I realized it must be St. Hill!
More rapid than eagles her myrmidons came,
When she whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;
"Now, Daschle! Now, Durbin! Now, Eliot Spitzer!
On, Matthews! On, Russert! On, Woodruff and Blitzer!
To the Sunday news shows! To the National Mall!
Now bash away! Bash away! Bash away all!"
As big bucks before dirty congressmen fly,
When they meet with flush lobbyists, eager to buy;
So out to the hustings the Democrats flew,
With a slate full of programs for states colored blue.
And then in a twinkling, I saw on TV,
As stunning a change as you're likely to see;
As I grabbed for my clicker to turn up the sound,
Through my Sony, St. Hillary came with a bound!
She was dressed all in white from her head to her toe,
All except for a pink blouse that set her aglow;
An American flag pin she wore with great pride,
And she looked to my eyes like a blushing new bride.
Her eyes -- how they sparkled! Her cheeks were so rosy!
Her little pug nose just like Nancy Pelosi!
Her sweet smiling lips bore no hint of complaint
And her overall bearing was that of a saint.
A worn-out old bible she clutched in her hand
And declared that upon it our nation should stand:
"The war in Iraq is just part of God's willing,
Like permanent tax-cuts and ANWR oil drilling."
She was clearly possessed by some right-wingish soul,
And she spoke with the drawl of Elizabeth Dole!
A shy sheepish grin and a toss of her hair,
Soon gave me a feeling of awful despair.
She spoke of the heartland with tears in her eyes;
And grand fruited plains and of God's spacious skies.
When praising Rush Limbaugh and Tammy Wynette,
She caused me to wake from my sleep in a sweat!
My screen was now dark but I wasn't alone;
St. Hill had a message that chilled to the bone;
With a voice that resembled sharp nails on a slate,
She exclaimed, "HAPPY CHRISTMAS! At least till '08!"
The ACLU makes repeated reference to the 'separation of church and state.' This extra-constitutional construct has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state. Our nation's history is replete with governmental acknowledgment and in some cases, accommodation of religion.Judge Richard Suhrheinrich, 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals, writing the unanimous decision which allows a Kentucky county to continue to display the Ten Commandments.
----- Original Message ----- From: Barbara Boxer To: Mark in MexicoDear Barbara and Sim,
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 4:15 PM
Subject: Stop Bush's illegal wiretaps -- act now!
Dear Mark in Mexico,
It's now been 5 days since President Bush admitted to authorizing the National Security Agency to spy on Americans without court order -- a system he reauthorized as many as 3 dozen times since 2001. Yet despite the outcry from millions of Americans -- both Democrats and Republicans alike -- President Bush has stubbornly promised to continue this illegal and unconstitutional activity.
How can the President of the United States -- the highest elected official in our land, a leader who swore an oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution" -- so egregiously and repeatedly violate our most basic civil liberties?
It's time for Congress to act -- to thoroughly investigate the President's actions now.
Urge Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter to hold hearings into the President's conduct, before beginning Supreme Court nomination hearings for Judge Alito -- sign my petition today!
Clearly, protecting Americans from terrorism here at home must be the top priority of any Administration. But we certainly can do that without trampling on the Constitution in the process. Defending America means protecting our homeland as well as preserving our rights and freedoms as citizens.
Through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), enacted by Congress in 1978, the Bush Administration already has the tools it needs to obtain court orders for domestic wiretaps within minutes -- even retroactively, in urgent circumstances.
Why did President Bush consciously choose to violate federal law, and disregard a system that is already in place to deal with the very national security threats that the President is talking about, even though the Act clearly states that FISA "shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance...and the interception of domestic wire and oral communications may be conducted"?
This is just one of the many questions we need answered. That's why Congress must act now. We can't afford to wait when such critical civil liberties hang in the balance.
Urge Senator Arlen Specter to hold hearings now, before dealing with the Alito nomination -- sign my petition today!
This egregious and repeated violation of American civil liberties by President Bush and his Administration requires a thorough investigation.
That's why I urge Chairman Specter to hold hearings before the Senate takes up Judge Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court. Sandra Day O'Connor has agreed to stay on the bench as long as necessary, so there's no urgency on that front.
So again, join me in calling on Chairman Specter to schedule thorough public hearings into President Bush's actions as a first order of business for the Senate Judiciary Committee in the New Year -- sign my petition today!
Thank you so much for your support on this critical issue.
In Friendship,
Barbara Boxer
P.S. I'll be presenting our petition demanding thorough hearings to Senator Specter, so please add your name today! And then invite everyone you know to join us.
Sign the Petition Today!
Paid for by PAC for a Change, www.barbaraboxer.com, Treasurer Sim Farar, FEC#C00342048. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee
They need a thick skin. They need a sense of humor, and they should laugh a lot inside and outside and at themselves ... and be able to reach out and work effectively with leaders across the world.Then, British journalist James Bone, reporter for the London Times, asked him about his son's involvement in the illegal importation of a Mercedes Benz into Ghana. Annan, displaying the aforementioned sense of humor, thick skin and laughing a lot on the inside, said,
I think you're being very cheeky. Listen James Bone, you've been behaving like an overgrown schoolboy in this room for many, many months and years.Well, Kofi, we're all laughing on the outside. What Annan really meant to say about character was:
You are an embarrassment to your colleagues and to your profession. Please stop misbehaving and please let's move on to a serious subject.
They need a sense of humor, except for me, and they should laugh a lot inside and outside and at themselves but NEVER at me ... and be able to reach out and work effectively with leaders across the world, with the exception, of course, for the recalcitrant and bellicose leaders of the world's richest, most powerful and most generous nation, as well as those of the Jooz.UPDATE: Reuters tries to whitewash Annan's statements, but fails. Reuters leaves out the tirade Annan directed at James Bone. Reuters quotes Annan as saying:
I hope you ladies and gentlemen of the press will also do some reflection of your own as to how you covered that event, how you allowed deliberate leaks and others to lead you in one direction," he said, after refusing to answer a question from a British reporter.UPDATE II: Much more from Claudia Rosett
"But I leave you to reflect on that. It is not up to me to tell you how to do your job," Annan said. "But we all have to be careful, whatever responsibilities we have, not to be fed by people with agendas."
"Oprah had become my first of many code names," she wrote. . . . "(A)s time passed, the code-vocabulary increased & changed, but in the beginning things like 'C' on baseball caps referred to me, and specific messages through songs sung by his guests, were the beginnings of what became an elaborate means of communication between he and myself."And Judge Sanchez signed it.
The collection, mainly through electronic means, of vast amounts of personal data is said to invade privacy. But machine collection and processing of data cannot, as such, invade privacy. Because of their volume, the data are first sifted by computers, which search for names, addresses, phone numbers, etc., that may have intelligence value. This initial sifting, far from invading privacy (a computer is not a sentient being), keeps most private data from being read by any intelligence officer.Judge Posner's view is unique. I haven't seen it before. Machine surveillance is not a 4th amendment violation because no human is involved. Hmmmm, veddy interrresting.
Mr Powell, who argued the case for military action against Saddam Hussein in the UN in 2003, told BBC News 24 television he was "deeply disappointed in what the intelligence community had presented to me and to the rest of us."While admitting that he had been bypassed on occasion by some of the White House hawks and that some discussions with Donald Rumsfeld "were not pleasant", Powell came nowhere close to the position taken by his former chief-of-staff Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson. Wilkerson essentially accused the White House hawks, Cheney and Rumsfeld of running a "cabal" to wrest control of foreign policy away from the State Department.
"What really upset me more than anything else was that there were people in the intelligence community that had doubts about some of this sourcing, but those doubts never surfaced to us," he said.
But he told the BBC that "essentially just to walk away, to say that we're taking all of our troops out as fast as we can, would be a tragic mistake". A US presence would be required in Iraq for "years", he added.This must be causing heartburn amongst the leftie administraters of the BBC who were no doubt hoping for a tell-all fingerpointing tattle tale from Powell. Sorry, mateys.
"We've invested a great deal in this country, and the Iraqi people deserve democracy and the freedom that they were promised when we got rid of Saddam Hussein and we have to stay with them... until they decide that they can get it now on their own, they don't need us any longer," he added.
"There's a little bit of the movie Casablanca in this, where, you know, the inspector says 'I'm shocked, shocked that this kind of thing takes place'.The BBC must be shocked, shocked, that David Frost couldn't get Powell to once mention President Chimplerburton Gitmostein in a bad light.
"Well, most of our European friends cannot be shocked that this kind of thing takes place... The fact that we have, over the years, had procedures in place that would deal with people who are responsible for terrorist activities, or suspected of terrorist activities, and so the thing that is called rendition is not something that is new or unknown to my European friends."
"The United States is going through a period right now where public opinion world-wide is against us.Powell's disputes with Cheney and Rumsfeld are well known so there's no there, there. The best that the BBC can do is, and you'll see this if you follow the link above, show a photo of 5 US troops on patrol somewhere in Iraq with this caption:
"I think that's a function of some of the policies we have followed in recent years with respect to Iraq and in not solving the Middle East's problem and perhaps the way in which we have communicated our views to the rest of the world, we have created an impression that we are unilateralist, we don't care what the rest of the world thinks.
"I don't think it's a fair impression"
The state department's plans for post-war Iraq were discardedI cannot find a transcript of the interview which was shown tonight on BBC World TV and later on BBC News24. In fact, I followed both links and there was no mention whatsoever of the interview on either website. Try your luck.