first off, i am writing saturday. i didn't say i'd write early and c.i. didn't say i would when it was noted that i was blogging on saturday.
fly boy and i went to see play last night. (i didn't care for it and it was obvious the cast was trying very hard so i'll avoid knocking it. plays get so little attention that if it just doesn't work, i have no need to weigh in. if it's offensive, that's another story.)
no, ruth, thank you.
ruth thanks me for listening to her report. (i heard three versions of it.) it was a pleasure. i asked her the 1st time, 'did c.i. ask you to cut it for length?' she said no but she felt like her reports were getting too long. i don't think that's true. no 1's ever said that to me in person or in an e-mail. but she feels like she goes on too long.
i think that has to do with the fact that she's trying to cover so much. i teased her by saying that i'd grab Law and Disorder for her. teased her because that's 1 of her favorite programs. she said, 'oh you should cover it too. we can both cover it. mike's been mentioning it.'
i won't grab Law and Disorder because i know she loves that program but i will try to listen to and cover something. i think kat's going to start grabbing Guns and Butter. ruth's got a lot to cover and i can grab at least 1 show. i may try to grab something that she never gets to but always means to cover.
this report, she has a wonderful feminist critique of the attitude of a guest on CounterSpin which is a program i listen to now thanks to ruth. i'm sure i'd heard about it before from c.i. but it was ruth's highlighting it each week that made me say, 'okay, i'm going to listen.' i heard the woman being interviewed by janine jackson so when ruth wanted to read her take on it to me, i did know what she was getting at and she didn't have to explain the interview to me.
ruth's kinder than i am. i heard it and didn't think, 'oh she doesn't know about all the work women have done before.' i heard it and thought, 'oh she doesn't care about the battles women have fought and that's partly because of where she writes.' i don't mind an opinion journal, i don't mind a news magazine, but i have no use for a party organ and let's not kid.
i hunted down the article online, the 1 the woman had written, because ruth said she was going to write about it. when i found it, i read it and was prepared when ruth called back with the next section of her report. she is correct, the woman does suggest that women, who are elected and pro-life, should be given space. i'm sorry that's crap.
the issue the writer has tried to focus on is the fact that the new york times shuts out pro-choice voices and instead runs anti-choice male voices. adding anti-choice female voices helps no 1. i really don't buy into the 'i'm a feminist but i'm pro-life' if you're a woman working to defeat other women's rights. you don't want to have 1, for whatever reason, don't. but you're not a feminist if you're working to take away the legal choice from other women.
i don't see that as a gray area.
and to offer that lame 'well .... uh, the new york times depends on officials .... on the academy ... on government officials' nonsense is not feminism. (and that's not a quote from the woman, that's my impression of her statements on the broadcast.) feminism is about valuing women's right to speak and write about their own experience. the new york times is not about feminism.
that's why they have their 'i was a happy working woman but decided i'd be happier at home' stories every 6 months or so. trophy wives are all over that paper, women of achievement barely.
gatekeepers set up the rules so as not to include women unless they were queen bees working to hold other women back. women have had to storm the gates to get the little bit of public space they have. to turn around and accept the premise of gatekeeping goes against feminism.
so read ruth's latest public radio report. she's not playing 'cautious' and she's not going to go 'uh ... uh ...' women of ruth's generation don't play. they don't mess around with abortion, they don't bother with nonsense. they fought this battle.
women who came after, and that includes me, owe them a huge debt and we need to quit playing nonsense games with our times. nonsense includes acting like we have to preface a defense of a medical right with some sort of 'oh abortion is wrong, i know' nonsense.
never heard a man say of a kidney stone operation: 'oh i know it's wrong but i had the procedure. i know it's not in the bible. i know god put the kidney stones in me and i am disowning his will by taking them out, but i did it.'
i don't have time for nonsense and roe v. wade doesn't either. it's under attack.
as ruth pointed out, great number crunching by the woman, lousy commentary. (ruth was kinder.)
on ruth's report, max blumenthal is the writer at the nation who slammed joan mellen. i have no idea why he felt the need for his rebuttal. in the same issue, people objecting to katha pollitt had their say and katha didn't have the need to reply. but blumenthal's got to have the last word.
mellen wrote a great book and you should all read it. A Farewell to Justice is the name of the book. if you're 1 of my younger readers, read it especially. you'll be alive when papers start coming out about the jfk assassination. you'll be able to look at all the blumenthals who have covered up and denied for years. when those papers start coming out, do me a favor and write the nation. write them and tell them that max blumenthal was a lousy man who attacked people trying to find out the truth. tell them that he was a judith miller. he was being fed info by the cia.
this actually wasn't what i planned to write about. i'll do what i planned on monday. but i am just so blown away by ruth every week. if you're a community member of the common ills and you think 'i should share more' i want you to take a look at ruth. she was a member who didn't think any 1 would care what she had to say. when c.i. wrote about how npr gets a pass for all their distortions, despite having a larger audience than fox, msnbc and cnn combined, ruth thought, 'okay, i know this topic, i can write about this.' and that's how she carved out her space.
members love her. (i love her. she blows me away!) i think it was around this time last year that she started contributing to the common ills. her voice is a valued 1 and it is also 1 that we all love. i want more yiddish from ruth! that's my only gripe. i loved reading her using a yiddish phrase and trying to figure it out and then, later, calling her up and asking her how to say it.
she's 1 of a kind. she really should have her own site. c.i.'s told her that too. but she thinks the report is really all she can handle right now. (during work hours, she's the primary caretaker for her youngest grandson monday through friday.) we're lucky to have her voice.
by the way, there was a playwright on RadioNation with Laura Flanders tonight. see, she appreciates the arts in all their forms. tomorrow esther kaplan's going to be on so make a point to listen.
3/25/2006
3/23/2006
news roundup and grace (will & grace) socks it to the repubes
first off, ava's written a post called 'Ava's entry' at the common ills mirror site so don't miss that. she's running down the history of the third estate sunday review and she's also sharing her own opinions about the process that goes into each marathon session that turns out an edition. jim phoned me to give me a heads up to it. (he loves it.)
now funniest and most true lines of dialogue on tv this week? will & grace had them. (c.i. phoned me to remind me to watch for it.) grace hired a middle eastern woman. the woman was worse than karen when it came to working and grace didn't feel like she could fire her because the woman was middle eastern. however, grace found out that the woman was jewish and was thrilled because that meant that she, grace - who is jewish, could fire her. which she did.
with karen after, grace pinned her reluctance (before learning that the woman was jewish) on 'liberal guilt.' that's all the set up to grace's lines.
here it is:
sometimes i wish i were a republican. then i wouldn't have to worry about anyone's feelings; i'd just have to worry about being indicted.
by the way, i was asked what i thought about monday's peace concert that's gotten some raves and some crappy reviews. i think it was a good cause and have to wonder about the people crapping on the concert. (yes, new york times, i mean you.)
okay, let's do the news. rumsfeld won't make predictions regarding iraq according to the associated press. a policy that he should have implemented prior to the invasion when he was so gosh-it's-going-to-be-a-cakewalk-with-roses-strewn-in-our-path.
who spreads the rumors of 'liberal media'? it's not just the right wing. this was noted repeatedly at the third estate sunday review - how cjr daily (it has a new name now) would go over newsweek, time, and then drop in the national review as though that was balance (in their magazine reports). maybe they thought it was - they thought the new republican was 'left.'
kylie asked me what i thought of aol's 'rate the media' on iraq. i hadn't seen it (so thanks for the link.) through a series of 6 questions, you're asked to weigh in on the media and bully boy. which do you believe? nonsense like that.
if you're a conservative, you've got plenty of room to sound off in their six close-ended questions.
if you're liberal?
How would you rate the media's pre-war coverage?
Poor
36%
Fair
27%
Good
26%
Excellent
11%
Total Votes: 160,271
How do you rate the media's coverage of the war?
Poor
63%
Good
13%
Fair
13%
Excellent
11%
Total Votes: 162,173
now if i think the media does a poor job because they cover it and minimize (as many on the left believe), i'm giving props to bully boy's latest talking point that the media just won't report the good news. the whole poll's like that, see for yourself.
so, in the poll, you're either with the bully boy or the corporate press.
next 2 questions.
How would you rate the information you got from Bush before the war?
Good
35%
Poor
34%
Excellent
16%
Fair
15%
Total Votes: 105,855
How do you rate the information you get from Bush during the war?
Poor
35%
Good
33%
Excellent
18%
Fair
14%
Total Votes: 106,952
shocking that 35% are such dedicated kool-aid drinkers that they believe bully boy gave them good info in the lead up. note also that at least a thousand people who voted in question 4 chose to skip evaluating bully boy's info before the war.
last 2 questions:
How much does the media influence your opinion of the war?
Not at all
67%
A little
24%
A lot
10%
Total Votes: 104,261
How much does the Bush administration influence your opinion of the war?
Not at all
36%
A lot
36%
A little
29%
Total Votes: 105,206
see, it's set up as a battle between bully boy and the press. if you're a right winger, vote for bully boy. where is the left supposed to go? this is the sort of implied message the corporate media sends out all the time.
i don't think it's by accident. just like i don't think it's an accident that bean counters like james carville are presented on tv like they're lefties. (when they aren't.)
henry kissinger is back in the news. he's like the whore they've all slept with. but he's in the news over his time in the nixon white house. he was for building ties with iraq. the ambassador to iran wasn't for it: richard helms, later in charge of the cia and a liar to congress.
chalmers johnson on richard helms:
Richard Helms, the director of the CIA back in 1977, was convicted of a felony for lying to Congress. He said, no, we had nothing to do with the overthrow of [Chilean President] Salvador Allende when we had everything to do with it. He gets a suspended sentence, pays a small fine, walks into the CIA building at Langley, Virginia, and is met by a cheering crowd. Our hero! He's proudly maintained the principles of the secret intelligence service, which is the private army of the president and we have no idea what he's doing with it. Everything they do is secret. Every item in their budget is secret.
note this from the ap:
Faced with hundreds of claims by detainees at Guantanamo Bay, a federal appeals court pressed the Bush administration on Wednesday to say how much power judges will have to determine the legality of the detentions.
The three-judge panel is being asked to decide whether the Detainee Treatment Act, signed by
President Bush on Dec. 30, retroactively voids hundreds of lawsuits by abolishing a right to challenge detentions that has been part of U.S. legal principles since the nation's founding.
Judges David B. Sentelle and A. Raymond Randolph seemed willing to accept the administration's view that the act forces dismissal of more than 200 lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court here on behalf of over 300 detainees.
of course the hideous sentelle was willing to accept the administration's view - as long as it's republican, he'll walk around with a daisy up his crack if they ask him to. if you're not familiar with the hideous sentelle, read this by robert parry.
and note this by the center for constitutional rights:
On March 22 in New York a three-judge panel heard arguments from attorneys representing Guantánamo detainees in the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals (Al Odah v. United States of America and Boumediene v. Bush). They asked the panel to reject the Government's effort to have the cases dismissed. CCR won the Supreme Court case establishing the detainees' right to challenge their detention in U.S. court (Rasul v. Bush), and currently oversees more than 500 pro-bono attorneys representing the detainees.
Barbara Olshansky, CCR Deputy Legal Director who attended oral arguments today stated:
"Despite the government's effort to the contrary, I feel that the Court understood the great importance of preserving the writ of habeas corpus. Their questions about ensuring the Court's ability to consider factual evidence of innocence made clear that justice is their true concern."
Olshansky expects a ruling from the Court in the next few weeks. According to recent estimates, the government is currently detaining about 490 prisoners at the Guantánamo Bay prison camp. CCR is working around the clock to achieve their release to freedom or a fair trial.
now go check out cedric's 'Will Interview With The Vampire become the new Catcher in the Rye?'
now funniest and most true lines of dialogue on tv this week? will & grace had them. (c.i. phoned me to remind me to watch for it.) grace hired a middle eastern woman. the woman was worse than karen when it came to working and grace didn't feel like she could fire her because the woman was middle eastern. however, grace found out that the woman was jewish and was thrilled because that meant that she, grace - who is jewish, could fire her. which she did.
with karen after, grace pinned her reluctance (before learning that the woman was jewish) on 'liberal guilt.' that's all the set up to grace's lines.
here it is:
sometimes i wish i were a republican. then i wouldn't have to worry about anyone's feelings; i'd just have to worry about being indicted.
by the way, i was asked what i thought about monday's peace concert that's gotten some raves and some crappy reviews. i think it was a good cause and have to wonder about the people crapping on the concert. (yes, new york times, i mean you.)
okay, let's do the news. rumsfeld won't make predictions regarding iraq according to the associated press. a policy that he should have implemented prior to the invasion when he was so gosh-it's-going-to-be-a-cakewalk-with-roses-strewn-in-our-path.
who spreads the rumors of 'liberal media'? it's not just the right wing. this was noted repeatedly at the third estate sunday review - how cjr daily (it has a new name now) would go over newsweek, time, and then drop in the national review as though that was balance (in their magazine reports). maybe they thought it was - they thought the new republican was 'left.'
kylie asked me what i thought of aol's 'rate the media' on iraq. i hadn't seen it (so thanks for the link.) through a series of 6 questions, you're asked to weigh in on the media and bully boy. which do you believe? nonsense like that.
if you're a conservative, you've got plenty of room to sound off in their six close-ended questions.
if you're liberal?
How would you rate the media's pre-war coverage?
Poor
36%
Fair
27%
Good
26%
Excellent
11%
Total Votes: 160,271
How do you rate the media's coverage of the war?
Poor
63%
Good
13%
Fair
13%
Excellent
11%
Total Votes: 162,173
now if i think the media does a poor job because they cover it and minimize (as many on the left believe), i'm giving props to bully boy's latest talking point that the media just won't report the good news. the whole poll's like that, see for yourself.
so, in the poll, you're either with the bully boy or the corporate press.
next 2 questions.
How would you rate the information you got from Bush before the war?
Good
35%
Poor
34%
Excellent
16%
Fair
15%
Total Votes: 105,855
How do you rate the information you get from Bush during the war?
Poor
35%
Good
33%
Excellent
18%
Fair
14%
Total Votes: 106,952
shocking that 35% are such dedicated kool-aid drinkers that they believe bully boy gave them good info in the lead up. note also that at least a thousand people who voted in question 4 chose to skip evaluating bully boy's info before the war.
last 2 questions:
How much does the media influence your opinion of the war?
Not at all
67%
A little
24%
A lot
10%
Total Votes: 104,261
How much does the Bush administration influence your opinion of the war?
Not at all
36%
A lot
36%
A little
29%
Total Votes: 105,206
see, it's set up as a battle between bully boy and the press. if you're a right winger, vote for bully boy. where is the left supposed to go? this is the sort of implied message the corporate media sends out all the time.
i don't think it's by accident. just like i don't think it's an accident that bean counters like james carville are presented on tv like they're lefties. (when they aren't.)
henry kissinger is back in the news. he's like the whore they've all slept with. but he's in the news over his time in the nixon white house. he was for building ties with iraq. the ambassador to iran wasn't for it: richard helms, later in charge of the cia and a liar to congress.
chalmers johnson on richard helms:
Richard Helms, the director of the CIA back in 1977, was convicted of a felony for lying to Congress. He said, no, we had nothing to do with the overthrow of [Chilean President] Salvador Allende when we had everything to do with it. He gets a suspended sentence, pays a small fine, walks into the CIA building at Langley, Virginia, and is met by a cheering crowd. Our hero! He's proudly maintained the principles of the secret intelligence service, which is the private army of the president and we have no idea what he's doing with it. Everything they do is secret. Every item in their budget is secret.
note this from the ap:
Faced with hundreds of claims by detainees at Guantanamo Bay, a federal appeals court pressed the Bush administration on Wednesday to say how much power judges will have to determine the legality of the detentions.
The three-judge panel is being asked to decide whether the Detainee Treatment Act, signed by
President Bush on Dec. 30, retroactively voids hundreds of lawsuits by abolishing a right to challenge detentions that has been part of U.S. legal principles since the nation's founding.
Judges David B. Sentelle and A. Raymond Randolph seemed willing to accept the administration's view that the act forces dismissal of more than 200 lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court here on behalf of over 300 detainees.
of course the hideous sentelle was willing to accept the administration's view - as long as it's republican, he'll walk around with a daisy up his crack if they ask him to. if you're not familiar with the hideous sentelle, read this by robert parry.
and note this by the center for constitutional rights:
On March 22 in New York a three-judge panel heard arguments from attorneys representing Guantánamo detainees in the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals (Al Odah v. United States of America and Boumediene v. Bush). They asked the panel to reject the Government's effort to have the cases dismissed. CCR won the Supreme Court case establishing the detainees' right to challenge their detention in U.S. court (Rasul v. Bush), and currently oversees more than 500 pro-bono attorneys representing the detainees.
Barbara Olshansky, CCR Deputy Legal Director who attended oral arguments today stated:
"Despite the government's effort to the contrary, I feel that the Court understood the great importance of preserving the writ of habeas corpus. Their questions about ensuring the Court's ability to consider factual evidence of innocence made clear that justice is their true concern."
Olshansky expects a ruling from the Court in the next few weeks. According to recent estimates, the government is currently detaining about 490 prisoners at the Guantánamo Bay prison camp. CCR is working around the clock to achieve their release to freedom or a fair trial.
now go check out cedric's 'Will Interview With The Vampire become the new Catcher in the Rye?'
3/22/2006
alan sandals endorsed by feminist majority pac for us senate seat in penn
"Feminist Majority PAC Endorses Alan Sandals for US Senate Race in PA, Statement of Eleanor Smeal"
3/21/2006 - The Feminist Majority PAC is very proud to announce its endorsement of Alan Sandals to be Pennsylvania's next United States Senator.
Alan Sandals' candidacy is in keeping with Pennsylvania's long history of progressive thought and action.
Pennsylvania has long been the heart of the feminist movement, as so many of the movement's leaders got their start in that state, including myself. I grew up in Pennsylvania and raised my own children during their formative years in the South Hills of Pittsburgh. I've traveled all over the state organizing for women's rights and social justice, and I served as president of the Pennsylvania National Organization for Women.
I feel strongly that Pennsylvania needs the kind of progressive leadership that Alan Sandals would bring.
The Feminist Majority PAC has thoroughly examined Sandals' record, and we believe he represents the best of the Pennsylvania tradition of women's equality and social justice. Pennsylvania needs a strong voice in the U.S. Senate for women's rights, reproductive rights, pension rights, economic justice, and the rights of older Americans, especially women. Alan Sandals would be that voice.
This is a critical time for reproductive rights in the United States. South Dakota has just passed a ban on virtually all abortions in the state, and some eleven other states are considering similar bans. The Senate has confirmed two anti-choice Supreme Court Justices in the past six months. And the Supreme Court will soon decide whether the federal abortion procedure ban is constitutional.
There is no question -- Pennsylvania voters are in favor of keeping abortion and family planning legal. Alan Sandals represents these strongly held views. As a pension rights lawyer, he also is a fighter for economic justice for women. Alan Sandals is the best choice to represent Pennsylvania in the U.S. Senate.
that's from the feminist wire daily and, if you live in pennsylvania, get on it. or send him money even if you don't. penn needs a senator, a real one. arlen's holding hands with the administration right now but not sure what base he's going to let them get to (nsa spying). he's not up for re-election. rick santorum is and the sooner he's out of office the quicker he can star in those solo j/o porn films he seems destined for. but casey junior is a creep and not worth voting for. casey junior is daddy's boy and there's something really sad about a grown man being daddy's little boy. so support alan sandals.
bully boy's working hard to try to build public support for his illegal and unpopular war. you just know he's going to need 6 weeks at the crawford ranchette any day now. i love how jennifer loven of ap calls it his 'iraq strategy.' there's a strategy? maybe she means when he infamously taunted 'bring it on'? it won't wash. just another daddy's boy trying to act like a man.
c.i. wrote about that and iraq this morning:
Bully Boy's efforts at the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk (not surprisingly) didn't charm/fool this community. This as CBS announces that Abdul Ameer Younis Hussein will be tried April 5th. The CBS cameraman will stand trial (no charges announced) exactly one year after he was taken into military custody. This news comes as Samir Mohammed Noor is released (Reuters cameran) after being held for eight months without charges. And in Baghdad, a car bomb has taken the life of at least one person and injured at least three others. Also in Baghdad, at least two people have been killed and forty-two wounded as Iraqi Shi'ites were targeted on their return from a pilgrimage. Away from Iraq, Dr. Malcolm Kendall-Smith is now facing a court martial for refusing to deploy to Basra. The prosecution/persecution, sounding a lot like Bully Boy, said that the issue of the legality of the war was "irrelevant." This as "US Faces Charges of Two Massacres of Iraqi Civilians." That's a small snap-shot of where we are as year four of the illegal war of choice begins.
in 1946, the united nations created the human rights commission. with bully boy's favorite reach around john bolton as our ambassador to the un it sees the death of the commission. in its place, a human rights council will be created. the us voted 'no' on this, by the way. from the article:
Many developing nations were critical of the plan for a new rights council, saying Western powers merely wanted to target poor countries and would protect their friends.
to find out what daryl hannah did for world water day click here.
i spent most of the night on the phone including over an hour with kat after i read her post. and i was on the phone with elaine as well and recommend her 'Musings' - highly recommend.
i spent so much time on the phone that was my whole night. so i'll leave it at this for the post tonight.
3/21/2006 - The Feminist Majority PAC is very proud to announce its endorsement of Alan Sandals to be Pennsylvania's next United States Senator.
Alan Sandals' candidacy is in keeping with Pennsylvania's long history of progressive thought and action.
Pennsylvania has long been the heart of the feminist movement, as so many of the movement's leaders got their start in that state, including myself. I grew up in Pennsylvania and raised my own children during their formative years in the South Hills of Pittsburgh. I've traveled all over the state organizing for women's rights and social justice, and I served as president of the Pennsylvania National Organization for Women.
I feel strongly that Pennsylvania needs the kind of progressive leadership that Alan Sandals would bring.
The Feminist Majority PAC has thoroughly examined Sandals' record, and we believe he represents the best of the Pennsylvania tradition of women's equality and social justice. Pennsylvania needs a strong voice in the U.S. Senate for women's rights, reproductive rights, pension rights, economic justice, and the rights of older Americans, especially women. Alan Sandals would be that voice.
This is a critical time for reproductive rights in the United States. South Dakota has just passed a ban on virtually all abortions in the state, and some eleven other states are considering similar bans. The Senate has confirmed two anti-choice Supreme Court Justices in the past six months. And the Supreme Court will soon decide whether the federal abortion procedure ban is constitutional.
There is no question -- Pennsylvania voters are in favor of keeping abortion and family planning legal. Alan Sandals represents these strongly held views. As a pension rights lawyer, he also is a fighter for economic justice for women. Alan Sandals is the best choice to represent Pennsylvania in the U.S. Senate.
that's from the feminist wire daily and, if you live in pennsylvania, get on it. or send him money even if you don't. penn needs a senator, a real one. arlen's holding hands with the administration right now but not sure what base he's going to let them get to (nsa spying). he's not up for re-election. rick santorum is and the sooner he's out of office the quicker he can star in those solo j/o porn films he seems destined for. but casey junior is a creep and not worth voting for. casey junior is daddy's boy and there's something really sad about a grown man being daddy's little boy. so support alan sandals.
bully boy's working hard to try to build public support for his illegal and unpopular war. you just know he's going to need 6 weeks at the crawford ranchette any day now. i love how jennifer loven of ap calls it his 'iraq strategy.' there's a strategy? maybe she means when he infamously taunted 'bring it on'? it won't wash. just another daddy's boy trying to act like a man.
c.i. wrote about that and iraq this morning:
Bully Boy's efforts at the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk (not surprisingly) didn't charm/fool this community. This as CBS announces that Abdul Ameer Younis Hussein will be tried April 5th. The CBS cameraman will stand trial (no charges announced) exactly one year after he was taken into military custody. This news comes as Samir Mohammed Noor is released (Reuters cameran) after being held for eight months without charges. And in Baghdad, a car bomb has taken the life of at least one person and injured at least three others. Also in Baghdad, at least two people have been killed and forty-two wounded as Iraqi Shi'ites were targeted on their return from a pilgrimage. Away from Iraq, Dr. Malcolm Kendall-Smith is now facing a court martial for refusing to deploy to Basra. The prosecution/persecution, sounding a lot like Bully Boy, said that the issue of the legality of the war was "irrelevant." This as "US Faces Charges of Two Massacres of Iraqi Civilians." That's a small snap-shot of where we are as year four of the illegal war of choice begins.
in 1946, the united nations created the human rights commission. with bully boy's favorite reach around john bolton as our ambassador to the un it sees the death of the commission. in its place, a human rights council will be created. the us voted 'no' on this, by the way. from the article:
Many developing nations were critical of the plan for a new rights council, saying Western powers merely wanted to target poor countries and would protect their friends.
to find out what daryl hannah did for world water day click here.
i spent most of the night on the phone including over an hour with kat after i read her post. and i was on the phone with elaine as well and recommend her 'Musings' - highly recommend.
i spent so much time on the phone that was my whole night. so i'll leave it at this for the post tonight.
3/21/2006
year 4 of the illegal war begins
it's the war queen hillary from isaiah's 'got war?' for the world today just nuts. look, she's got her blood mustache and drops of blood drip from it.
kylie e-mailed to say it's the bully boy's illegal war but a lot of others got us over there and keep us over there. i agree completely and hillary clinton is 1 of the 1s who has the blood lust just like the bully boy.
it's people like hillary that keep us over there and that's worth remembering as year four of the illegal war begins and reality seems to fade. (check out c.i. for how the new york times invents false 'trends' to avoid covering reality in iraq.)
cedric thinks he just lost his whole post. he goes to post it and gets a message just as it is posting 'blogger is down.' they're down an awful lot considering that most of the bugs never get worked out.
wally's already noted that bully boy is now saying that the troops will remain in iraq long after the bully boy is gone. another case of him starting something he can't finish.
the associated press has this:
America risks convicting the innocent and letting the guilty evade justice in how it handles detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the military attorney defending an Australian terror suspect held at the U.S. prison camp said Monday.
Maj. Michael Mori, a Marine Corps lawyer, told an audience at George Washington University that no civilized justice system would accept "information being acquired potentially under torture or questionable methods."
are we finally in a place where we can listen and hear? i don't know. i hope the warning won't go unheeded but i know we've had so much fear instilled in us and so many lies that this could just fly right over a lot of heads.
but what's happening in guantanamo goes against democracy, against the consitution and stains every american.
here's something from the jerusalem post:
On Saturday, Feingold said that for him the censure was not just an important moral decision but a smart political move. He disdained other Democrats who have been afraid to take a stronger stance against the administration and who warned last week that Feingold's motion would play into the hands of Republican strategists, who would use it as a way to rally their own base around an embattled president.
and from the bbc:
US military investigators have flown to Iraq to study reports that marines shot dead at least 15 civilians, including seven women and three children.
The incident is said to have happened in Haditha on 19 November 2005.
The military's initial claim that the civilians died in a roadside blast was disproved by an earlier investigation.
Investigators will now ask if the civilians died in crossfire or were targeted deliberately in a potential war crime.
and here's this from the independent:
The US military is investigating two incidents in which American soldiers killed at least 26 Iraqi civilians and then claimed that they were either guerrillas or had died in cross fire.
The growing evidence of retaliatory killings of unarmed Iraqi families, often including children, by US soldiers seemingly bent on punishing Iraqis after an attack, will spark comparisons with the massacre of Vietnamese villagers at My Lai in 1968.
US troops have been notorious among Iraqis for their willingness to shoot any Iraqi they see in the aftermath of an insurgent attack. But it is only now that convincing and detailed information is becoming available about the killings.
good thing bully boy's so full of optimism, right? it would be awful if reality confronted him and he had to see the ugliness of the illegal war he forced on the world.
jesse jackson is attempting to get the election in new orleans postponed because there have not been adequate provisions to ensure that displaced people will be able to vote.
cedric lost 1/2 his post. i've just stayed in this window waiting for word that blogger is back up so i didn't lose anything by attempting to post.
i told him to forget it and i'd grab the section he lost.
okay, this is what he wanted to note from democracy now:
Historic Black Church Faces Closure in New Orleans
And in New Orleans, ten people barricaded themselves inside one of the country's oldest black Roman Catholic Churches Monday to protest its planned closure. Freed slaves founded the St. Augustine Church in 1841. The New Orleans Archdiocese plans to close it down as a cost-saving measure. We reached Cynthia Dolliole, who is among the ten people inside the church. She said: "We are just trying to get answers as to why they would close the oldest black church in the US when everyone in New Orleans has lost everything else and now we are trying to make us lose our church; we're very disappointed and hoping someone will hear us and we'll get better answers than what we've gotten before."
with all the scandals the catholic church has been through it shocks me that they're inviting a new 1. why does a chuch exist? i never counted the collection plate so i always assumed it was to provide a community with spiritual support.
can you think of a community that needs support now more than new orleans? but the church wants to pull out. (we can't pull out of iraq but the catholic church can pull a church out of an area where it's needed - logic 2006.)
with everything that has been lost what is the catholic church thinking when they decide that the community can also lose a church? it seems like a slap in the face to me.
they need to rethink that decision and they need to stay. a church should always be where it is needed and if they don't think they're needed in new orleans, they'd kidding themselves.
seth's posted again so check him out. he's weighing in on when soaps go cowardly.
3/20/2006
bully boy thinks war is funny, do you?
that's isaiah's the world today just nuts.
it's the 3rd anniversary of the illegal invasion. 3 years of an illegal war.
if you don't get the joke bully boy's making about wmd - he made it to the d.c. press corps.
yucked it up about not being able to find wmd.
want to know something even sicker?
the press laughed.
they thought it was all a joke.
we're entering the 4th year of the occupation. over 200,000 iraqis have died.
2317 american military deaths in iraq; 17004 troops wounded.
and bully boy and the press suck up to 1 another in the illegal war he launched, the illegal war they helped 'market.'
you should be disgusted. he can't be. he can't even say 'war.'
the press can't be. they can't even take accountability for their actions.
'and the war drags on' is worth reading every sunday & thursday but especially on the 3rd anniversary.
bully boy won't end the illegal war.
only we can.
so don't let this topic fall by the wayside tomorrow. talk about the war. bring it up with your friends, with your teachers, in classes, anywhere you can, anyway you can.
it's all grins & giggles to the bully boy. there's been no sacrifice for him.
don't let him get away with his illegal war of choice that never should have been launched and that's taking lives each day.
bring the troops home. we can make it happen.
if you're not sure you can do it, read this.
3/18/2006
stop depending on corporate media (and those who schill for it)
i told cedric to blog and then i would. we both agreed to put off blogging last night so that we could take part in a thing common ills community member polly was doing. we were glad to take part but we both thought we'd have time to blog early today. that didn't happen.
i'm not complaining.
please, we're in holding pattern on The Third Estate Sunday Review because c.i.'s at a rally. this is the 3rd location c.i.'s been in today. i won't dare whine about being tired with that example in my face.
we've got two ideas for stories for the third estate sunday review and dona's asking that we try to think of at least 1 short entry. everyone's exhausted from speaking out today. i hope you are too. it's a good kind of exhaustion but it's also true that people need their rest and, as dona pointed out, we may not get any tonight.
tomorrow night, sunday night, on RadioNation with Laura Flanders christian parenti will be one of the guests so be sure to listen. he's smart, he's sexy, he's parenti. don't miss him.
cedric's written 'About the fighters: Russ Feingold, Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez' and you should check it out. those are fighters. they put the rest of us to shame.
"New York Times Chief Military Correspondent Michael Gordon Defends Pre-War Reporting on WMDs" is what you need to check out. amy and juan don't take any crap from michael gordon and all michael gordon has to offer is crap.
and read c.i.'s "NYT: Can't own up to mistakes, be it the paper or Michael Gordon" which outlines just how full of crap michael gordon and his paper are. fly boy and i were reading that this morning. fly boy said, 'c.i.'s really not in the mood for crap these days.' no.
i think it has to do with seeing so much nonsense around us. so many people acting like a war isn't going on. acting like people aren't dying. and you've got supposed left of center people who are still talking the b.s. of 'stay the course.'
i wonder about some blogs who whine that they don't get attention but all they do is repeat the talking points from the dnc. if they missed it, established democrats aren't real popular right now. russ feingold is popular. the spineless cowards? not.
but, and you know who they are, you see a lot of idiots rushing in to shore up weak ass policies and statements. like the flag waver who didn't know a thing about cindy sheehan but that didn't prevent her from writing about it. has any 1 ever been more stupid than that woman who, in the midst of camp casey, wrote that cindy sheehan wasn't for bringing the troops home?
it's ignorance. it's because you've got people who just tell you what the democratic party says and turn to mainstream media for their news. they rely on mainstream media. you never see them mention democracy now. now maybe if the idiot had watched democracy now she would have known who cindy sheehan was before camp casey and she would have known that cindy sheehan is for and has been for bringing the troops home now.
so you get those idiots and you wonder why the country is in the state it is?
take the dope who, in january of 2005, hectors c.i. about how james dobson needs to be respected and listened to. now if that was a right-wing site, no problem. but that fool, a man this time, thought he was left-of-center if not left.
that was just nonsense.
people like that should have to eat their damn words. they are so uninformed and they go and blog about something they know nothing about. whether it's james dobson or cindy sheehan or promoting the hideous t.d. jakes.
know something about what you're talking about.
or how about the fool claiming 'free speech' allows recruiters on campus. no, it doesn't. free speech isn't for the federal government. the federal government did not need a bill of rights. that's not why it was created.
and it's these voices that have pissed off so many.
we're tired of the uninformed still saying 'stay the course.' maybe, because their posts are archived, they can't pretend like they haven't been preaching that all this time?
you can put all the flags up on your site that you want, if you want this war, get your ass over there and serve. quit hiding behind the flag and quit trying to pretend your left.
you're nothing but a dlc dem.
1 of the idiots, the man, wrote something like 'simon rosenberg is making sense' or some such nonsense. c.i. asked him, 'are you for the war?' this was back in 2004 or 2005. no, he said, he was opposed to the war. then why didn't he know that simon rosenberg was for the war before the war and during the war?
i mean, come on people, use your brains. try reading.
they think because they went to the popular click of the day they're informed. they know the 'big story' of the day, as reported by mainstream media, but because they don't buy a paper or magazine, that's all the know.
you need to quit relying on the mainstream media that's failed this country repeatedly.
and little wimps who want to say 'i can't speak out on the war' need to just shut up then. seriously. there's one 'online mag' (you know which 1) that thought it was okay to go to town on bright eyes and kat. they can't speak out against the war, this online mag, but they can slam people who do (while they promote the new republic). that's nonsense.
seriously, it's useless, it's just wasting every 1's time.
of the little fool who thought she was funny trashing ms. magazine. well, if you can't read, maybe all you can do is blog about a cover photograph. (and even that you can't comprehend.)
we're sick of them and their nonsense.
we're sick of a supreme court judge retiring and a supposed feminist blogging about her dopey vacation instead of the retirement. (repeatedly. for days and days and days.)
the bully boy is destroying the constitution, we've got 2 wars (afganistan and iraq) and bully boy wants a 3rd, reproductive rights are under attack, gays and lesbians are under attack and there's just a feeling of 'i'm not in the mood for the nonsense.'
i get e-mails complaining about that. people wondering why it's so hard for some 1 who sets up a blog to declare a position on the war, for instance? i have no idea. i have no idea why some 1 would go to the trouble of setting up a blog to share their thoughts and have no thought to share on the illegal occupation.
i think a lot of people have made themselves useless.
and unless we want 3 more years of this war (or more than that), we need to use our voices. online or offline, we need to use our voices. we need to talk about the war. about the wars overseas and the wars at home. and if we're not doing that, if we're busy talking about the latest time cover story because it's the hot link of the day (and a cover story that media matters will demolish shortly - after some of the dopes and dupes have praised it), what good are we to any 1?
so there is a feeling of 'i've had enough.'
if you've had enough, use your voice. and seek out alternative media.
3 years into the war that corporate media sold, it's time to stop depending on the corporate media.
i'm not complaining.
please, we're in holding pattern on The Third Estate Sunday Review because c.i.'s at a rally. this is the 3rd location c.i.'s been in today. i won't dare whine about being tired with that example in my face.
we've got two ideas for stories for the third estate sunday review and dona's asking that we try to think of at least 1 short entry. everyone's exhausted from speaking out today. i hope you are too. it's a good kind of exhaustion but it's also true that people need their rest and, as dona pointed out, we may not get any tonight.
tomorrow night, sunday night, on RadioNation with Laura Flanders christian parenti will be one of the guests so be sure to listen. he's smart, he's sexy, he's parenti. don't miss him.
cedric's written 'About the fighters: Russ Feingold, Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez' and you should check it out. those are fighters. they put the rest of us to shame.
"New York Times Chief Military Correspondent Michael Gordon Defends Pre-War Reporting on WMDs" is what you need to check out. amy and juan don't take any crap from michael gordon and all michael gordon has to offer is crap.
and read c.i.'s "NYT: Can't own up to mistakes, be it the paper or Michael Gordon" which outlines just how full of crap michael gordon and his paper are. fly boy and i were reading that this morning. fly boy said, 'c.i.'s really not in the mood for crap these days.' no.
i think it has to do with seeing so much nonsense around us. so many people acting like a war isn't going on. acting like people aren't dying. and you've got supposed left of center people who are still talking the b.s. of 'stay the course.'
i wonder about some blogs who whine that they don't get attention but all they do is repeat the talking points from the dnc. if they missed it, established democrats aren't real popular right now. russ feingold is popular. the spineless cowards? not.
but, and you know who they are, you see a lot of idiots rushing in to shore up weak ass policies and statements. like the flag waver who didn't know a thing about cindy sheehan but that didn't prevent her from writing about it. has any 1 ever been more stupid than that woman who, in the midst of camp casey, wrote that cindy sheehan wasn't for bringing the troops home?
it's ignorance. it's because you've got people who just tell you what the democratic party says and turn to mainstream media for their news. they rely on mainstream media. you never see them mention democracy now. now maybe if the idiot had watched democracy now she would have known who cindy sheehan was before camp casey and she would have known that cindy sheehan is for and has been for bringing the troops home now.
so you get those idiots and you wonder why the country is in the state it is?
take the dope who, in january of 2005, hectors c.i. about how james dobson needs to be respected and listened to. now if that was a right-wing site, no problem. but that fool, a man this time, thought he was left-of-center if not left.
that was just nonsense.
people like that should have to eat their damn words. they are so uninformed and they go and blog about something they know nothing about. whether it's james dobson or cindy sheehan or promoting the hideous t.d. jakes.
know something about what you're talking about.
or how about the fool claiming 'free speech' allows recruiters on campus. no, it doesn't. free speech isn't for the federal government. the federal government did not need a bill of rights. that's not why it was created.
and it's these voices that have pissed off so many.
we're tired of the uninformed still saying 'stay the course.' maybe, because their posts are archived, they can't pretend like they haven't been preaching that all this time?
you can put all the flags up on your site that you want, if you want this war, get your ass over there and serve. quit hiding behind the flag and quit trying to pretend your left.
you're nothing but a dlc dem.
1 of the idiots, the man, wrote something like 'simon rosenberg is making sense' or some such nonsense. c.i. asked him, 'are you for the war?' this was back in 2004 or 2005. no, he said, he was opposed to the war. then why didn't he know that simon rosenberg was for the war before the war and during the war?
i mean, come on people, use your brains. try reading.
they think because they went to the popular click of the day they're informed. they know the 'big story' of the day, as reported by mainstream media, but because they don't buy a paper or magazine, that's all the know.
you need to quit relying on the mainstream media that's failed this country repeatedly.
and little wimps who want to say 'i can't speak out on the war' need to just shut up then. seriously. there's one 'online mag' (you know which 1) that thought it was okay to go to town on bright eyes and kat. they can't speak out against the war, this online mag, but they can slam people who do (while they promote the new republic). that's nonsense.
seriously, it's useless, it's just wasting every 1's time.
of the little fool who thought she was funny trashing ms. magazine. well, if you can't read, maybe all you can do is blog about a cover photograph. (and even that you can't comprehend.)
we're sick of them and their nonsense.
we're sick of a supreme court judge retiring and a supposed feminist blogging about her dopey vacation instead of the retirement. (repeatedly. for days and days and days.)
the bully boy is destroying the constitution, we've got 2 wars (afganistan and iraq) and bully boy wants a 3rd, reproductive rights are under attack, gays and lesbians are under attack and there's just a feeling of 'i'm not in the mood for the nonsense.'
i get e-mails complaining about that. people wondering why it's so hard for some 1 who sets up a blog to declare a position on the war, for instance? i have no idea. i have no idea why some 1 would go to the trouble of setting up a blog to share their thoughts and have no thought to share on the illegal occupation.
i think a lot of people have made themselves useless.
and unless we want 3 more years of this war (or more than that), we need to use our voices. online or offline, we need to use our voices. we need to talk about the war. about the wars overseas and the wars at home. and if we're not doing that, if we're busy talking about the latest time cover story because it's the hot link of the day (and a cover story that media matters will demolish shortly - after some of the dopes and dupes have praised it), what good are we to any 1?
so there is a feeling of 'i've had enough.'
if you've had enough, use your voice. and seek out alternative media.
3 years into the war that corporate media sold, it's time to stop depending on the corporate media.
3/16/2006
never cheerlead an illegal war
okay, i need some help here. sing with me here, we're going for the melody to dionne warwick's 'i'll never fall in love again.'
what do you get when you cheerlead an illegal war?
bit of reality to burst your bubble.
that's what you get for all your trouble
mara liasson, never cheerlead a war again.
what do you get when you rah-rah-rah?
americans coming home with worse than pneumonia
some of whom can never phone you
chris matthews, never cheerlead a war again
chris matthews, never cheerlead a war again.
don't tell me what's it all about
because you were a fool and people died
from those lies
your lies that bind you
that is why i'm here to remind you.
what do you get when you cheerlead an illegal war?
you only get lies and pain and sorrow
so take a vow for peaceful tomorrows
never cheerlead an illegal war again.
never cheerlead an illegal war again.
the inspiration for the above version of hal davis and burt bacharach's classic is a new item from fair - '"The Final Word Is Hooray!" Remembering the Iraq War's Pollyanna pundits' and here are some of my personal favorites of dupes embarrassing themselves as they got on board for the illegal war:
"Oh, it was breathtaking. I mean I was almost starting to think that we had become inured to everything that we'd seen of this war over the past three weeks; all this sort of saturation. And finally, when we saw that it was such a just true, genuine _expression. It was reminiscent, I think, of the fall of the Berlin Wall. And just sort of that pure emotional _expression, not choreographed, not stage-managed, the way so many things these days seem to be. Really breathtaking." (Washington Post reporter Ceci Connolly, appearing on Fox News Channel on 4/9/03, discussing the pulling down of a Saddam Hussein statue in Baghdad, an event later revealed to have been a U.S. military PSYOPS operation [stunt]--Los Angeles Times, 7/3/04)
"The war winds down, politics heats up.... Picture perfect. Part Spider-Man, part Tom Cruise, part Ronald Reagan. The president seizes the moment on an aircraft carrier in the Pacific." (PBS's Gwen Ifill, 5/2/03, on George W. Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech)
"This has been a tough war for commentators on the American left. To hope for defeat meant cheering for Saddam Hussein. To hope for victory meant cheering for President Bush. The toppling of Mr. Hussein, or at least a statue of him, has made their arguments even harder to defend. Liberal writers for ideologically driven magazines like The Nation and for less overtly political ones like The New Yorker did not predict a defeat, but the terrible consequences many warned of have not happened. Now liberal commentators must address the victory at hand and confront an ascendant conservative juggernaut that asserts United States might can set the world right." (New York Times reporter David Carr, 4/16/03)
"Over the next couple of weeks when we find the chemical weapons this guy was amassing, the fact that this war was attacked by the left and so the right was so vindicated, I think, really means that the left is going to have to hang its head for three or four more years." (Fox News Channel's Dick Morris, 4/9/03)
use the link to relive more embarrassing moments of the war cheerleaders.
so how are you protesting the war on the third anniversary of the invasion?
andrea and her best friend hannah are going to read a piece they wrote together to their grandmother's saturday mah jong group. andrea asked her asked her grandmother and she said 'sure.' andrea says she and hannah are really excited and have been practicing their presentation in front of her grandmother who says it's really good.
i'm sure it is and i'm sure if 2 young women, 12 year olds, can find a way to make their voices heard, you can too.
goldie's having her friends over for a sleep over like mindy's doing this week (and like goldie did in september) but this time, before the sleep over, they're going to walk up and down the sidewalks carrying signs. they've already made 'stop the war'; 'bring the troops home'; and 'bush lied people died' and they're working on the other 1s. goldie's mom told her it was fine as long as she made sure the other mothers knew ahead of time so she and mom called the other mother's and everything is okay with it. they're working a cheer to chant right now.
7 high schoolers are attending their 1st protest. some of you who became protest veterans in 2005 are gearing up for the next wave and bringing friends along.
there's a huge group in oregon that's working on sign they'll hang from a bridge over a highway.
we've got 2 different women organizing teach ins with their friends.
so what are the rest of you doing?
if nothing else, you can make a point to talk 1 on 1 to a friend about the war. in my opinion, that's the very least you can do, bare minimum.
check out elaine's "Peace doesn't come about through silence" and wally's "THIS JUST IN! BULLY BOY LAUNCHES OPERATION GET IT UP!" and c.i.'s "NYT: It's only news when Republicans issue statements."
and do something. make your voice heard.
fair
war cheerleaders
like maria said paz
the daily jot
the common ills
what do you get when you cheerlead an illegal war?
bit of reality to burst your bubble.
that's what you get for all your trouble
mara liasson, never cheerlead a war again.
what do you get when you rah-rah-rah?
americans coming home with worse than pneumonia
some of whom can never phone you
chris matthews, never cheerlead a war again
chris matthews, never cheerlead a war again.
don't tell me what's it all about
because you were a fool and people died
from those lies
your lies that bind you
that is why i'm here to remind you.
what do you get when you cheerlead an illegal war?
you only get lies and pain and sorrow
so take a vow for peaceful tomorrows
never cheerlead an illegal war again.
never cheerlead an illegal war again.
the inspiration for the above version of hal davis and burt bacharach's classic is a new item from fair - '"The Final Word Is Hooray!" Remembering the Iraq War's Pollyanna pundits' and here are some of my personal favorites of dupes embarrassing themselves as they got on board for the illegal war:
"Oh, it was breathtaking. I mean I was almost starting to think that we had become inured to everything that we'd seen of this war over the past three weeks; all this sort of saturation. And finally, when we saw that it was such a just true, genuine _expression. It was reminiscent, I think, of the fall of the Berlin Wall. And just sort of that pure emotional _expression, not choreographed, not stage-managed, the way so many things these days seem to be. Really breathtaking." (Washington Post reporter Ceci Connolly, appearing on Fox News Channel on 4/9/03, discussing the pulling down of a Saddam Hussein statue in Baghdad, an event later revealed to have been a U.S. military PSYOPS operation [stunt]--Los Angeles Times, 7/3/04)
"The war winds down, politics heats up.... Picture perfect. Part Spider-Man, part Tom Cruise, part Ronald Reagan. The president seizes the moment on an aircraft carrier in the Pacific." (PBS's Gwen Ifill, 5/2/03, on George W. Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech)
"This has been a tough war for commentators on the American left. To hope for defeat meant cheering for Saddam Hussein. To hope for victory meant cheering for President Bush. The toppling of Mr. Hussein, or at least a statue of him, has made their arguments even harder to defend. Liberal writers for ideologically driven magazines like The Nation and for less overtly political ones like The New Yorker did not predict a defeat, but the terrible consequences many warned of have not happened. Now liberal commentators must address the victory at hand and confront an ascendant conservative juggernaut that asserts United States might can set the world right." (New York Times reporter David Carr, 4/16/03)
"Over the next couple of weeks when we find the chemical weapons this guy was amassing, the fact that this war was attacked by the left and so the right was so vindicated, I think, really means that the left is going to have to hang its head for three or four more years." (Fox News Channel's Dick Morris, 4/9/03)
use the link to relive more embarrassing moments of the war cheerleaders.
so how are you protesting the war on the third anniversary of the invasion?
andrea and her best friend hannah are going to read a piece they wrote together to their grandmother's saturday mah jong group. andrea asked her asked her grandmother and she said 'sure.' andrea says she and hannah are really excited and have been practicing their presentation in front of her grandmother who says it's really good.
i'm sure it is and i'm sure if 2 young women, 12 year olds, can find a way to make their voices heard, you can too.
goldie's having her friends over for a sleep over like mindy's doing this week (and like goldie did in september) but this time, before the sleep over, they're going to walk up and down the sidewalks carrying signs. they've already made 'stop the war'; 'bring the troops home'; and 'bush lied people died' and they're working on the other 1s. goldie's mom told her it was fine as long as she made sure the other mothers knew ahead of time so she and mom called the other mother's and everything is okay with it. they're working a cheer to chant right now.
7 high schoolers are attending their 1st protest. some of you who became protest veterans in 2005 are gearing up for the next wave and bringing friends along.
there's a huge group in oregon that's working on sign they'll hang from a bridge over a highway.
we've got 2 different women organizing teach ins with their friends.
so what are the rest of you doing?
if nothing else, you can make a point to talk 1 on 1 to a friend about the war. in my opinion, that's the very least you can do, bare minimum.
check out elaine's "Peace doesn't come about through silence" and wally's "THIS JUST IN! BULLY BOY LAUNCHES OPERATION GET IT UP!" and c.i.'s "NYT: It's only news when Republicans issue statements."
and do something. make your voice heard.
fair
war cheerleaders
like maria said paz
the daily jot
the common ills
3/15/2006
you don't need a pollster to know which way the wind blows
Feingold Criticizes Fellow Dems Bush Measure
Here in the United States, Senator Russ Feingold has lashed out at fellow Democrats for not supporting his measure to censure President Bush for his warrantless domestic spy program. Feingold has failed to attract any co-sponsors. Appearing on Fox News, Feingold said: "I'm amazed at Democrats, cowering with this president's numbers so low. The administration just has to raise the specter of the war and the Democrats run and hide. … Too many Democrats are going to do the same thing they did in 2000 and 2004.… [Democrats shouldn't] cower to the argument, that whatever you do, if you question the administration, you're helping the terrorists."
that's from democracy now. so are we surprised?
the democrats are still running scared. the evan blahs are running the show and the result is every 1 plays duck and cover. scared little turtles afraid to come out of the shells.
they better learn to do something or quit complaining about the results of elections.
2006 is supposed to be a lock, a sure thing.
of course we heard that in 2004 and 2002 as well. remember?
in 2002, it was 'we're going to win! we're going to win! the opposition party always, always, always picks up seats in the mid-terms!' and?
they lost.
in 2004, it was 'people are sick of bully boy so we're going to win!' and?
they're so scared to say a damn thing.
i'm sick of the hillary clintons who want to get their war on. i'm sick of the bean counters who crunch the numbers. i'm sick of james carville most of all.
he really needs to go away.
he and paul begela are cowards and have always been cowards. carville knows how to shout, when he's not stammering, but what's the point when he can't stand up for anything?
could he or the weasel begela stand up for cynthia mckinney? no, they ran with the press lies and slammed her.
that's who they are. if there's a hint of controversy, they run.
and i really do not think 1 of our talking heads should be married to mary matalin. not because she's a republican, not because she wipes the floor with him in their 'cutesy' tv matchups, but because she's involved with cheney.
with all that's happened regarding scooter libby and the outing of valerie plame, with the hunting accident, with every thing, he needs to step away from the limelight.
we have no idea who aided in the lies and who didn't. matalin's a spinner. she's often a liar. if she's part of the lie the people into war, then we don't need her husband speaking for us.
if she was involved in the conspiracy to out valerie plame, do you think she'll get what's coming to her or will she get a pass?
i'm not saying she is involved. i'm saying there are too many serious issues coming out of the vice president's office and someone so close to it should not be the spouse of a democratic talking head. he needs to step away from the limelight.
worst case scenario, he's married to this year's g. gordon liddy. the democratic party doesn't need him speaking for them.
so what do we lose out on?
a few of his bizarre sayings that make tim russert chuckle and make us look like idiots?
that's really all we miss out on.
he's 1 of the triangulators. his whole life is triangulation.
he's not going to step away, even if mary matalin gets frog marched off, so we should wake up to the fact that he's not a political genius.
he can't figure out how to solve a problem and his campaign strategy for bill clinton was nothing but the most simplistic crap that every 1's used since. in bill clinton's 1st campaign, there was betsy wright to balance out carville and wright got the big picture.
carville doesn't. that's why he runs such crappy campaigns and why kerry's campaign was doomed the minute carville and the others hopped on board.
it's all about 'don't make any waves and you'll win.'
this while the other side launches attacks and makes their own waves.
so the candidate floats along while a tidal wave mounts until it's wipe out time.
then there's jimmy carville within 2 weeks telling the press how the candidate failed. the candidate. it's never jimmy carville's fault.
i'm really sick of him and his centrist, b.s. crowd that can't speak honestly because they're too busy polling to figure out what people MIGHT think.
i don't know what's worse, those people are a democratic party inane enough to send out a fund raising e-mail entitled 'russ feingold is a traitor.' after the generic salutation, 'howard dean' tells you that's what the republicans want you to think. (i didn't get an e-mail with that title from republicans, 'howard dean.') then they hit you up for money.
here's some of that e-mail:
That's what Republicans want you to think.
They are so scared of having a legitimate debate about Iraq or national security that they have only one reaction to news of their failures or calls for accountability.
On Monday, Democratic Senator Russ Feingold introduced legislation to censure the President for breaking the law by creating a secret domestic spying program. Agree or disagree with his proposal, as a Senator -- and as an American -- he has the right to speak his mind and express his views without Republican Senators questioning his patriotism.
But that's exactly what happened. This week Republican Senator Wayne Allard of Colorado, in an interview with Fox News radio, said in response to Feingold's action that he has "time and time again [sided] with the terrorists".
they're scared, 'howard'? them? i didn't see any democrats in the senate rushing to defend feingold. so who's scared?
seriously, let's be objective. wayne allard's an idiot. but he's speaking his mind. his inflamatory statement passed his polling group or he side stepped them. where are the democrats?
some 1 needs to tell them: YOU DON'T NEED A POLLSTER TO KNOW WHICH WAY THE WIND BLOWS.
until they can figure that out, they're stuck in their own mess as sure as we're stuck in iraq.
tomorrow, i'm going to note some things that readers are planning to mark the 3rd annivesary of the invasion but tonight, i'm too pissed off at cowardly democrats. if you need to know about something serious, something the dems won't talk about, go read c.i.'s "NYT: They're calling the current situation in Iraq 'strife'". i read it this morning while drinking my coffee. i had parts of read it to me by t over the phone. (she loves it.) then fly boy came by tonight (not a good night because we had the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin) and wanted to talk about it and he's still wondering exactly what it takes up to wake up the big media and the democratic party to what's going on in iraq? i have no idea.
Here in the United States, Senator Russ Feingold has lashed out at fellow Democrats for not supporting his measure to censure President Bush for his warrantless domestic spy program. Feingold has failed to attract any co-sponsors. Appearing on Fox News, Feingold said: "I'm amazed at Democrats, cowering with this president's numbers so low. The administration just has to raise the specter of the war and the Democrats run and hide. … Too many Democrats are going to do the same thing they did in 2000 and 2004.… [Democrats shouldn't] cower to the argument, that whatever you do, if you question the administration, you're helping the terrorists."
that's from democracy now. so are we surprised?
the democrats are still running scared. the evan blahs are running the show and the result is every 1 plays duck and cover. scared little turtles afraid to come out of the shells.
they better learn to do something or quit complaining about the results of elections.
2006 is supposed to be a lock, a sure thing.
of course we heard that in 2004 and 2002 as well. remember?
in 2002, it was 'we're going to win! we're going to win! the opposition party always, always, always picks up seats in the mid-terms!' and?
they lost.
in 2004, it was 'people are sick of bully boy so we're going to win!' and?
they're so scared to say a damn thing.
i'm sick of the hillary clintons who want to get their war on. i'm sick of the bean counters who crunch the numbers. i'm sick of james carville most of all.
he really needs to go away.
he and paul begela are cowards and have always been cowards. carville knows how to shout, when he's not stammering, but what's the point when he can't stand up for anything?
could he or the weasel begela stand up for cynthia mckinney? no, they ran with the press lies and slammed her.
that's who they are. if there's a hint of controversy, they run.
and i really do not think 1 of our talking heads should be married to mary matalin. not because she's a republican, not because she wipes the floor with him in their 'cutesy' tv matchups, but because she's involved with cheney.
with all that's happened regarding scooter libby and the outing of valerie plame, with the hunting accident, with every thing, he needs to step away from the limelight.
we have no idea who aided in the lies and who didn't. matalin's a spinner. she's often a liar. if she's part of the lie the people into war, then we don't need her husband speaking for us.
if she was involved in the conspiracy to out valerie plame, do you think she'll get what's coming to her or will she get a pass?
i'm not saying she is involved. i'm saying there are too many serious issues coming out of the vice president's office and someone so close to it should not be the spouse of a democratic talking head. he needs to step away from the limelight.
worst case scenario, he's married to this year's g. gordon liddy. the democratic party doesn't need him speaking for them.
so what do we lose out on?
a few of his bizarre sayings that make tim russert chuckle and make us look like idiots?
that's really all we miss out on.
he's 1 of the triangulators. his whole life is triangulation.
he's not going to step away, even if mary matalin gets frog marched off, so we should wake up to the fact that he's not a political genius.
he can't figure out how to solve a problem and his campaign strategy for bill clinton was nothing but the most simplistic crap that every 1's used since. in bill clinton's 1st campaign, there was betsy wright to balance out carville and wright got the big picture.
carville doesn't. that's why he runs such crappy campaigns and why kerry's campaign was doomed the minute carville and the others hopped on board.
it's all about 'don't make any waves and you'll win.'
this while the other side launches attacks and makes their own waves.
so the candidate floats along while a tidal wave mounts until it's wipe out time.
then there's jimmy carville within 2 weeks telling the press how the candidate failed. the candidate. it's never jimmy carville's fault.
i'm really sick of him and his centrist, b.s. crowd that can't speak honestly because they're too busy polling to figure out what people MIGHT think.
i don't know what's worse, those people are a democratic party inane enough to send out a fund raising e-mail entitled 'russ feingold is a traitor.' after the generic salutation, 'howard dean' tells you that's what the republicans want you to think. (i didn't get an e-mail with that title from republicans, 'howard dean.') then they hit you up for money.
here's some of that e-mail:
That's what Republicans want you to think.
They are so scared of having a legitimate debate about Iraq or national security that they have only one reaction to news of their failures or calls for accountability.
On Monday, Democratic Senator Russ Feingold introduced legislation to censure the President for breaking the law by creating a secret domestic spying program. Agree or disagree with his proposal, as a Senator -- and as an American -- he has the right to speak his mind and express his views without Republican Senators questioning his patriotism.
But that's exactly what happened. This week Republican Senator Wayne Allard of Colorado, in an interview with Fox News radio, said in response to Feingold's action that he has "time and time again [sided] with the terrorists".
they're scared, 'howard'? them? i didn't see any democrats in the senate rushing to defend feingold. so who's scared?
seriously, let's be objective. wayne allard's an idiot. but he's speaking his mind. his inflamatory statement passed his polling group or he side stepped them. where are the democrats?
some 1 needs to tell them: YOU DON'T NEED A POLLSTER TO KNOW WHICH WAY THE WIND BLOWS.
until they can figure that out, they're stuck in their own mess as sure as we're stuck in iraq.
tomorrow, i'm going to note some things that readers are planning to mark the 3rd annivesary of the invasion but tonight, i'm too pissed off at cowardly democrats. if you need to know about something serious, something the dems won't talk about, go read c.i.'s "NYT: They're calling the current situation in Iraq 'strife'". i read it this morning while drinking my coffee. i had parts of read it to me by t over the phone. (she loves it.) then fly boy came by tonight (not a good night because we had the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin) and wanted to talk about it and he's still wondering exactly what it takes up to wake up the big media and the democratic party to what's going on in iraq? i have no idea.
3/14/2006
what are you doing to be heard?
so the weekend is fastly approaching. have you made your plans for how you're going to make yourself heard on the third anniverary of the invasion of iraq?
now i know i have young readers but i know they are strong readers. you never fail to amaze me with your strength and your convictions. mindy is 13 and is planning a sleep over with her 12 girlfriends. they're all against the war so what she's going to do is try to make sure they all have information on the war. she was wondering if i had any suggestions for dvds she could show? she wants to show at least 2 movies. i wrote her back that if she only shows 1 movie it needs to be danny schechter's weapons of mass deception.
i'm participating in a discussion on that tonight for the gina and krista round-robin. i was out today and there seems to be some problem with my cell phone judging by the number of people complaining to my answering machine here. i did have some messages on my cell phone but i've got a lot of people who called my landline and left a message on answering machine saying they called repeatedly and couldn't get through.
but that's the 1 movie to watch if you're only going to watch 1. i'm sending mindy another movie that's shorter and is about falluja. but i told her that it should be used only after and and only if every 1 is still in the mood for another dvd.
why? because you don't just need to watch, you need to discuss. so if you watch danny schechter's documentary and then discuss it, with every 1 sharing, it will have a huge impact. you shouldn't attempt to load every 1 down with a series of dvds.
if you're not able to attend a rally, then you need to be thinking along those lines. something with information that people will watch (and enjoy) that can prompt a discussion.
we need to all be having a dialogue. (c.i. wrote about how the media refuses to do so last night.)
if you don't use your voice, what good are you?
hey, sounds like a question for the senate democrats, right? if you missed it, they're having a hard time figuring out where they stand regarding russ feingold's call for censure:
"Democrats run and hide" when the administration invokes the war on terrorism, Feingold told reporters.
Feingold introduced censure legislation Monday in the Senate but not a single Democrat has embraced it. Several have said they want to see the results of a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation before supporting any punitive legislation.
isn't that sweet. aren't they so brave?
cedric and i spoke about this today and we can't believe how disgusted we are with the cowards.
he's already shared his thoughts on it so be sure to read that.
right before i started this entry, kat called me about a story she heard on kpfa's evening news tonight. i hadn't heard about it but i looked online and here's a link to an associated press story on the topic. what's going on?
The Bush administration last year quietly rewrote the rules for allowing gays and lesbians to receive national-security clearances, drawing complaints from civil rights activists.
The Bush administration said security clearances cannot be denied "solely on the basis of the sexual orientation of the individual." But it removed language saying sexual orientation "may not be used as a basis for or a disqualifying factor in determining a person's eligibility for a security clearance."
are you surprised? you shouldn't be. and lincoln logs who support bully boy (log cabin republicans) and other gay and lesbian people who support him should either admit that they're self-hating or masochistic or both if they can't wake up to the reality that they are not a part of the republican big tent.
that is so disgusting. this was done in december. stephen hadley distributed the changes on dec. 29th. we hear about it now.
guess what else? bully boy has a record. his administration has rejected, said no to, storm disaster loans more than any administration in 15 years. well it's not like any 1 needed them in 2005 or now, right? it's not like we've had any hurricanes in years, right?
he's a loser. he's an embarrassment. he's a war criminal.
which must be why pat roberts has decided to rush through the investigation into the faked intel that bully boy used to lead us into an illegal war.
so are we going to use our voices? we need to. mindy's using her's. all you high schoolers reading, is a 13 year-old about to show you up? (i think she might.)
now i know i have young readers but i know they are strong readers. you never fail to amaze me with your strength and your convictions. mindy is 13 and is planning a sleep over with her 12 girlfriends. they're all against the war so what she's going to do is try to make sure they all have information on the war. she was wondering if i had any suggestions for dvds she could show? she wants to show at least 2 movies. i wrote her back that if she only shows 1 movie it needs to be danny schechter's weapons of mass deception.
i'm participating in a discussion on that tonight for the gina and krista round-robin. i was out today and there seems to be some problem with my cell phone judging by the number of people complaining to my answering machine here. i did have some messages on my cell phone but i've got a lot of people who called my landline and left a message on answering machine saying they called repeatedly and couldn't get through.
but that's the 1 movie to watch if you're only going to watch 1. i'm sending mindy another movie that's shorter and is about falluja. but i told her that it should be used only after and and only if every 1 is still in the mood for another dvd.
why? because you don't just need to watch, you need to discuss. so if you watch danny schechter's documentary and then discuss it, with every 1 sharing, it will have a huge impact. you shouldn't attempt to load every 1 down with a series of dvds.
if you're not able to attend a rally, then you need to be thinking along those lines. something with information that people will watch (and enjoy) that can prompt a discussion.
we need to all be having a dialogue. (c.i. wrote about how the media refuses to do so last night.)
if you don't use your voice, what good are you?
hey, sounds like a question for the senate democrats, right? if you missed it, they're having a hard time figuring out where they stand regarding russ feingold's call for censure:
"Democrats run and hide" when the administration invokes the war on terrorism, Feingold told reporters.
Feingold introduced censure legislation Monday in the Senate but not a single Democrat has embraced it. Several have said they want to see the results of a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation before supporting any punitive legislation.
isn't that sweet. aren't they so brave?
cedric and i spoke about this today and we can't believe how disgusted we are with the cowards.
he's already shared his thoughts on it so be sure to read that.
right before i started this entry, kat called me about a story she heard on kpfa's evening news tonight. i hadn't heard about it but i looked online and here's a link to an associated press story on the topic. what's going on?
The Bush administration last year quietly rewrote the rules for allowing gays and lesbians to receive national-security clearances, drawing complaints from civil rights activists.
The Bush administration said security clearances cannot be denied "solely on the basis of the sexual orientation of the individual." But it removed language saying sexual orientation "may not be used as a basis for or a disqualifying factor in determining a person's eligibility for a security clearance."
are you surprised? you shouldn't be. and lincoln logs who support bully boy (log cabin republicans) and other gay and lesbian people who support him should either admit that they're self-hating or masochistic or both if they can't wake up to the reality that they are not a part of the republican big tent.
that is so disgusting. this was done in december. stephen hadley distributed the changes on dec. 29th. we hear about it now.
guess what else? bully boy has a record. his administration has rejected, said no to, storm disaster loans more than any administration in 15 years. well it's not like any 1 needed them in 2005 or now, right? it's not like we've had any hurricanes in years, right?
he's a loser. he's an embarrassment. he's a war criminal.
which must be why pat roberts has decided to rush through the investigation into the faked intel that bully boy used to lead us into an illegal war.
so are we going to use our voices? we need to. mindy's using her's. all you high schoolers reading, is a 13 year-old about to show you up? (i think she might.)
3/13/2006
robert parry & russ feingold
Special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh was so outraged by Sen. Bob Dole's disruption of the Iran-contra criminal cases against senior Reagan-Bush officials that Walsh "briefly considered" adding a chapter to his final report criticizing Dole's tactics. Walsh detailed Dole's strategy for hindering the prosecutions in Firewall, a book scheduled for publication next year. Walsh, a lifelong Republican, released two chapters now to show voters how Dole lobbied President Bush to pardon former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger in 1992. Because of that position, Walsh deemed Dole's recent demands that Clinton eschew pardons for Whitewater defendants a clear case of "Dole's hypocrisy." The two chapters offer other insights as well into how Bush and Dole engineered the Iran-contra end game to minimize political damage to the Republican Party. Their strategy succeeded, in part, because some leading Democrats and influential members of the Washington news media signaled acceptance of the Weinberger pardon.
that's from robert parry's 'lost history: dole nearly cited in iran-contra report' published in 1996 at consortium news. carey e-mailed it to me and asked if i would note it. sunday when the new york times felt the need to offer that there used to be more civility in the congress and 1 moron quoted in the article noted how wonderfully they got along and worked together during iran-contra. that's because the democrats rolled over. it's easy for every 1 to get along when 1 side gets what it wants because the other throws in the towel.
and we're seeing it again. note this from democracy now:
Sen. Feingold to Introduce Resolution to Censure Bush
On Capitol Hill, Democratic Senator Russ Feingold is introducing a resolution today to censure President Bush for deliberately breaking the law by ordering the National Security Agency to conduct domestic surveillance without legally required court warrants. Feingold's resolution also accuses the president of misinforming the public about the program's existence and legality. Feingold announced his plan on Sunday on ABC's This Week. "It's an unusual step. It's a big step, but what the President did by consciously and intentionally violating the constitutional laws of this country with this illegal wiretapping has to be answered," Feingold said. "There can be debate about whether the law should be changed. There can be debate about how best to fight terrorism. We all believe that there should be wiretapping in appropriate cases. But the idea that the President can just make up a law in violation of his oath of office has to be answered." Minutes after Senator Feingold spoke, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist appeared on the same program and said he hoped that the leadership in Iran was not listening because of the terrible signal Feingold's message sent to the world about President Bush.
great, right? dems are getting their act together?
wrong. either they don't know where they stand on censure yet or else they've already come out slamming like the ultimate loser joe lieberman.
as kat noted saturday, i think russ feingold is sexy. he's a fighter who fights for what he believes in. and he's also physically sexy. and don't understimate that when people start competing for the democratic nomination.
hilary? the sure thing? i don't think she's a sure thing.
evan blah? get serious.
the new york times tried to tell us sunday that mark warner stands a chance. no chance in hell.
i called c.i. sunday evening and asked about the cover photo? c.i. had pulled the main section and 'i've already sorted for recycling' but i persisted.
okay, i said, look at the cover of the sunday magazine. tell me who it looks like?
'oh my god!'
uh-huh.
he looks like a younger richard nixon.
forget the gaps in his teeth (which are really bad teeth). forget that he hasn't learned that men need to trim their eyebrows.
just the fact that he so closely resembles tricky dick is enough to tank that nomination.
here's 1 more bit of news you should know about. (besides the fact that russ feingold stands a chance at the presidential nomination and mark warner is just going to embarrass himself.) it's from democracy now:
Sen. DeWine To Propose Law Criminalizing Reporting on NSA
Meanwhile Ohio Republican Senator Mike DeWine has proposed legislation that could result in the arrest and jailing of journalists who disclose information about the government's surveillance program. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the bill which could be introduced as soon as this week. Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, said "The bill would make it a crime to tell the American people that the president is breaking the law, and the bill could make it a crime for the newspapers to publish that fact."
i don't know why they need a law for this. i mean when the new york times found out about the illegal nsa spying they sat on the story when the bully boy asked them not to run it. they waited over a year before reporting on it.
that's from robert parry's 'lost history: dole nearly cited in iran-contra report' published in 1996 at consortium news. carey e-mailed it to me and asked if i would note it. sunday when the new york times felt the need to offer that there used to be more civility in the congress and 1 moron quoted in the article noted how wonderfully they got along and worked together during iran-contra. that's because the democrats rolled over. it's easy for every 1 to get along when 1 side gets what it wants because the other throws in the towel.
and we're seeing it again. note this from democracy now:
Sen. Feingold to Introduce Resolution to Censure Bush
On Capitol Hill, Democratic Senator Russ Feingold is introducing a resolution today to censure President Bush for deliberately breaking the law by ordering the National Security Agency to conduct domestic surveillance without legally required court warrants. Feingold's resolution also accuses the president of misinforming the public about the program's existence and legality. Feingold announced his plan on Sunday on ABC's This Week. "It's an unusual step. It's a big step, but what the President did by consciously and intentionally violating the constitutional laws of this country with this illegal wiretapping has to be answered," Feingold said. "There can be debate about whether the law should be changed. There can be debate about how best to fight terrorism. We all believe that there should be wiretapping in appropriate cases. But the idea that the President can just make up a law in violation of his oath of office has to be answered." Minutes after Senator Feingold spoke, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist appeared on the same program and said he hoped that the leadership in Iran was not listening because of the terrible signal Feingold's message sent to the world about President Bush.
great, right? dems are getting their act together?
wrong. either they don't know where they stand on censure yet or else they've already come out slamming like the ultimate loser joe lieberman.
as kat noted saturday, i think russ feingold is sexy. he's a fighter who fights for what he believes in. and he's also physically sexy. and don't understimate that when people start competing for the democratic nomination.
hilary? the sure thing? i don't think she's a sure thing.
evan blah? get serious.
the new york times tried to tell us sunday that mark warner stands a chance. no chance in hell.
i called c.i. sunday evening and asked about the cover photo? c.i. had pulled the main section and 'i've already sorted for recycling' but i persisted.
okay, i said, look at the cover of the sunday magazine. tell me who it looks like?
'oh my god!'
uh-huh.
he looks like a younger richard nixon.
forget the gaps in his teeth (which are really bad teeth). forget that he hasn't learned that men need to trim their eyebrows.
just the fact that he so closely resembles tricky dick is enough to tank that nomination.
here's 1 more bit of news you should know about. (besides the fact that russ feingold stands a chance at the presidential nomination and mark warner is just going to embarrass himself.) it's from democracy now:
Sen. DeWine To Propose Law Criminalizing Reporting on NSA
Meanwhile Ohio Republican Senator Mike DeWine has proposed legislation that could result in the arrest and jailing of journalists who disclose information about the government's surveillance program. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the bill which could be introduced as soon as this week. Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, said "The bill would make it a crime to tell the American people that the president is breaking the law, and the bill could make it a crime for the newspapers to publish that fact."
i don't know why they need a law for this. i mean when the new york times found out about the illegal nsa spying they sat on the story when the bully boy asked them not to run it. they waited over a year before reporting on it.
3/10/2006
when the fbi spied on laugh-in
okay, there's about to be a long excerpt and i wanted to start out talking so that no 1 reading was lost. in the late 60s and early 70s, there was a television show called rowan & martin's laugh-in but most people just called it laugh-in. of today's programs, probably mad tv and saturday night live would be closest to it. it was a comedy program with a lot of fast paced gags and skits.
(in fact, wally will tell you that while he was in dc with kat, c.i. and the third estate sunday review, c.i. brought some episodes of laugh-in for him to look at. c.i. thought that would give wally some ideas for how to get back to the daily jot. he meant for it to be a humorous, fast-paced site but when hurricane wilma hit florida, wally lives in florida, he started covering that and then it became a lot heavier site. he was very depressed when alito got confirmed to the supreme court and took a break from the daily jot for a week. he's doing a great job at his site and it is moving along quickly and with irreverance.)
goldie hawn was on laugh-in the 60s and that's how she became famous. she left to make catcus flower and won an oscar for that film. lily tomlin is another famous name to come out of the show. she did many of her famous characters on the show like edith ann and ernastine the telephone operator. so that was laugh-in and it was a very popular, very funny show.
i always learn things at the common ills, but last night i learned, in 'and the war drags on', that the fbi had 'reviewed' laugh-in at the request of fbi director j. edgar hoover. here's the fbi report:
A skit concerning the FBI was performed. It was introduced by a shorter skit representing a President and First Lady sitting in the White House chatting. Between them was a large vase of flowers. When their converation turned to the the Director [FBI Director, J. Edgar Hoover], it was made obvious that one of the flowers was actually a bugging device and the President spoke directly to Mr. Hoover by means of this device.
The longer skit was unified by means of a production-type number consisting of cheerleaders, complete with sweaters emblazoned with "FBI," who sang a "fight song" pertaining to the FBI. This "song," satirical in nature, was interrupted by various minor skits and short gag situations, all bearing on the FBI.
A great deal of what was purported to be humor related to the Director and his age. For example, the statement, "I don't believe that just because the Director of the FBI is named Hoover that there has been a vacuum in that Department for years." A particularly vicious attack was made by means of a knock-knock joke in which the answer to "Who is there?" is "Hoover." In reply to the question "Hoover who?" a play on words is made in the statement: "Hoover heard of a seventy-six-year-old policeman?" Another sick-type joke pertaining to the Director was an announcement that "J. Edgar Hoover retired one half-hour ago but will be back at his desk first thing in the morning."
Although jokes and sight gags were made in rapid fashion, emphasis was placed on surveillance-type activities and clandestine-type operations. In one minor skit, two Agents were portrayed meeting and being extremely guarded in their conversation with each other, with each trying to elict information from the other.
All in all, this skit pertaining to the FBI was rather typical of the poor fare that is served on this so-called laugh show, a show that has gained some considerable notoriety by its risque jokes and irreverent satirical attacks. Tasteless, sometimes downright vicious jokes and a great deal of forced humor add up to a more telling commentary on this low-grade show itself than on the FBI.
now what do you think of that? and does it seem like something that could happen today? it does to me.
it's as though we've completely forgotten lessons we should have learned from that time.
i hope you're ready to speak out and address the topic of the war. we need to be vocal, we need to be loud. we need to say bring the troops home now. we also need to say 'stop the illegal spying'. congress isn't saying it for us.
but congress isn't the country. we're the country. and if our elected officials want to shirk their responsibilities, it's up to us to call them out on it.
a year ago this month, bully boy was still falsely claiming a 'mandate' from the 2004 elections. he was bragging about having 'capitol' to spend. he's not walking so tall today, is he, not with the latest poll:
The poll suggests that most Americans wonder whether Bush is up to the job. The survey, conducted Monday through Wednesday of 1,000 people, found that just 37 percent approve of his overall performance. That is the lowest of his presidency.
that happened because of the events that are ongoing and because we haven't been afraid to speak the truth. we need to keep speaking the truth.
do you know this guy:
Claude Alexander Allen, 45, was arrested Thursday by Montgomery County police for allegedly claiming refunds for more than $5,000 worth of merchandise he did not buy, according to county and federal authorities.
he was a nominee (blocked) by bully boy to the 4th circuit. a thief. of course bully boy nominated him. besides being a nominee, he also served as 2nd in charge at health and human services. and in 2005, bully boy hired him as 'a domestic policy adviser.'
it's a crooked administration. speak your truth this month.
(in fact, wally will tell you that while he was in dc with kat, c.i. and the third estate sunday review, c.i. brought some episodes of laugh-in for him to look at. c.i. thought that would give wally some ideas for how to get back to the daily jot. he meant for it to be a humorous, fast-paced site but when hurricane wilma hit florida, wally lives in florida, he started covering that and then it became a lot heavier site. he was very depressed when alito got confirmed to the supreme court and took a break from the daily jot for a week. he's doing a great job at his site and it is moving along quickly and with irreverance.)
goldie hawn was on laugh-in the 60s and that's how she became famous. she left to make catcus flower and won an oscar for that film. lily tomlin is another famous name to come out of the show. she did many of her famous characters on the show like edith ann and ernastine the telephone operator. so that was laugh-in and it was a very popular, very funny show.
i always learn things at the common ills, but last night i learned, in 'and the war drags on', that the fbi had 'reviewed' laugh-in at the request of fbi director j. edgar hoover. here's the fbi report:
A skit concerning the FBI was performed. It was introduced by a shorter skit representing a President and First Lady sitting in the White House chatting. Between them was a large vase of flowers. When their converation turned to the the Director [FBI Director, J. Edgar Hoover], it was made obvious that one of the flowers was actually a bugging device and the President spoke directly to Mr. Hoover by means of this device.
The longer skit was unified by means of a production-type number consisting of cheerleaders, complete with sweaters emblazoned with "FBI," who sang a "fight song" pertaining to the FBI. This "song," satirical in nature, was interrupted by various minor skits and short gag situations, all bearing on the FBI.
A great deal of what was purported to be humor related to the Director and his age. For example, the statement, "I don't believe that just because the Director of the FBI is named Hoover that there has been a vacuum in that Department for years." A particularly vicious attack was made by means of a knock-knock joke in which the answer to "Who is there?" is "Hoover." In reply to the question "Hoover who?" a play on words is made in the statement: "Hoover heard of a seventy-six-year-old policeman?" Another sick-type joke pertaining to the Director was an announcement that "J. Edgar Hoover retired one half-hour ago but will be back at his desk first thing in the morning."
Although jokes and sight gags were made in rapid fashion, emphasis was placed on surveillance-type activities and clandestine-type operations. In one minor skit, two Agents were portrayed meeting and being extremely guarded in their conversation with each other, with each trying to elict information from the other.
All in all, this skit pertaining to the FBI was rather typical of the poor fare that is served on this so-called laugh show, a show that has gained some considerable notoriety by its risque jokes and irreverent satirical attacks. Tasteless, sometimes downright vicious jokes and a great deal of forced humor add up to a more telling commentary on this low-grade show itself than on the FBI.
now what do you think of that? and does it seem like something that could happen today? it does to me.
it's as though we've completely forgotten lessons we should have learned from that time.
i hope you're ready to speak out and address the topic of the war. we need to be vocal, we need to be loud. we need to say bring the troops home now. we also need to say 'stop the illegal spying'. congress isn't saying it for us.
but congress isn't the country. we're the country. and if our elected officials want to shirk their responsibilities, it's up to us to call them out on it.
a year ago this month, bully boy was still falsely claiming a 'mandate' from the 2004 elections. he was bragging about having 'capitol' to spend. he's not walking so tall today, is he, not with the latest poll:
The poll suggests that most Americans wonder whether Bush is up to the job. The survey, conducted Monday through Wednesday of 1,000 people, found that just 37 percent approve of his overall performance. That is the lowest of his presidency.
that happened because of the events that are ongoing and because we haven't been afraid to speak the truth. we need to keep speaking the truth.
do you know this guy:
Claude Alexander Allen, 45, was arrested Thursday by Montgomery County police for allegedly claiming refunds for more than $5,000 worth of merchandise he did not buy, according to county and federal authorities.
he was a nominee (blocked) by bully boy to the 4th circuit. a thief. of course bully boy nominated him. besides being a nominee, he also served as 2nd in charge at health and human services. and in 2005, bully boy hired him as 'a domestic policy adviser.'
it's a crooked administration. speak your truth this month.
3/09/2006
non-pretty news
i'm starting late tonight but for a good reason. cedric wanted to read a post he was working on so i listened to it and we stayed on the phone for about an hour after just talking.
make a point to read cedric's 'Thoughts on Michael Jackson and heroes.' when he called, he had to fill me in 1st because i hadn't even heard any michael jackson news today.
so let's get the bad news out of the way. bully boy's signed the reauthorization of the patriot act and tenneessee's state senate is moving to overturn abortion. every right wing controlled state will probably follow this pattern as they attempt to create the 'perfect' test case to get the supreme court to overturn roe v. wade.
here's kim gandy, president of now, from 'the attack has begun:'
The attack has begun. Women are counting on us and we must not lose this fight.
This week South Dakota enacted a ban on all abortions except to save the life of the woman. Her health and future fertility do not matter to the South Dakota legislature or Governor Rounds. The fact that a woman has survived rape or incest does not matter to them. Because THEY know what is best for her and for her family, and they intend to force their will on her. Will your state be next?
roberts and alito's confirmations mattered, even though democrats didn't seem to think so. not enough to filibuster. and i'm also recalling all the gas bags taking up time prior to each confirmation whining that 'abortion isn't the only issue.' no, it wasn't. and all the law professors stating that usually went on to make a bad case for their own pet issue. too bad because abortion is concrete and every 1 can grasp it. too bad that a lot of them dismissed concerns about abortion.
more bad news. add in that the efforts to privatize the irs continue. following up on 2004 legislation, the irs has selected 3 private companies to help them collect debts. how much fun that will be for the people who owe taxes.
from my e-mail inbox, danny schechter's 'Academy Awards Showcase Hollywood's Progressive Turn:'
New York, March 7: Jon Stewart gave it that old college try as the host of this year's Academy Awards. He got off a few on-target one-liners but could not light the place on fire. If, as the old song has it, "you can't put a tuxedo on the funky blues," you also can't take a TV comic that works in the controlled television culture and assume that because he's popular in one medium, he will knock the socks off of another.
Jon is in the attitude business, not the news business. He's ridiculing news media and political pretensions every day and, as a result, has become a counter-cultural hero and an anti-establishment figure.
The Academy Awards is an establishment function, the annual spectacle of the movie business and culture. It is deliberately star-studded and packaged to sell the dream machine and with it the fashions and personalities of the day.
Putting it down while pumping it up is a contradiction that is hard to resolve.
That could be one reason the ratings were down this year.
But what we also saw this year is that a concerned Hollywood is itself taking on the shallow Hollywood, challenging mindless entertainment with films that matter. That's why we were treated to that montage of social issue movies that Stewart smugly joked about. Jon knows that his own company Viacom, which owns CBS, would never have made a tough film about the network's glory years. (Notice how many stars plugging movies show up on his show and how few media activists there are promoting change. His Comedy Channel is there to keep us laughing -- not struggling for change.)
Those socially conscious films all took battles to make and offered the kind of creative commentary we rarely see on TV. "Network" was about TV, not a product of it, and far more radical than the Daily Show because it appeals to its viewers not just to smirk or smile but to shout "I am mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore." (In some ways that's what media activists are doing today with the upcoming protests against the coverage of the war.)
also from the inbox, fair's 'Brian Ross "Completely Aware" of WMD Context: So why weren't ABC viewers allowed to know?:'
Two recent reports on ABC raised the possibility that 10-year-old tapes of Saddam Hussein might show that he "did hide weapons of mass destruction"--giving the White House's rationale for the March 2003 invasion a boost.But as a February 17 FAIR action alert pointed out, ABC's reporting omitted evidence that undermined this argument. The tapes seem to show Hussein Kamel, Iraq's weapons chief at the time, talking about information about weapons programs that Iraq had concealed from U.N. inspectors. But when Kamel defected--soon after these tapes were recorded--he not only told CIA and U.N. investigators about this concealment, he at the same time insisted that Iraq had destroyed all its unconventional weapons stockpiles. FAIR's alert questioned why ABC failed to inform its viewers about this key information.
2 more things i want to note. first c.i.'s 'NYT: 'G.O.P. Plan Would Allow Spying Without Warrants' (Shane and Kirkpatrick)' which i'm going to lobby hard for to get it spotlighted at the third estate sunday review. (lobbying means taking on c.i. who always says, 'go with some 1 else.') 2nd, "Washington nonprofit where Abramoff was director wrote articles favoring Abramoff clients" which is an abramoff story by john byrne and ron brynaert (why are we back in iraq?). oops, got a 3rd 1, betty's got a new chapter up, 'Club Membership: One.'
between ann richards cancer and the attacks on abortion, it didn't feel like much of an international women's day yesterday to me. ann richards is a strong woman and i'm sure she's in there fighting and i pray it turns out well. but between the 2 blows, it didn't feel much like a day of celebration.
democracy now wraps up their broadcasts from london so make sure to check that out tomorrow.
oh, elaine said i quoted her last night. she did make that statement. after the woman left. my statement, before that, was what caused 'perky' to leave. i don't remember making it but it sounds like me, unfortunately, it's too lewd to put up here. so i did remember right that elaine said what i remembered. i just didn't remember that i had said something prior and that after perky left, we all riffed on what i'd said (with cleaner versions).
make a point to read cedric's 'Thoughts on Michael Jackson and heroes.' when he called, he had to fill me in 1st because i hadn't even heard any michael jackson news today.
so let's get the bad news out of the way. bully boy's signed the reauthorization of the patriot act and tenneessee's state senate is moving to overturn abortion. every right wing controlled state will probably follow this pattern as they attempt to create the 'perfect' test case to get the supreme court to overturn roe v. wade.
here's kim gandy, president of now, from 'the attack has begun:'
The attack has begun. Women are counting on us and we must not lose this fight.
This week South Dakota enacted a ban on all abortions except to save the life of the woman. Her health and future fertility do not matter to the South Dakota legislature or Governor Rounds. The fact that a woman has survived rape or incest does not matter to them. Because THEY know what is best for her and for her family, and they intend to force their will on her. Will your state be next?
roberts and alito's confirmations mattered, even though democrats didn't seem to think so. not enough to filibuster. and i'm also recalling all the gas bags taking up time prior to each confirmation whining that 'abortion isn't the only issue.' no, it wasn't. and all the law professors stating that usually went on to make a bad case for their own pet issue. too bad because abortion is concrete and every 1 can grasp it. too bad that a lot of them dismissed concerns about abortion.
more bad news. add in that the efforts to privatize the irs continue. following up on 2004 legislation, the irs has selected 3 private companies to help them collect debts. how much fun that will be for the people who owe taxes.
from my e-mail inbox, danny schechter's 'Academy Awards Showcase Hollywood's Progressive Turn:'
New York, March 7: Jon Stewart gave it that old college try as the host of this year's Academy Awards. He got off a few on-target one-liners but could not light the place on fire. If, as the old song has it, "you can't put a tuxedo on the funky blues," you also can't take a TV comic that works in the controlled television culture and assume that because he's popular in one medium, he will knock the socks off of another.
Jon is in the attitude business, not the news business. He's ridiculing news media and political pretensions every day and, as a result, has become a counter-cultural hero and an anti-establishment figure.
The Academy Awards is an establishment function, the annual spectacle of the movie business and culture. It is deliberately star-studded and packaged to sell the dream machine and with it the fashions and personalities of the day.
Putting it down while pumping it up is a contradiction that is hard to resolve.
That could be one reason the ratings were down this year.
But what we also saw this year is that a concerned Hollywood is itself taking on the shallow Hollywood, challenging mindless entertainment with films that matter. That's why we were treated to that montage of social issue movies that Stewart smugly joked about. Jon knows that his own company Viacom, which owns CBS, would never have made a tough film about the network's glory years. (Notice how many stars plugging movies show up on his show and how few media activists there are promoting change. His Comedy Channel is there to keep us laughing -- not struggling for change.)
Those socially conscious films all took battles to make and offered the kind of creative commentary we rarely see on TV. "Network" was about TV, not a product of it, and far more radical than the Daily Show because it appeals to its viewers not just to smirk or smile but to shout "I am mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore." (In some ways that's what media activists are doing today with the upcoming protests against the coverage of the war.)
also from the inbox, fair's 'Brian Ross "Completely Aware" of WMD Context: So why weren't ABC viewers allowed to know?:'
Two recent reports on ABC raised the possibility that 10-year-old tapes of Saddam Hussein might show that he "did hide weapons of mass destruction"--giving the White House's rationale for the March 2003 invasion a boost.But as a February 17 FAIR action alert pointed out, ABC's reporting omitted evidence that undermined this argument. The tapes seem to show Hussein Kamel, Iraq's weapons chief at the time, talking about information about weapons programs that Iraq had concealed from U.N. inspectors. But when Kamel defected--soon after these tapes were recorded--he not only told CIA and U.N. investigators about this concealment, he at the same time insisted that Iraq had destroyed all its unconventional weapons stockpiles. FAIR's alert questioned why ABC failed to inform its viewers about this key information.
2 more things i want to note. first c.i.'s 'NYT: 'G.O.P. Plan Would Allow Spying Without Warrants' (Shane and Kirkpatrick)' which i'm going to lobby hard for to get it spotlighted at the third estate sunday review. (lobbying means taking on c.i. who always says, 'go with some 1 else.') 2nd, "Washington nonprofit where Abramoff was director wrote articles favoring Abramoff clients" which is an abramoff story by john byrne and ron brynaert (why are we back in iraq?). oops, got a 3rd 1, betty's got a new chapter up, 'Club Membership: One.'
between ann richards cancer and the attacks on abortion, it didn't feel like much of an international women's day yesterday to me. ann richards is a strong woman and i'm sure she's in there fighting and i pray it turns out well. but between the 2 blows, it didn't feel much like a day of celebration.
democracy now wraps up their broadcasts from london so make sure to check that out tomorrow.
oh, elaine said i quoted her last night. she did make that statement. after the woman left. my statement, before that, was what caused 'perky' to leave. i don't remember making it but it sounds like me, unfortunately, it's too lewd to put up here. so i did remember right that elaine said what i remembered. i just didn't remember that i had said something prior and that after perky left, we all riffed on what i'd said (with cleaner versions).
3/08/2006
some news roundups just depress
Westboro Baptist has outraged mourning communities across the nation by showing up at soldiers' funerals with signs that read "God Hates F*gs" or "God Made IEDs," a reference to roadside bombs. Members of the congregation contend soldiers are being struck down by God for defending a nation that tolerates homosexuality.
the item above contains a censoring by me. i have a pretty laid back approach to language but i'm not going to have that word, used in hate, on my site. so that's from an associated press article about how that church will no longer picket the funerals of soldiers in states that have laws forbidding them from picketing. i can't believe how disgusting that makes me feel.
hateful people. hateful to gays and lesbians, hateful to the families burying their loved 1s.
i just find it so disgusting.
on the sad front, ann richards has cancer. i've always liked her. she has a real fighting spirit and, hopefully, that spirit will help her through this.
somedays, it's just not worth reading the news.
ok, we're going to move on.
who asked jack abramoff 'what are you benching, buff guy?'
did you guess bully boy?
supposedly, according to bully boy, he barely knows abramoff so what was that? a pick up line?
moving from 1 close friend/crook bully boy's distancing himself from to one he still pretends he barely knew, ken lay (or 'kenny-boy' as bully boy dubbed him) got dissed in court today. andrew fastow, under cross, said 'i had the character to admit what i did was wrong.'
ken lay didn't. maybe that's what he and bully boy bonded over - remember bully boy, in the debates, when asked to name 1 mistake he'd made had to take a pass.
and today is international women's day. kim gandy has a statement on that worth reading.
lastly, check out this from democracy now: "Legendary Actor Vanessa Redgrave Calls Cancellation of Rachel Corrie Play an 'Act of Catastrophic Cowardice.'" i've always liked vanessa redgrave. she's a great actress, she cares about the world around and she's so graceful.
on graceful, elaine is graceful. a number of you have written about a prompt c.i. was giving me to tell a story. i thought it was elaine's story. elaine swears that it's me. c.i. swears it too. i've spoken to 3 other friends from college and they all say i was the 1 who told off perky. i've never been accused of being modest before so it must be my memory's way of trying to teach me modesty. but there was this perky little thing who would always say 'on the other hand ...' to any news. some 1 could say 'i just failed that exam' and she would reply 'on the other hand, you learned a valuable lesson about the importance of studying.' some 1 could say, 'i just got a ticket.' she would reply 'on the other hand, you now know the importance of road safety.'
she'd have this insane grin on her face. it was really freaky. so 1 night, elaine, c.i., another friend and i were at a table eating but mainly talking when the other friend says she thinks she's pregnant and there's perky. actually she said, 'i am afriad i'm pregnant. i know i'm pregnant. i don't know what i'm going to do.' and perky pops up and pipes up, 'on the other hand, now you'll know if he loves you or not.' i swear i still think it was elaine, even with every 1 saying it was me, but apparently i said 'everybody hates you. on the other hand, you'll never have to worry about having any friends.' said in the same sing-song way that perky delivered all her stupid lines and with the same stupid grin. if it was me, and every 1 says it was, good for me. but i swear i still think it was elaine.
the item above contains a censoring by me. i have a pretty laid back approach to language but i'm not going to have that word, used in hate, on my site. so that's from an associated press article about how that church will no longer picket the funerals of soldiers in states that have laws forbidding them from picketing. i can't believe how disgusting that makes me feel.
hateful people. hateful to gays and lesbians, hateful to the families burying their loved 1s.
i just find it so disgusting.
on the sad front, ann richards has cancer. i've always liked her. she has a real fighting spirit and, hopefully, that spirit will help her through this.
somedays, it's just not worth reading the news.
ok, we're going to move on.
who asked jack abramoff 'what are you benching, buff guy?'
did you guess bully boy?
supposedly, according to bully boy, he barely knows abramoff so what was that? a pick up line?
moving from 1 close friend/crook bully boy's distancing himself from to one he still pretends he barely knew, ken lay (or 'kenny-boy' as bully boy dubbed him) got dissed in court today. andrew fastow, under cross, said 'i had the character to admit what i did was wrong.'
ken lay didn't. maybe that's what he and bully boy bonded over - remember bully boy, in the debates, when asked to name 1 mistake he'd made had to take a pass.
and today is international women's day. kim gandy has a statement on that worth reading.
lastly, check out this from democracy now: "Legendary Actor Vanessa Redgrave Calls Cancellation of Rachel Corrie Play an 'Act of Catastrophic Cowardice.'" i've always liked vanessa redgrave. she's a great actress, she cares about the world around and she's so graceful.
on graceful, elaine is graceful. a number of you have written about a prompt c.i. was giving me to tell a story. i thought it was elaine's story. elaine swears that it's me. c.i. swears it too. i've spoken to 3 other friends from college and they all say i was the 1 who told off perky. i've never been accused of being modest before so it must be my memory's way of trying to teach me modesty. but there was this perky little thing who would always say 'on the other hand ...' to any news. some 1 could say 'i just failed that exam' and she would reply 'on the other hand, you learned a valuable lesson about the importance of studying.' some 1 could say, 'i just got a ticket.' she would reply 'on the other hand, you now know the importance of road safety.'
she'd have this insane grin on her face. it was really freaky. so 1 night, elaine, c.i., another friend and i were at a table eating but mainly talking when the other friend says she thinks she's pregnant and there's perky. actually she said, 'i am afriad i'm pregnant. i know i'm pregnant. i don't know what i'm going to do.' and perky pops up and pipes up, 'on the other hand, now you'll know if he loves you or not.' i swear i still think it was elaine, even with every 1 saying it was me, but apparently i said 'everybody hates you. on the other hand, you'll never have to worry about having any friends.' said in the same sing-song way that perky delivered all her stupid lines and with the same stupid grin. if it was me, and every 1 says it was, good for me. but i swear i still think it was elaine.
3/07/2006
news roundup: patriot act, spying, olympia snowe and more
democracy now is in london this week. it's always a show you should watch but if you've put it off and said, 'i'll watch it some day,' well, here's your reason to tune in. want to know what's going on in england. what the british are thinking without the new york times' alan cowell stamping his filter on it? tune in to democracy now.
by the way, am i the only 1 who misses pru's regular feature in the round-robin where she'd ask cowell a basic question about england and he'd have no clue? i love her new target but it was just so much more fun to laugh at alan cowell.
so let's dish the news. 1st 2 items from democracy now.
South Dakota Gov. Signs Near-Total Abortion Ban
In South Dakota, Governor Mike Rounds has signed legislation to ban all abortions in the state, unless they're performed to save the life of the woman. Rounds said he expects a lengthy court battle over the new law. The measure comes as a similar effort is moving ahead in the state of Mississippi.
well, i know nina simone's 'mississippi goddamn' and phil ochs' 'here's to the state of mississippi' but i don't know any south dakota songs. any 1?
the republicans think they'll have another appointment to the supreme court by next year, they actually think it will be by this summer. the senate should have fought alito, they should have fought roberts. instead, they went along. i'm so sick of the senate and so sick of having to beg for my rights to be protected.
you saw what happened with the patriot act. they objected for a little bit and then went along.
and the house just passed it tonight so it's time for bully boy to sign it. we have a congress that's afraid to take a stand and afraid to fight. that's republicans and democrats. (and, yes, there are exceptions.) i used to think, when i was in jr. high, that being in congress required smarts and strength. now i know it just requires lobbyists pumping money into your campaign. and apparently it requires that you never make waves, never fight for anything.
it's rather sad what we've come to in this country. but note, while women (and some men) have to scream for our reproductive rights to be protected by congress, congress abandons their own powers. they're letting bully boy trample on them as much as on the constitution.
in the meantime, women lose ground while bully boy gives lip service to the notion of equality.
Khalilzad Warns of Iraq Civil War
In comments the Los Angeles Times calls "among the frankest and bleakest public assessments of the Iraq situation by a high-level American official," U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad has warned of a full-blown civil war. Referring to the recent bombing of a Shiite shrine in Sammara, Khalilzad said: "If another incident [occurs], Iraq is really vulnerable to it at this time." Khalilzad went on to say: "We have opened the Pandora's box and the question is, what is the way forward?" His comments come just days after General Peter Pace, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said things were "going very, very well" in Iraq.
if you missed it, rumsfeld's been busy today. 1st he accused the media of being the 1 to hype that iraq is in crisis and may head towards civil war - does zalmay work for the administration or for the press? 2nd, he's dismissing reports of a civil war in iraq, take that zalmay!
olympia snowe is a hack of the 1st degree. she's joining with mike dewine, lindsey graham and chuck-i-didn't-see-nothing-hagel to make bully boy's 4 year illegal spying now legal - according to the ap. oh, olympia, isn't there some constitutents you can have arrested?
she must be bored. which would explain the hair.
pat roberts is rail roading his intel committee to do bully boy's bidding:
Meanwhile, Democrats on the Intelligence Committee expressed outrage after a meeting Tuesday that senators voted -- along party lines -- to reject an investigation of the surveillance proposed by West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the committee's top Democrat.
"The committee -- to put it bluntly -- basically is in the control of the White House," a visibly angry Rockefeller said.
republican motto: ask not what you can do for your country, ask what you can can do for your bully boy!
in good news, the town of newfane, vermont voted to impeach bully boy today.
thank god we've got a happy note to go out on.
by the way, am i the only 1 who misses pru's regular feature in the round-robin where she'd ask cowell a basic question about england and he'd have no clue? i love her new target but it was just so much more fun to laugh at alan cowell.
so let's dish the news. 1st 2 items from democracy now.
South Dakota Gov. Signs Near-Total Abortion Ban
In South Dakota, Governor Mike Rounds has signed legislation to ban all abortions in the state, unless they're performed to save the life of the woman. Rounds said he expects a lengthy court battle over the new law. The measure comes as a similar effort is moving ahead in the state of Mississippi.
well, i know nina simone's 'mississippi goddamn' and phil ochs' 'here's to the state of mississippi' but i don't know any south dakota songs. any 1?
the republicans think they'll have another appointment to the supreme court by next year, they actually think it will be by this summer. the senate should have fought alito, they should have fought roberts. instead, they went along. i'm so sick of the senate and so sick of having to beg for my rights to be protected.
you saw what happened with the patriot act. they objected for a little bit and then went along.
and the house just passed it tonight so it's time for bully boy to sign it. we have a congress that's afraid to take a stand and afraid to fight. that's republicans and democrats. (and, yes, there are exceptions.) i used to think, when i was in jr. high, that being in congress required smarts and strength. now i know it just requires lobbyists pumping money into your campaign. and apparently it requires that you never make waves, never fight for anything.
it's rather sad what we've come to in this country. but note, while women (and some men) have to scream for our reproductive rights to be protected by congress, congress abandons their own powers. they're letting bully boy trample on them as much as on the constitution.
in the meantime, women lose ground while bully boy gives lip service to the notion of equality.
Khalilzad Warns of Iraq Civil War
In comments the Los Angeles Times calls "among the frankest and bleakest public assessments of the Iraq situation by a high-level American official," U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad has warned of a full-blown civil war. Referring to the recent bombing of a Shiite shrine in Sammara, Khalilzad said: "If another incident [occurs], Iraq is really vulnerable to it at this time." Khalilzad went on to say: "We have opened the Pandora's box and the question is, what is the way forward?" His comments come just days after General Peter Pace, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said things were "going very, very well" in Iraq.
if you missed it, rumsfeld's been busy today. 1st he accused the media of being the 1 to hype that iraq is in crisis and may head towards civil war - does zalmay work for the administration or for the press? 2nd, he's dismissing reports of a civil war in iraq, take that zalmay!
olympia snowe is a hack of the 1st degree. she's joining with mike dewine, lindsey graham and chuck-i-didn't-see-nothing-hagel to make bully boy's 4 year illegal spying now legal - according to the ap. oh, olympia, isn't there some constitutents you can have arrested?
she must be bored. which would explain the hair.
pat roberts is rail roading his intel committee to do bully boy's bidding:
Meanwhile, Democrats on the Intelligence Committee expressed outrage after a meeting Tuesday that senators voted -- along party lines -- to reject an investigation of the surveillance proposed by West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the committee's top Democrat.
"The committee -- to put it bluntly -- basically is in the control of the White House," a visibly angry Rockefeller said.
republican motto: ask not what you can do for your country, ask what you can can do for your bully boy!
in good news, the town of newfane, vermont voted to impeach bully boy today.
thank god we've got a happy note to go out on.
3/06/2006
oscar blahs
well blogger/blogspot certainly has a mind of it's own, doesn't it?
i've added a blog to the blog roll, american tonic. support women bloggers and check it out.
sherry wondered what i thought of the oscars? 1st off, this weekend cedric wrote and entry that everyone should check out 'The Oscars'. reading it made me handle the oscars better.
why? i wanted jake to win. i love george clooney but i really wanted to see jake win. no 1 won that i was rooting for.
reese witherspoon? well, didn't doris day win an oscar once too?
i mean, we're not talking a real actress here. in that film with matthew broadrick years ago, her quirks seemed fresh and you thought they were part of the character. election was the name of that film. since then, it's been the same old, same old. i'm not real fond of perky.
sally field had to really stretch to get her oscars. i didn't think the johnny cash film was a good film and i didn't think she was good in it. i had a party here and a number of people were booing when reese won.
t said it best, 'duckface! they just gave it to duckface!'
but it wasn't really a year about inclusion. cedric got that right. what was it? awarding the usual people.
i thought jon stewart was funny. but the show was dragging from the start. and i wasn't pleased with the award winners.
people make fun of marisa tomei, but she created a character for her oscar win. reese tossed on a wig and acted like ... reese.
after she won, people were betting on how long before her marriage busted up because when the woman wins the oscar and the husband's career is in the toilet, the marriage is in trouble.
i don't wish a divorce upon her but i would have picked any of the 4 other actresses. i was really rooting for felicity because i thought she gave an incredible performance but i would have been fine with any 1 but reese.
my hope is that she'll suffer the 'i won the oscar' curse and start doing serious roles, heavy dramas, first lady of the screen roles, kill off her career and we'll all be spared legally blonde XXII.
i was going to do a rundown on the news but ...
need news, check out 'And The War Drags On.'
i've added a blog to the blog roll, american tonic. support women bloggers and check it out.
sherry wondered what i thought of the oscars? 1st off, this weekend cedric wrote and entry that everyone should check out 'The Oscars'. reading it made me handle the oscars better.
why? i wanted jake to win. i love george clooney but i really wanted to see jake win. no 1 won that i was rooting for.
reese witherspoon? well, didn't doris day win an oscar once too?
i mean, we're not talking a real actress here. in that film with matthew broadrick years ago, her quirks seemed fresh and you thought they were part of the character. election was the name of that film. since then, it's been the same old, same old. i'm not real fond of perky.
sally field had to really stretch to get her oscars. i didn't think the johnny cash film was a good film and i didn't think she was good in it. i had a party here and a number of people were booing when reese won.
t said it best, 'duckface! they just gave it to duckface!'
but it wasn't really a year about inclusion. cedric got that right. what was it? awarding the usual people.
i thought jon stewart was funny. but the show was dragging from the start. and i wasn't pleased with the award winners.
people make fun of marisa tomei, but she created a character for her oscar win. reese tossed on a wig and acted like ... reese.
after she won, people were betting on how long before her marriage busted up because when the woman wins the oscar and the husband's career is in the toilet, the marriage is in trouble.
i don't wish a divorce upon her but i would have picked any of the 4 other actresses. i was really rooting for felicity because i thought she gave an incredible performance but i would have been fine with any 1 but reese.
my hope is that she'll suffer the 'i won the oscar' curse and start doing serious roles, heavy dramas, first lady of the screen roles, kill off her career and we'll all be spared legally blonde XXII.
i was going to do a rundown on the news but ...
need news, check out 'And The War Drags On.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)