BENNETT:
"All right, well, I mean, I just don't know. I would not argue for the pro-life position based on this, because you don't know. I mean, it cuts both -- you know, one of the arguments in this book Freakonomics that they make is that the declining crime rate, you know, they deal with this hypothesis, that one of the reasons crime is down is that abortion is up. Well --"
CALLER:
"Well, I don't think that statistic is accurate."
BENNETT:
"Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky."
-- BILL BENNETT, September 28, 2005
Friday, September 30, 2005
NOT AGAIN WITH BILL BENNETT
Even giving Bill Bennett full benefit of the doubt, I
have two specific objections to what said. Even
conceding he’s an “intellectual,” and sometimes
oddball hypotheses are thrown out from time, to time,
he was still dishonest, and to my mind, racist.
First, Bennett is now claiming he was actually arguing
against the idea of aborting blacks or anybody, that
he was in fact refuting such an argument, one made in
“Freakonomics” and presumably by liberals everywhere.
But that’s not just wrong, it’s disingenuous and
dishonest. In fact, his later foot-in-mouth problems
stem from this.
It’s true that the book does make
the argument that legalization of abortion is the
reason for the sudden drop in crime in 1990s. And
it might be correct. This
makes pro-life conservatives unhappy, but it pleases
those who think there’s an underclass of undesirable
people we’d all be better off without – i.e., racists.
Now, people who are pro-choice obviously do not, and
never have, suggested this as a reason to support
abortion rights.
This argument exists only in the fevered imagination
of Bill Bennett. What’s odd is how he swings back and
forth in the course of this discussion. First, he
cites the book. Then he says he disagrees with it.
The he makes his outrageous statement suggesting he
very much DOES agree with it.
Either way, he’s setting up this intellectual straw man
and knocking it down, which is what the right wing does all
the time, to the bafflement of normal people
everywhere.
The other objection I have has to do with his
out-of-the-blue statement “you could abort every black
baby in this country, and your crime rate would go
down.”
Why bring race into it? The book “Freakonomics” does
not mention race in any way. Why not use the word
“poor” or “urban” or “White” or “Christian”?
Why is it, in the heat of the moment, Bennett reached
into the back of his brain and pulled out “black”? Is
it because, somewhere, deep down, Bill Bennett equates
criminals with blacks and all blacks with criminals?
Was Bennett advocating aborting all black babies, like
some kind of modern-day Heinrich Himmler? Probably
not, though there are supporters of his who might.
But when asked by enterprising ABC reporter Jake
Tappper why he linked blacks and crime, according to
Tapper, “Bennett told me on the phone that race was on
his mind because of recent stories in the media about
New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.”
That’s just great.
I’m done with these people.
Bennett is useless chronic gambler who lectures other
people about morality, who has parlayed one tiny
Reagan Cabinet position into a hack career writing
about virtue and other concepts alien to him. He was
the Brownie of his day. Whatever else he is, he is
now officially an idiot and we should all devote the
remainder of our time on earth to ignoring whatever he
says.
******************************************************************
have two specific objections to what said. Even
conceding he’s an “intellectual,” and sometimes
oddball hypotheses are thrown out from time, to time,
he was still dishonest, and to my mind, racist.
First, Bennett is now claiming he was actually arguing
against the idea of aborting blacks or anybody, that
he was in fact refuting such an argument, one made in
“Freakonomics” and presumably by liberals everywhere.
But that’s not just wrong, it’s disingenuous and
dishonest. In fact, his later foot-in-mouth problems
stem from this.
It’s true that the book does make
the argument that legalization of abortion is the
reason for the sudden drop in crime in 1990s. And
it might be correct. This
makes pro-life conservatives unhappy, but it pleases
those who think there’s an underclass of undesirable
people we’d all be better off without – i.e., racists.
Now, people who are pro-choice obviously do not, and
never have, suggested this as a reason to support
abortion rights.
This argument exists only in the fevered imagination
of Bill Bennett. What’s odd is how he swings back and
forth in the course of this discussion. First, he
cites the book. Then he says he disagrees with it.
The he makes his outrageous statement suggesting he
very much DOES agree with it.
Either way, he’s setting up this intellectual straw man
and knocking it down, which is what the right wing does all
the time, to the bafflement of normal people
everywhere.
The other objection I have has to do with his
out-of-the-blue statement “you could abort every black
baby in this country, and your crime rate would go
down.”
Why bring race into it? The book “Freakonomics” does
not mention race in any way. Why not use the word
“poor” or “urban” or “White” or “Christian”?
Why is it, in the heat of the moment, Bennett reached
into the back of his brain and pulled out “black”? Is
it because, somewhere, deep down, Bill Bennett equates
criminals with blacks and all blacks with criminals?
Was Bennett advocating aborting all black babies, like
some kind of modern-day Heinrich Himmler? Probably
not, though there are supporters of his who might.
But when asked by enterprising ABC reporter Jake
Tappper why he linked blacks and crime, according to
Tapper, “Bennett told me on the phone that race was on
his mind because of recent stories in the media about
New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.”
That’s just great.
I’m done with these people.
Bennett is useless chronic gambler who lectures other
people about morality, who has parlayed one tiny
Reagan Cabinet position into a hack career writing
about virtue and other concepts alien to him. He was
the Brownie of his day. Whatever else he is, he is
now officially an idiot and we should all devote the
remainder of our time on earth to ignoring whatever he
says.
******************************************************************
BROWNIE, YOU REALLY ARE A WEASEL, AREN’T YOU?
******************************************************************
Another one I’m done with is this character Mike
Brown. One might have a touch of sympathy for a guy
who, after all, was put in charge of an agency he knew
nothing about and had no experience in; one that the
Bush administration gutted and hated anyway; and faced
a uniquely large natural disaster; and on top of that,
has been made the scapegoat for everything from FEMA’s
natural limits to the loss national guard troops to
not breaching the levees to Bush’s cluelessness.
On the other hand, his testimony before Congress this
week stunned even Republicans with his gyrations into
total weaselness. There was no real apology, no real
acknowledgement of mistakes, no real suggestions on what to
do better.
Just remarks like this:
"My biggest mistake was not recognizing by Saturday
that Louisiana was dysfunctional.”
And this:
"I very strongly personally regret that I was unable
to persuade Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin to sit down,
get over their differences, and work together. I just
couldn't pull that off."
As the kids say, give me a break. Bear in mind, the
man was under oath. This doesn’t even pass the laugh
test. This is the equivalent of saying, “I work too
hard” in a job interview.
No one buys the image of a desperate
Brown, begging Blanco and Nagin, not to be petty, to
get along, and save all the innocent people!
Blanco & Nagin are politicians in the same state, from
the same political party, and who frequently work
together. And Brown was gonna get them to work
together!
Let’s cut to the chase. Take it away, Chris:
"I'm happy you left. That kind of look in the lights
like a deer tells me you weren't capable of doing that
job."
-- Republican Congressman Christopher Shays
******************************************************************
Another one I’m done with is this character Mike
Brown. One might have a touch of sympathy for a guy
who, after all, was put in charge of an agency he knew
nothing about and had no experience in; one that the
Bush administration gutted and hated anyway; and faced
a uniquely large natural disaster; and on top of that,
has been made the scapegoat for everything from FEMA’s
natural limits to the loss national guard troops to
not breaching the levees to Bush’s cluelessness.
On the other hand, his testimony before Congress this
week stunned even Republicans with his gyrations into
total weaselness. There was no real apology, no real
acknowledgement of mistakes, no real suggestions on what to
do better.
Just remarks like this:
"My biggest mistake was not recognizing by Saturday
that Louisiana was dysfunctional.”
And this:
"I very strongly personally regret that I was unable
to persuade Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin to sit down,
get over their differences, and work together. I just
couldn't pull that off."
As the kids say, give me a break. Bear in mind, the
man was under oath. This doesn’t even pass the laugh
test. This is the equivalent of saying, “I work too
hard” in a job interview.
No one buys the image of a desperate
Brown, begging Blanco and Nagin, not to be petty, to
get along, and save all the innocent people!
Blanco & Nagin are politicians in the same state, from
the same political party, and who frequently work
together. And Brown was gonna get them to work
together!
Let’s cut to the chase. Take it away, Chris:
"I'm happy you left. That kind of look in the lights
like a deer tells me you weren't capable of doing that
job."
-- Republican Congressman Christopher Shays
******************************************************************
INCOMPETENTS ABROAD
I’m done with Karen Hughes, too. It’s over. I mean,
this is the person we sent, out of all the Americans
we could have chosen, to go over to the Middle East
and improve the image of the U.S. So she’s been
meeting with people, nominally sympathetic, but all
they do is barrage her with questions about Iraq, and
U.S. military action, and stuff like that, and she
wants to talk about how great the U.S. is. It’s very
frustrating.
So this week she had this to say:
“I had one person at one lunch raise the issue of the
President mentioning God in his speeches. And I asked
whether he was aware that previous American presidents
have also cited God, and that our Constitution cites
“one nation under God.” He said “well, never mind”
and went on to something else. So he sort of was
trying to equate that with the terrorists’
(inaudible). So I explained that I didn’t really think
that was something you could equate. And he sort of
dropped it and moved on. He was one of the opposition
leaders in Egypt.”
Ye gods. We’ve sent a moron to improve America’s
image, and she promptly destroys it.
Look, no one is saying she has speak fluent Arabic
(although it might help) or have a thorough knowledge
of the Koran.
But for the love of god, how do you think it looks
when this Egyptian knows more about our Constiutuion
that our representative does? That “never mind,” is
purely dismissive, knowing he’s either dealing with
kook, an ignoramus, or a liar.
Now he knows how we all feel.
******************************************************************
this is the person we sent, out of all the Americans
we could have chosen, to go over to the Middle East
and improve the image of the U.S. So she’s been
meeting with people, nominally sympathetic, but all
they do is barrage her with questions about Iraq, and
U.S. military action, and stuff like that, and she
wants to talk about how great the U.S. is. It’s very
frustrating.
So this week she had this to say:
“I had one person at one lunch raise the issue of the
President mentioning God in his speeches. And I asked
whether he was aware that previous American presidents
have also cited God, and that our Constitution cites
“one nation under God.” He said “well, never mind”
and went on to something else. So he sort of was
trying to equate that with the terrorists’
(inaudible). So I explained that I didn’t really think
that was something you could equate. And he sort of
dropped it and moved on. He was one of the opposition
leaders in Egypt.”
Ye gods. We’ve sent a moron to improve America’s
image, and she promptly destroys it.
Look, no one is saying she has speak fluent Arabic
(although it might help) or have a thorough knowledge
of the Koran.
But for the love of god, how do you think it looks
when this Egyptian knows more about our Constiutuion
that our representative does? That “never mind,” is
purely dismissive, knowing he’s either dealing with
kook, an ignoramus, or a liar.
Now he knows how we all feel.
******************************************************************
IT’S MILLER TIME!
Yeah, it’s been a pretty good week for liberals.
First Tom DeLay is indicted and then Judy Miller is
freed from jail for contempt, which means she’s going
to testify, finally, before the grand jury (damm,
they’re everywhere, aren’t they?) about who in the
White House broke the law and revealed Valerie Plame’s
name.
What’s funny is the Times has been whining daily about
how unjust it is that she’s in jail, and she could
never reveal her source without the world coming to an
end.
Here’s what they wrote in August:
“As of today, Judith Miller has spent more time behind
bars to protect privileged information than any other
New York Times journalist. Reporters from other news
organizations have endured longer jail time in the
same important cause over the years, but for us and we
hope for others, it should be clear after 41 days in a
Virginia jail that Ms. Miller is not going to change
her mind. She appears unwavering in her mission to
safeguard the freedom of the press to do its job
effectively.
If she is not willing to testify after 41 days, then
she is not willing to testify. It's time for the judge
and the prosecutor to let Ms. Miller go.”
Well guess what. Judy testified TODAY.
As other bloggers have noted, there’s no good way to
spin this. She caved. They say now she finally got a
waiver from Scooter Libby.
But Libby says, it’s the same waiver her gave her A
YEAR AGO.
One blogger said of Scooter:
“I don’t have much good to say about the vice
president’s chief of staff, but I don’t doubt that he
knows the difference between being coerced and acting
on his own free will.
How deep is the Times’ contempt for its readers that they really
think they’ll buy the “Oh, Judy finally has the right waiver” line?”
******************************************************************
First Tom DeLay is indicted and then Judy Miller is
freed from jail for contempt, which means she’s going
to testify, finally, before the grand jury (damm,
they’re everywhere, aren’t they?) about who in the
White House broke the law and revealed Valerie Plame’s
name.
What’s funny is the Times has been whining daily about
how unjust it is that she’s in jail, and she could
never reveal her source without the world coming to an
end.
Here’s what they wrote in August:
“As of today, Judith Miller has spent more time behind
bars to protect privileged information than any other
New York Times journalist. Reporters from other news
organizations have endured longer jail time in the
same important cause over the years, but for us and we
hope for others, it should be clear after 41 days in a
Virginia jail that Ms. Miller is not going to change
her mind. She appears unwavering in her mission to
safeguard the freedom of the press to do its job
effectively.
If she is not willing to testify after 41 days, then
she is not willing to testify. It's time for the judge
and the prosecutor to let Ms. Miller go.”
Well guess what. Judy testified TODAY.
As other bloggers have noted, there’s no good way to
spin this. She caved. They say now she finally got a
waiver from Scooter Libby.
But Libby says, it’s the same waiver her gave her A
YEAR AGO.
One blogger said of Scooter:
“I don’t have much good to say about the vice
president’s chief of staff, but I don’t doubt that he
knows the difference between being coerced and acting
on his own free will.
How deep is the Times’ contempt for its readers that they really
think they’ll buy the “Oh, Judy finally has the right waiver” line?”
******************************************************************
THE BROTHERS BENNETT
*****************************************************************
This is pretty funny. Judith Miller’s lawyer is Bob
Bennett, Bill Bennett’s brother. So he’s on CNN
today, bening asked about Judy’s suddenly changing her
mind about selling out her confidential source. So
the reporter naturally asks about Bob and his plan to
abort all black babies.
WOLF BLITZER: “Have you discussed this issue with
him?”
BOB BENNETT:
“Well, no, and, Wolf, let me say, I am rather
disappointed at you for not telling me you would ask
me about that. This was about Judy Miller, and I think
that's a courtesy you could have extended to me. What
I would emphasize is Bill's comment that such a
position would be morally reprehensible, I think it's
largely making a mountain out of a molehill.
I mean, I suppose I'll get in trouble by saying that
it's well established that MEN ARE MORE VIOLENT THAT
WOMEN are more violent than women and so maybe if we
ABORT ALL MALE BABIES, we would have a safer world.”
Thanksgiving at that house must some kind politically
incorrect marathon.
******************************************************************
This is pretty funny. Judith Miller’s lawyer is Bob
Bennett, Bill Bennett’s brother. So he’s on CNN
today, bening asked about Judy’s suddenly changing her
mind about selling out her confidential source. So
the reporter naturally asks about Bob and his plan to
abort all black babies.
WOLF BLITZER: “Have you discussed this issue with
him?”
BOB BENNETT:
“Well, no, and, Wolf, let me say, I am rather
disappointed at you for not telling me you would ask
me about that. This was about Judy Miller, and I think
that's a courtesy you could have extended to me. What
I would emphasize is Bill's comment that such a
position would be morally reprehensible, I think it's
largely making a mountain out of a molehill.
I mean, I suppose I'll get in trouble by saying that
it's well established that MEN ARE MORE VIOLENT THAT
WOMEN are more violent than women and so maybe if we
ABORT ALL MALE BABIES, we would have a safer world.”
Thanksgiving at that house must some kind politically
incorrect marathon.
******************************************************************
THE WHEELS ARE COMING OFF THE BUS
******************************************************************
Clearly, something is happening. The modern
Republican party has become a parody of Big Spending,
War, Incompetence, Cronyism and Corruption.
Consider this exchange from Joe Scarborough, former
Republican member of Congress, on his tv show.
SCARBOROUGH: “Let me ask you this. After, what‘s it
been now, 11 years, have Republicans become what they
hate? That‘s what Americans think…”
Later...
SCARBOROUGH:
“There has been the belief for some time
that Republicans have slowly morphed into the
Democrats. Now, that‘s not coming from me. That‘s
coming from “The National Review,” that says it‘s hard
to tell the difference between the Republican Party of
2005 and the Democratic Party of 1994. I mean, that‘s
coming from other conservative sources.”
The wheels really are coming off. The spending, the
pork, the obvious corruption – it’s just embarrassing.
******************************************************************
Clearly, something is happening. The modern
Republican party has become a parody of Big Spending,
War, Incompetence, Cronyism and Corruption.
Consider this exchange from Joe Scarborough, former
Republican member of Congress, on his tv show.
SCARBOROUGH: “Let me ask you this. After, what‘s it
been now, 11 years, have Republicans become what they
hate? That‘s what Americans think…”
Later...
SCARBOROUGH:
“There has been the belief for some time
that Republicans have slowly morphed into the
Democrats. Now, that‘s not coming from me. That‘s
coming from “The National Review,” that says it‘s hard
to tell the difference between the Republican Party of
2005 and the Democratic Party of 1994. I mean, that‘s
coming from other conservative sources.”
The wheels really are coming off. The spending, the
pork, the obvious corruption – it’s just embarrassing.
******************************************************************
GOD KILLS THOUSANDS: FILM AT 11
This is also from Scarborough’s show this week:
(Note: This has been edited for length)
SCARBOROUGH: “You have said a lot of things that have
shocked a lot of people. Explain to me why you think
that Katrina was God‘s wrath.”
HANK ERWIN, ALABAMA STATE SENATOR:
“Well, I think, if you look at what‘s going on, this
whole region has always known that, with the church,
that New Orleans and the Gulf Coast are known for
sin.”
“And if you go to a church and you read your Bible,
you are always told avoid sin and that there‘s
judgment for sin. And I just think that, in my
analysis—and I can‘t speak for everybody, but I
believe that, if you look at the factors, that you had
a city that was known for sin—the signature of New
Orleans is the French Quarter, Bourbon Street. It is
known for sin. And you have a Bible that says God
will judge sin, you can put two and two together and
say, it may not be the judgment of God, but it sure
looks like the footprint.”
So, I just told my friends, in an opinion, I think it
could be the judgment of God on the Gulf Coast and on
New Orleans. And I would urge the good folks that are
the innocent victims to rally and rebuild that city
and get a new signature.”
SCARBOROUGH:
“I have got to ask you this, Senator. I was on the
ground in Mississippi. We certainly saw the pictures
out of Louisiana. I saw young children, 15-month-old
babies, who were suffering. I saw, in New Orleans,
young children. I mean, you look on TV, you see young
babies dying on the sidewalk of heat exhaustion.
Certainly, these babies aren‘t sinful, are they?
Should they be made to pay for the sins of tourists
from Florida that go over and gamble in New Orleans
and Biloxi?”
ERWIN: “Well, I think you need to understand that,
whenever—wherever sin goes, the sins of a few can
affect the innocence of many.”
SCARBOROUGH:
“But, you know, Senator—you know, Senator, though, I
mean, the thing about the New Orleans—the New Orleans
storm is that it was the French Quarter that seemed to
be spared of devastation.”
ERWIN:
“Well, I understand that, and I think the lord sent
them a message that we need to turn around or we may
have another hurricane come. And I just think the
people who have been going in there, the church people
have been going into the French Quarter for years,
appealing for the people to turn around and get back
right with God. So, I think the message needs to go
even stronger, please turn around, so we never have to
go through this again.”
Sorry for the length, but that man is a STATE SENATOR,
for pete’s sake.
(Note: This has been edited for length)
SCARBOROUGH: “You have said a lot of things that have
shocked a lot of people. Explain to me why you think
that Katrina was God‘s wrath.”
HANK ERWIN, ALABAMA STATE SENATOR:
“Well, I think, if you look at what‘s going on, this
whole region has always known that, with the church,
that New Orleans and the Gulf Coast are known for
sin.”
“And if you go to a church and you read your Bible,
you are always told avoid sin and that there‘s
judgment for sin. And I just think that, in my
analysis—and I can‘t speak for everybody, but I
believe that, if you look at the factors, that you had
a city that was known for sin—the signature of New
Orleans is the French Quarter, Bourbon Street. It is
known for sin. And you have a Bible that says God
will judge sin, you can put two and two together and
say, it may not be the judgment of God, but it sure
looks like the footprint.”
So, I just told my friends, in an opinion, I think it
could be the judgment of God on the Gulf Coast and on
New Orleans. And I would urge the good folks that are
the innocent victims to rally and rebuild that city
and get a new signature.”
SCARBOROUGH:
“I have got to ask you this, Senator. I was on the
ground in Mississippi. We certainly saw the pictures
out of Louisiana. I saw young children, 15-month-old
babies, who were suffering. I saw, in New Orleans,
young children. I mean, you look on TV, you see young
babies dying on the sidewalk of heat exhaustion.
Certainly, these babies aren‘t sinful, are they?
Should they be made to pay for the sins of tourists
from Florida that go over and gamble in New Orleans
and Biloxi?”
ERWIN: “Well, I think you need to understand that,
whenever—wherever sin goes, the sins of a few can
affect the innocence of many.”
SCARBOROUGH:
“But, you know, Senator—you know, Senator, though, I
mean, the thing about the New Orleans—the New Orleans
storm is that it was the French Quarter that seemed to
be spared of devastation.”
ERWIN:
“Well, I understand that, and I think the lord sent
them a message that we need to turn around or we may
have another hurricane come. And I just think the
people who have been going in there, the church people
have been going into the French Quarter for years,
appealing for the people to turn around and get back
right with God. So, I think the message needs to go
even stronger, please turn around, so we never have to
go through this again.”
Sorry for the length, but that man is a STATE SENATOR,
for pete’s sake.
MCLELLAN BRIEFING OF THE WEEK
******************************************************************
Q: Is the President concerned that there's a stench of
corruption around the Republican establishment in
Washington?
MR. McCLELLAN: Terry, I don't think you can make such
a broad characterization. There are some instances of
individual situations, and we'll let those -- the
legal process proceed in those instances.
Q: But he's not -- he doesn't take it as seriously as
he takes other allegations of wrongdoing?
MR. McCLELLAN:I didn't say that; you said that.
Q: He did take it seriously?
MR. McCLELLAN: There's a legal process in place to
address these matters.
Q Does he still have confidence in Leader DeLay? And
what does he think the impact of this will be on his
agenda?
MR. McCLELLAN: I just expressed his views. Again, the
President considers him a good ally and a friend who
we have worked with very closely to get things done
for the American people.
Q: Does he still have confidence in him?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?
Q: Does he still have confidence in him?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, Leader DeLay is going to work to
address this issue. He has put out a statement by his
office. I think our views are very clear, in terms of
our relationship with the Congressman.”
Q: Is the President concerned that there's a stench of
corruption around the Republican establishment in
Washington?
MR. McCLELLAN: Terry, I don't think you can make such
a broad characterization. There are some instances of
individual situations, and we'll let those -- the
legal process proceed in those instances.
Q: But he's not -- he doesn't take it as seriously as
he takes other allegations of wrongdoing?
MR. McCLELLAN:I didn't say that; you said that.
Q: He did take it seriously?
MR. McCLELLAN: There's a legal process in place to
address these matters.
Q Does he still have confidence in Leader DeLay? And
what does he think the impact of this will be on his
agenda?
MR. McCLELLAN: I just expressed his views. Again, the
President considers him a good ally and a friend who
we have worked with very closely to get things done
for the American people.
Q: Does he still have confidence in him?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?
Q: Does he still have confidence in him?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, Leader DeLay is going to work to
address this issue. He has put out a statement by his
office. I think our views are very clear, in terms of
our relationship with the Congressman.”
MCLELLAN BRIEFING OF THE WEEK, PART TWO
Because once just isn’t enough:
Q: “All you say is, don't finger-point, the American
people want answers.”
MR. McCLELLAN: "That's not what I said.”
Q: “The American people want answers to what happened
and what went wrong –“
MR. McCLELLAN: “You're absolutely wrong. The American
people recognize that sometimes here in Washington,
people get all focused on the bickering and the
finger-pointing, they get into this charged
atmosphere. The President is –“
Q: “Maybe they could be focused on more than one thing
at the same time.”
MR. McCLELLAN: “The President is trying to elevate the
discourse, and we are. We're doing that, as well,
Bill. And that's what we're getting: the facts.
"As I just pointed out, there are some people that
thought things were happening initially in the
immediate aftermath of the storm that now turn out to
be not true. And we need to let the facts be gathered
and let the facts come out, and that's exactly what
we're doing.”
Q: “The facts would include what went wrong, wouldn't
they?”
Q: “All you say is, don't finger-point, the American
people want answers.”
MR. McCLELLAN: "That's not what I said.”
Q: “The American people want answers to what happened
and what went wrong –“
MR. McCLELLAN: “You're absolutely wrong. The American
people recognize that sometimes here in Washington,
people get all focused on the bickering and the
finger-pointing, they get into this charged
atmosphere. The President is –“
Q: “Maybe they could be focused on more than one thing
at the same time.”
MR. McCLELLAN: “The President is trying to elevate the
discourse, and we are. We're doing that, as well,
Bill. And that's what we're getting: the facts.
"As I just pointed out, there are some people that
thought things were happening initially in the
immediate aftermath of the storm that now turn out to
be not true. And we need to let the facts be gathered
and let the facts come out, and that's exactly what
we're doing.”
Q: “The facts would include what went wrong, wouldn't
they?”
This is Progress?
“The number of Iraqi army battalions that can fight
insurgents without U.S. and coalition help has dropped
from THREE to ONE, top U.S. generals told Congress
yesterday, adding that the security situation in Iraq
is too uncertain to predict large-scale American troop
withdrawals anytime soon.
Gen. George W. Casey Jr., who oversees U.S. forces in
Iraq, said there are fewer Iraqi battalions at "Level
1" readiness than there were a few months ago.”
******************************************************************
insurgents without U.S. and coalition help has dropped
from THREE to ONE, top U.S. generals told Congress
yesterday, adding that the security situation in Iraq
is too uncertain to predict large-scale American troop
withdrawals anytime soon.
Gen. George W. Casey Jr., who oversees U.S. forces in
Iraq, said there are fewer Iraqi battalions at "Level
1" readiness than there were a few months ago.”
******************************************************************
REMARKABLY LIKE A CIVIL WAR
If this isn't civil war, you could've fooled me.
"A senior U.S. Marine commander said Monday that
insurgents loyal to militant leader Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi had taken over at least five key western
Iraqi towns on the border with Syria and were forcing
local residents to flee."
"In an interview, Lt. Col. Julian Alford, commander of
the 3rd Battalion, 6th Marines Regiment stationed
outside the western Iraqi town of al Qaim, said
insurgents in the area had been distributing flyers
they called "death letters," in which they ordered
residents of this western corner of volatile Anbar
province to leave -- or face death.
"Basically, the insurgents say if they don't leave
they will... behead them," said Alford, who took
command this month of about 1,000 Marines stationed in
the dusty desert area populated by roughly 100,000
Sunni Arabs."
******************************************************************
"A senior U.S. Marine commander said Monday that
insurgents loyal to militant leader Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi had taken over at least five key western
Iraqi towns on the border with Syria and were forcing
local residents to flee."
"In an interview, Lt. Col. Julian Alford, commander of
the 3rd Battalion, 6th Marines Regiment stationed
outside the western Iraqi town of al Qaim, said
insurgents in the area had been distributing flyers
they called "death letters," in which they ordered
residents of this western corner of volatile Anbar
province to leave -- or face death.
"Basically, the insurgents say if they don't leave
they will... behead them," said Alford, who took
command this month of about 1,000 Marines stationed in
the dusty desert area populated by roughly 100,000
Sunni Arabs."
******************************************************************
Monday, September 26, 2005
Did I Say $200 Billion? I meant less. A lot less.
(Reuters) - U.S. government spending to repair Hurricane Katrina damage may turn out to be just half of early estimates, or about $100 billion, the Senate Majority Leader's chief budget aide said on Monday.
Bill Hoagland, who works for Tennessee Republican Sen. BillFrist (news, bio, voting record), also said congressional leaders would shortly ask lawmakers to find additional spending cuts to help pay for hurricane disaster aid, but added: "It's going to be tough."
At a conference on Katrina reconstruction, Hoagland said an estimate frequently cited on Capitol Hill that federal recovery costs would hit $200 billion "has no basis in analysis."
He warned that Congress, which in six days this month approved $62.3 billion in emergency aid to Gulf Coast states, should be more careful before rushing through another disaster assistance package that the White House is expected to request in October.
"The number could at the end of the day be closer to $100 billion as opposed to $200 billion," Hoagland told the conference organized by Equity International, a business development firm, and held in a Senate office building.
The rate of government spending so far was slower than anticipated, Hoagland said. So far, just $16 billion of the emergency government aid actually had been allocated, he said.
"The rate of expenditure today is not what was reported early on -- $2 billion a day -- but something like $700 million a day. So I'm not sure how fast this will go, but it does suggest that there are some restrictions on the way the money is flowing out to those who are in need," he said.
Hoagland said estimates for what would probably be the biggest chunk of federal spending -- repairs to public infrastructure -- were not in yet, partly because some areas hit by Hurricane Katrina in late August had been hit again during the weekend by Hurricane Rita.
Congressional leaders would step up efforts to find ways to pay for hurricane aid, he said. Before Hurricane Katrina, congressional leaders were hoping to make $35 billion in spending cuts over five years."
Bill Hoagland, who works for Tennessee Republican Sen. BillFrist (news, bio, voting record), also said congressional leaders would shortly ask lawmakers to find additional spending cuts to help pay for hurricane disaster aid, but added: "It's going to be tough."
At a conference on Katrina reconstruction, Hoagland said an estimate frequently cited on Capitol Hill that federal recovery costs would hit $200 billion "has no basis in analysis."
He warned that Congress, which in six days this month approved $62.3 billion in emergency aid to Gulf Coast states, should be more careful before rushing through another disaster assistance package that the White House is expected to request in October.
"The number could at the end of the day be closer to $100 billion as opposed to $200 billion," Hoagland told the conference organized by Equity International, a business development firm, and held in a Senate office building.
The rate of government spending so far was slower than anticipated, Hoagland said. So far, just $16 billion of the emergency government aid actually had been allocated, he said.
"The rate of expenditure today is not what was reported early on -- $2 billion a day -- but something like $700 million a day. So I'm not sure how fast this will go, but it does suggest that there are some restrictions on the way the money is flowing out to those who are in need," he said.
Hoagland said estimates for what would probably be the biggest chunk of federal spending -- repairs to public infrastructure -- were not in yet, partly because some areas hit by Hurricane Katrina in late August had been hit again during the weekend by Hurricane Rita.
Congressional leaders would step up efforts to find ways to pay for hurricane aid, he said. Before Hurricane Katrina, congressional leaders were hoping to make $35 billion in spending cuts over five years."
Bush Can't Get HIMSELF Adequate Body Armor
So now Bush can't even get himself proper body armor? Can we all finally agree that he doesn't have any idea what he's doing?
Would you trust your safety to this man?
"Potentially Flawed Armor Bought for President Bush, Elite Troops"
By JOHN SOLOMON, AP
WASHINGTON (Sept. 26) - Federal prosecutors are investigating whether a maker of bulletproof vests endangered lives, including President Bush's, by concealing potentially deadly flaws in the body armor sold to the government and police agencies.
A whistle-blower from the company, Second Chance Body Armor Inc., of Central Lake, Mich., testified this month that the Secret Service tested and bought some of the defective vests for the president and first lady Laura Bush.
The Pentagon also obtained the same armor for elite troops who guard generals, according to transcripts obtained by The Associated Press.
Many sales occurred well after Second Chance had been alerted that the Japanese-made Zylon synthetic material in the vests was degrading faster than expected from heat, light and moisture exposure, allowing bullets to potentially penetrate the armor, according to the whistle-blower's testimony and other company documents....
[SNIP]
By 2001, Second Chance's research chief, Aaron Westrick, was pleading unsuccessfully with his company's president to replace the vests after his own tests showed them degrading, the memos show.
"Lives and our credibility are at stake," Westrick wrote then-Second Chance president Richard Davis in a Dec. 18, 2001, memo. "We will only prevail if we do the right things and not hesitate. This issue should not be hidden for obvious safety issues and because of future litigation."
...."Second Chance customers were not alerted to the problems until September 2003 _ after a California police officer was shot to death wearing the vest and a Pennsylvania officer was seriously wounded."
..."Throughout 2001 and 2002, agencies from the Pentagon to local police bought vests from Second Chance, records show. The company now says more than 100,000 Zylon vests it sold are in question, and the government said it bought at least 40,000."
In summer 2002, company executives prepared a memo for their board of directors recommending two stark options.
"Solution 1: We continue to operate as though nothing is wrong until one of our customers is killed or wounded or Germany, Japan, Dupont or some other entity exposes the Zylon problem," the memo said.
Under a category "Downfalls" for that option, the memo warned an officer wearing one of the vests might be killed. "In the eyes of law enforcement, we will either be stupid for not knowing or greedy and uncaring for knowing and not doing anything about it," the memo said.
The second option recommended the company publish an ad "denouncing" the vests and "decline to make them" unless customers knew of the problem and still wanted them.
"...It is apparent that Toyobo was duped by Second Chance," Kent Jarrell, a U.S. spokesman for Toyobo, said Sunday. "We were shocked by the level of Second Chance's deception when their behavior was finally uncovered because of documents that surfaced in litigation and through investigation."
..."The president had Zylon Ultima armor and his wife had it, if I recollect, and they took a look at it ... I believe it was the Secret Service put the armor through some special tests and went with it, bought it," Westrick testified in a Sept. 9 transcript obtained by The Associated Press."
"...Westrick was told Bush wore Zylon-protection during the 2001 inauguration and during a 2002 event with police that his boss attended, according to legal professionals familiar with the case."
Would you trust your safety to this man?
"Potentially Flawed Armor Bought for President Bush, Elite Troops"
By JOHN SOLOMON, AP
WASHINGTON (Sept. 26) - Federal prosecutors are investigating whether a maker of bulletproof vests endangered lives, including President Bush's, by concealing potentially deadly flaws in the body armor sold to the government and police agencies.
A whistle-blower from the company, Second Chance Body Armor Inc., of Central Lake, Mich., testified this month that the Secret Service tested and bought some of the defective vests for the president and first lady Laura Bush.
The Pentagon also obtained the same armor for elite troops who guard generals, according to transcripts obtained by The Associated Press.
Many sales occurred well after Second Chance had been alerted that the Japanese-made Zylon synthetic material in the vests was degrading faster than expected from heat, light and moisture exposure, allowing bullets to potentially penetrate the armor, according to the whistle-blower's testimony and other company documents....
[SNIP]
By 2001, Second Chance's research chief, Aaron Westrick, was pleading unsuccessfully with his company's president to replace the vests after his own tests showed them degrading, the memos show.
"Lives and our credibility are at stake," Westrick wrote then-Second Chance president Richard Davis in a Dec. 18, 2001, memo. "We will only prevail if we do the right things and not hesitate. This issue should not be hidden for obvious safety issues and because of future litigation."
...."Second Chance customers were not alerted to the problems until September 2003 _ after a California police officer was shot to death wearing the vest and a Pennsylvania officer was seriously wounded."
..."Throughout 2001 and 2002, agencies from the Pentagon to local police bought vests from Second Chance, records show. The company now says more than 100,000 Zylon vests it sold are in question, and the government said it bought at least 40,000."
In summer 2002, company executives prepared a memo for their board of directors recommending two stark options.
"Solution 1: We continue to operate as though nothing is wrong until one of our customers is killed or wounded or Germany, Japan, Dupont or some other entity exposes the Zylon problem," the memo said.
Under a category "Downfalls" for that option, the memo warned an officer wearing one of the vests might be killed. "In the eyes of law enforcement, we will either be stupid for not knowing or greedy and uncaring for knowing and not doing anything about it," the memo said.
The second option recommended the company publish an ad "denouncing" the vests and "decline to make them" unless customers knew of the problem and still wanted them.
"...It is apparent that Toyobo was duped by Second Chance," Kent Jarrell, a U.S. spokesman for Toyobo, said Sunday. "We were shocked by the level of Second Chance's deception when their behavior was finally uncovered because of documents that surfaced in litigation and through investigation."
..."The president had Zylon Ultima armor and his wife had it, if I recollect, and they took a look at it ... I believe it was the Secret Service put the armor through some special tests and went with it, bought it," Westrick testified in a Sept. 9 transcript obtained by The Associated Press."
"...Westrick was told Bush wore Zylon-protection during the 2001 inauguration and during a 2002 event with police that his boss attended, according to legal professionals familiar with the case."
Thursday, September 22, 2005
Roberts Approved by Senate Judiciary Committee
The Senate Judiciary Committee today approved the nomination of John Roberts as the next Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.
Three Democrats voted with ten Republicans for a vote of 13-5.
Five Democrats -- Senators Dianne Feinstein of California, Joseph Biden of Delaware, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Charles Schumer of New York and Dick Durbin of Ilinois voted against his nomination.
Republicans who voted yes:
Sen. Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, Utah
Sen. Charles Grassley, Iowa
Sen. Jon Kyl, Arizona
Sen. Mike DeWine, Ohio
Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama
Sen. Lindsey Graham, S. Carolina
Sen. John Cornyn, Texas
Sen. Sam Brownback, Kansas
Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma
Democrats who voted yes:
Sen. Patrick Leahy, Vermont
Sen. Herbert Kohl, Wisconsin
Sen. Russ Feingold, Wisconsin
Democrats who voted no:
Sen. Edward Kennedy, Massachusetts
Sen. Joseph Biden, Delaware
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California
Sen. Charles Schumer, New York
Sen. Richard Durbin, Illinois
Three Democrats voted with ten Republicans for a vote of 13-5.
Five Democrats -- Senators Dianne Feinstein of California, Joseph Biden of Delaware, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Charles Schumer of New York and Dick Durbin of Ilinois voted against his nomination.
Republicans who voted yes:
Sen. Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, Utah
Sen. Charles Grassley, Iowa
Sen. Jon Kyl, Arizona
Sen. Mike DeWine, Ohio
Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama
Sen. Lindsey Graham, S. Carolina
Sen. John Cornyn, Texas
Sen. Sam Brownback, Kansas
Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma
Democrats who voted yes:
Sen. Patrick Leahy, Vermont
Sen. Herbert Kohl, Wisconsin
Sen. Russ Feingold, Wisconsin
Democrats who voted no:
Sen. Edward Kennedy, Massachusetts
Sen. Joseph Biden, Delaware
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California
Sen. Charles Schumer, New York
Sen. Richard Durbin, Illinois
Friday, September 16, 2005
THAT MUST HAVE BEEN QUITE A RIDE
I got this note from the ASPCA:
“Working on a grid system, our five teams of three
rescuers each waded through waist-high, fetid water,
pulling boats loaded with equipment and supplies,
successfully avoiding injury on fallen tree limbs and
downed power lines.
This hot, sticky, frustrating day netted 25 cats, 14
dogs, one pet snake and a gentleman who been
overlooked by earlier rescuers.”
*****************************************************************
“Working on a grid system, our five teams of three
rescuers each waded through waist-high, fetid water,
pulling boats loaded with equipment and supplies,
successfully avoiding injury on fallen tree limbs and
downed power lines.
This hot, sticky, frustrating day netted 25 cats, 14
dogs, one pet snake and a gentleman who been
overlooked by earlier rescuers.”
*****************************************************************
To Bush, People are Just Props
HEY BIG SPENDER
Early estimates are that the cost of rebuilding the
Gulf Coast next year alone could more than the entire
cost of the Iraq war thus far.
Doesn’t make you feel good?
*****************************************************************
ALL PEOPLE ARE JUST PROPS TO HIM
“I am going to defend the people who are on the front
line of saving lives. Those Coast Guard kids pulling
people out of the -- out of the floods are -- did
heroic work. The first responders on the ground,
whether they be state folks or local folks, did
everything they could. There's a lot of people that
are -- have done a lot of hard work to save lives.”
-- George W. Bush
No one was attacking the Coast Guard. Bush is such a
coward, that just as when war supporters chant “you
have to support the troops,” Bush is going dodge his
terrible record from the Huricane by hiding behind the
heroism of other people.
*****************************************************************
THE WHEELS ARE COMING OFF THE BUS
"Katrina's winds have unspun the spin of the Bush
machine, particularly the crucial idea that he is a
commanding commander in chief. In the Newsweek Poll,
only 17 percent of Americans say that he deserves the
most blame for the botched early response to Katrina.
But, for the first time, less than a majority -- 49
percent -- say he has 'strong leadership qualities,'
down from 63 percent last year. That weakness, in
turn, dragged down his job-approval rating -- now at
38 percent, his lowest ever -- as well as voters'
sense of where the country is headed. By a 66-28
margin, they say they are 'dissatisfied,' by far the
gloomiest view in the Bush years, and among the worst
in recent decades."
–– Howard Fineman, Newsweek
*****************************************************************
THIS IS THE GUY THEY DIDN’T FIRE
"It was on Tuesday that the levee — may have
been overnight Monday to Tuesday — that the
levee started to break,"
-- DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff to Tim
Russert.
“The New Orleans office of the National Weather
Service issued a flash flood warning at
8:14 a.m. Monday, saying "a levee breach
occurred along the industrial canal at Tennessee
Street. 3 to 8 feet of water is expected due to
the breach."
*****************************************************************
Early estimates are that the cost of rebuilding the
Gulf Coast next year alone could more than the entire
cost of the Iraq war thus far.
Doesn’t make you feel good?
*****************************************************************
ALL PEOPLE ARE JUST PROPS TO HIM
“I am going to defend the people who are on the front
line of saving lives. Those Coast Guard kids pulling
people out of the -- out of the floods are -- did
heroic work. The first responders on the ground,
whether they be state folks or local folks, did
everything they could. There's a lot of people that
are -- have done a lot of hard work to save lives.”
-- George W. Bush
No one was attacking the Coast Guard. Bush is such a
coward, that just as when war supporters chant “you
have to support the troops,” Bush is going dodge his
terrible record from the Huricane by hiding behind the
heroism of other people.
*****************************************************************
THE WHEELS ARE COMING OFF THE BUS
"Katrina's winds have unspun the spin of the Bush
machine, particularly the crucial idea that he is a
commanding commander in chief. In the Newsweek Poll,
only 17 percent of Americans say that he deserves the
most blame for the botched early response to Katrina.
But, for the first time, less than a majority -- 49
percent -- say he has 'strong leadership qualities,'
down from 63 percent last year. That weakness, in
turn, dragged down his job-approval rating -- now at
38 percent, his lowest ever -- as well as voters'
sense of where the country is headed. By a 66-28
margin, they say they are 'dissatisfied,' by far the
gloomiest view in the Bush years, and among the worst
in recent decades."
–– Howard Fineman, Newsweek
*****************************************************************
THIS IS THE GUY THEY DIDN’T FIRE
"It was on Tuesday that the levee — may have
been overnight Monday to Tuesday — that the
levee started to break,"
-- DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff to Tim
Russert.
“The New Orleans office of the National Weather
Service issued a flash flood warning at
8:14 a.m. Monday, saying "a levee breach
occurred along the industrial canal at Tennessee
Street. 3 to 8 feet of water is expected due to
the breach."
*****************************************************************
THE WEEK IN REVIEW
FUN FACT OF THE WEEK
In the first day of his confirmation hearings, John
Roberts pledged that he understood that “It's my job
to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch."
The next day Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
threw out the first pitch at the Chicago Cubs game at
Wrigley field.
*****************************************************************
SUPREME COURT QUOTE OF THE WEEK
Sen. Joe Biden:
“Judge Roberts' answers are "misleading."
Sen. Arlen Specter:
"The answers may be misleading but they are his
answers."
*****************************************************************
REMEMBER, YOU’RE UNDER OATH
This week, at the confirmation hearing, Senator Chuck
Schumer asked John Roberts this question:
“Let me ask you, then -- this hypothetical: And
that is that it came to our attention, Congress',
through a relatively and inexpensive, simple
process, individuals were now able to clone
certain species of animals, maybe an arroyo toad.
Didn't pass over state lines; you could somehow
do it without doing any of that. Under the
commerce clause, can Congress pass a law
banning even noncommercial cloning?”
Aren’t you glad you didn’t go to law school?
*****************************************************************
SUPREME COURT HEARING
QUESTION OF THE WEEK
Which of the following occurred during John Robert’s
confirmation hearing?
(A) Roberts answered whether he thought Marbury v.
Madison was correctly decided.
(B) Joe Biden said he was jealous of Roberts’ hair.
(C) Ted Kennedy sang, “Oh, Danny Boy”.
(D) Arlen Specter reminded everyone that he invented
the Lone Gunman theory.
(E) Senator Brownback asked whether Roberts had ever
been a fetus.
(F) John Roberts’ wife fell asleep.
ANSWER: F
The others did not happen. As far as I know.
*****************************************************************
YOU CAN’T ARGUE WITH THAT
Bill O’Reilly:
“The truth of the matter is our correspondents at Fox
News can’t go out for a cup of coffee in Baghdad.”
Condi Rice:
“Bill, that’s tough. It’s tough. But what — would they
have wanted to have gone out for a cup of coffee when
Saddam Hussein was in power?”
I imagine this later exchange:
"Mr. President, you're about to leave office with the
lowest approval ratings of any President in modern
history. Iraq is in the middle of vicious civil war,
we have record defcits, gas is $5 per gallon, and our
network correspondents can't even walk the streets of
New Orleans because the city, under the temporary rule
of Halliburton, has become a disease-infested swamp of
failed casinos. What is your response?"
President Bush:
"That’s tough. It’s tough. But what — would they have
wanted to have gone out in the streets when the city
was under 20 feet of water?"
-–– January, 2009
*****************************************************************
YES, WE’RE STILL IN IRAQ
In case your mind was on other things, hundreds of
people were killed in Iraq this week. Literally.
The number of people killed by massive waves of
bombers on Wednesday ALONE has risen to 150, and
hundreds more were injured.
It was the worst one day toll since the fall of Saddam
in 2003.
*****************************************************************
In the first day of his confirmation hearings, John
Roberts pledged that he understood that “It's my job
to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch."
The next day Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
threw out the first pitch at the Chicago Cubs game at
Wrigley field.
*****************************************************************
SUPREME COURT QUOTE OF THE WEEK
Sen. Joe Biden:
“Judge Roberts' answers are "misleading."
Sen. Arlen Specter:
"The answers may be misleading but they are his
answers."
*****************************************************************
REMEMBER, YOU’RE UNDER OATH
This week, at the confirmation hearing, Senator Chuck
Schumer asked John Roberts this question:
“Let me ask you, then -- this hypothetical: And
that is that it came to our attention, Congress',
through a relatively and inexpensive, simple
process, individuals were now able to clone
certain species of animals, maybe an arroyo toad.
Didn't pass over state lines; you could somehow
do it without doing any of that. Under the
commerce clause, can Congress pass a law
banning even noncommercial cloning?”
Aren’t you glad you didn’t go to law school?
*****************************************************************
SUPREME COURT HEARING
QUESTION OF THE WEEK
Which of the following occurred during John Robert’s
confirmation hearing?
(A) Roberts answered whether he thought Marbury v.
Madison was correctly decided.
(B) Joe Biden said he was jealous of Roberts’ hair.
(C) Ted Kennedy sang, “Oh, Danny Boy”.
(D) Arlen Specter reminded everyone that he invented
the Lone Gunman theory.
(E) Senator Brownback asked whether Roberts had ever
been a fetus.
(F) John Roberts’ wife fell asleep.
ANSWER: F
The others did not happen. As far as I know.
*****************************************************************
YOU CAN’T ARGUE WITH THAT
Bill O’Reilly:
“The truth of the matter is our correspondents at Fox
News can’t go out for a cup of coffee in Baghdad.”
Condi Rice:
“Bill, that’s tough. It’s tough. But what — would they
have wanted to have gone out for a cup of coffee when
Saddam Hussein was in power?”
I imagine this later exchange:
"Mr. President, you're about to leave office with the
lowest approval ratings of any President in modern
history. Iraq is in the middle of vicious civil war,
we have record defcits, gas is $5 per gallon, and our
network correspondents can't even walk the streets of
New Orleans because the city, under the temporary rule
of Halliburton, has become a disease-infested swamp of
failed casinos. What is your response?"
President Bush:
"That’s tough. It’s tough. But what — would they have
wanted to have gone out in the streets when the city
was under 20 feet of water?"
-–– January, 2009
*****************************************************************
YES, WE’RE STILL IN IRAQ
In case your mind was on other things, hundreds of
people were killed in Iraq this week. Literally.
The number of people killed by massive waves of
bombers on Wednesday ALONE has risen to 150, and
hundreds more were injured.
It was the worst one day toll since the fall of Saddam
in 2003.
*****************************************************************
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
BUSH TO DELIVER MESSAGE BY BULLHORN
September 14, 2005 (Dateline: Washington)
(NEWS) President Bush will deliver his entire message to the nation Thursday night while shouting into a bullhorn, sources close the White House say. According to anonymous sources, the President is trying to recapture the support of the nation he received immediately following September 11. The President "feels he is more imposing and leader-like with the bullhorn," a source said. In fact, said one senior aide, the President often conducts meetings with the bullhorn. "He started an informal meeting the other day yelling 'I can hear you!'" the aide said. "It was crazy. But that's Bush."
Presidential historians say this would be the first time a President has addressed the nation in this fashion. The President's address is Thursday evening.
(NEWS) President Bush will deliver his entire message to the nation Thursday night while shouting into a bullhorn, sources close the White House say. According to anonymous sources, the President is trying to recapture the support of the nation he received immediately following September 11. The President "feels he is more imposing and leader-like with the bullhorn," a source said. In fact, said one senior aide, the President often conducts meetings with the bullhorn. "He started an informal meeting the other day yelling 'I can hear you!'" the aide said. "It was crazy. But that's Bush."
Presidential historians say this would be the first time a President has addressed the nation in this fashion. The President's address is Thursday evening.
Senator Brownback, Moron
I was just listening to Senator Brownback of Kansas in the Roberts hearing going on and on about much he really, really cared about the plaintiffs in Roe v. Wade, and the other cases. How no one else cared for them but him, and the other anti-choicers. And the then he called her "Sandra McCorvey" three times. "Sandra McCorvey, "Sandra McCorvey," "Sandra McCorvey ..."
It's NORMA McCorvey, moron....
It's NORMA McCorvey, moron....
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Does the Truth Even Matter Any More?
From Larry Johnson posting on Josh Marshall's TPM Cafe:
SORTING OUT OPINION FROM FACT ON KATRINA
By Larry Johnson
"While watching the MSNBC program, CONNECTED, COAST TO COAST with Ron Reagan, a man from the Evergreen Foundation was on air spinning the myth that the President had to "beg" the Governor of Louisiana to take action. Having been on this show several times I called one of the bookers, Susan Durrwatcher, to alert her to the fact that this man was misrepresenting what happened. I offered Susan the following objective, documented facts (see timeline below). Susan thanked me for my "opinion" and said "we just have a different perspective". Stunned, I asked her by what standard of journalism that an objective fact was mere opinion? I asked her to simply look at the documents and correct the record. She declined. I asked her to remove me from the MSNBC list of contacts. I'm sure MSNBC won't miss me and I am certain I will have a happy life without having to subject myself to their unprofessional approach to journalism."
So MSNBC has given up on the truth.
Oh well. It was an outdated concept anyway.
SORTING OUT OPINION FROM FACT ON KATRINA
By Larry Johnson
"While watching the MSNBC program, CONNECTED, COAST TO COAST with Ron Reagan, a man from the Evergreen Foundation was on air spinning the myth that the President had to "beg" the Governor of Louisiana to take action. Having been on this show several times I called one of the bookers, Susan Durrwatcher, to alert her to the fact that this man was misrepresenting what happened. I offered Susan the following objective, documented facts (see timeline below). Susan thanked me for my "opinion" and said "we just have a different perspective". Stunned, I asked her by what standard of journalism that an objective fact was mere opinion? I asked her to simply look at the documents and correct the record. She declined. I asked her to remove me from the MSNBC list of contacts. I'm sure MSNBC won't miss me and I am certain I will have a happy life without having to subject myself to their unprofessional approach to journalism."
So MSNBC has given up on the truth.
Oh well. It was an outdated concept anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)