The DCF News

God's First Press Conference In 2000 Years: He's Pissed

2006-07-24T18:45:00.000-04:00

Heaven - (DCF) - Lifting a ban on press conferences for the first time in over 2,000 years, God spoke candidly with reporters this morning about ongoing strife in the Middle East, the actions of the United States government, and the End Times. Here is a transcript of the press conference.

God: Good morning. As most of you know - especially Helen Thomas, who was at My last press conference; Hi, Helen! - I haven't really had a lot to say. My methods, ineffable as they are, made it so you, the people of this universe I have created for you, could try to figure out things on your own. Unfortunately, it appears that most of you didn't come to realize this, and so you want Me to do your thinking for you.
When I created all of this for you - the Earth, the sun, the moon, the rest of Creation - I wanted nothing but the best for all of you. I did what little needed to be done in order to give you the perfect place to start, and then I sat back and watched, trying to interfere as little as possible once I got the ball rolling. I wanted to see what you would do with what I had given you. To say that I've been incredibly disappointed would be a gross understatement. The term "pig's ear" is just scratching the surface, really.
I gave you animals, that you might eat their flesh and wear their fur for warmth. I was hoping, however, that you'd be able to show a little restraint. You let me down, mankind, and have succeeded in killing most of them off. Way to go.
I gave you shelter in caves, so that you would be able to stay warm and dry when it rained. You responded by vandalizing - I said vandalizing - the walls with pictures of you and your friends killing the animals I gave you. Again, nice job.
I gave you intelligence, and you used it to make weapons. Weapons that, instead of being used to hunt the animals (with restraint) so you could feed your families, you used against each other. That's not what I had intended.
And the spears, rocks, and arrows you had weren't good enough; you had to make things that went "BANG!" And you used them on each other again, trying to get rid of the people you didn't get with the spears, rocks, and arrows. How very sad that you cannot see eye to eye with each other and realize that you are all the same, regardless of which religion you choose.
And speaking of religion, what's all this "Doing It in God's Name" stuff? I haven't asked for any of this. And I certainly do not advocate killing each other over a patch of land that is, quite frankly, no more holy than any other place on the planet. I made it all, didn't I? You can't get more holy than that. I worked so hard to create you, and to suggest that I support the idea of destroying any of you is, at best, ludicrous. I do not condone it, and I most certainly do not support it.
Which brings me to another point: What is this "End Times" business? Relax, people. The Rapture - if I even decide to go through with it - is a long way off. And here's why: Those people just creep Me out. Look at them. All they talk about is the end of humanity as they know it, and they're excited for it, because they think they're going to be sitting at My right hand. I don't think so. The last thing I want is a bunch of loonies up here, slouching around and bothering Me with their problems. I've got real problems to worry about.
For instance, I've got to deal with these yahoos in the United States who are trying to appease Me. Like this stem cell thing I've heard about. If I've read this right - and there's no reason to believe I haven't because I'm God, and therefore infallible - stem cell research could potentially cure diseases that, right now, are incurable. Well, that sounds good to Me. I mean, what happened to "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"? I think I heard that in a Star Trek movie or something, and it makes complete sense to me. But in the United States, they've put a man in charge who, believing he's doing My will, refuses to let that research be done. Not too bright, is he?
The same guy has also started a war against a country that did nothing to his. I know for a fact that I never said that I wanted that.
So, people of the United States, let me ask you this: What were you thinking? Is this the best choice you had available to you? If so, I'd hate to see what the other guy was like.
And don't even get me started about that Cheney guy. He's not one of mine.
Let me say this about other people - and they know who they are - who claim they are talking to Me: Don't believe them. If I wanted to get a message out to all of you, I'd do it Myself, like I am today. I wouldn't go to Pat Robertson and say, "Hey, could you let everyone know..." I have a press agent - his name is Saint Peter - and I tell him what I want people to know, and he handles it for Me. Hi, Pete. Good to see you.
And that's it, really. I'd like to finish my statement by telling all of you to be nice to each other, because you're all you've got. Oh, I'm still around, and I'm watching, but you're on Earth to try to help each other. If I didn't think you could do it, I'd be down there Myself, guiding you along. But I still think you've got it in you to impress me. You've just got to start thinking for yourselves. Go to it.

God then took questions from the reporters.

Q: Thank you, sir. Concerning your statement about the End Times, could you be a bit more specific about how far "a long way off" is?
God: I'm sorry, no. You see, the thing is, if I went around telling people when the End Times were going to be - you know, being specific about time and date, like you're asking - can you imagine the problems it would case for, say, credit card companies? Some goober finds out that the End Times are on, for instance, the Thursday after next, and decides to max out his Visa because he believes he's not going to be around when the bill comes due. That's no way to be.
Q: So you have consulted with the credit card companies about the specific date of the End Times?
God: No, it was just an example.
Q: So it's not the Thursday after next?
God: No! What is it with you people? It was just an example!
Q: You said that you thought President Bush was a bad choice because of his opinions on stem cell research and the war in Iraq--
God: It's not a war. Nobody has declared war.
Q: Okay. But the point of my question is this: Are you saying you don't support President Bush?
God: Look, let me say it like this: It's not a matter of whether I support one guy or the other. It's about whether I support the ideas that are being put forth. It wouldn't matter if it was this guy or that guy, so long as he was trying to help his fellow man. Stifling the efforts of scientists who are trying to make the world a better place - and that includes the ones working on Global Warming - is wrong, especially when there is proof that they've made advances that can help humanity.
Q: Can you give examples? Of things science has done that have helped humanity?
God: Sure. Look at how much the average lifespan has lengthened since I first created you? Humans' lifespan have increased dramatically since you were first put here by Me.
Q: What about Methuselah?
God: That guy was a fluke. And he was a bit weird at the end, so he's not really a good representative example.
Q: Can you tell us why it is that you've taken so long between press conferences?
God: In all honesty, I didn't want to do this one. See, the whole point of all of this - you, the Earth, the animals, the plants...everything - was to see what happened. I started things, as I said, and then sat back to see where you took yourselves. I wanted to be completely hands-off with this project.
Q: So the reason you finally came back to talk to us is...?
God: Because you've cocked it up so badly. I figured I'd come tell you that I wasn't happy with the way it was going. Maybe it would get you on the right track again. One more chance, humanity, and then I wipe the slate clean and start over.
Q: So you want us to go back to church and start worshipping again?
God: Good Me, no. I'm really pretty shy. I don't need the extra attention, in all honesty. Especially with those religious fruit loops doing all those stupid things and then saying they did it for Me. No, I think what you should really do is start paying closer attention to each other, rather than Me. These other people you share your world with are the ones you have to deal with on a daily basis during your life. You won't have to answer to me until you're dead, and to tell the truth, I'd be more inclined to listen to what you have to say if you spent your time helping your fellow man instead of sitting in church and giving 10% of your paycheck to a guy in a suit.
Q: So you're against tithing?
God: Well, yeah. We don't even have money here in Heaven. Which is just as well, because I never see a nickel of the money those guys take in down there. It all goes to radio and television stations, and air conditioned dog houses. Let Me say it again: You need to look out for each other. You're all you've got, and if you spend the time you have left down there - and, cosmically, it's the blink of an eye - trying to talk to Me instead of turning and talking to the person sitting next to you, you're wasting the time I've given you.
I've got time for one last question, and then I have to take My Son to an appearance on a bagel in New Jersey.
Q: I've got one, with a possible follow-up.
God: Go ahead.
Q: Which religion is the right one?
God: Ha! I knew this was coming. The truth? None of them, really. They're all too wrapped up in trying to please Me by doing everything they can to destroy all the other ones, which, as I say, isn't the way to do it. I bet it'll be a huge surprise to those guys when they get here and realize that it's all the same.
Q: Could you clarify that?
God: It's simple. It's all about Me. Pick a religion. When they talk about their "god," they're talking about Me. Muslims? Yeah, they're praying to Me. Christians? Catholics? Same deal. One God. That's it. Jews, too. The expressions on their faces when they get here is priceless, let me tell you. Especially when I get wrapped up in a meeting and I have My Son go meet them for the tour. Talk about shocked expressions! (Laughter) You had a follow-up?
Q: Yes, thank you. Well, in light of this revelation, it's different than my original question. What about cultures that had more than one god, such as Ancient Greece?
God: Yeah, those guys just didn't know when to quit, did they? Anyway, they were all Me. I had this great wig guy who helped me out with the costumes. It actually made it a bit easier when they were doing their thing, because I knew if it was this group, it concerned this issue, and if it was that group, it was a different issue. I had a really organized system for them. Now, everyone wants Me to take care of everything all at once, and there's no order to it. Oh, Me, what I wouldn't do for a vacation.
Those are all the questions I'm going to take, but let Me close by saying this: Pay attention, humanity, because no matter how long it is before I finally decide to shut down the whole project, you still have the intervening time to deal with each other, and it won't work if you're not willing to recognize that the person standing in front of you is the same as you, regardless of what color their skin is or who they pray to. (Laughter) I can't say this enough. You've got each other, and that's the greatest gift I could have ever given you. Don't waste it by trying to do all kinds of terrible things to each other.
Be good to each other. Or so help Me, I'll come back and put the fear of...er...Me into you!
Thank you.

All the best,

Derek

(DCF)

Bush the Lesser Uses First Veto - Screws That Up, Too!

2006-07-20T05:47:00.000-04:00

For the first time in the 5 1/2 years he has occupied the White House, George "Dubya" Bush used his veto power - a power he has threatened to use (but never had) in the past - against a bill that would allow an increase in funding for embryonic stem cell research, claiming the bill "crossed a moral boundary."

A moral boundary? This, coming from a man who has sold out his country to the highest bidders, allowed corruption to run rampant through Congress, started an undeclared war against a soveriegn nation that had done nothing to the United States, supported torture, courted those who trained and financed terrorists, and continues to ignore the Constitution in order to advance his own paranoia? Just amazing.

The embryos that would be used for this research - research that could, potentially, bring about the cure of countless diseases - would be frozen embryos that had been left unused by fertility clinics. But that's not good enough for Dubya, who, while refusing to allow the press to cover his veto of the bill, still took the time for a photo op with a group of children.

"These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said of the children in the audience. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells."

Puh-leez.

The House attempted to override the veto, but found themselves 51 votes short.

*****

Elsewhere, more people died as Israel and Lebanon continued fighting. This has been coming for a long time, and finally came to fruition last week, when Israel decided that they'd had enough of Hezbollah, attacking Lebanon with missles, bombing attacks, rocks, sticks, and possibly a few pies. Republicans like former House Speaker Newt "The Moralist" Gingrich (who approached his second wife in the hospital with his divorce demands while she was still recovering from cancer surgery) are insisting that Republicans should frame this as the beginnings of World War III in order to firm up the Republican base for the November mid-term elections in Congress. And yet they accuse Democrats of trying to politicize everything. Just amazing.

*****

Meanwhile, while the U.N. is trying to stop the fighting, Dubya was in Russia, taking part in the G8 Summit, where he was caugth cursing on live video and audi o, and then attempted to give the German Chancellor an unwanted shoulder rub. The expression on her face says more than anything I could write. It's also a prime example of the kind of image this faux cowboy presents to the civilized world. How proud we all are.

*****

Back here in the U.S., the campaigns for Congressional mid-terms have been very entertaining. Here are two of my favorites:

In Connecticut, challenger Ned Lamont had his first debate against DINO ("Democrat In Name Only") Joe Lieberman. Both men are trying to win the Democratic nomination for Senate on August 8th. Since the debate, in which Lamont held his own quite well, Lieberman has pulled out all the stops, going so far as to question Lamont's dedication to the Democratic party. This would be a reasonable question to ask, were it not for the fact that Lieberman intends to run as an Independent (Connecticut For Lieberman) if he should lose the Dem primary. Pot, meet kettle.

In Florida - you remember 2000 in Florida, right? - Katherine Harris' campaign continues to eat itself alive under her clearly insane leadership. There's just too much fun stuff to list here, so I'd just suggest going here and reading about it. Then laugh. A lot.

And there you have it. My round up for the time being. It's not complete by any means, but it's the stuff that caught my attention.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

VP Cheney's Stunning Physical Results

2006-07-01T13:38:00.000-04:00

An Undisclosed Location - (DCF) - As has been widely reported in the media, Vice President Richard "Cranium" Cheney went for his annual physical today.

Vice-President Cheney at the 2004 Republican National Convention

The results of the physical were generally positive, but there were a few small anomolies that caught the attention of the attending physician, Dr. Nick Riviera.

"Hi, everybody! The initial tests came back showing the vice president in very good condition," Dr. Riviera told reporters at a press conference shortly after the physical. "He's in very good shape, especially for a man who has suffered almost as many heart attacks as he's had deferments from military service."

There were a few tense moments, Dr. Riviera conceded, as an assistant attempted to collect blood samples. "As many people know - some of whom aren't even doctors! - we prefer that a patient doesn't eat or drink anything for at least eight hours before a physical. However, even in the brief period he was in the waiting room, my receptionist told me that he was continuously drinking from a large mug labeled 'Virgin Blood'."

Dr. Riviera added that it took all seven Secret Service agents to wrest the mug from Cheney long enough for the nurse to draw blood. The vice president fought hard to keep the mug, insisting that it kept him "on top of my game."

Shortly after, the nurse quit her job. "You'd think she's never seen it when it glows green," Dr. Riviera told reporters.

One of the most unusual findings during the physical concerned Cheney's heart. Sort of.

"We couldn't find it!" Dr. Riviera said. "We looked all over for it, but could find nothing fo the sort."

What, then, reporters asked, was the vice president's pacemaker connected to?

"It was wired directly to a small, black lump of some sort of carbon-like material," Riviera said. "We took it out, and the boys in the lab took a look. They had no idea what it was, so now we're going to send it to NASA and see if they can figure it out."

Dr. Riviera assured reporters that the removal of the object doesn't appear to have had any effect on the vice president.

Apparently, Riviera added, there had been modifications made to the pacemaker since its original installation. Secondary wires fed off from the main ones, and were connected to Cheney's colon. "This would explain that squinty look he has all the time," said Dr. Riviera.

The vice president's sneer, however, appears to be a natural extension of his intense hatred of all human beings, Dr. Riviera said. "It's not a medical condition," he added. "He is just an ornery cuss."

Until the rest of Vice President Cheney's test results come back, very little else can be established.

"Until I see the final results, for all I know he's a bald, albino warthog," said Dr. Riviera. "And remember: I'll do bypass surgery on anyone for $129.95! Just call 1-800-DOCTORB! The B stands for 'bargain'! Bye, everybody!"

All the best,

Derek

(DCF)

NSA Forced Out of the Closet

2006-06-27T23:38:00.000-04:00

Washington, D.C. - (DCF) - A week after the New York Times announced that the White House has initiated yet another possibly illegal program which calls for monitoring the bank transactions of tens of thousands of Americans, further revelations have come to light that the administration has stepped even further over the line of citizens' personal freedoms.

The Red Bank (New Jersey) Sentinnel announced this morning that another program, believed to have been active since late 2002, has allowed for as many as four NSA agents to be installed in the closets of one out of every three citizens to monitor activities in those citizens' bedrooms.

Once again, the White House has not asked for permission from the FISA court.

When questioned by Helen Thomas about this latest revelation, White House spokesmonkey Tony Snow said that the White House had briefed the head of the House Judiciary Committee, and the program was completely legal and constitutional.

Thomas: Tony, how does the president respond to this latest story from the Sentinnel?

Snow: Well, the president feels--

Thomas: The story says that the president has bypassed FISA again--

Snow: Yes, I know what it--

Thomas: --and many suggest that the president has gone too far.

Snow: As I was saying--

Thomas: Again.

Snow: If I could just answer--

Thomas: I wish you would.

Snow: I'm try--

Thomas: The American people deserve an answer.

Snow: (Pushing aside the podium and rushing into the press pit, lifting Thomas from her chair by her collar) Shut up! SHUT UP, YOU HATEFUL HAG! (Begins shaking her) For the love of God... BE QUIET! You want the truth? Fine! It's all illegal! Happy? We're trying to get rid of the Constitution because the president feels it's outdated in the post-9/11 world! Happy? HAPPY?!? (Drops Thomas back into her chair.)

Unidentified Reporter: Tony, if I could ask a question--

Snow: Yes. Chris.

Thomas: All I wanted to ask was--

Snow: Shut up, Helen, or so help me God, I'll cut you! Chris?

Unidentified Reporter: Thank you, Tony. As a follow-up to Helen's question, are you saying that the White House acknowledges that these programs are all illegal? And if so, how does the presideint feel about this?

Snow: Is that what I said?

Unidentified Reporter: Yes. Yes it is.

Snow: Sorry about that. I, uh...I misspoke. What I meant to say was, this program is, like the other programs before it, completely legal and constitutional. We've had Karl take a look at it, as well as the guy at the donut shop down the street, and they both say we're standing on pretty solid ground here.

Unidentified Reporter: So your previous statement--

Snow: My previous statement...never happened. Now gaze into the Evil Eye of Tony Snow.

Entire Press Corps: Yes, master. We willingly give up our rights to make the country safer.

Numerous former Republican congressmen, including Bob Packwood and Newt Gingrich, have come forward to stand beside the current Republicans in Congress in support of this new program, many of them going so far as to point out that their support has nothing to do with the fact that the NSA allows them to review any "really interesting" videotapes recorded during the surveillance.

Most current Democratic congresspersons do not, however, share the White House's belief that the program is legal, and have also expressed disappointment that they weren't given access to the tapes for review.

The only Democrat to come out in favor of the program is Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman, who stated that it was vitally important to protecting America, and not just because "I really, really, really love George W. Bush." Lieberman added, "Man...what a kisser..."

More on this story as it develops.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Yes, I AM Angry...

2006-06-19T16:48:00.000-04:00

(Cross-posted at Daily Kos.)

I received a comment today concerning my last blog post, and I feel I should directly respond to with a post of its own.

Here's the comment:

Chico said...

DCF, you sound angry. I am angry too about all of this BS. These right wing looneys are callous, arrogant, popous asses. But some 60 million people (supposedly) thought it would be a good idea to give these cowards another 4 years back in Nov '04. Mind boggling.

10:53 AM

Well, yes, Chico, I am angry. In fact, I'll do you one better and say that I am pissed-off about countless things concerning this administration, not the least of which was Snow's callous and shameful remark, which shows exactly how he and those he works for view those brave men and women who have died in Iraq as nothing more than "a number".

I'm pissed-off because we shouldn't even have our soldiers there in the first place. I'm pissed because some of us were foolish enough to believe the lies that led us there. I'm pissed-off because of the lies themselves. I'm pissed-off because now, three-and-a-half years later, we're still there, even though those lies have been exposed for what they are, but the people in the Republican-controlled Congress who are supposed to be representing us - you and I - have all but completely relinquished their oversight of the person who got us into this, allowing him to do whatever he wants under the guise of fighting his ridiculous "War on Terror".

I'm pissed-off about "Mission Accomplished" because it clearly was not.

I'm pissed-off that Dubya still hasn't managed to catch the guy who was responsible for killing 1300 innocent people on September 11th, 2001 before traipsing off to another country to settle a score with the guy who made his Poppy look like an idiot.

I'm pissed-off because the man who got us into this undeclared "war" has not let something as trivial as the Constitution - a document designed to ensure that this country would never become a dictatorship - stop him from taking steps to create a police state.

I'm pissed-off that while he has focused on taking over another country, he has let the one he's supposed to be taking care of fall by the wayside. I'm pissed-off that "No Child Left Behind" has left almost all the children behind, forcing schools to teach kids to test well rather than teaching them the things they'll need to know when they get out of school. I'm pissed-off that his job creation since he first took office is still in the negative numbers six-and-a-half years later. I'm pissed-off that he has given the largest tax breaks to the wealthiest 1%, while the other 99% of us have been getting poorer. I'm even more pissed-off that he did this at a time when we are supposed to be "at war." I'm pissed-off that he refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol, which was intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that are destroying the ozone layer of the planet.

I'm pissed-off about the so-called elections of 2000 and 2004. Both have been called into question, quite rightly, although there's nothing that we can really do about them. Nobody is going to give us back the past six-and-a-half years.

I'm pissed-off that these same idiots who are going on and on about what a great guy Dubya is, even in the face of mounting evidence that he truly is the worst president ever, were so hot to see Bill Clinton swing for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office, an event that should have been nobody's business but his and his wife's. Back then, they were all full of moralistic zeal. Where did that all go, now that the current Idiot-in-Chief is responsible for the deaths of over 2500 Americans and God alone knows how many innocent Iraqi men, women and children?

I'm pissed-off that Congress is more concerned about keeping gay men and women from getting married and flag burning than they are about making sure everyone has affordable healthcare and a roof over their heads. I'm pissed off that those same congresspersons are not taking care of their constituents because they are too busy lining their pockets with special interest money from corporations who could care less if we live or die.

I'm pissed-off because of all the people who died last year as a result of Hurricane Katrina. I'm even more pissed-off because of the ones who died after because FEMA and the rest of the government were running around with their dicks in their hands. I am incredibly pissed-off that they knew it was coming, promised to help, and then completely failed to do so.

I'm pissed-off because the petrolium companies used Katrina and its follow-up, Rita, as an excuse to screw the American people by raising the prices of their products to ridiculous heights. I'm pissed-off that they used a national tragedy to garner record-breaking profits through price-gouging that continues to this day.

Chico, you said "some 60 million people (supposedly) thought it would be a good idea to give these cowards another 4 years back in Nov '04." While that, in itself, is questionable, I'm still pissed-off - and, quite frankly, shocked - that even 33% of those who have been here on Earth with the rest of us still think that smirking asshole is doing a good job. What the fuck is wrong with those people?

I'm pissed-off that right now, as I type this, there is probably a computer somewhere recording every keystroke and branding me a traitor because I'm speaking my mind.

So, yes. I am pissed-off. You should be, too. If you're not, you haven't been paying attention.

DCF

2500 dead soldiers? "It's a number..."

2006-06-15T21:34:00.000-04:00

Tony Snow, "former" Fox News whore and current White House press bitch, acknowledged today that 2500 is, in fact, a number.

Dan Bartlett (left) and Tony Snow (right) try to
make each other laugh with their Sgt. Schultz impressions.

The problem, however, is that Snow, shown above quietly soiling himself as he flies over Iraq during President Bush's unannounced trip this week, was referring to the number of US soldiers killed in Iraq as of today. Here's the number again, in case it hasn't quite sunk in:

2500

That is how many people like you and me - people who are just there to do the job they are supposed to do, people with families - who have died in this so-called "war" against insurgents that have been, according to Vice President "Big" Dick Cheney, in their "last throes" for three-plus years. That's how many people have been killed since Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said those soldiers would be "greeted as liberators."

That is how many people have died since the President of the United States, a man who has never been in combat, put aside a hunt for the man responsible for the deaths of more than 1500 Americans in the attack on September 11th, 2001, and chose to invade a country that had never done anything to the United States, using a web of lies to justify it.

2500 lives...gone. And all Tony Snow has to say about it is "it's a number"?

Question: Tony, American deaths in Iraq have reached 2,500. Is there any response or reaction from the president on that?

Snow: You know, it's a number, and every time there's one of these 500-benchmarks, people want something.

Yes, Tony. They do. They want it to be over. They want the senseless deaths to stop. And not just the deaths of our brave soldiers who are over there doing all the shit work that is heaped upon them while their so-called Commander-in-Chief sits safely in Washington, D.C. demanding that the terrorists "bring it on," but the deaths of innocent Iraqi citizens, as well.

How about that number, Tony? If 2500 dead American soldiers is a tragedy, then the death of 28,355 or more innocent Iraqi citizens should be a fucking crime.

DCF

Where Is That 35%, Anyway?

2006-06-05T16:35:00.000-04:00

As has been noted just about everywhere on Earth, Dubya's approval rating is in the tank. Some suggest he's bottomed-out, although these are the same people who have been saying exactly the same thing each time a new poll comes out with a new low.

Anyway, for quite some time, Dubya's approval rating has floated around 35%. I've often wondered where, exactly, that 35% lives. How we have a visual. Oboserve:

Idaho and Utah. Ah. That explains it.

(Animation courtesy of dreaminonempty at Daily Kos.)

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Gore Hype: Distracting Us From What's Important RIGHT NOW?

2006-06-04T17:43:00.000-04:00

(Cross-posted at Daily Kos.)

Let me start this off by saying that I like Al Gore. I like him enough that I voted for him in 2000, like the majority of Americans did. I also like him enough that, if he were to decide to run in 2008, I would most certainly vote for him again.

But right now, at this time, there's something we should be paying a lot more attention to, rather than pushing for a Gore presidential run in two years' time: This year's upcoming midterm elections.

Gore's new film, An Inconvenient Truth, is generating a lot of discussion right now, which is good. It's get people who may not have thought about global warming previously to actually ponder the consequences of what we and our "elected" representatives are allowing to happen to the planet. It's also changing the minds of many who didn't believe that we are a major part of the problem. Again, that's awesome, and I fully support Gore's efforts to bring attention to this.

Myself, I haven't been able to see the film yet, as it hasn't shown up anywhere near me where I could reasonably expect to make the trip. (My car is on its last legs.) However, when it shows in Flint, Michigan later this month, there's nothing that will stop me from seeing it. And I'll probably write about it in the same glowing terms I've read from others who have seen it.

As you can see from the long-winded introduction I've just written, even for someone who has not seen the film, the whole Gore phenomenon tends to catch you up and keep you entangled in it. And that's what I wanted to discuss.

Right now, as I type this, we are in the run-up to the mid-term elections that could put the House and Senate back in our hands. A substantial amount of time and space have been put into making sure we're all aware of this, especially here, at Daily Kos, where we are regularly kept abreast of the current polls in many of the congressional districts that are up for grabs.

However, as I surf back and forth between the other "mainstream" news sources available out there, I'm not seeing it nearly as much as I think I should be seeing it, especially considering how historical this election cycle may turn out to be.

It seems that the only time anything about any of the current campaigns or those that are running shows up in the press is when someone is (allegedly) caught doing something that they shouldn't have been. Case in point, the ongoing (and admittedly entertaining) hoopla surrounding the Katherine Harris mess that's masquerading as a campaign. Sure, it's good for a laugh, but what about all the others?

Ned Lamont is getting a lot of press concerning his run against Lieberman. The stories are valid, as is the interest. However, it appears the fact that he's challenging Joe Lieberman is secondary, from most of the stories I've read. Instead, they focus on Lieberman's DINO status, as well as the support Lamont has gotten from the netroots.

Francine Busby in CA-50 is getting attention, too, but I sumbit that this is because it was Randy "Duke" Cunningham's district, and the scandal caught the attention of many national news sources. The people who want to fill the spot are, at best, secondary to the folks who write the stories for the "mainstream media".

These three items are, really, the only ones that I can recall seeing mentioned regularly on television and on the various news sites. It's not really that surprising, in that these various races that aren't being mentioned are, technically, "local" issues (a guy living in Oregon can't vote in the Michigan election, so why should he care?), although they will help decide who will be making the rules on a national basis.

With the current possibility, as I mentioned above, of the Democrats retaking both houses of Congress looking more and more likely, it seems that the importance of it has taken a backseat to Al Gore coming out from his own "undisclosed location" to promote his new movie. Suddenly, there's an overwhelming netroots push for Gore to run for president in 2008, including on DKos, when one has a few minutes to take a break from writing about troll ratings. The enthusiasm for such a run has even made its way to the mainstream press, where much speculation has gone into whether it's going to happen.

I can't help but wonder whether this focus on a potential Gore run in 2008 is distracting us from keeping the pressure on for the mid-term elections. Some may point out that, because the numbers are so much in our favor, we can afford to take a break and speculate about 2008. I might remind those who would suggest this that the numbers were in our favor in 2000, as well as on election night 2004, according to exit polls. Both times, it got away from us (conspiracy theories aside), and we were paying close attention then.

As I said at the beginning of this post, I support Al Gore and would enthusiastically support a run in 2008. But right here, right now, I'm going to be paying attention to what's going to happen in a few short months, not what may or may not happen two years from now.

I would implore the rest of you to consider doing the same. We've got to keep on eye on this, lest it gets pulled out from under us again.

All the best,

Derek

(DCF)

The "Duh" Factor

2006-06-02T09:10:00.000-04:00

I've noticed lately that there's been a definite increase in the "Duh" Factor around Wahington, D.C.

The term "Duh" can be used a few different ways, as I'm sure you all know. For the purposes of this article, there are two kinds of "Duh" I'll be referring to. There's the plain old "Duh", which shows that something someone has done is incredibly stupid. It can also be used sarcastically to show that one realizes the obviousness of the situation, even as someone else is explaining it in great detail, just as I am doing now, so feel free to go ahead and mutter "well, duh" before I move on to the important bits. Feel better? Good. Let's get started.

*****

Our first "Duh!" goes to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. It turns out that Frist has broken the law, according to an Federal Exchange Commission (FEC) investigation. Raw Story is reporting that a group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) had filed a complaint with the FEC, questioning Frist's handling of campaign contributions. Here's a better explanation from the article:

In June 2000, Senator Frist too $1 million of the money that hadbeen contributed to his 2000 Senate campaign and invested it in the stock market, where it promptly began losing money. In November 2000, Senator Frist sought to collect $1.2 million he had lent his 1994 Senate campaign committee. As a result of the stock market losses, however, Frist 2000, Inc. did not have enough money to repay the loan. Senator Frist solved this problem by having the 1994 and 2000 campaign committees jointly take out a $1.44 million bank loan at a cost of $10,000 a month interest. Frist 2000, Inc. did not report this debt on its FEC disclosure forms.

The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) requires full disclosure of any loans taken out by campaign committees. Yet only the 1994 campaign committee, which had been largely dormant, disclosed the loan.

What does all of this mean? It means that Frist, another member of the party that claims moral values, is a criminal but is not being prosecuted for it. (Yet.) Big surprise there.

A friendly "Well, Duh!" to Rolling Stone and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. for their detailed, but somewhat slow-on-the-draw article entitled Was the 2004 Election Stolen? Those of us who were actually paying attention back in 2004 have known this was the case since, oh, about 8 PM on Election Night, when the exit polls were showing a huge win for Kerry in Ohio, but more and more precincts were reporting back that Bush had taken them by a smaller, but still ridiculous, margin, thus making the various networks backpedal furiously, stating that the exit polls were flawed.

The thing is, the company that was doing the exit polling had designed the system to be the most accurate yet!

For its nationwide poll, Edison/Mitofsky selected a random subsample of 12,219 voters -- approximately six times larger than those normally used in national polls -- driving the margin of error down to approximately plus or minus one percent.

On the evening of the vote, reporters at each of the major networks were briefed by pollsters at 7:54 p.m. Kerry, they were informed, had an insurmountable lead and would win by a rout: at least 309 electoral votes to Bush's 174, with fifty-five too close to call.

What makes it even weirder is that Edison/Mitkofsky went out of its way to offer an "out" to those who ripped-off the American people!

In its official postmortem report issued two months after the election, Edison/Mitofsky was unable to identify any flaw in its methodology -- so the pollsters, in essence, invented one for the electorate. According to Mitofsky, Bush partisans were simply disinclined to talk to exit pollsters on November 2nd -- displaying a heretofore unknown and undocumented aversion that skewed the polls in Kerry's favor by a margin of 6.5 percent nationwide.

However, this was not the case...

Industry peers didn't buy it. John Zogby, one of the nation's leading pollsters, told me that Mitofsky's ''reluctant responder'' hypothesis is ''preposterous.''(36) Even Mitofsky, in his official report, underscored the hollowness of his theory: ''It is difficult to pinpoint precisely the reasons that, in general, Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polls than Bush voters.''(37)

Now, thanks to careful examination of Mitofsky's own data by [Stephen R.] Freeman and a team of eight researchers, we can say conclusively that the theory is dead wrong. In fact it was Democrats, not Republicans, who were more disinclined to answer pollsters' questions on Election Day. In Bush strongholds, Freeman and the other researchers found that fifty-six percent of voters completed the exit survey -- compared to only fifty-three percent in Kerry strongholds. ''The data presented to support the claim not only fails to substantiate it,'' observes Freeman, ''but actually contradicts it.''

It's a good article, if a bit behind the rest of us. Raw Story and Brad Blog have been on this since the very beginning, as has Black Box Voting. Go read the rest of it, and then do some research on your own. See what you come up with.

"Duh!" to Michael Chertoff. You remember him, don't you? The guy who was the boss of FEMA during Katrina? He was the one who sent "Brownie" down there to do the "heckuvva job" that Dubya insisted he did. He's an older guy who looks a bit like the Crypt Keeper.

Anyway, Katrina debacle aside, Chertoff has shown to be even dumber than expected, with the Department of Homeland Security having just issued a report to justify cutting spending on national security in New York and Washington, D.C., the two cities that were attacked on September 11th, 2001.

What was Chertoff's reason for cutting that money in New York? Well, because they don't have any national landmarks. (PDF document)

Naturally, the esteemed Senator from the Great State of New York has something to say about that, doesn't she? You betcha! And so does her House counterpart!

Whoops.

You can see some of the other postcards they sent here.

Another cheerful "Well, Duh!" goes out to Helen Thomas, who is about to release a book entitled Watchdogs of Democracy? : The Waning Washington Press Corps and How It Has Failed the Public.

In the exclusive excerpt posted on Raw Story, Thomas refers to the Dubya's current and former press secretaries as untruthful, Orwellian robots who blindly toe the company line. Again, no big surprise. However, it sounds like a good read, and I intend to pick it up. It can be pre-ordered on Amazon right now.

"Duh" to Ann "The Man" Coulter. She's about to be booted off the voter rolls in Palm Beach County, Florida, where she willfully and intentionally committed a third-degree felony by lying on her voter registration. Along with being removed from voter rolls, she also faces fines of up to $5,000 (pocket change for a media whore who writes hateful books) and up to five years in prison, if convicted.

According to Brad Blog, what's the upside of all of this? Well, everything, really. But the best part is that it finally got the manly skank to shut her pie hole - something nothing else has managed to do.

Even more entertaining, if it turns out that she really does not live in Palm Beach County, which appears to be the case, she could also face charges for taking a $25,000 homstead exemption on her taxes. In order for this to be the case, it has to be proven that her residence in Palm Beach is not her permanent residence.

The hits just keep on coming!

And now, finally, a few giggles that I've found online. Enjoy:

It appears that kubla000 at Daily Kos has found Dick Cheney's super-secret "Undisclosed Location". Jeez...what a pigsty. (Apologies to any pigs who may be offended by this comparison.)

Also on Daily Kos, filmgeek83 has put together a nice little list of things that are necessary to believe, should you decide you want to be a Republican. My favorite is this one:

There's nothing wrong with supporting drunken hunters who shoot their friends and blaming the friends for looking too much like quail.

Speaking of what it takes, have a look at this. It offers a disturbing insight into the actual physiology of being a Republican.

Next, we have a three-month old article from Slate.com, showing the New, Improved, Bush-Approved Bill of Rights.

Ever wonder why you don't hear about most of this stuff in the "left-leaning mainstream media"? This animated cartoon from Robert Smeigel's TV Funhouse (which is regularly shown on Saturday Night Live) might explain it. Let's all get down with the "Conspiracy Theory Rock!"

Democratic Underground has an exclusive story about "Government Appreciation Day" in Washington, D.C., including a description of some of the floats from the parade!

The Big Pharma float won top honors, and for good reason. The float consisted of a giant maze of flowering shrubbery, through which hapless seniors tried to navigate their way. The Conservative American Horticulture Society (a subsidiary of Halliburton) designed the piece, and the multi-million dollar cost to taxpayers was well worth it.

Trailing behind the float was a band of silver-haired citizens, who shook their prescription pill bottles (filled with pebbles, since they can no longer afford the actual medication). It sounded like maracas, and gave the whole thing a Latin flair!

The second prizewinner was the Katrina/NOLA portion of the parade, dozens of empty FEMA trailers being pulled by former New Orleans residents. (I’m told they were paid $10 each for their participation, and Babs Bush was gushing in her “They’re much better off now” praise of the participants’ efforts.)

Good stuff.

And finally, because I firmly believe that it's fun to kick a man while he's dumb, we have the latest and greatest in action figures...

It's... DIHONEST DUBYA, LYING ACTION FIGURE! (Kung-fu grip only available on the "Executive Priveledge" model.)

Oh... One more thing. This picture of Dubya, once again standing on the shoulders of his base:

"My fellow Americans... Hey... Where'd everybody go? Hello?"

And that wraps it up for today. Tune in next time, when we investigate Tom DeLay's plastic head and find a delicious, cream-filled center!

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Playing Devil's Advocate...I Think...

2006-05-26T23:55:00.000-04:00

All righty. For the most part, this post is directed to Mike D. Long, a good friend from a message board I frequent, because of the incredibly bizzare situation that has arisen due to claims that House Representative William Jefferson, a Louisiana Democrat, has taken bribes. (Information about it can be found here.) The investigation into Jefferson is part of what is being referred to as a "bi-partisan" investigation into congressional corruption - Ohio Republican congressman Bob Ney is also being investigated because of possible ties to Jack Abramoff.

Anyway, one of the things that happened after he was accused (and two people acknowledged their guilt in bribing him, and he was also videotaped by FBI agents, accepting $100,000 in cash) was that his home and House of Representatives office were searched. Remember this bit. I'll have more on it later.

At Jefferson's home, FBI agents found, among other things, I believe $90,000 in his freezer, wrapped in $10,000 bundles.

Let me repeat that so it sinks in: Representative William Jefferson from Louisiana, who has claimed no wrongdoing whatsoever since his name first popped up for investigation, had stashed a huge sum of money in his kitchen freezer, wrapped in aluminum foil.

My response to this is, "Huh?" If he's got nothing to hide, why not put the money in, oh, I don't know, a bank?

No information has been given as to whether anything incriminating was found in his office at the House of Representatives.

Now, if I may sidestep for a moment to direct you to this thread, you will see that, among the many issues discussed, one point that Mike made was how Republicans were getting more attention for bad stuff than Democrats were. In all honesty, I do agree with him on that point, but as I pointed out in the thread, since the Republicans are the ones in power, most of the attention is going to be directed at them. If it were the Democrats in power, the same thing would be happening. (For a reference point, feel free to go look up some old articles about Bill Clinton's Oval Office daliances. Or just read the headlining article in the New York Times that said Hillary Clinton's marriage to Bill Clinton could "hinder" her run for president - never mind the fact that she's not exactly a Dem favorite anymore.)

I'm getting away from my point, which was, when I saw the initial article (and resulting news coverage), I was going to send Mike a link and say, "Ha! See? It's not just the Republicans who are getting attention!"

But then, something weird happened.

For those just too bored or who can't be bothered to click the link, here's a brief rundown of what it's about, with a few paragraphs borrowed from the Associated Press article:

WASHINGTON - The FBI’s weekend search of the House office of a Louisiana Democrat under investigation for bribery may have overstepped constitutional boundaries, House leaders said as the congressman under investigation pledged to stay in office.

House Majority Leader John Boehner of Ohio told reporters Tuesday that the Congress will somehow speak to “this issue of the Justice Department’s invasion of the legislative branch. In what form, I don’t know.”

“I’ve got to believe at the end of the day it’s going to end up across the street at the Supreme Court,” Boehner said.

House Speaker Dennis Hastert said the Justice Department had never before crossed a line that separates Congress from the executive branch by searching a congressional office while investigating a member of Congress.

So, what does this mean? It means that William Jefferson's possible (and, judging from the evidence that is being reported in the so-called liberally-biased mainstream media, probable) bribe-taking is being pushed aside so members of Congress can make a fuss about the FBI searching a fellow congressman's office!

This revelation seems to support Mike's theory. Jefferson, a Democrat, is being ignored while a big stink is being made over the FBI's actions. However, if you take a look at the names listed above, you may notice something a bit odd about it. Go ahead and take a minute to do a search, if you feel you need to. I'll wait.

Find it? For those of you who did, stop laughing. For those who didn't, let me clue you in: John Boehner and Dennis Hastert are... Republicans!

So, while the story itself seems to support Mike's theory, the ones who are behind it are exactly the wrong people to be doing it! The smart money, for those guys, would be to bring this thing out and ride it like a pony - "Look! See? The Democrats are just as lousy! It's not just us!" (I imagine it would be worded differently, but what do I know?) It might not cause their ever-dwindling base to suddenly turn around and say, "Oh, well nevermind, then," but it could very possibly take a little bit of heat off of them. (Or, at the very least, put a little under the Democrats' feet.)

Now, a few things about all this have me wondering...

1. Why are all of these congresspersons so concerned? (And it's not just Republicans, mind you; there are a bunch of Democrats making a fuss... I just used the two examples above to point out what I was getting at.) Do they have something to hide? Do any of them, Dem and Repub alike, have a little price chart in their desks, like Randy "Duke" Cunningham did? I understand the "We're all supposed to be on the same side" thing, so I imagine they wouldn't expect this sort of thing to happen to one of their own, but they all seem a bit twitchy about it.

2. Why doesn't Jefferson show a bit of honor and step aside until this matter is cleared up, one way or the other? Sure, he says he doesn't think he did anything wrong, but wouldn't it be wise to step down, or at least ask to be removed from the committees he's a part of, until this is taken care of? There are a lot of Democrats who would like to see him just leave, obviously, because it could tarnish their stance as "the good guys who want to clean up corruption in Congress." As if there are no other Dems who might, you know, be skimming a few bucks on the side. Case in point, Hillary Clinton. (Hey, I already said I don't like her.) She is the Democrat who has received the most money from lobbyists. For the record, Rick Santorum of PA is the #1 Republican.

As I said in the last political thread on that message board, if someone did something illegal, they need to be frog-marched out the door. Plain and simple. Political party means exactly zip to me when you are screwing over good, honest people in order to line your pockets. If Jefferson was taking bribes - and, as I pointed out, it looks pretty damn convincing that he did - then he needs to go. I just wanted to make that clear so nobody thinks I'm trying to whitewash anything.

Anyway, the bottom line is, I wanted to give Mikey a "Tip of the Hat" (thanks, Stephen Colbert!) for causing me to find all of this so funny.

Thanks, Mike!

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Time for a light giggle...

2006-05-15T00:24:00.000-04:00

In celebration of former Vice President (and legitimately elected President in 2000) Al Gore's appearance on Saturday Night Live this past weekend, I thought it might be entertaining to post the Top Ten list he presented on Late Night with David Letterman in 2000. Enjoy.

TOP TEN REJECTED GORE-LIEBERMAN CAMPAIGN SLOGANS
(as read by Al Gore on David Letterman)

10. Vote for me or I'll come to your home and explain my 191-page economic plan to you in excruciating detail.

9. Remember, America, I gave you the Internet, and I can take it away!

8. Your vote automatically enters you in drawing for the $123 billion dollar surplus.

7. With Lieberman on the ticket, you get all kinds of fun new days off.

6. We know when the microphone is on.

5. Vote for me and I will take whatever steps necessary to outlaw the term, "Whazzzup?"

4. Gore-Lieberman -- you don't have to worry about pork barrel politics.

3. You'll thank us in four years when the escalator to the moon is finished.

2. If I can handle Letterman, I can handle Saddam Hussein.

And the number one rejected Gore-Lieberman campaign slogan...

1. I'll be twice as cool as that president guy on The West Wing.

Now, putting aside all the 2000 Election complaints and accusations, as well as the fact that Joe Lieberman has now shown himself to be just another Republican in Democrats' clothing (sorta like Zell Miller at the 2004 Republican National Convention, but a little less jittery... Woo! What an...interesting speech that was!), I would like to say that Al Gore is a friendly, outgoing, and downright funny guy. How do I know this? I met him back in October of 1996, when came through my hometown of Port Huron and gave a speech in Pine Grove Park. He spoke for about an hour, discussing his and then-president Bill Clinton's plans if they won the presidential election again (for those of you who were dozing, they did win), as well as saying a few kind words about a few Michigan Democrats, such as David Bonior. He also promised that he would not attempt to do the Macarena. (This was shortly after he'd done it at a campaign stop, and it was played almost constantly on the news as proof of what a nutball he was.) The crowd was a bit disappointed about that.

After his speech, his Secret Service crew were trying to move him along to the car that would take him to the Thomas Edison Inn for a luncheon with city leaders and, I assume, nice people with thick checkbooks. However, the Secret Service guys had to keep stopping and retrieving him because he kept stopping and chatting with people standing near the little fence the city had erected, I assume, so he wouldn't be mobbed by well-wishers and angry Republicans. Now, when I say "chatting," I mean he would stop, start talking to them about whatever they wanted to ask him about, and would actually lean against the fence, as if he weren't the Vice President of the United States, but instead just a neighbor who took a minute out from mowing the lawn to discuss crab grass with his neighbor.

As the speech ended, I had managed to find the only empty spot along the fence, and waited patiently for the vice president to make his way over to me. When he finally did, he smiled and shook my hand. I told him that I'd voted for him and President Clinton in 1992, and I was planning to do it again. (I know, I know... How original.)

I also said that I hoped he'd consider running for president in 2000. (There had already been a bunch of people in the crowd chanting "Gore 2000! Fore 2000!" during his speech.)

"Well, it's a little early to worry about that, don't you think?"

I said, "It never hurts to plan ahead."

"Well, who knows? We'll have to wait and see," he said, offering me his hand again as his Secret Service guy started pulling him away.

That's it. No amazing story or anything. I just thought he was a really nice guy.

One of the things that Al Gore has always been steady on is his stance on global warming. In fact, he has a documentary called An Inconvenient Truth, concerning global warming, and it will be in limited release on May 24th that covers the power point pesentation he's been giving since he "lost" the 2000 election. If you can find a place that's showing it, go see it.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

White House Shoots Its Wad Too Early?

2006-05-13T16:00:00.000-04:00

This article cross-posted at Daily Kos.

*****

While cruising around online Friday, looking for more information about the latest NSA scandal and the companies involved, I ran across a video clip of Tweety Matthews saying that he believed an indictment of Karl Rove would be forthcoming that day. (Sorry, can't find the link for the clip, but I believe it was somewhere on Crooks and Liars.) For those of you who were paying attention, it became obvious over the course of the day that this would not be the case.

Of course, we all now know that even Rove himself expects an indictment soon, and even went so far as to tell his boss about it, adding that he would resign his position immediately after the charges are publicly announced.

These two events seem unrelated, but it got me wondering...

In the past, whenever someone from BushCo's senior board of directors was about to be fingered for some immoral and/or illegal act, the standard White House strategy was, of course, to claim that Osama bin Laden was again peeking out of his hidey hole to leave cryptic messages about "death and destruction to the infidels." (That would appear to be us, from what I gather.

Some noted that these sudden messages were rather conveniently spaced to coincide with other events that might have otherwise gone bad for the the Republicans and, specifically, the White House - elections, indictments, revelations that there were no WMDs, badly chosen appointments...you know the drill. But few others took notice.

Initially, it was videotapes. After a while, it turned into audiotapes. Then they wouldn't let independent professionals analyze the tapes, choosing instead to have their own "professions" give them a look (or a listen) to determine whether or not they were authentic. Amazingly, they always turned out to be, according to those in-house professionals.

By that point, most people were saying, "Er... Hold on a second..." while looking at the timeline of events and their correlation to the release of these messages. People were getting suspicious, and it appears that someone at the White House may have noticed, choosing to dump the "bin Laden's gonna getcha" method for something a bit more radical.

(Author's note: Please note that, from this point on, this article is speculation on my part, quite possibly initiated by the intake of entirely too much caffeine. So feel free to take it with a grain of salt. Thank you. - DCF)

A lot of new, non-bin Laden-related revelations that have been popping up in the news lately seem to have been coinciding with other, less Bush-friendly ones. Let me give you an example of what I mean, if I may.

It was announced earlier in the week that Patrick Fitzgerald was going to meet with the grand jury to discuss Karl Rove's testimony Friday. Many were laying bets that Rove was going to be indicted under charges of perjury and lying to a grand jury, and the announcement was going to come Friday afternoon.

The previous day, USA Today published its article about the NSA collecting phone call information on "tens of millions of Americans" to create the world's largest database.

Had an announcement about charges against Rove come out Friday, it very likely would have received minimal coverage from the mainstream press, barely making it onto the front page, below all the ongoing stories about who the NSA is watching and why. Possibly, there might be an editorial or two, but not much else.

Keeping this in mind, I ask you to consider this: Is it possible that, assuming the White House thought they knew charges would be announced Friday, the "leak" of the NSA's newest "dirty little secret" was a pre-emptive strike against intense coverage of a Rove indictment announcement, an attempt to draw attention away from yet another White House monkey-boy getting busted for trying to cover up BushCo's shady dealings?

If this is the case, is it also possible that, once the White House allowed this leak, Fitzgerald realized the same thing and has decided to hold off a few more days, giving this newest scandal a little more time to settle in before dropping yet another bomb, thereby allowing it the coverage it deserves?

Or, more importantly, am I just talking out my ass about wildly ridiculous speculation based on little more than a lack of sleep and an excessive amount of sugar intake?!?

You make the call.

DCF

Catching up, yet again...

2006-05-12T21:40:00.000-04:00

Okay, so I've been a tiny bit lax in keeping up with this blog. I blame my brother.

You see, Vern recently contacted me and asked me to, in his words, "fix my shit," meaning his MySpace page. In order to get in there and figure out how to make it work the way he wanted it to, I had to join and read the FAQ. And, being the kind of guy who feels a deep urge to get in there and take part once I've signed up for something, I ended up building a MySpace page of my own. If you're interested in my writing but are sick of listening to me bitch about the current administration, feel free to go over there and read the blog I've started, as it is completely devoid of political rambling. Go ahead. I'll wait while you click the link.

Are they gone? Good.

It's been a busy week and a half since my post about Stephen Colbert's incredibly hilarious (and laden with truthiness) presentation at the White House Correspodents' Dinner. As I mentioned in that post, the mainstream media pretty much blew him off. The blogosphere, however, was all over it, to the point where it drew attention to C-Span removal of it from their own site and how they made sites like YouTube and Google Video remove the clips from their own sites.

For four days, it was the big subject on Daily Kos, where I'd be willing to guess that a solid third of the posts were in some way related to it, and other sites. Some of it is still going on. However, there was a lot of other fun stuff happening, so it was sort of moved to the back burner. But that doesn't mean we don't love ya anymore, Stephen! We're just trying to keep up with all the scandals!

Speaking of...

Hookergate...The New Watergate!

The head of the CIA, Porter Goss, abruptly quit (or was fired from, depending on who you ask) his job last Friday. Oddly enough, this was at the same time that he was starting to be scrutinized by the Justice Department concerning poker parties (with hookers!) at the Watergate Hotel. (I know, I know... Another Watergate scandal, and right on time, as Dubya's numbers get closer and closer to Nixon's at the time of the original scandal. More on this in a moment.)

Shortly after Goss left, Dubya announced that his replacement would be General Michael V. Hayden.

Let me say that one more time, but with a little more detail.

Bush announced his nomination for the new CIA head, a post in a civilian governemnt organization normally filled by a civilian, to be filled by a current General, a man who also answers to the Pentagon and Donald Rumsfeld.

The result? Lots of pissed-off lawmakers, Democrats and Republicans. The confirmation hearings should be a hoot, especially with new information that has come to light over the past couple of days. I'll get to that shortly.

*****

Dick Cheney: Narcoleptic?

This really doesn't need much of an explanation. This picture was posted on the front of The Huffington Post today:

Looks like someone's not getting enough sleep. It must be his conscience getting to him. Either that, or Mrs. Cheney snores really loud.

*****

The Snow Job Starts

Tony Snow gave his first press conference today, what is referred to as a "gaggling" - an unaired briefing for the press corps - and proclaimed it to be a complete failure. Not because of his ability to not answer questions (he was actually quite good at that, using his "new guy" status as a way to deflect questions that might be a bit difficult to answer with a straight face); he deemed the briefing a failure because he held it in his office, as opposed to the briefing room, and it was way too crowded. He also timed it badly, and scheduled it incorrectly, causing several reporters to miss the first ten minutes of the briefing.

It's okay, Tony. First time, they'll give you a Mulligan. But you better hunker down and start lying good and hard next time.

*****

George W. Bush Can Finally Stop Competing With His Father

Amid ever-decreasing poll numbers, the words "a new low" have become old hat to George W. Bush.

However, a new poll released today says that his approval rating has dropped to 29%, matching his father's lowest point during the Bush I presidency.

The only real challenge for him now (aside from regaining all the jobs lost during his presidency, repaying the deficit that he allowed the Republican-controlled Congress to run up with record spending, removing the corruption from Congress, finding Osama bin Laden, finally establishing democracy in Iraq, regaining the trust of the international community, rebuilding New Orleans, stopping global warming, and keeping Dick Cheney awake long enough to make it through a televised press conference) is to see how much lower than his father he can go. It might seem obvious to most of us that the lowest he could go is, theoretically, 0%, but as someone on Daily Kos pointed out, if the dead start rising and voting Democratic, he could actually end up in negative numbers. Now that would be impressive.

*****

Big Brother Is Listening! (Or at least keeping track of who you call.)

An article in USA Today on Thursday told of another program connected to the NSA's illegal wiretapping program. This newly discovered program consists of the NSA building "the world's largest database" to keep track of tens of millions of calls made on a daily basis. by average Americans "many of whom," the report states, "are not suspected of a crime."

"Many"? Like how many? Half? Two-thirds? Let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say that only one-third of those whose calls are being tracked are not suspected of a crime. That means that the innocent one-third are having their rights violated by the NSA and, more importantly, their phone service providers. Those phone companies specifically named include AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth. The only company who has come forward and said that they denied the NSA's request was Qwest Comminucations.

Not only are those companies in violation of their own customer privacy policies, they may also be in violation of the law. Two class-action suits for $20 billion and $5 billion have been brought against Verizon as of today. I have no doubt that more will come.

Dubya, of course, insists that everything is on the up-and-up, and nobody's rights are being violated. We can trust him can't we?

Well, no. We can't. Here's why:

"Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires - a wiretap requires a court order."
- George W. Bush, April 20, 2004, Buffalo, New York

Hey, what about when you admitted that you circumvented the FISA courts and didn't bother to get warrants?

"While the president approved this program to respond to the new threats against us, he also imposed several important safeguards to protect the privacy and the civil liberties of all Americans."

- Alberto Gonzales, during his confirmation hearings to become Attorney General

Okay. That's all right, then.

Since the disclosure last week of the NSA's domestic surveillance program, President Bush and his senior aides have stressed that his executive order allowing eavesdropping without warrants was limited to the monitoring of international phone and e-mail communications involving people with known links to Al Qaeda.

- An article on Truthout.org, quoting the New York Times' article about the original NSA program

Oh, so it's just the international calls that they're monitoring. We Americans that aren't doing anything illegal are safe, right?

Right?

The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.

The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren't suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews.
"It's the largest database ever assembled in the world," said one person, who, like the others who agreed to talk about the NSA's activities, declined to be identified by name or affiliation. The agency's goal is "to create a database of every call ever made" within the nation's borders, this person added.

For the customers of these companies, it means that the government has detailed records of calls they made — across town or across the country — to family members, co-workers, business contacts and others.
- From the USA Today article on Thursday

See what crotchety old CNN reporter Jack Cafferty has to say about it.

What next? Funny you should ask...

*****

"It's just the tip of the iceberg."

Let's get right to the quote, shall we? From CongressDaily (subscription required) via ThinkProgress.org (for free!):

A former intelligence officer for the National Security Agency said Thursday he plans to tell Senate staffers next week that unlawful activity occurred at the agency under the supervision of Gen. Michael Hayden beyond what has been publicly reported, while hinting that it might have involved the illegal use of space-based satellites and systems to spy on U.S. citizens. …

[Tice] said he plans to tell the committee staffers the NSA conducted illegal and unconstitutional surveillance of U.S. citizens while he was there with the knowledge of Hayden. … “I think the people I talk to next week are going to be shocked when I tell them what I have to tell them. It’s pretty hard to believe,” Tice said. “I hope that they’ll clean up the abuses and have some oversight into these programs, which doesn’t exist right now.” …

Tice said his information is different from the Terrorist Surveillance Program that Bush acknowledged in December and from news accounts this week that the NSA has been secretly collecting phone call records of millions of Americans. “It’s an angle that you haven’t heard about yet,” he said. … He would not discuss with a reporter the details of his allegations, saying doing so would compromise classified information and put him at risk of going to jail. He said he “will not confirm or deny” if his allegations involve the illegal use of space systems and satellites.
(Emphasis is in the original article.)

What? There's more? I can't wait until next week!

*****

Cinco de Fitzo - Coming Soon?

The word is that an indictment against Karl Rove will be handed down soon. Some expected it to be today. I'm willing to wait a few more days. Maybe Fitz needs to get rested up over the weekend for his big press conference next week.

The word is also that Rove has already informed the president that an indictment is forthcoming, and he will be resigning from his job in the White House as soon as the charges are announced.

Karl? Do you have anything to say in your defense?

Spoken like a true Bush appointee.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

The Story Everyone (Except The Press) Is Talking About

2006-05-01T22:50:00.000-04:00

Why isn't the so-called "liberal media" picking up on Stephen Colbert's appearance at the White House Correspondents' Dinner?

Sure, the president's appearance with his doppelganger was funny - although a bit disturbing; it was a bit like having a look inside Dubya's head and hearing exactly what he thinks (I know that was the idea, but I can't shake the belief that what was being passed off as humor and self-deprecation was actually a blinding glimpse into reality) - but Colbert was on fire! And was completely ignored in the media. Perhaps it was because of this comment:

As excited as I am to be here with the president, I am appalled to be surrounded by the liberal media that is destroying America, with the exception of Fox News. Fox News gives you both sides of every story: the president's side, and the vice president's side.

Or maybe it was this:

But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works: the president makes decisions. He's the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know - fiction!

Of course, this wasn't about the media, even if it is called the White House Correspondents' Dinner. No, it was about the president, and one of the few chances some people will get to take cheap shots at him without him being able to throw them in a secret CIA gulag in Europe. As I said, Dubya's bit was pretty funny (if mildly disturbing). But he was clearly outshone by Colbert, who, in his guise as the Stephen Colbert who hosts The Colbert Report - a staunch conservative Republican with only the slightest grasp on reality, pulled no punches against anyone in attendance, in the name of snark and satire:

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe it's yogurt. But I refuse to believe it's not butter. Most of all, I believe in this president.

Now, I know there are some polls out there saying this man has a 32% approval rating. But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in "reality." And reality has a well-known liberal bias.

So, Mr. President, please, pay no attention to the people that say the glass is half full. 32% means the glass -- it's important to set up your jokes properly, sir. Sir, pay no attention to the people who say the glass is half empty, because 32% means it's 2/3 empty. There's still some liquid in that glass is my point, but I wouldn't drink it. The last third is usually backwash. Okay, look, folks, my point is that I don't believe this is a low point in this presidency. I believe it is just a lull before a comeback.

I mean, it's like the movie "Rocky." All right. The president in this case is Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed is -- everything else in the world. It's the tenth round. He's bloodied. His corner man, Mick, who in this case I guess would be the vice president, he's yelling, "Cut me, Dick, cut me!," and every time he falls everyone says, "Stay down! Stay down!" Does he stay down? No. Like Rocky, he gets back up, and in the end he -- actually, he loses in the first movie.

OK. Doesn't matter. The point is it is the heart-warming story of a man who was repeatedly punched in the face. So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't.

You know... A post like this just about writes itself. With that in mind, let me direct you to a few more quotes before I finish it with a couple of links...

I stand by this man. I stand by this man because he stands for things. Not only for things, he stands on things. Things like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares. And that sends a strong message, that no matter what happens to America, she will always rebound -- with the most powerfully staged photo ops in the world.

And...

And I just like the guy. He's a good joe. Obviously loves his wife, calls her his better half. And polls show America agrees. She's a true lady and a wonderful woman. But I just have one beef, ma'am.

I'm sorry, but this reading initiative. I'm sorry, I've never been a fan of books. I don't trust them. They're all fact, no heart. I mean, they're elitist, telling us what is or isn't true, or what did or didn't happen. Who's Britannica to tell me the Panama Canal was built in 1914? If I want to say it was built in 1941, that's my right as an American! I'm with the president, let history decide what did or did not happen.

And, finally, some more of his jabs at the press...

But the rest of you, what are you thinking, reporting on NSA wiretapping or secret prisons in eastern Europe? Those things are secret for a very important reason: they're super-depressing. And if that's your goal, well, misery accomplished. Over the last five years you people were so good -- over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew.

If you found these quotes amusing, you can read the entire transcript of Colbert's speech here. Better yet, if you've got BitTorrent, you can download the whole presentation (including Dubya's bit) here in high res!

Give it a look, won't we?

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

"750" or "Do As I Say, Not As I Do"

2006-04-30T12:28:00.000-04:00

750. Seven-five-zero. Seven hundred and fifty. That is, according to an article in the Boston Globe (free registration required to read the whole thing, but you can get the gist of it in the first three pages), the number of laws that George W. Bush has said he is allowed to ignore during his time as president. This doesn't even include what his campaign monkeys and political party are alleged to have done during the past two presidential elections.

And yet, the Criminal-in-Chief still sits in office, and many of his detractors still scurry away in terror whenever the word "impeachment" is brought up.

How does this repeat offender weasel his way around the law without any punishment? I'm glad you asked.

It is well known that Bush has not once vetoed a bill that has come across his desk. Although he has threatened on numerous occasions to do so, he has always capitulated and signed, often inviting the author(s) of the bill to the signing ceremony. Much has been made by the mainstream media about how Bush is willing to reach out to those he might not see eye-to-eye with.

But what the mainstream media hasn't been so big on covering is what happens after the signing ceremony, and this is where we should be paying the most attention.

Many of the times that Bush has signed these bills into law, he has also filed what is called a "signing statement." A signing statement is basically an acknowledgement that, while this law is good and important to "th' 'Mer'can people," it holds no bearing on what he, the president, will do himself.

Let me say that one more time, just to make sure you're getting the idea.

George W. Bush, the guy who, whether legitimately or not, was sworn in as President of the United States twice, and swore to "uphold the laws of the Constitution to the best of my ability," is saying that these laws, which we regular citizens have to follow, do not apply to him.

This initially came to light, according to the Globe article, when Bush signed the bill that included John McCain's anti-torture ammendment. Immediately after signing the bill, Bush filed a signing statement that said, in effect, that it didn't really apply to him, and he could still torture captives.

The man is a monster.

But it doesn't stop there. He also filed a signing statement when Congress passed a bill requiring him to report regularly in order to make sure that the Patriot Act wasn't being used illegally. Again, the statement said, in effect, "I don't have to tell you nothin'! You're not the boss of me!"

More from the Globe:

Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, ''whistle-blower" protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research.

Legal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush's assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government. The Constitution is clear in assigning to Congress the power to write the laws and to the president a duty ''to take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Bush, however, has repeatedly declared that he does not need to ''execute" a law he believes is unconstitutional.

His excuse, however, is "everyone is doin' it!"

Bush administration spokesmen declined to make White House or Justice Department attorneys available to discuss any of Bush's challenges to the laws he has signed.
Instead, they referred a Globe reporter to their response to questions about Bush's position that he could ignore provisions of the Patriot Act. They said at the time that Bush was following a practice that has ''been used for several administrations" and that ''the president will faithfully execute the law in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution."

But the words ''in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution" are the catch, legal scholars say, because Bush is according himself the ultimate interpretation of the Constitution. And he is quietly exercising that authority to a degree that is unprecedented in US history.

Still working on that "King George" thing...

In his signing statements, Bush has repeatedly asserted that the Constitution gives him the right to ignore numerous sections of the bills -- sometimes including provisions that were the subject of negotiations with Congress in order to get lawmakers to pass the bill. He has appended such statements to more than one of every 10 bills he has signed.

''He agrees to a compromise with members of Congress, and all of them are there for a public bill-signing ceremony, but then he takes back those compromises -- and more often than not, without the Congress or the press or the public knowing what has happened," said Christopher Kelley, a Miami University of Ohio political science professor who studies executive power.

More secrets. More lies. And yet he still manages to garner 33% support. Are these people brain dead?

And guess what? You're not safe, either:

Congress has also twice passed laws forbidding the military from using intelligence that was not ''lawfully collected," including any information on Americans that was gathered in violation of the Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable searches.

Congress first passed this provision in August 2004, when Bush's warrantless domestic spying program was still a secret, and passed it again after the program's existence was disclosed in December 2005.

On both occasions, Bush declared in signing statements that only he, as commander in chief, could decide whether such intelligence can be used by the military.

Still not nervous? How about this:

Many laws Bush has asserted he can bypass involve requirements to give information about government activity to congressional oversight committees.
In December 2004, Congress passed an intelligence bill requiring the Justice Department to tell them how often, and in what situations, the FBI was using special national security wiretaps on US soil. The law also required the Justice Department to give oversight committees copies of administration memos outlining any new interpretations of domestic-spying laws. And it contained 11 other requirements for reports about such issues as civil liberties, security clearances, border security, and counternarcotics efforts.

You know where this is going, right?

After signing the bill, Bush issued a signing statement saying he could withhold all the information sought by Congress.

And even government employees aren't safe, should they decide to report their bosses for unethical or illegal activities:

On several other occasions, Bush contended he could nullify laws creating ''whistle-blower" job protections for federal employees that would stop any attempt to fire them as punishment for telling a member of Congress about possible government wrongdoing.

When Congress passed a massive energy package in August, for example, it strengthened whistle-blower protections for employees at the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The provision was included because lawmakers feared that Bush appointees were intimidating nuclear specialists so they would not testify about safety issues related to a planned nuclear-waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada -- a facility the administration supported, but both Republicans and Democrats from Nevada opposed.

When Bush signed the energy bill, he issued a signing statement declaring that the executive branch could ignore the whistle-blower protections.

Bush's statement did more than send a threatening message to federal energy specialists inclined to raise concerns with Congress; it also raised the possibility that Bush would not feel bound to obey similar whistle-blower laws that were on the books before he became president. His domestic spying program, for example, violated a surveillance law enacted 23 years before he took office.

Remember the halcyon days of "I'm a uniter, not a divider"? We've since heard it changed to "I'm the decider," and apparently that doesn't just cover who gets to stay and who gets to go in the administration.

But there are more and more people breathing down Dubya's neck, watching and waiting for the day of reckoning. Many are looking forward to the next presidential election. Others, saying it's entirely too early for that, are pinning their hopes on the 2006 midterm elections. If the Democratic party takes control of the House (and maybe even the Senate), which is looking more and more like with the revelation of three new scandals (on average) per day, Bush will be called to the carpet for the half-asseds way he has done his job. As it is, he is already being sued by a group of 11 House Democrats for signing a spending bill that did not pass both houses of Congress.

It's looking like the "I" word isn't that hard to fit your mouth around these days.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Blurring The Lines Even Further

2006-04-26T00:07:00.000-04:00

Fox "News" has posted a story on their website stating that Fox "News" anchor Tony Snow will be taking over the spot recently vacated by White House press secretary Scott McClellan. The announcement is expected to be made Wednesday morning, and comes as a surprise to nobody. It was even predicted by Jon Stewart of The Daily Show, who said that it was "a change in job title, but not in job description."

It may have initially come as a shock to Snow, whose comments (provided by Think Progress) about Dubya in the past have not always been the standard company line. F'rinstance:

Bush has “lost control of the federal budget and cannot resist the temptation to stop raiding the public fisc.” [3/17/06]

“George Bush has become something of an embarrassment.” [11/11/05]

“When it comes to federal spending, George W. Bush is the boy who can’t say no. In each of his three years at the helm, the president has warned Congress to restrain its spending appetites, but so far nobody has pushed away from the table mainly because the president doesn’t seem to mean what he says.” [The Detroit News, 12/28/03]

“George W. Bush, meanwhile, talks of a pillowy America, full of niceness and goodwill. Bush has inherited his mother’s attractive feistiness, but he also got his father’s syntax. At one point last week, he stunned a friendly audience by barking out absurd and inappropriate words, like a soul tortured with Tourette’s.” [8/25/00]

And my personal favorite:

“He recently tried to dazzle reporters by discussing the vagaries of Congressional Budget Office economic forecasts, but his recitation of numbers proved so bewildering that not even his aides could produce a comprehensible translation. The English Language has become a minefield for the man, whose malaprops make him the political heir not of Ronald Reagan, but Norm Crosby.” [8/25/00]

(More quotes available at the link.)

This should be fun.

Personally, I don't know much about Snow; I can't watch Fox for more than two or three minutes without feeling ill, so I avoid the channel. I know enough about them network itself to say that Jon Stewart was right; Fox "News" is a shill for the Bush Administration. Everyone on Fox is a shill for the administration. They are loathe to bring in anyone who might represent a point of view that isn't the same as theirs.

When there's nothing positive to report about the administration, they resort to reporting about missing white girls. The Natalee Holloway story, which has been covered by the other news channels and programs rather sufficiently, has been beaten to death by Fox, mainly because there really hasn't been a lot of positive things coming out of the White House lately.

When there is a shortage of missing white girl stories, they move on to attack Democrats whenever possible. And their favorite target is still Bill Clinton. But he's not the only target. (Go check out the News Hounds for more. They're great folks, and they monitor Fox "News" constantly to point out the network's biases. Also see Robert Greenwald's excellent documentary, Outfoxed.)

And finally, when there's nothing else to report on, they talk about the ongoing "war" against Christianity. Anchor John Gibson put out a book last Christmas about the so-called "War on Christmas". Bill O'Reilly went on David Letterman and tried to further push the "War on Christmas" agenda, until Letterman shut him down by saying, "I'm not smart enough to debate you on all of this, but I have a feeling about 65% of what you say is crap." There were specials on the network about this supposed "war". I completely ignored them all. Apparently, these Christians who are so upset by people saying "happy holidays" are not aware of the bit in the Bible where Jesus preaches tolerance.

Then, in February, there was just a regular "War on Christianity". (Apparently, Groundhog Day is still safe from us heathens.) This month, there was a "War on Easter". I didn't really pay any attention to this after the whole "War on Christmas" thing, so you'll excuse me if I don't offer you any links. Again, check the News Hounds out. They've got tons of this stuff.

It never ceases to amaze me that these so-called Christians are quick to point out the bits in the Bible that supposedly support their views, but are quick to skip the bits that go against their hate-filled rhetoric. They give legitimate Christians - the ones who are trying to make the world a better place and help their fellow man - a bad rap.

But I'm getting away from the point, whatever it was. What was it again? Oh! Right. Tony Snow as the new press secretary.

Tony Snow is going to be the new press guy, and I'm just about wobbly with anticipation, because although he has carried the Fox "News" line (for the most part) throughout his time there - I know I said I didn't watch him, and it's true, but he wouldn't have lasted long if he didn't toe the company line - I'm also pretty sure he isn't going to appreciate the press corps climbing up his nose the way they did with McClellan. Fox "News" creates a neat little bubble for their personalities, and with the bubble missing, Snow will be eaten alive. I will be watching his first legitimate press briefing with some relish. Will they give him a break as the new guy? Will they start right at him? Will Helen Thomas challenge him to an arm wrestling competition right there? Oh! What exciting times these are!

Of course, the White House is calling it differently. Surprise, surprise.

*****

Some quick hits...

Too Little, Too Late

Dubya has ordered a probe into the high price of gas. Nobody cares because, quite frankly, with his administration in office, there's not going to be a straight answer anyway. (Why expect one now?) He also "temporarily" suspended environmental regulations to refineries to allow them produce more fuel for the country, and put a hold on the purchase of oil for the National Reserve until the end of summer, which will have a minimal impact on the price of gas, at best.

My Brother's Secret Life

For those of you who know me (that would, I assume, be all five of you who actually read this blog), you know about my brother Vern. For several years, he was doing the "good husband/married guy" thing, and had put down his guitar. His wife, Sherrie, Gawd love her, was patient when I would drag my gear to their house and Vern and I would jam - loudly - in the rec room. Now, it seems, she has been medicated thoroughly enough to support his urge to play in public again. More power to both of them.

Anyway, Vern has picked up a gig with a band called My Secret Life. (This is his second band - I think he was getting nervous that I'm in three now, and decided to get back into it before I joined every band in Michigan, leaving him nothing.) Go check out their MySpace page and listen to the tunes. Good stuff. It's on heavy rotation in my car's CD player. Heck, if you're in the area, go check them out! Maybe I'll see you at one of their gigs. (I plan on going to one as soon as my schedule opens up.)

My Damaged, Loaded Life (Rewind)

As I said above, I'm in three bands myself - Damaged Goods, Loaded and, most recently, Rewind. It's been pretty harried lately, trying to keep track of where I'm playing and with whom, but I think I'm getting the hang of it, so bear with me.

Anyhow, this year marks the third year in a row that I've held a Birthday Bash for myself (after much harrassment from friends and coworkers who complained because I didn't celebrate my birthday in any big way). The first year, Loaded had a great time at the Willow Tree Golf Course bar in Melvin. (Town motto: "The middle of nowhere? No, you passed that already.") For the second year, Loaded played at the Golden Dawn in Lexington. (Town motto: "We are a booming metrpolis compared to Melvin!") We almost burned the palce to the ground with some faulty lights. Good times!

This year, however, it's going to be a special event, lasting (unofficially) five weeks! It kicked off last weekend with Loaded at Willow Tree again. This coming weekend, I'll be partying with Rewind at the VFW in St. Clair Shores. The following weekend will be the "official" kickoff of my 3rd Annual Birthday Bash, and I'll be playing with Damaged Goods at Timmy D's in Capac on May 5th and 6th. Come on out!

If you miss the Timmy D's show, I have a show on the 13th with Rewind (more details on this later) and closing it down on the 20th with Loaded. (Again, more details later.) Come on out! Shots of Cabo tequila will be more than welcome!

Bobbie Dumps Here!

Those of you who come here may be familiar with my friend Bobbie's blog, ThatBobbieGirl's Brain Dump. (Especially you, Bobbie.) If you're not, check it out.

Anyhow, from time to time, I get e-mails from Bobbie with some really...interesting links. Here are a few that she recently sent me:

When I think candy, I think "Mmmmm... Ear wax..." Doesn't everyone? The best part is that it comes with its own edible "swab"!

For those of you who long for simpler days but are not willing to give up the tenuous grasp you have on technology, why not get a bit retro while still maintaining your computer savvy by baking a cake or two with the PC EZ Bake Oven? It fits right into your computer's 5-1/4" drive bay! Seriously! Check it out:
I have got to get me one of these.

And for those of you who enjoy squinty, oily performances by a mumbling buttsteak of a man, Steven Segal is offering up Lightning Bolt! I'm speechless. Really. But the website isn't:
"All of our drinks are sweetened with an imported sugarcane juice concentrate that is not only all natural, but contains naturally occurring policosanols - that can help maintain healthy cholesterol!"
Wow! policosanols! Gotta get me some of those!

And that about wraps it up.

Tune in next time, when we build a full-scale replica of the Parthenon using only Ritz crackers and squeeze cheese!

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Scotty, We Hardly Knew Ye...

2006-04-19T13:48:00.000-04:00

"You! Pull my finger!"

White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, who has served the president for the past seven and a half years (two of those years as press secretary), announced his resignation this morning. It was greeted by the press as a monumental move prompted by the new White House Chief of Staff, Josh Bolten. Bolten had a meeting with staff recently, inviting those who were considering resigning to do so.

It was greeted by those of us who aren't in the press with mild indifference.

Why? Because McClellan's job was inconsequential. All he did was get in front of reporters every morning and toe the White House line. No useful information was even shared, nor, for the most part, any honest information. If anyon in the White House press corps was looking for a direct answer to any question, they were given empty words, or references to previous empty words. Case in point:

"As I've previously stated, while that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it." McClellan on new PlameGate revelations, July 11, 2005. (Courtesy of Perrspectives)
"The last thing anyone should do is politicize this issue by rewriting history." McClellan on revelations regarding bogus uranium in Niger claims, July 17, 2003. (Courtesy of Perrspectives)
"This was a report based on a single anonymous source that could not substantiate the allegation that was made." McClellan describing the Newsweek Koran story, not the role of Curveball in Iraq pre-war intelligence, May 16, 2005. (Courtesy of Perrspectives)

The guy turned his job into an artform.

And now, we're left with an empty spot that will more than likely be filled by Fox shill Tony Snow. The only real difference in Snow's reporting will be a change of venue.

Also affected by Bolten's changes, Karl Rove has effectively been demoted from his position of formulating policy to being "involved in long-term strategic planning as a deputy chief of staff and a senior adviser," according to a CNN article.

Completely untouched (so far) by this shake-up is the one person whose resignation has been called for over the past week or two: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Nobody is sure why.

I wrote a humor piece about some of this last night at Daily Kos, if you're interested in a more humorous take on the whole thing.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Catching Up...Again.

2006-04-15T01:31:00.000-04:00

You know, I've really been dragging my feet lately on this blog, and I regularly feel guilty about it because it seems like every post lately has to do with catching up from the last time. However, I look at it this way: When I hear about this stuff - stuff like the things I'oll be writing about in this post - I like to let it sit in my brain for a little while so I can attempt to write something coherent, as opposed to blasting off on an unplanned rant that reads like a fever dream.

(I realize that some of you might feel like pointing out that most of my writing reads like a fever dream anyway, but I'll assume you mean that in a nice way and ask you to keep it to yourself.)

Anyway... Let's go to the replay.

*****

"Rummy, you're doin' a heckuvva job..."

In the wake of no less than seven retired military generals calling for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's resignation, President Bush today released a statement saying, in effect, that he fully stands behind Rummy and the job he's doing. Isn't that a nice little Easter egg for the guy?

It's a shame, though, because almost immediately afterward a new document came to light directly linking Rumsfeld to the torture of captives held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

Looks like the egg was rotten.

What really twists my nipples about this is that Rumsfeld has tried twice to resign from his job, but Dubya wouldn't accept it. Now he's got an opportunity for the exact thing he wanted, and he won't freakin' go away!

*****

"Special K" Street

Grover Norquist, according to The Hill, is trying to trademark the name "K Street Project" to keep Democrats and Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) from using it in a negative way. Here's a little background from that article:

Norquist said he founded the K Street Project in 1989 to bring ideological balance to lobbying firms. His group distributes weekly jobs bulletins by e-mail to 250 subscribers. This week’s bulletin is a 75-page dossier with positions at the Federal Election Commission, Merrill Lynch, the American Health Care Association, WellPoint and Home Depot.
Norquist said, “We argued to K Street — to trade associations, Fortune 500 companies, the Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers — you should hire people who agree with you philosophically. That means, labor unions, you should hire liberals.”
But the phrase “K Street Project” has since come to encompass a nefarious practice
of Republican lawmakers pressuring groups to hire right-leaning employees; Rep.
Tom DeLay (R-Texas) was admonished by the House ethics committee for doing so in 1998.
Republican Sen. Rick Santorum has come under fire in his reelection race from Pennsylvania Treasurer Bob Casey Jr., his likely Democratic challenger, for hosting weekly meetings between Republican senators and lobbyists, another event that has come to be seen as part of K Street Project.
Norquist’s trademark application could take up to a year and a half to be processed.

In the meantime, DailyKos blogger mini mum suggested that "[s]ince it will take 18 months to process the application, I suggest someone photoshop the icon with a couple of streetwalkers under it..."

Okay. You asked for it:

(Photoshopped by yours truly.)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Jack Abramoff part of the K Street deal, too?

*****

Libby ~~Gives Cheney The Finger~~ Fingers Cheney

This little tidbit comes from an article in the National Journal:

Vice President Dick Cheney directed his then-chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on July 12, 2003 to leak to the media portions of a then-highly classified CIA report that Cheney hoped would undermine the credibility of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, a critic of the Bush administration's Iraq policy, according to Libby's grand jury testimony in the CIA leak case and sources who have read the classified report.

And Libby's testimony also points to Dubya, former press secretary Ari Fleischer, and, as always, Karl "Turd Blossom" Rove.

I think it's getting to a point where it would be easier to just list the people at the White House who weren't involved in some with with the CIA leak case. As best as I can tell, the list is as follows:

Some of the kitchen staff
Jenna Bush
The lawn maintenance guy
The Bush family's dog, Barney (unverified)

*****

Zacarias Moussaoui: What a Dickweed

Currently going through the death-penalty phase of his trial, would-be al-Qaida terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui, the only person to be tried in this country in connection with the 9/11 terrorist attacks, says he's glad that people died on September 11th, 2001. He also has suggested that he and wannabe shoe-bomber Richard Reid were supposed to hijack yet another plane and crash it into the White House.

Already found guilty, Moussaoui is doing everything he can to get himself executed, his argument being that he would rather be executed "in battle" than die in a prison cell. My personal opinion is that he should be given life in prison for that reason alone. Why should this assclown be given the death he wants so badly, allowing him to portray himself as the martyr he so badly wants to be? Stick him in a box and let him rot. That'll learn him.

*****

The First Democrat to Throw His Hat into the 2008 Election is...

...some guy that almost nobody has ever heard of.

Mike Gravel is the first Democrat to announce that he will run for president in 2008.

Now, when I first read this, I, like I'm sure many of you who are reading this now are doing, immediately thought, "Who?" Fortunately, the dirth of information on these here "internets" and about two minutes of research reveals that Gravel actually does have a bit of a history about him. Here's what Wikipedia has to say about him:

Maurice Robert Gravel (born May 13, 1930 in Springfield, Massachusettes), better
known as Mike Gravel, was a Democratic U.S. Senator from Alaska for two terms, from 1969 to 1981. He is primarily known for having put into the public record a large portion of the Pentagon Papers by entering 4,100 pages of the Papers into the record of his Senate subcommittee on Buildings and Grounds, in 1971.
He is the first declared candidate for the 2008 Democratic nomination for President of the United States. (My emphasis.)

Ah... Well, that explains it. He's a former Democratic Senator from Alaska who hasn't held office for twenty-five years, and read parts of a report about the government's involvement in Vietnam to a subcommittee for the Committee on Public Works. Why hasn't this guy been elected president already? (Did you catch the subtle sarcasm in there?)
*****

Iran, Israel, and the Bomb

The really big story (as opposed to the continuous stream of scandal news surrounding the White House and Republicans in Congress) is that Dubya and Friends have turned their sights on Iran because they are enriching uranium. BushCo is convinced that Iran is trying to build nuclear (or "nukyular", if you're White House staff) weapons, insisting that they could have a nuke in days.

According to Juan Cole, professor of history at University of Michigan (GO BLUE!), this is not the case:

Iran Can Now Make glowing Mickey Mouse Watches

Despite all the sloppy and inaccurate headlines about Iran "going nuclear," the fact is that all President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday was that it had enriched uranium to a measely 3.5 percent, using a bank of 180 centrifuges hooked up so that they "cascade."

The ability to slightly enrich uranium is not the same as the ability to build a bomb. For the latter, you need at least 80% enrichment, which in turn would require about 16,000 small centrifuges hooked up to cascade. Iran does not have 16,000 centrifuges. It seems to have 180. Iran is a good ten years away from having a bomb, and since its leaders, including Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei, say they do not want an atomic bomb because it is Islamically immoral, you have to wonder if they will ever have a bomb.

The title says it all, I think. And there are others who believe that Iran is at least sixteen years away from being able to produce anything like a nuclear weapon.

On a related subject, while the U.S. actually has some support for the idea that Iran's attempts to enrich uranium might not just be for peaceful purposes, you would think that they would be doing everything they could to look as unthreatening and docile as possible.

You would think...

However, what Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is doing may not qualify as "thinking," as such.

It seems that Ahmadinejad made a statement Friday about how he is looking forward to "annihilating" Israel. From the article:

Days after announcing that Iran had successfully enriched uranium, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Friday called Israel a "rotten, dried tree"
that will be annihilated by "one storm."

Opening of at the opening ceremony of the Qods (Jerusalem) conference in Tehran on supporting the Palestinians, Ahmadinejad fired a series of verbal shots at Israel, saying it was a "permanent threat" to the Middle East that will "soon" be liberated, and again questioning the validity of the Nazi Holocaust against Jews in World War II.

"Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihiliation," Ahmadinejad said. "The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm," he said.

This is not, of course, the first time that Ahmadinejad has made statements such as these. Last October, he said Israel should be "wiped off the map." He also said of the Holocaust, "If such a disaster is true, why should the people of this region pay the price? Why does the Palestinian nation have to be suppressed and have its land occupied?"

That guy needs a better speechwriter...

*****

And that wraps it up. I'll try to be a bit more regular about posting from now on.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Getting Caught Up...

2006-04-04T00:07:00.000-04:00

I've been dragging my feet lately, because I got a copy of Guitar Pro 5, and I've been transcribing songs like crazy with it. But today, I'm going to get caught up with some of the things I have caught from the blogs, the radio, and the occasional bit of TV between songs. (In no particular order.)

Let's get started, shall we?

*****

First, Tom DeLay has announced that he's not going to run for re-election, even though he already won the TX-22 primary. According to a Time magazine article:

The surprise decision was based on the sort of ruthless calculation that had once given him unchallenged dominance of House Republicans and their wealthy friends in Washington's lobbying community: he realized he might lose in this November's election. DeLay got a scare in a Republican primary last month, and a recent poll taken by his campaign gave him a roughly 50-50 shot of winning, in an election season when Republicans need every seat they can hang onto to avoid a Democratic takeover of the House [...]

So, basically, Tommy's not absolutely certain he's going to win, so he's dropping out before he has to face defeat under the weight of his own failures. (Speaking of which, how's that indictment coming along, Tom?) How truly Republican of him to cut and run when he can't fix the odds in his favor.

DeLay's retirement will likely take place sometime next month, when he changes his residence to his condo in Virginia.

*****

Next, Katherine Harris is trying to put a good face on her "imploding" run for the Senate. Unfortunately, it's this face:

She's a MAN, baby!

However, to her credit, Harris has decided to stay the course, because she believes she has the right assets. See if you can figure out what they are from this helpful photograph:

(Photo shamelessly lifted from the comments section of an article on Daily Kos.)

Yikes.

Anyway, on March 21st Harris promised that she would put her entire $10 million inheritance into her senatorial run, prompting the creation of a new website called MakeHerSpendItAll.com. Later that day, her staff explained exactly what she meant by that:

Due largely to her repeating the phrase, "I'm putting everything on the line," folks assumed she meant she was adding that cash to the inheritance money she'd already pledged to spend. In other words, we understood she was actually putting "everything" on the line.

But now her campaign says she's not spending her inheritance, only her liquidated assets, which Harris says also total $10 million.

Money quote: "I think I'm being pretty clear," her campaign spokeswoman Morgan Dobbs told the Orlando Sentinel.

As clear as mud.

*****

Why isn't Dick Cheney singing on American Idol?

While speaking to a crowd at a campaign stop on Orlando, Florida, Vice President "Big Dick" Cheney said of Democrats, "If they are competent to fight this war, then I ought to be singing on American Idol."

This from the guy who got five deferments to avoid serving in the military and is second banana to a guy who joined the National Guard to avoid going to Vietnam, and then went AWOL. And there are countless other Republicans in the White House and Congress who avoided having to wear a uniform and learn to march.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have a pretty solid record of military participation. Sure, Bill Clinton didn't, but he was honest about it and never started a war for profit resulting in over 2300 members of the military dying, as well as at least 30,000 Iraqi civilians.

Anyway, it seems to me that most Democratic politicians are more competent to fight this "war" than pretty much every Republican politician combined. So start singin', DICK!

*****

WashingtonPost.com hired the co-founder of RedState.com, 24-year old Ben "Box Turtle" Domeneche, to write a blog on their website called Red America. Domeneche was hired supposedly to bring "balance" to the Post's website.

Almost immediately, bloggers like Atrios and Daily Kos (among many others) went to work on Ben, trying to show that he was incompetent, at best. What they found, though, was even more intriguing than an uninformed chickenhawk Republican. It turns out that Domeneche was also a serial plagiarist! (Here are just a few of them. More are available.)

Best of all, he lifted almost an entire article from P.J. O'Rourke, whom he claimed had given him permission to use the article. (He did not, however, offer any credit.) O'Rourke, when contacted, said he didn't ever recall even meeting Domeneche, let alone giving him permission to copy the article.

After blaming the whole thing on editors from the newspaper he worked at during his time in college (he dropped out), he resigned two days later to the cheering of Lefties everywhere. Good times.

*****

And finally, Senator Russ Feingold's censure resolution got a little more support from Democrats in the Senate, as well as an actual hearing. Of course, the whole thing is a farce, and nothing will happen - at least until November, when midterm elections may give control of one or both houses of Congress back to the Democrats. (Sort of like the Jedi coming back into power after the long reign of the Sith. Please refrain from calling me a nerd because I used this metaphor.)

And that about wraps it up. I do, however, want to say a quick "howdy" to Dexter, who has apparently been checking by from time to time to see if I'm alive. So, hiya, Dex!

Oh yeah... And Kim is an animal. That's all you need to know.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Helen Thomas, You Da Man!

2006-03-21T20:36:00.000-05:00

President Bush gave a speech today, in yet another failed attempt to bring up his poll numbers - you know, the ones he doesn't pay attention to - and perhaps shore up a bit more support for his ridiculous war in Iraq.

After spending a bit of time going over the usual talking points - stay the course, 9/11, Islamo-fascists, yadda yadda yadda - and wasting even more oxygen that could better be used by non-knuckle-dragging, upright walking mammals like you and me, he opened the floor to questions, which is always entertaining when the audience hasn't been pre-screened. Oh, and did I mention that this particular Q&A was in front of the White House press corp?

Among those chosen to ask questions was Helen Thomas, an intelligent, thoughtful and, above all, insistent reporter who has been covering the White House for the past several centuries.

First, it's surprising that Thomas was called on at all. As best as anyone can remember, she hasn't been called on in the past four years, and it's possible that even she was taken by surprise. However, she rallied nicely, and managed to deliver a forceful bitch-slap with her single question:

Thomas: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President -- your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime.

Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is: Why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, your Cabinet officers, former Cabinet officers, intelligence people and so forth -- but what's your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil, the quest for oil. It hasn't been Israel or anything else. What was it?

Damn!

But the president, always on his toes, bobbed and weaved to the best of his abilities, cutting off Thomas with any possible follow-up she might have had:

Bush: I think your premise, in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist -- that I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect.

Thomas: And...

Bush: Hold on for a second, please. Excuse me. Excuse me.

No president wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true.

My attitude about the defense of this country changed in September the 11th. When we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people.

Our foreign policy changed on that day. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life.

And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people, that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.

Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy, and that's why I went into Iraq.

(CROSSTALK)

Bush: Hold on for a second. Excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for Al Qaida.

That's where Al Qaida trained and that's where...

Thomas: (OFF-MIKE)

Bush: Helen, excuse me.

That's where -- Afghanistan provided safe haven for Al Qaida. That's where they trained, that's where they plotted, that's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.

I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council. That's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed.
Thomas: Did they say go to war?

And the world said, "Disarm, disclose or face serious consequences." And therefore, we worked with the world. We worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world.

And when he chose to deny the inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did. And the world is safer for it.

After completely failing to give an honest and clear answer to Thomas, he deliberately turned away from her to take a question from someone else.

Now, admittedly, this may not seem like that big a deal, until you see Dubya's expression when Thomas tries to interrupt him so she can follow up. I suggest going to Crooks & Liars and checking out the video.The rest of the press conference was a practice in futility because, as with Thomas, Dubya refused to actually answer any questions with a straight answer, other than to suggest that he does not intend to let anyone on his staff go, regardless of the numerous calls for exactly that.

Later, Thomas made a brief appearance on CNN to speak with Leslie "Wolf" Blitzer, where she continued her campaign of verbally smacking around really dumb guys. According to the CNN transcript, Blitzer asked why Dubya had not called on her in the past few years. Thomas, ever the honest professional, had this to say:

Thomas: That's right. So -- well, he wasn't calling on me because I think he was avoiding what he considered very tough questions that I would be asking. And I don't blame him for that. That's his privilege.

Leslie Blitzer then moved on to a more direct question about the "confrontation" in the press room:

Blitzer: And you asked him a tough question. Did you accept his answer? Namely, that he didn't come into the presidency believing he was going to go to war against Saddam Hussein, but after 9/11 his world view changed?

Thomas: It doesn't -- it doesn't parse. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, it certainly had -- was secular, it was not tied to al Qaeda.

I think he wanted to go into Iraq because he had all the neo- conservatives advising at the top of their agenda for Project for a New American Century. First Iraq, then Iran -- then Syria, then Iran, and so forth.

Blitzer: So you believe even before 9/11, he was about -- he wanted to take out Saddam Hussein?

Thomas: Oh, I think this is very clear. You couldn't sit in that press room day after day. Every time -- every time it was mentioned by Ari Fleischer or Scott, they would say in one breath, 9/11, Saddam Hussein, 9/11, Saddam Hussein.

I don't -- I don't blame the American public for thinking there was a tie.

After that, things started to get a bit tense, and ended with Thomas pointing out that Blitzer has basically turned into a puss:

Blitzer: Let's go back to this issue, being the worst president ever. And you've covered a lot of presidents, going back to President Kennedy.

Worse than Richard Nixon?

Thomas: Well, I think what this president has done is really strike a match to the tinderbox that we all know is the Middle East. And I think that Nixon's crime, so-called, was the abuse of government power.

In the case, in the case of the president and his cohorts, I think they have really spread war throughout the Middle East. They have really encouraged all of the horror that is going on.

We have killed so many innocent people. I mean...

Blitzer: But you can't forget 9/11. Three thousand people were killed.

Thomas: But the Iraqis didn't do it. I mean, how can you -- why don't you go bomb some other country? I mean, if you have no reason -- this is -- I don't believe in preemptive war, and it certainly is against international law. It's against the U.N. charter, it's against Geneva, and it's against Nuremberg. BLITZER: Tell our viewers, who, as I said earlier, have grown up with you, Helen, what you're up to nowadays, how you feel, what your goals are right now.

Thomas: My goals are to seek the truth, wherever it leads me. And I do think that's the goal of journalists, and I think we fell down on the job.

Blitzer: The news media in general? That we weren't watching?

Thomas: Come back. All is forgiven.

Blitzer: You're going to forgive us?

Thomas: To the White House.

Blitzer: You're part of -- they're part of the news media, too.

Thomas: Right.

Blitzer: We sat in those briefings for a long time together.

Helen, I hope you're around...

Thomas: You ask very tough questions.

Blitzer: Well, I'm trying to do the best I can, like you.

Thomas: You asked President Clinton why he wouldn't resign.

Blitzer: I asked him some tough questions, but that's another time. And this is another story right now.

From there, Blitzer ended the interview.

Again, the man is a total puss, and I give huge props to Helen Thomas for standing up for the Truth (with a capital "T") while so many other White House reporters, as well as others in the mainstream media, fold under the smirking pomposity of the Chimp-in-Chief.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Seeing Red...Not So Much...

2006-03-16T21:24:00.000-05:00

Via a link at Daily Kos, check out a nifty little graphic from Radical Writ concerning Dubya's continuously dropping approval rating. (Sorry, for some reason I couldn't post it here.)

Interesting, don't you think?

Dubya's numbers have been dropping pretty consistently lately, with even his media wing, Fox News, giving him only 39% approval.

And then, of course, there's Senator Russ Feingold's call for a censure of the president for the illegal wiretapping program. Oh, and let's not forget Representative John Conyer's (D-MI) request for a committee to look into grounds for impeachment against Dubya (House Resolution 635), first presented on December 18th, 2005, which now has 32 sponsors or co-sponsors in the House.

Of course, one cannot help but also point out that, while it may have seemed implausible that impeachment would be supported by regular Americans like you and me, a new poll suggests that 42% of Americans are now in favor of impeaching Dubya, according to Raw Story. A slightly higher 46% supports Senator Feingold's call for censure. Here are a few more interesting points from the Raw Story article:

Even more shocking is that just 57% of Republicans are opposed to the move, with 14% still undecided and 29% actually in favor. Fully 70% of Democrats want to see Bush censured.

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't surprised by the Democrat numbers. Who are the other 30%? People with open-head injuries? People who ate lead-based paint chips as children? Joe Leiberman's followers? The world will never know...

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

An Open Letter to Senate Democrats

2006-03-14T20:10:00.000-05:00

To The Democratic Senators in Washington, D.C. :

I am a registered voter from Michigan who, after considering which party had the most to offer people like myself, chose to register as a Democrat when I did register, almost twenty years ago. I chose the Democratic party because I felt that they supported the "little guy," like myself, whereas the Republicans were all about big business.

When President Clinton, the first president I voted for (both times), was impeached by the Republicans in Congress over marital infidelity - which, while I do not condone it, I also do not feel that it was something I should have had to hear about day in and day out on television; what happened should have stayed between the president, his wife, and Miss Lewinsky - I stood by my votes for him because, personal issues aside, he was a good president. He had eliminated the federal deficit and had, in fact, allowed a surplus to build. He had helped develop stronger relations throughout the world. He created jobs for people like me. The country was in good shape. To put it simply, he did his job. And he fought tooth-and-nail against the Repulicans in Congress who tried to kill off his initiatives.

When Al Gore ran for president in 2000, I voted for him as well. I felt that he would be able to carry on the work that President Clinton had started - taking us in the right direction. Apparently, I wasn't the only one who felt this way. The majority of voters felt the same way I did, and voted him into office. Unfortunately, many of those votes were not counted until well after the fact, and the election was decided by the Supreme Court, which had every reason to choose in favor of George W. Bush, what with their connections to his father and his father's former boss, Ronald Reagan. But up until the Court chose the president, Gore put up a strong fight in an attempt to make sure every vote was counted. He had my respect.

In 2004, John Kerry ran a solid campaign against an incumbent president who did everything in his power to make Kerry out to be some sort of anti-American traitor. The treatment Kerry received from Bush, as well as groups working under the umbrella of Bush's supporters and handlers (such as Karl Rove), was not enough to bring the man down. He worked hard, stood by his message (albeit rather longwindedly), and kept on proving that the only issue Bush could run on was his ridiculous "war" - a war of covenience, which had nothing to do with the attacks of September 11th, 2001, no matter how hard Bush and company tried to tie it in. When it came time to vote, I voted for Kerry because I felt that he, a decorated military veteran, could do a better job of getting our troops back home from Iraq. At the very least, he could do a better job than an AWOL National Guard pilot whose only public "military record" consists of some dental records.

Once again, as the votes were being tallied, there were inconsistencies. There were rumors of voter intimidation in areas that were known to be Democratic strongholds in Ohio. There were problems with voting machines, which were built by a company that strongly supports the Republican party. All of the same things that happened in Florida four years earlier were taking place in Ohio, and then some. Exit polls, which are normally very accurate, called overwhelmingly for Ohio to go to John Kerry, giving him the election. But we all know how that one finished - before all of the votes were finally counted, John Kerry conceded to President Bush, allowing him to have a second term. The fight this time was, at best, minimal.

When the "official" vote count came out, Bush's "victory" was only by a very small margin. President Bush, however, called it a "Mandate", suggesting that the people had spoken, and they had chosen him. It would later come to light that, like in 2000, they had not. But nobody said much of anything about it. This was where things started to go really bad.

In the five years that President Bush has been in the White House, things have gone from good to worse. The "war" continues. The surplus that President Clinton had given us has dwindled to a record-breaking deficit in the face of two tax cuts that Bush pushed through in his first term, allowing for enormous cuts for the top 1% of earners in the country (unheard of, especially in a time of "war"), while the middle and lower class took up the largest part of the burden. The Patriot Act has taken away the civil liberties that we Americans were promised 270 years ago, and every president until the current one has upheld for us. The "small government" Republicans have made it even bigger, even while closing off valuable government programs designed to help those who need it the most. Congress is rife with corruption, as the Abramoff, DeLay, and other scandals have shown us.

And last year, we learned that the President believes he is above the law. His illegal warrantless wiretap program with the NSA has allowed him to thumb his nose at the Constitution that you, the ones who are supposed to be elected "by the people, for the people," and he swore to uphold. In bypassing the FISA court, President Bush has broken the law. Countless legal experts, and even some Congresspersons from his own party believe this is the case.

Members of his staff are allegedly responsible for leaking the name of a covert CIA operative to the press, a clear violation to the law. One of those staff members is currently under indictment, and others are still being investigated.

For God's sake, the Vice President shot a 78 year old lawyer in the face, waited twenty-four hours to report it, and was let go without so much as a minor investigation, even with rumors of alcohol being involved!

Where are the Democrats that I believed would support the "little people" back when I registered to vote? On almost every issue that has come up against the president, Congressional Democrats have made a lot of noise, but have done little else. Some, such as Senator Leiberman, have rolled over and become lapdogs for the White House, wagging their tails and licking the hand of the man who doesn't believe the law applies to him.

And yesterday, when Senator Feingold asked for a motion to censure the president, Senator Frist decided to try and force Feingold's hand by calling for an immediate vote. Did you, Senator Feingold's colleagues, stand by him and support the motion?

No. Instead, you used stalling tactics to put a hold on the vote - which now will most likely never see the light of day - and went on TV to tell everybody that Feingold's actions were "grandstanding" and "all about him." You whined about "alienating voters" and "looking weak on national security."

How dare you? How dare you turn your back on one of your colleagues? Especially when he is the only one of you who has enough of a spine to stand up to the administration and attempt to hold it accountable for its questionable and, above all, illegal activities. How dare you question the motivation behind Senator Feingold's actions, when you yourselves have repeatedly called for action against the president, although none of you had the nerve to be the first to take a stand?

The only voters you have alienated are the ones who, like myself, believed that you represented them. I know a lot of Democratic voters. I have not heard one say that they didn't want the president held accountable for breaking the law. Many have pointed out that President Clinton, whose biggest indiscretion was cheating on his wife, was held accountable before Congress, and paid a price for it. President Bush is, directly or indirectly, responsible for the deaths of over 2500 American soldiers in Iraq, a country that has never done anything to us, as well as more than 30,000 civilian deaths. Every day, those death tolls grow. He has forced his version of "democracy" (complete with questionable election results) on a country he decided to invade based on bad or false information, and is looking to force it on another in the not-to-distant future. My Democrat friends (as well as several Republicans I know) believe that Bush has lied to the people who supposedly put him in office. They believe we are caught up in a civil war in a country that doesn't want us there. They believe this country is headed in the wrong direction under this man's control.

They believe he needs to be held accountable. Why don't you?

Again, I ask: Where are the Democrats that I believed would support the "little people" back when I registered to vote? So far, only Senator Feingold has stood up to this call.

DCF

OH NO! We Don't Have A Slogan!

2006-03-10T21:07:00.000-05:00

Republican National Committee head Ken Mehlman gave a speech today to the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in Tennessee, and made a point to show what a horrible party the Democratic party is.

"Not only can they not settle on an agenda, they can't even agree on a slogan," Mehlman said in remarks prepared for delivery. He then offered some suggestions, albeit critical ones.

"If they really want the American people to know what they are going to do, then how about, 'Together, Americans can pay more in taxes,' " he said. "Or, 'Together, we can retreat from the central front in the war on terror.' "

Hur! Hur! Hur! That's hilarious, Ken! Tell me... Does it hurt much?

Of course, numerous news sites have made much of this, including Netscape News with CNN, who posted this fascinating headline:

Indicted? By whom? Mehlman? CNN? To my knowledge, neither of those entities has the power to indict anyone. To bring an indictment against someone, you need to be some kind of lawyer, like, say, Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald, who has indicted I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby (and, if God is paying attention, will be doing the same to Karl "Turd Blossom" Rove), or DA Ronnie Earle, who has indicted Tom DeLay, don't you?

No, in this case, it was CNN taking a bit of liberty - and a really sleazy grab for readers - by posting a flat-out bogus headline about Mehlman's speech. Nice.

Getting back to Mehlman's speech; as I said, he suggested that the Democrats can't even come up with a slogan for their 2008 convention. Apparently, this is supposed to show just how disorganized we are, running around without a clear agenda or message. However, with just a quick click, you can go to the Democratic National Committee's website and have a look at the agenda the party has laid out.

Now, if you're taking about the Republican party... Well, then you can have a ton of slogans, such as the ones listed on Daily Kos:

"The world changed on September the 11th."
"We fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here."
"Freedom is on the march."
"Up or down vote, up or down vote, up or down vote (deep breath...) up or down vote, up or down vote, up or down vote."

As for a legitimate agenda, the RNC appears to be recycling their points from the last two election cycles: "Stay the course!" Admittedly, it is kind of catchy, and you can dance to it. However, it doesn't exactly address the ongoing issues that it should, such as the rising insurgency in Iraq, which teeters on the edge of civil war as I write this. (Although there are some GOP spokesmonkeys who are spouting the old Katrina-inspired White House nugget about how we "dodged a bullet" on that one.)

One of the growing number of people who are not buying the Republican finger-pointing is MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, who had this to say today:

"The lack of leadership in Washington, D.C., is sickening. If you look at what Republicans did-promised to do in 1994, when they took control of Congress, and see how they've been acting over the past three or four years, the biggest debt and deficit ever. They are irresponsible and reckless on so many levels. I'm embarrassed right now to be a Republican. It's a disgrace because of the lack of leadership."

Wait a minute, Joe... I thought that was supposed to be us Democrats...

Another MSNBC host, Hardball host Chris "Tweety" Matthews, however, is standing side-by-side with the Republicans, just so long as they're willing to pay him to do it.

But that's all beside the point, which is that the Democrats do have an agenda. And no, they do not currently have a slogan for their 2008 convention. That's because they're busy trying to actually help their constituents by attempting to do their jobs to the best of their abilities. (Although this is somewhat hampered by the Republican majority in both the House and the Senate, who seem intent on making sure nothing the Dems try will get through, just to show 'em who's boss - with the exception of the Dubai Ports Worls deal; credit where it's due, and kudos to those Repubs who stood by and supported the Dems.)

I guess that explains why Dubya's numbers are back down to 37%.

That about wraps it up for now, except for one little item for my own entertainment:

Van Halen guitarist Edward Van Halen came out of his cave (the guy's more elusive than Dick Cheney!) to attend an Oscar Night after-party hosted by Sir Elton John. Paparazzi managed to get a few shots of him, including this not-so-good one:

What is up with that facial expression?

Anyway, BDillon, one of the members over at EddieVanHalen.com, is sponsoring a contest for members, ending tonight, to Photoshop the picture any way we want to. I've done quite a few - you can enter multiple images - and thought I'd post a few of my favorites here. Enjoy.

And this last one:

Have a great weekend!

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

A Whole Buncha Stuff

2006-03-09T22:14:00.000-05:00

Okay, so I've been a tiny bit lax in my posting this past week. (My brother probably thinks I've been deported or something - I'm okay, Vern!)

Anyway, because it's been so long, I've got a ton of stuff to post. Hopefully, I'll be able to keep the chit-chat light so you can get the idea... Let's go to the phones!

In no particular order...

The big news from today is that Dubai Ports World has given up its quest to take over several U.S. ports, after ongoing complaints from Congress. President Bush was relieved, not having to break his streak of "Longest Time in Office Without Having to Use His Magic Veto Pen". However, news has come to light that DP World are probably not worried due to their $50 million contract to maintain U.S. naval vessels in the Middle East. DP World has said they're going to divest to a U.S. company. Guess who it is?

Disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff is singin' like a bird! In a new article in Vanity Fair magazine, Abramoff mentions quite a few people by name - particularly George W. Bush, Karl Rove, Tom DeLay and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Funny that none of these guys can remember ever meeting him. That's okay, though. Abramoff's got a whole bunch of pictures.

Speaking of DeLay, Tuesday night was Democratic and Republican primary night in Texas. DeLay, who is currently under indictment for money laundering, managed to still gain the Repub nod in District 22. Clearly, the "moral majority" doesn't have a problem with electing an alleged felon calling the shots for them. On the downside, Ciro Rodriguez, whose campaign got a late, but much needed shot in the arm fron the netroots (amounting to close to $300,000 raised on various left wing blogs and other sites) was unable to beat incumbent Henry Cuellar in District 28, to receive the Dem nomination. It's a sad thing because Cuellar is about as much a Democrat as I am a Republican.

If you're a fan and customer to internet porn sites owned by a company that is serviced (no pun intended) by iBill, an internet credit card billing company, you may be one of the 170,000 whose personal information has been sold to some spammer who is going tot ry to rip you off. It turns out someone stole all of those records, and is selling them on the black market to the highest bidders.

Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), who in January swore he would stop taking meetings with lobbyists is, in fact, meeting with many of the same lobbyists, at the same time, on the same day as he did before. Another lie. What a surprise.

A woman in San Diego named Linda Laroca was fired because she had an a bumper sticker on her car advertising Air America Radio on a local station. (KLSD 1360.) While meeting with her boss, Beverly Fath on a Saturday afternoon, Laroca met with her at a grocery store to give her some documents she needed. When Fath spotted the sticker, she called it "that Al Franken left wing radical radio station," according to the lawsuit Laroca has filed. Fath also added, "The country is on a high state of alert. For all I know, you could be al-Qaida."

See if you can figure out this commercial. Am I the only one who thinks that Vernon Robinson is a bit of a dickweed?

Discount department store giant, Wal-Mart, has decided to hit the net in an attempt to bring a little shine to its tarnished image. They're only hitting up right wing blogs, because they are the ones who have no problems with Wal-Mart's treatment of its employees.

Donald Rumsfeld continued to deny that there's anything wrong going on in Iraq. In fact, he believes everything is hunky-dory. The only problem is, the people who are actually there aren't quite so optimistic. In a recent poll, 72& of the soldiers stationed in Iraq said that the U.S. should get out of there within the next year.

I absolutely love The Colbert Report, Stephen Colbert's "spinoff" from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. The guy is a genius. (Or his writers are. It doesn't matter.) In particular, I really enjoy "The Word" - a piece he does pretty much every day, where he explains a phrase one way, while the graphics people tell the truth. Here's a recent (and incredibly funny) example.

Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS), the chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, is helping the White House out by completely failing in his job and not investigating the voluminous intelligence issues he should be looking into.

South Dakota has passed legislation that bans abortions in that state, except in cases where the mother's life may be in danger. Not a word about incest. State senator Bill Napoli did address what he considered a viable candidate who might have been raped: "A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life." Rather graphic, don't you think? And a bit on the excessive side, too.

The president signed a renewal of the Patriot Act again. However, he had to accept a few measures that were put in it to keep him under control. (If that's at all possible.) The new Act allows people who receive a subpoena under FISA for medical, library and other records, to fight it in court. It also puts strict new guidelines into effect for the sale of over-the-counter cold and alergy medicines in order to cut production of methamphetamines. How this affects national security is beyond me, but I'm just a guy with a blog.

And finally, Kurt Vonnegut, author of Slaughterhouse Five, God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater, and my personal favorite, Breakfast of Champions, gave a speech at Ohio State University a few days ago, speaking to a group of about 2,000 students about a number of things, including his thoughts on Bush ("I just want to say that George W. Bush is the syphilis president”), the Democratic party ("We have no Democratic Party...[s]o we have no representatives in Washington. Working people have no leverage whatsoever"), and his philosophy ("We are here on Earth to fart around"). Read the whole article and understand why it is that I love this man's work.

Anyway, that wraps it up for now. Tune in next time, when we'll show you how to create your own uranium enrichment program with just a few old metal tubes.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)

Bush, the Humanitarian Who Cares... (Yeah. Sure.)

2006-03-04T16:14:00.000-05:00

SusanG over at Daily Kos has a fascinating article comparing Dubya's actions against his own words. F'rinstance:

People appreciate somebody who sets a tone, a tone that values life.
-- George W. Bush, June 5, 2000

Fact: Estimated 100,000+ Iraqi civilian deaths.

Fact: 2,506 coalition military deaths as of 3/3/06

Because a society is measured by how it treats the weak and vulnerable, we must strive to build a culture of life.
-- George W. Bush, Feb. 2, 2005

Fact: 16,742 American military wounded as of 3/3/06.

Fact: Even though the cost of providing medical care to veterans has been growing by leaps and bounds, White House budget documents assume a cutback in 2008 and further cuts thereafter.

----

I believe the most solemn duty of the American president is to protect the American people.
--George W. Bush, March 31, 2005

Fact: 1300+ dead in Katrina

Fact: 1,900+ still missing from Katrina as of 2/22/06.

Fact: Hurricane Katrina exposed the U.S. government's failure to learn the lessons of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, as leaders from President Bush down disregarded ample warnings of the threat to New Orleans and did not execute emergency plans or share information that would have saved lives, according to a blistering report by House investigators.

Still not buying it? Try this one on for size:

In our time, respect for the right to life calls us to defend the sick and the dying, persons with disabilities and birth defects, and all who are weak and vulnerable.
George W. Bush, January 23, 2006

Fact: Estimated 55,000 deaths and 160,000 heart attacks due to Vioxx, a pain reliever for those suffering from arthritis.

Fact: Dr. David J. Graham of the FDA's Office of Drug Safety told Senate investigators he faced resistance to his findings within the FDA and that instead of acting as a public watchdog, the Food and Drug Administration was busy challenging its own expert and calling his work scientific rumor.

Fact: Graham's testimony at the hearing became front-page news after he identified the FDA's handling of Vioxx as the worst public health disaster in its history, resulting in a probable 30,000-55,000 deaths. No official could credibly challenge his Vioxx findings, and he identified five other suspect drugs: Accutane, Bextra, Crestor, Meridia, and Serevent.
A week after the hearing, sympathetic insider colleagues and press contacts warned Graham that the FDA was finalizing plans to exile him from drug safety work within days.

Read the rest of the article. Although it is ostensibly an argument concerning his stance on abortion, it brings together several instances where George W. Bush - a so-called "pro-lifer" - has indirectly caused, or at the very least sopported efforts that caused, the loss of numerous lives.

"Pro-lifer," indeed.

All the best,
Derek
(DCF)