pure bs WORLD EXCLUSIVE!

U.S Tob Job Outsourced!

By WARREN TERRAH

Published: February 28, 2004

WASHINGTON, DC -- BANGALORE, INDIA -- Feb. 28 -- In a unexpected move, the job of President of the United States has been outsourced to the Bangalore region of India. That the Presidential tasks and title were being considered for outsourcing has been a closely guarded secret according to White House officials speaking on condition of anonymity.

One official said, "It's been in the works for some time now. We felt the time was right as we needed to move the Chief Executive position to an individual with something of a command of the English language."

Asked if President's Bush's polling numbers were in part reason for the change, another Senior staffer told us, "Polling numbers? No. Not at all. His polling numbers weren't that bad. It was the fact that, we felt, and still feel, that a person requires a certain level of knowledge to run the world's largest economy, along with the world's most powerful military. We weren't getting the leadership needed to do the job. There was a consensus that something needed to be done, and with outsourcing being all the rage, we get better leadership at less cost. It's a win-win for all of us."

While Vice President Richard Cheney couldn't be reached for comment, sources tell us that he is "cautiously optimistic" about the move, and once he emerges from his undisclosed location, will address the American people concerning the change in Chief Executives.

We reached newly installed U.S. President Rahul Dravid in the new Oval Office East and asked him what does it feel like being the most powerful man on the planet. Sounding somewhat taken aback he replied, "I'm sorry to hear that Mr. Cheney has passed. A great man. He'll be missed and mourned by all."

When we explained that we were talking about President Dravid himself, he quipped, "Oh, of course. I am sorry for Mr. Bush, but happy for the American people. They have been put through a lot over the past three plus years, and a change is precisely the correct medicine for what ails the American psyche."

He went on to ask, "Are you sure Mr. Cheney is well?" We assured him Mr. Cheney is unharmed.

Mr. Bush, already back in Crawford, Texas following the change was upbeat, saying "Yeah. Murrcan's need the best person for the best price."

When asked what he would do with his time now that his job has been moved overseas, he said, "Y'know, if you've been followin' me the past coupla years, I like clearin' brush and stuff. I been talkin' it over with Laura(Mrs. Bush), an' she thinks I should maybe start a, y'know, brush clearin' business."

John Kerry, campaigning in New Delhi New York, was quoted as saying, "The first order of my administration is going to be the re-establishment of the highest office in the land to America. With your help, we can bring the job of President of the United States back to Washington, DC."

In researching this article, we found that President Dravid, in his first official act, signed into law a bill(HR2007) that deprives any government official whose job gets outsourced to any and all future government benefits, including pensions and health care. The new law is retroactive, effectively leaving Mr. Bush without any safety net. He will be given Social Security when he reaches the age of eligibility.

Sources tell us that President Dravid is busy assembling his re-election team. His term is due to elapse in November of this year, as his Presidency is under the same terms as Mr. Bush's. President Dravid has already energized the GOP bloc of unrepentant corporatists, and is wooing American Christians with an initiative designed to reform future oursourcing.

The President's plan is to use church attendance and tithing records in an effort to keep good Christian jobs here in the U.S.

We asked Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia if this would be allowable under the Constitution's separation clause. Justice Scalia told us, "There is no such clause in the Constitution. America was, and will always be, a Christian nation. I'm glad that President Dravid has taken his God given talent, and brought us a common sense approach to governance." He added, "Why Vishnu is just another name for Jesus."

Democrats in both the House and Senate are reportedly furious over President Dravid's proposal, but said that they will wait and until they have seen the President's initiative before leaping to conclusions.

I'll admit it. I didn't see this one coming. Competition is one thing, but I can't see how the GOP doesn't see this as a HUGE national security issue. Aren't the Dems supposed to be 'soft on defense?'

I'm sure you'll here a lot more about this story. This has to be THE political story of the year. I'm still shaking my head. What the heck was Congress thinking? Or not thinking.

TEN LINKS SPECIAL EDITION!

IRAQ INFO LINKS!

I get a lot of news regarding Iraqi violence, and the horrific loss of life at lunaville.org. Since Centcom stopped listing the 'casualties' on their front page, I've found lunaville to not only be very current, but an invaluable source of news form Iraq.

Comw.org's War Report is a good place to go data mining..but they are usually behind the curve by a few days. Sometimes this can a VERY good thing.

Democracy Now! with hosts Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez is a must if you have the time to listen. I usually catch the show a couple of times per week. I was listening daily, but my job got in the way. (curses) It's as current as the 'net without reading.

It's not a web source, but some of the very best information to be found anywhere regarding Iraq is of course FRONTLINE. Terry Gross on NPR's Fresh Air sometimes has Iraq pieces. And of course NOW with Bill Moyers is always a good bet.

I think the best online news from the Middle-East comes from IslamOnline. Lots of great current stuff, wonderful archives. A real gem.

Okay, I've given up all my pet Iraq sources. Onward.

*******************************************

SCIENCE!

Spirit is getting it done on the red planet. Looks like the water mystery may be cleared up any time now.Here's the NASA rovers homepage. Big image of Humphrey. :)

In case you don't believe natural virii are potent enough, we'll make you a custom virus using recombinant DNA techniques.

*******************************************

ECOLOGY!

I didn't lump this in with science for a reason. These are issues that are very political as well. Plus, I've never linked to these things, and I am going to give you two reading assignments per day...there is math, but it's fun. Trust me.

First an 'eco-primer' of sorts. Bill Moyers Reports: Earth on Edge series. It's not all that much reading.

Then much more depth at the World Resources Institute. It's good to know stuff.

I'll be adding two ecology links in when I 'do the ten,' from here on.

*******************************************

There is a lot to read. Be sure to check out Islam Online. If you're concerned about the Mid-East, and who isn't, you should give it a bookmark.

I'm done blathering on for one night. What I lacked in content, I certainly didn't make up for in quality. :)

Peace!

What a truly odd day. At all of the usual progessive sites, there are articles discussing things I have covered in the recent past. Arianna Huffington, Mark Morford, and RFK Jr. all have pieces on Bush's lack of knowledge and or sensitivity on the environment, and how the Democratic nominee could slay the GOP on this issue. I have given a lot of time and effort to the environment. I don't think I can add anything at this juncture. The only caveat I'll issue the reader, is that none of these folks are scientists, much less climatologists that have chosen the effects of greehouse gases on climaic change, so check their facts.

The Doonesbury $10K Guard challenge I've been aware of for a few days, so I don't think that worthy of more than link.

It's been a rough day for new political stuff that I have enough of a working knowledge of to possibly add something useful to the dialogue. There are plenty of things that I have read, but don't have enough background concerning the topic to make a meaningful statement about. In fact, that's most of the news on most days. :)

Even Cursor, a usual sourse of good stuff is covering items I've already done. I will note that Commissioner Kean did indeed get his extension to the 9/11 commission. (I got that from Cursor)

Cursor also has news that the Senate is having a closed session to "scrutinize flaws in America's prewar intelligence about Iraqi weapons."

Of interest is Reuters piece wherein a U.N. representative says that the Iraq security has worsened. I do see this from a statistical standpoint, with the caveat that any statistics from Iraq must be viewed with skepticism..as all data must be.

I touched upon the security issue a couple of days ago here. My armchair conclusion was that Iraq has turned into precisely the kind of place that we, well heck, I'll quote myself:

Iraq is still a very dangerous place.

Unexploded cluster munitions have caused most of the post-conflict(?) casualties. A hospital director in Najaf said that families were playing with the munitions not knowing what they were. This continues to this day.

So, it looks like the U.S. worst fears are coming home to roost. We are not up to the task of even maintaining law and order, or basic services in post-war Iraq. We were told that we would stay in Iraq as long as it takes for democracy to take hold in Iraq. Iraq, as it is today, we were told, would not happen.

Let us hope that the people of Iraq, who deserve none of this, will forgive us for the carnage we have inflicted upon them. Let us hope that we have the patience, and the courage to follow through on our promises to the Iraqi people.

Thus far, our record has not been an enviable one.

If you think that was just a wee bit narcissistic, I assure you it's not. And the two dozen mirrors in my office agree :)

Unlike lots of bloggers, I don't play expert in anything but a tiny area in the field of semiconductor technology. Where I think I am qualified to be something of an authority.

Anything I write should be fact checked. I try and fact check everyting that I post as fact. If I am speculating, I try and alert the reader.

I think I'll go round up ten links of interest for this evening. At least that will lend the appearance that I'm actively blogging tonight.

General Election stuff already?

Rush Lies, and he knows it.

Conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, whose program is syndicated by Clear Channel, misled listeners on Thursday by suggesting it was the government, not Clear Channel, that was attempting to "censor" Howard Stern.

Clearly, it was Clear Channel. Salon has the poop. It's a pretty good read on how to get action out of behemoth Clear Channel. Threats appear to be effective.

While we're tangentially discussing the FCC, I should disclose that I think Chairman Powell is really bad for democracy. The FCC under Powell has moved toward more media consolidation, and that's only a good thing if you're one of the few giants standing when the dust settles.

There was one other thing I wanted to get in tonight but it slips my feeble mind.

Snow Job.

Snow Defends Mankiw's Outsourcing Gaffe

(Mankiw is Gregory Mankiw, chairman of the CEA, who said last week that outsourcing of U.S. jobs while painful is a 'temporary dislocation.' He neglected to define 'temporary.')

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Treasury Secretary John Snow on Tuesday defended U.S. corporations' right to send U.S. jobs offshore to cheaper-labor countries, and said a more productive source for jobs might be found by breaking down global trade barriers.

Snow was asked on CNBC television whether he would advise U.S. corporations to reduce the rate at which they are "outsourcing" U.S. jobs by having them performed in countries like China and India.

"I think American companies need to do what they need to do to be competitive, and as they're competitive, it's good for their shareholders, it's good for their consumers and it's good for their employees," Snow said.

Good for their employees? It should be noted that Secretary Snow was CEO of CSX a railroad company. Just the kind of leading edge guy you need running the world's largest economy. Forbes rates him as an 'also-ran' as a CEO. I think that frames his comments rather nicely. Moving right along.

He added: "Enterprises that don't succeed don't create many jobs."

As Bob Somerby would say: Try to believe he said it. Hard to argue with Snow's statement there. Why does my head ache?

Snow was interviewed from New York, where he visited Wall Street investment houses and made multiple television appearances repeating that the economy was growing and that as it does so, "lots of jobs are going to be created."

Far be it for me to disagree with Secretary Snow, but the economy has to grow at a greater rate than it currently is to create lots of jobs. Why this very week, it has been reported that durable goods orders are down, January new home sales slipped, and people filing for unemployment are on the rise. A mixed picture at best.

He declined to specify how many jobs might be created, though, and how many of the roughly 2.8 million factory jobs lost since the Bush administration took office might be regained this year.

"I'd like it to be the biggest possible number," Snow said, maintaining his distance from a forecast in the Economic Report to the President earlier this month that 2.6 million jobs could be created this year, comparing this year's average employment with last year's average.

No argument there. I'd like to see big numbers too!

Link to incredible statements

You just can't make this stuff up. No one would believe you.

With people such as this operating the levers of power, it's hard to be optimistic. I really hope these quotes are out of context. If they aren't, I think regime change is a must. And what's with his eyebrows? He oughta get those things trimmed. Somebody'll get an eye put out from those things.

Well, mate. Everybody does it.

Bliar.

I fail to see what the furor over the U.K. Spying on the Secretary General of the U.N.. I mean it's not a well kept secret that the U.S. does it as matter of course.

To the best of my knowledge no one in the U.S, denied the spying allegations. Probably because the laughter would have set off area auto alarms.

Blair should freely admit that yes, we spy on members of the U.N.

I get the feeling that everybody spies on everybody at the U.N.

Haha. Just as I was looking for confirmation of my above statement I find this.

"Everybody spies on everybody"(at the UN) -- Spain's UN Ambassador Inocencio Arias

Even Spain spies? I guess my instincts are pretty darn good.

Gibson's film The Passion of the Christ seems second only to Gay marriage in blogdom today. Blogosphere just doesn't accurately describe the blogging phenomenon to me. Now that I've mentioned Mel's controversial film, I can move on. Heh. What a useless entry.

Hastert next to go? One can dream.

In another 'where there's smoke story,' House Speaker Dennis Hastert(R-Stonewaller) says he'll prevent the 9/11 commission an extension.

The Globe has the poop:

WASHINGTON -- House Speaker Dennis Hastert has hardened his opposition to extending the deadline for the independent commission studying the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, even as the panel's leaders pleaded yesterday for more time to complete their work.

Hastert, an Illinois Republican, told Republican lawmakers in a meeting yesterday that he would not bring up any legislation to grant the commission extra time, said spokesman John Feehery. Hastert rejected a personal plea from White House chief of staff Andrew Card on the extension Monday, Feehery said.

"He still doesn't feel the commission needs any extra time and should complete its report as soon as possible," Feehery said, adding that a later deadline also would make the commission "a political issue" during the presidential campaign.

Hastert's stance casts serious doubt on the commission's efforts to secure a 60-day extension of its May 27 deadline, which the panel contends it needs to produce a complete report and avoid cutting back on public hearings. Legislation granting the panel extra time is moving ahead in the Senate, where majority leader Bill Frist of Tennessee has indicated his support. After opposing the idea, President Bush reversed himself earlier this month and agreed to support an extension.

The Globe has more

If I was conspiracy 'theorist,' I'd say that this was a pre-arranged deal to make Bush appear as if he was cooperating with the commission, while Hastert plays the heavy(no pun intended).

If you take the couple of minutes to read the article, you'll note that Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell have testified, or have agreed to testify before the commission. Rice has declined to testify in public. Odd that.

Kean claims to have the votes in the House to get an extension, and is entirely accurate in saying that America deserves the very best possible report.

If this extension is not granted, our government in not accountable to the people, and those involved should resign.

It now seems clear that that the GOP is concerned only about November, and in their quest to retain the levers of power, will not have an issue denying the survivors of 9/11 the truth that they so richly deserve.

Goodbye, Mr. Perle.

Rumsfeld advisor who vocally endorsed Saddam's ouster resigns

By Jonathan S. Landay, John Walcott and Joseph L. Galloway

Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - Richard Perle, one of the most outspoken advocates for invading Iraq, has quietly resigned from the Defense Policy Board, an influential bipartisan Pentagon advisory group.

Perle informed Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld that he was quitting the board in a letter dated Feb. 18, although a week later a Pentagon list of board members still included him. A copy of the letter was obtained by Knight Ridder.

Perle's resignation comes as President Bush, who had hoped to ride popular support for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to a second term, finds his administration facing a growing number of congressional, legal and internal investigations into dubious prewar intelligence on Iraq and lucrative contracts for Iraqi reconstruction.

In his letter, Perle said he was resigning after 17 years on the board so that the Bush administration and the Department of Defense would no longer be associated with his outspoken views on Iraq and other matters.

"We are now approaching a long presidential election campaign, in the course of which issues on which I have strong views will be widely discussed and debated," Perle wrote. "I would not wish those views to be attributed to you or the president at any time, and especially not during a presidential campaign."

Perle didn't return a telephone call seeking comment on his resignation, and a Pentagon spokesman would confirm only that he had resigned.

In recent weeks, Perle has called for the resignation of CIA Director George Tenet, criticized Secretary of State Colin Powell and other current and former senior U.S. officials as "soft-liners" and urged the Bush administration to consider pulling out of the United Nations if the agency doesn't legalize pre-emptive attacks on states that harbor terrorists.

Perle also is a prominent supporter and close friend of Ahmad Chalabi, a member of the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council who's the subject of a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation into exaggerated and fabricated intelligence about Iraqi weapons programs and ties to Osama bin Laden.

In the run-up to the invasion, Perle advocated installing Chalabi as Iraq's interim leader, and he told Knight Ridder in a July 2003 interview that CIA and State Department opposition to this plan led to the insurgency against the U.S.-led occupation.

Much more at link

If you just can't get enough of whacky Dick, you can read his utterly sincere letter of resignation here.

Goodbye, Mr. Perle

Meanwhile, in Iraq...

Al-Sistani is calling for direct elections by years end. Actually, al-Sistani's election schedule doesn't differ that much from the that which I detailed in this screed of a week ago. In fact, it now seems likely that the U.S. is going to abide by the U.N. recommendations as long as the 30 June 2004 date is left intact for transfer to an interim power(most likely an enlarged version of the IGC)

Just so you don't become complacent regarding Iraq, here is the day's violence update:

• a bomb exploded Thursday near a police car in Baquoba, killing one policeman, injuring four others and damaging four police vehicles.



• A homemade bomb Thursday damaged an oil and gas line running between Beiji and Baghdad, a member of the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps told The Associated Press.



• On Wednesday, a U.S. Army OH-58 Kiowa helicopter crashed into the Euphrates River, killing its two pilots. Sanchez, the U.S. commander, said the helicopter clipped a power line and was not brought down by hostile fire. The pilots' deaths brought to 547 the number of American service members who have died since the Iraq war began on March 20. Most of the deaths have occurred since President Bush declared an end to active combat May 1.

Iraq is still a very dangerous place.

Unexploded cluster munitions have caused most of the post-conflict(?) casualties. A hospital director in Najaf said that families were playing with the munitions not knowing what they were. This continues to this day.

So, it looks like the U.S. worst fears are coming home to roost. We are not up to the task of even maintaining law and order, or basic services in post-war Iraq. We were told that we would stay in Iraq as long as it takes for democracy to take hold in Iraq. Iraq, as it is today, we were told, would not happen.

Let us hope that the people of Iraq, who deserve none of this, will forgive us for the carnage we have inflicted upon them. Let us hope that we have the patience, and the courage to follow through on our promises to the Iraqi people.

Thus far, our record has not been an enviable one.

Dean is Back.

Howard Dean that is. I think it's great that the Dean organization is alive.

Here are the bits you need to know:

The former Vermont governor said the Democratic Party should "not paper over its differences with the most radical administration in our lifetime," according to remarks prepared for delivery Thursday to supporters in New Haven, Conn.

"In order to win, the Democratic Party must aggressively expose the ways in which George W. Bush's policies benefit the privileged and the most extreme ideologues," said Dean, who plans to start a political organization that will promote grass-roots democracy and support candidates who favor progressive policies such as universal health care.

Dean plans to announce details about the organization March 18.

Dean also urged his supporters to stay with the Democratic Party and warned them not to be tempted by independent or third-party candidates, a reference to Ralph Nader's independent run for president.

"I will do everything I can to ensure that the 2004 Democratic nominee runs as a true progressive, as a champion of working Americans and their hopes for a better future," Dean said. "Because -- I will say it again -- that is the way to win in 2004."

More at link

So, it looks like the good doctor is forming some sort of anti-Bush organization. I must agree with his assessment that Bush's presidency has been the most radical in our lifetime. It'll be interesting to see what Dean is cooking up.

If this was truly a functional democracy, Bush -- if he had been elected -- would be out of office by now. There is just way too much smoke for there not to be a fire somewhere. From pre 9/11 intelligence to the Plame Wilson affair, this is a White house shrouded in secrecy. Soft-pedaling and stonewalling at every conceivable opportunity is beneath what is owed the American people.

On Iraq alone, one can see mis-steps, obfuscations, cherry-picked intelligence, and a total lack of concern for the 'liberated' Iraqis. Bush may even believe much of what he says, and he is entitled to his own opinions. He is not however, entitled to his own facts.

I wish Howard well.

Intentional Obfuscation?

Poll Shows Americans Confused by Medicare Changes

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - American seniors are keenly interested in the new Medicare bill signed into law last December, but more than two-thirds are confused about it, according to a survey released on Thursday.
The survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows just 15 percent of people over 65, who will be most affected by the new prescription drug law, understand it very well. And the younger general public understands it even less well.

The new bill added prescription drug coverage to Medicare, the government's health care plan for older Americans, and boosted the roles of private health maintenance organizations and the drug industry.

Nearly 70 percent of those polled did not understand that it was a bill passed in Congress and signed into law by President Bush, the nonprofit research group said.

"The lack of understanding of the prescription drug law makes it ripe for political demagoguery on both sides as we enter the election season," Kaiser President Drew Altman said in a statement.

"The president will say he delivered a good prescription drug law and the Democratic candidate will say it's a bad law. How are seniors to judge?"

Both sides have launched advertising campaigns about the law, with many Democrats complaining the federal government's ads amount to political campaign. They have asked the General Accounting Office, the investigational arm of Congress, to check.

Princeton Survey Research Associates International called 1,201 adults for the survey, including 237 over 64.

They found that 49 percent of all adults and 64 percent of seniors said they had followed the Medicare prescription drug debate "very closely" or "somewhat closely."

More at link

If you got to the Kaiser Family Foundation, what should strike you is that just 15% say they understand the new prescription drug law very well. To me this is a red flag.

Like all polls, answering yes to a question, and actually having a working knowledge of the issue being polled are two very different things.

I remind you of the polls taken pre, during and post Iraq War II, that showed that more than two thirds of Americans believed that, "Hussein was personally responsible for the fall of the Trade Towers."

This demonstrates an obvious disconnect between reality and perception. I believe that the same effect is occurring with seniors' degree of understanding of Medicare Reform. Of course I may be wrong, but time and again, the more you deeply you delve into a person's understanding of most anything, you'll find that they hold demonstrably false beliefs.

I always try and cut out the politics of an issue, and get to the core truth. I'm not always successful in this pursuit, as things are often nuanced beyond my ability to explain them cogently, or error free.

Since this issue is of such paramount importance to ALL Americans, I found a table of benefits that is strictly factual. This table lists the various timelines and benefit options in as clear a format as I've yet found.

Although I am truly certain of few things, it seems a good bet that both sides of aisle will selectively extract data to support their positions, and that of their party.

The GOP is going most certainly hail the passage of the bill into law as a boon to seniors, and the Dems will paint the law as a giveaway to HMOs and big Pharma, while not going far enough to protect seniors. There is of course
some truth to all of this.

As this is likely to remain an issue well into the future, it serves us all well to learn as much as we can the new structures, and separate the rhetoric from fact. No law is perfect. Doing the small amount of legwork to truly have a working knowledge of the facts of the issue are your best defense against demagoguery.

Read. Learn. Know stuff. That's the bs motto. Never allow anyone to steal your power through obfuscation of the facts.

PNAC is up to their usual bs. Calling on others to go and die and kill others. All in an attempt to resurrect a broken ideology. I'm petitioning that all of the PNAC signatories pre-pay in full for any "Excellent Adventures" that they call for. For the PNACer's war is most desirable. They don't have to fight in them -- most(all?) of them have NO battlefield experience -- and many of them stand to profit handsomely through their connections in the defense industry.

You'd think that after their thoroughly discredited Iraqi performance, that this 'group of intellectuals' would learn that regime change(RC) is a job best left to the people that already occupy the country. With any luck, we'll be having an RC of our own in a very few months.

Read and shake your head in horror.

As Gary North points out:

The neo-cons are finished. They said the Iraq war would be a cakewalk. It wasn't. They said we had to establish a presence in the Middle East. We couldn't. The Republican Party, once Bush leaves office, will not listen to them again. They will publish their subsidized magazines and pretend that the public is listening, but the public has had enough. The neo-cons are visibly losers. They got their shot at power, and they squandered it in the streets of Baghdad. Straussians do not need to read between the lines in order to discern this traditional message: "Americans do not listen to losers."

Pretty much sums up my sentiments.

Sure. Bush is going into Tehran. In an election year? With Congressional approval? After -- or rather -- while we're still engaged in Iraq?

You have to wonder what the color of the sky is in the PNACer's world.

BREAKING: ACTIVIST JUDGES UPDATE!

Ban on funding religious study upheld

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday a state scholarship plan that barred theology students from participating is not unconstitutional.

The justices by a 7-2 vote rejected a Washington state student's claim that he was being treated unfairly because of his major.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice William Rehnquist said, "Given the historic and substantial state interest at issue, we therefore cannot conclude that the denial of funding for vocational religious instruction alone is constitutionally suspect."

[Here's a bit of Tony "Dick's huntin' buddy" Scalia's dissenting opinion. Ed.]

"Let there be no doubt: This case is about discrimination against a religious minority."

Hey, I though atheists were the in the minority..Somebody should let Antonin know that ~82% of American's identify themselves as Christian.

Link to breaking SCOTUS news

I feel really good knowing that guys like Antonin Scalia are on the highest court in the country. What an obtuse thing to say. Heh.

*******************************************

Let's have a quick check of judicial activism in last hundred or so years in America.

This is just to illustrate a point. These are all U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

The following were decried at the time, as 'judicial activism.' Of course many still are today.

Scott v. Sandford (1856)
Upholding the institution of slavery

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Jim Crow laws -- Separate but equal

Buchanan v. Warley (1917)
Establishing equal access to housing

Shelley v. Kraemer (1948)
Equal access to housing

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Equal access to education ? separate but equal does not work

Brown v. Board of Education (1955)
Brown v. Board of Education upheld for all states

Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964)
Equal access to accommodation

Katzenbach v. McClung (1964)
Service in a public establishment must not discriminate

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Right to Remain Silent

Roe v. Wade (1973)
Women's reproductive rights

Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke (1978)
Affirmative Action in education

United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO-CLC v. Weber (1979)
Affirmative Action in hiring

Bob Jones Univ. v. United States (1983)
US government support prohibited from universities that discriminate

Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena (1995)
Federal contracting for minority and Women-owned small businesses

Romer v. Evans (1996)
Gays and lesbians can not be denied full protection

Bush v. Gore (2000)
Court remands presidential election decision to State of Florida

You'll have no problem picking out which side the conservatives and liberals fell on these issues. They were all denounced and derided as being the work of 'activist judges.'

I think we can thankful for those 'activist judges.'

Although the above are all SCOTUS decisions, I'll let ninth circuit Judge Alfred "no God" Goodwin have the last words. I should note that Judge Goodwin was appointed by Richard M. Nixon..hardly a liberal.

Judge Goodwin:

"I'm a little disappointed in our chief executive -- who nobody ever accused of being a deep thinker -- for popping off."

"The more you know about something, the more difficult it gets sometimes."

"I've been a judge for 47 years and I've been called everything, so it doesn't bother me. It comes with the territory."

"If the court makes a decision someone likes, it's applauded as 'judicial statesmanship.' If not, it's called 'judicial activism.' "

Indeed. For a Nixon appointee, Goodwin has no problem reading the Constitution, and Articles of Amendment.

News on the North Korean front has been pretty sparse as of late. Do you wanna know why? You should. It's a lot more important than a certain has-been celebrity's exposed naughty bit :)

Two excellent articles here and here.

Hint: The reason is not because the Bush Administration doesn't care about the nuclear happenings in Pyongyang.

Go. Read. Learn Stuff.

Greenspan. He's right, but sometimes you just can't tell the truth.

Greenspan urges SS cuts No, not the Waffen SS, Social Security.

Here's a bit of Mr. Greenspan with some context:

In his testimony before the Budget Committee, Greenspan said the current deficit situation, with projected record red ink of $521 billion this year, will worsen dramatically once the 77 million members of the baby boom generation start becoming eligible for Social Security benefits in just four years.

He said projections show the country will go from having just over three workers supporting each retiree to 2.25 workers for every retiree by 2025.

"This dramatic demographic change is certain to place enormous demands on our nation's resources - demands we will almost surely be unable to meet unless action is taken," Greenspan said. "For a variety of reasons, that action is better taken as soon as possible."

He said taking action now would mean that people still working would have time to adjust their retirement savings plans to deal with smaller Social Security benefits.

Greenspan said at some point the country needed to face the fact that the government has promised more in entitlement benefits than it can afford to pay. He said the problem was even worse for Medicare because it was impossible to estimate what types of costly medical advances will be available in coming years.

He did not mention that Congress late last year, at Bush's urging, adopted a new prescription drug benefit as part of a Medicare overhaul now estimated to cost $540 billion over the next decade.

"I am just basically saying that we are overcommitted at this stage," Greenspan said in response to committee questions. "It is important that we tell people who are about to retire what it is they will have." He warned that the government should not "promise more than we are able to deliver."

While the country is currently enjoying the lowest interest rates in more than four decades, Greenspan warned that financial markets will begin pushing long-term rates higher if investors do not see progress in dealing with the projected huge deficits that will occur once baby boomers begin retiring.

As he has in the past, Greenspan called on Congress to reinstitute rules that require any future tax cuts or spending increases to be paid for either by spending cuts in other areas or increases in other taxes. Bush has called for the rules to cover only spending increases, not tax cuts.

I have argued this position many times. My solution in part is take away from the DoD..I mean how does one spend $1.1 billion a day? Certainly you could shrink that by two thirds. That frees up ~ $245 billion/year. Now, I'm sure someone will call me weak on defense. Fine. You then have to show me what threat exists in the world today that requires doling out that kinda loot to the DoD. China is certain to be a huge defense player very soon. But it is also in China's best interests to keep Americans happy and consuming.

There are tens of billions of dollars in discretionary spending' that should be reined in before seniors have to eat the excesses of Bush's lower tax, higher spending fiscal policy. Here's a bit from the WaPo article:

Confounding President Bush's pledges to rein in government growth, federal discretionary spending expanded by 12.5 percent in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, capping a two-year bulge that saw the government grow by more than 27 percent, according to preliminary spending figures from congressional budget panels.

The sudden rise in spending subject to Congress's annual discretion stands in marked contrast to the 1990s, when such discretionary spending rose an average of 2.4 percent a year. Not since 1980 and 1981 has federal spending risen at a similar clip. Before those two years, spending increases of this magnitude occurred at the height of the Vietnam War, 1966 to 1968.

The preliminary spending figures for 2003 also raise questions about the government's long-term fiscal health. Bush administration officials have said fiscal restraint and "pro-growth" tax cuts should put the government on a path to a balanced budget. Bush has demanded that spending that is subject to Congress's annual discretion be capped at 4 percent.

But the Republican-led Congress has not obliged. The federal government spent nearly $826 billion in fiscal 2003, an increase of $91.5 billion over 2002, said G. William Hoagland, a senior budget and economic aide to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Serial Reline Killer). Military spending shot up nearly 17 percent, to $407.3 billion, but nonmilitary discretionary spending also far outpaced Bush's limit, rising 8.7 percent, to $418.6 billion.

I am totally against deficit spending. These Republicans are far worse at managing the nation's money, than the Clinton White House. A 17% increase in the DoD's budget..in one year? Come on. Let's show some responsibility. I don't think that Joe Six-Pack knows where his dollars are going.

If Bush was forthright, and said that we need to increase spendng on X, and we're funding it via Y, people could grasp that. But Bush has spent X, and there is no plan to pay for it.

I thought Clinton was marginal as a agent to handle the fiscal affairs of state. I still believe so. But Clinton actually had a veto pen. There is no such evidence that Bush has been given such an implement.

I'm still hopeful that W will find that darn thing, and slice some of the fat of his pork laden budgets.

Jobs, jobs, jobs!

The populist message of keeping jobs in America sounds really good, but it is likely to prove nearly impossible to implement. I just don't see workable solutions to the myriad of issues as to why the U.S. is bleeding jobs.

Job retraining seems a likely help for some workers, but if that one factory in town has moved overseas, where are you going to use your new skills?

Protectionism seems to be playing well to all audiences. It should be kept in mind that both GATT and NAFTA were passed under the Clinton administration. Although their primary drivers were GOP initiatives. (very inverse Nedra Pickler)

Kerry voted for GATT, NAFTA, and Permanent Normal Trade Relations(PNTR) for China. Obviously this should present a problem for Kerry.

Kerry has proven himself a much more savvy campaigner than I thought he was capable of. Instead of allowing the GOP to attack his voting record -- remember, all of these were GOP initiatives -- he has, at least for now defused the issue. How? I'll tell you how :)

Kerry has apparently proposed a 120-day review of all trade pacts. He laid out specific guidelines for companies wanting to send jobs overseas, including at least three months' advance notice for affected employees as well as notification of the Labor Department, state agencies and local government officials.

In addition, he would require the federal government to compile statistics on off-shored jobs and report to Congress annually on how many positions were going where and why. He also would ensure that federal contracts did not go to foreigners.

I'm sure that the GOP will use this to leverage the issue that the Dems are going to derail our vaunted economic recovery. What I'm not so sure about, is how well the GOP's likely message will play on Main Street.

If the economy is still treading water regarding job creation come November, the election may turn on this single issue.

I don't see any real movement to keep jobs here. It sounds terrific, but there is too much talent outside the U.S. at less cost to sway corporate bean counters.(no offense to any CPAs)

New GYWO out. Ya know..Get Your War On!

The first three frames of the bottom toon had me chuckling.

Tenet's Swan Song?

In testimony today before the Senate Armed Services Committee he contradicted his boss....Mr. Bush.

Eliminating Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida network will not end the danger to Americans from a growing Islamic extremist movement, CIA Director George Tenet warned Tuesday.

Tenet told the Senate Intelligence Committee that new groups inspired by bin Laden, his followers and their methods "have become the next wave of the terrorist threat. Dozens of such groups exist."

"We must overcome a movement, a global movement infected by al-Qaida's radical agenda" of attacking the United States with weapons capable of causing mass casualties, he said.

Tenet seems far less sanguine than Bush about our successes in 'defeating terrah.'

Even if bin Laden and his network are eradicated, other Islamic extremist groups will continue attacking targets overseas and in the United States for years to come, Tenet warned.

Al-Qaida has "infected others with its ideology, which depicts the United States as Islam's greatest foe," he said. "The steady growth of Osama bin Laden's anti-U.S. sentiment through the wider Sunni extremist movement and the broad dissemination of al-Qaida's destructive expertise ensure that a serious threat will remain for the foreseeable future - with or without al-Qaida in the picture."

Those inspired by bin Laden include the al Zarqawi network, active in Iraq; Ansar al Islam, an Iraqi Kurdish organization; and groups in Libya, Uzbekistan, Morocco, Indonesia, the Philippines, Kenya, Somalia and other Asian and African countries.

"These far-flung groups increasingly set the agenda and are redefining the threat we face," he said. "They are not creatures of bin Laden, and so their fate is not tied to his. They have autonomous leadership. They picked their own targets. They plan their own attacks."

The threat, Tenet said, goes beyond these groups to individual "jihadists," or holy warriors, who see the presence of 120,000 U.S. troops in Iraq as a "golden opportunity."

Jacoby warned that a failure of U.S. policy in Iraq could turn the country into "a training ground for the next generation of terrorists."

He said he was concerned about trends in the Muslim world that bode badly for the United States and Arab governments that are close to Washington.

Poverty, corruption, joblessness among large numbers of young people and poor education are combining with opposition to U.S. policies to threaten the stability of pro-U.S. regimes and create "a terrorist threat to the United States for years to come," he said.

"Favorable ratings (for the United States) in Morocco declined from 77 percent in 2000 to 27 percent in spring of last year, and in Jordan from 25 percent in 2002 to only 1 percent in May 2003," Jacoby said in a statement submitted to the committee.

Much more at link

I am wondering if this is Tenet's way of saving face in light of the harsh treatment given the CIA from the Bushistas. It would be a nice way to go out. What did Truman say about truth?

"I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell." -- HST

If there's one thing that this administration has issues with, it is the truth. Everything else flows from that fountain.

I wasn't in favor in any sense of spending the money to build an anti-missile defense shield..it's a stupid use of money from many standpoints. If I was a nuclear power, I'd just get some submarines close enough to the coasts and launch nuclear armed cruise missiles. Unstoppable.

Moving right along, if you think that a multi-billion dollar 'umbrella' is a good idea, read The protection paradox over at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Always great stuff over there.

It's real geek stuff, so it won't be for everyone. But it illuminates what the U.S. has done in the past to overcome Soviet missile defenses. Brand new stuff as far as I know.

I was just reading the notes from today's Consumer Confidence Index.

People really are getting the message about job growth. At its best, it has been tepid during this recovery, and at its worst, well, we lost jobs. This is hardly a revelation as employers usually don't hire in expectation of a recovery, but only after the fact that the trend is clear. So this is a backward looking indicator.

I think what spooked Wall Street was that people surveyed have a less favorable outlook for the future than at any time since last October. Wall Street, of course fears that Main Street will rein in personal spending.

There is some evidence to support this, as new housing starts dipped 8% in January, and major appliance sales are sharply down, while car sales fared better.

Essntially people are growing more concerned about the direction in which the economy is heading.

The trend is your friend, and the last two months may not be the start of a new downturn, but it bears watching closely.

I saw this linked to a specious news source earlier, hence I neither posted the quote nor commented on it. Now that K-R has picked up the story I feel somewhat better about the source.

Ahmed Chalabi is a piece of work. Read the whole article to see how you're still being fleeced by Mssrs. Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Chalabi, and the INC. Of particular note is this quote by Chalabi:

(since I don't want to be accused of taking a quote out of context, I've left in far too many preceding lines)

Posted on Sun, Feb. 22, 2004

Officials: U.S. still paying millions to group that provided false Iraqi intelligence

WASHINGTON - The Department of Defense is continuing to pay millions of dollars for information from the former Iraqi opposition group that produced some of the exaggerated and fabricated intelligence President Bush used to argue his case for war.

The Pentagon has set aside between $3 million and $4 million this year for the Information Collection Program of the Iraqi National Congress, or INC, led by Ahmed Chalabi, said two senior U.S. officials and a U.S. defense official.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because intelligence programs are classified.

The decision not to shut off funding for the INC's information gathering effort could become another liability for Bush as the presidential campaign heats up and, furthermore suggests that some within the administration are intent on securing a key role for Chalabi in Iraq's political future.

Chalabi, who built close ties to officials in Vice President Cheney's office and among top Pentagon officials, is on the Iraqi Governing Council, a body of 25 Iraqis installed by the United States to help administer the country following the ouster of Saddam Hussein last April.

The former businessman, who lobbied for years for a U.S.-backed military effort to topple Saddam, is publicly committed to making peace with Israel and providing bases in the heart of the oil-rich Middle East for use by U.S. forces fighting the war on terrorism.

Some of the INC's information alleged that Saddam was rebuilding his nuclear weapons program, which was destroyed by U.N. inspectors after the 1991 Gulf War, and was stockpiling banned chemical and biological weapons, according to the letter.

The letter, a copy of which was obtained by Knight Ridder, said the information went directly to "U.S. government recipients" who included William Luti, a senior official in Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld's office, and John Hannah, a top national security aide to Cheney.

The letter appeared to contradict denials made last year by top Pentagon officials that they were receiving intelligence on Iraq that bypassed established channels and vetting procedures.

The State Department and the CIA, which soured on Chalabi in the 1990s, viewed the INC's information as highly unreliable because it was coming from a source with a strong self-interest in convincing the United States to topple Saddam.

The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has concluded since the invasion that defectors turned over by the INC provided little worthwhile information, and that at least one of them, the source of an allegation that Saddam had mobile biological warfare laboratories, was a fabricator. A defense official said the INC did provide some valuable material on Saddam's military and security apparatus.

Even so, dubious INC-supplied information found its way into the Bush administration's arguments for war, which included charges that Saddam was concealing illicit arms stockpiles and was supporting al-Qaida.

No illicit weapons have yet been found, and senior U.S. officials say there is no compelling evidence that Saddam cooperated with al-Qaida to attack Americans.

The Information Collection Program is now overseen by the DIA, the Pentagon's main intelligence arm, which took over when the State Department decided to give it up in late 2002.

The defense official defended the current support of the INC effort, saying that it has been of some help to the CIA-led Iraq Survey Group, a team that is trying to determine what happened to Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.

INC-supplied informants also have identified insurgents who have been waging a guerrilla war that has claimed the lives of more than 500 U.S. troops and hundreds of Iraqis, he said.

"To call all of it (INC intelligence) useless is too negative," said the defense official, who described the Information Collection Program as a "massive" undertaking.

"You never take anything at face value," he continued. "When the INC gives information, we absolutely pursue it. You never know what that golden nugget is going to be."

But a senior administration official questioned whether the United States should still be funding the program.

"A huge amount of what was collected hasn't panned out," he said. "Some of it has turned out to have been either wrong or fabricated."

The senior administration official also sought to justify the initial decision to support the program.

Prior to the invasion, U.S. intelligence agencies had no better human sources in Iraq, and had no choice but to rely on the INC, minority Kurdish guerrilla groups and other sources who claimed to have knowledge of Saddam's illegal arms programs, ties to terrorist groups and his military forces, he said.

"The evidence now suggests that at some points along the way, we may have been duped by people who wanted to encourage military action for their own reasons," he conceded.

Chalabi apparently is less concerned about the past

"We are heroes in error," Chalabi was quoted as saying recently in Baghdad by The Daily Telegraph of London. "As far as we're concerned we've been entirely successful. That tyrant Saddam is gone and the Americans are in Baghdad. What was said before is not important. The Bush administration is looking for a scapegoat. We're ready to fall on our swords if he wants."

In a related development, U.S. officials said that on top of the Pentagon funds, Chalabi's organization asked the State Department in August for $5 million in unspent financing that was approved by Congress before the war.

There is much more at link. The fix is still in regarding Chalabi's role in a purportedly 'independent' IGC. As noted when I dissected the election time-table, certain Council members are more concerned with keeping their positions within the IGC, than doing what is in Iraq's best interests.

Of course, Chalabi remains 'our guy' in the IGC. Chalabi was convicted in Jordan -- in absentia -- on 31 charges of embezzlement, theft, misuse of depositor funds etc. etc.

It has been widely reported that Chalabi is hated by common Iraqis.

So where does that put the U.S.? We got rid of a tyrant in Iraq, and generally made a huge mess while doing so, and now we are going to do our damnedest to install a convicted felon that has lied to us repeatedly to get what he wanted. Will we ever learn? My head hurts.

So, Bush is out front with this asinine Marriage Definition Amendment Thingy

To me this undercuts the Constitution in the most fundamental of ways. I'm neither for nor against gay marriage. I am however, for providing every citizen that lives within our borders equal rights under the law. Marriage is a legal institution, not a religious one.

If you wish to argue otherwise, see any history of marriage. It wasn't until the 16th century that Cristianity got involved in the marriage process. Besides, atheists get marrried. :)

The Constitution was written so that majority rule would not override rule of law. This proposed amendment is likely to pass, but that does make it right nor fair. This is all about fairness and equality. In Bush's world, some are more fair and equal than others. The Constitution has been interpreted clearly to protect those that have no other advocacy.

This is pure campaign posturing, with Bush is preaching to the choir, because he has no record to run on.

Today we'll rail against gays marrying. Whose turn will it be tomorrow?

Jeezus..America under Bush. How very sad.

This can't be allowed to happen again.

Alright! Kerry branded "Liberal"

Since that suck-ass Chi-Town Trib has such an onerous registration process...

No, I won't post ALL of the article :)

'Liberal' tag resurrected to pin on John Kerry

By Jill Zuckman
Tribune national correspondent

February 24, 2004

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Outside the Plumbers and Pipe Fitters union hall, a scraggly band of young Republicans stood in the cold, waving their "Hanoi John" and "Bush-Cheney" signs at Sen. John Kerry's motorcade.

As Kerry closes in on the Democratic nomination for president, the Bush campaign has begun to try to portray him as a Massachusetts liberal, a hypocrite who switches positions for political expedience and a disloyal war protester from the hippie era.

"John Kerry is out of sync with most Americans, whether it's raising taxes or providing for a strong national defense," said Terry Holt, a senior official with the Bush campaign. "He's voted against every significant weapons system at work in Iraq and in the war on global terror. . . . Yes, he's liberal, but maybe more disturbing is that he's a phony."

It is an approach that worked famously before in the 1988 campaign of Bush's father against former Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis. Kerry has vowed that the strategy will not work again.

In a culture often given to ready caricature, however, resisting that label might be more difficult than Kerry thinks, especially because the Bush campaign will have more than $150 million in its coffer before the national political conventions this summer.

Kerry says he refuses to be branded, and he insists that his record is too complex to be susceptible to simplistic tags like `Massachusetts liberal.'

"I laugh at that," Kerry said in Oklahoma City recently. "The American people deserve something more than labels. What they want is leadership, and they're going to look me in the eye, all Americans are, and they'll make a judgment about my character and they will look at my record."

Combing Kerry's record

Indeed, officials within the Bush campaign and the Republican National Committee are looking closely at Kerry's record, even though he has not yet clinched the Democratic presidential nomination. They plan to back up their assertions using the lawmaker's votes--a total of 6,320--over the past 19 years in the Senate. They say his actions in the Senate will show him to be cozy with lobbyists and special interest groups, soft on defense and inconsistent when it comes to intelligence funding, gay marriage and the Iraq war.

"John Kerry has one of the longest legislative records in the United States Senate and it's significantly to the left of where the American public is," said Tom Rath, the Republican national committeeman from New Hampshire. "It's really not playing dirty when you simply remind people of somebody's voting record."

On Monday, Kerry said in New York that he does consider attacks on his voting record an assault on his patriotism. The senator noted he voted for the largest defense spending increase in history, and Republicans want to portray him as weak and "that's the game they play."

Stephanie Cutter, a spokeswoman for Kerry, said that legislative record includes his votes for welfare reform, defense spending and deficit control. His vocal support for the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings plan to balance the budget with automatic spending cuts if certain spending targets were not reached was a controversial one for a New England Democrat who was new to the Senate in 1985.

"He is not definable in the way Republicans want to define him," Cutter said.

Kerry's campaign is creating a rapid response team to contend with GOP attacks, and officials say the Republican broadsides are only half the story.

"We're ready to tell the truth about George Bush's failed policy," said Cutter. "He says he's strong on defense, but America is not stronger today than it was 3 1/2 years ago. He's not strong on the economy. Each step of the way, he says he's going to create 2 million jobs, and he's not been able to produce it."

Already, the Bush campaign has begun targeting Kerry as he stumps for votes. The day before Democratic front-runner traveled to the Ohio cities of Dayton and Columbus last week, Rep. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), a key player in the Bush-Cheney orbit, held a conference call with reporters to defend the president's economic policies.

Kerry campaign officials quickly fought back by producing two Ohio mayors to talk of devastating job losses and plant closings in their cities during Bush's tenure.

Bush campaign officials say everything is fair game, including Kerry's years as a young anti-war protester.

"We honor John Kerry's service in Vietnam," Holt said. "But it's his record since Vietnam that we would question. Obviously, as a protester, he said some fairly controversial things."

Providing ammunition

One of those things was a 1970 Harvard Crimson interview in which Kerry said U.S. troops should only be deployed at the direction of the United Nations.

"I think the issue is he has advocated a weaker national defense over a long public career," said Ralph Reed, chairman of the Bush-Cheney campaign for the Southeast region.

More at link

I really don't think the Bushistas want to revisit the '70s. I'm sure that there are some people that have fond memories of a younger Bush engaged in some good ol' fun.

I'd like to be called a 'liberal.' It's liberals that founded this country. Damned consrvatives were the Tories. Plus, As previously not my colleagues think of me as a neo-Bakunin. So a move to the right would be required to earn me the label liberal. :)

You can really smell the fear in the air from the Bush camp. What an aroma ;)

Bush's campaign mantra, in its entirety.

"Steady leadership requires making principled decisions based on what is important to the American people -- not advocating policies that would derail our economic recovery and weaken our ability to win the war on terror."

Of course pure bs readers know that the President is unprincipled in regard to fiscal policy, and fighting unneccessary wars. This whole war on terror bit is a red herring. GWB doesn't actually do anything to fight wars..he fights them by proxy. Rich guys usually do.

Consumer confidence is in the toilet.

No, I am not saying that consumers are bullish on Elgin :)

The Conference Board's consumer confidence index plunged to 87.3 in February from a revised 96.4 in January. It's the lowest level since October. Economists expected the Conference Board reading to fall to 92.9 in February from 96.8 January.

Looking forward, the Board's Expectations index sank to 96.8 from 107.8.

"The numbers are not good for the market or the economy in general as they show confidence is waning, especially if you look at the expectations figure," said Peter Cardillo, chief market analyst and strategist at S.W Bach.

The $64,000.00 question is: Will consumers keep spending? The real estate market in many areas is in bubble mode. This doesn't bode well for a sitting president. Time will tell.

FIVE LINKS IS BACK!

Surprise! Halliburton Fuel Overcharge Goes Criminal.
Ya gotta love Cheney's buds. Geez, the way these guys are being investigated for something new every other day, Dick must still be in charge :)

The next time world reknowned climatologist Rush Limbaugh goes on an anti-environment tirade use this global security nightmare item and be sure to read the links at the bottom of the piece.

The strange nuclear family of the rattlesnake. It's really not a nuclear family, but that makes better copy.

Time to check in on Spirit and Opportunity.

I meant to add this to an earlier edition of the TEN™, but I have mentioned it in the past. Studies show lack of Women in Scince and Engineering. I can count on the fingers of one hand how many female MSEEs graduated with my class. None. Sad that.

The Gropenator sure can turn a phrase

"I expect to get a lot of it, simply because I'm very persuasive. I am like a tick that hangs on itcq[sic] and will not let go until I get what I want."

That's Ahnuld in Washington today groping for dollars.

A tick. how quaint. :)

I've waited all day to find some sort of confirmation that our policy hacks are taking the Pentagon's climate issue seriously. Of course, it's the Foreign press that leads the way. The BBC:

Most US policymakers do accept that climate change is a significant threat, a leading British scientist believes. Professor John Schellnhuber, of the University of East Anglia, said he thought about 80% of senior politicians recognised the danger "in principle".

He said he thought this consensus would eventually lead to a change in policy by President Bush's administration.

Professor Schellnhuber was among a UK scientific delegation which held talks on climate recently in Washington DC.[snip]

Professor Schellnhuber said: "We spoke to the Congressional scientific committee, and my feeling is that in principle 80% of the people in Washington who are really informed feel dramatic climate change is a major threat.

Scary quotes below!

"The administration is a prisoner of its own determination not to do anything that would affect the lifestyle of US citizens.

"Perhaps, in a parallel with its stance on Iraq, it has chosen a certain position and will now not alter it for fear of losing face.

"I don't think the US public and policymakers will be happy to go on with a business-as-usual approach for the next five years.

"I'm a scientist, not a politician. But I think the political elite understands pretty well what is going on, and the administration will eventually change."

Go. Read. Be informed!

This should be THE DEFINING ISSUE of all time, and for all time. I have commented, or written 28 articles on environmental change since I started writing regularly in this blog in Dec. 2003. Everything else is temporal. The Dems would slaughter Bush on this issue. I certainly hope that our politicos remove their heads from their posteriors and start funding things that really matter. I do my bit.

Hold your elected officials accountable. For your children's sake. And their children's sake ad infinitum.

Bush on Defensive Already

He can't run on the issues, because he'll lose.

He can't run on his character, because he'll lose.

So what does he do? He takes his case to Republican governors. I like this line:

"He will take on his critics and their backward-looking, failed ideas that would derail our economic recovery and weaken our ability to fight and win the war on terror," said Mr Bush's campaign manager, Ken Mehlman. "The President is going to talk about the choice."

So, Bush is going to talk honestly about his economic plan..deficits as far as can be forecast? Record trade deficits? And he's going to hail our little Iraqi excursion that promises to cost a half-a-trillion-dollars as his accomplishments?

Lovely. The GOP's biggest fear must be a knowledgeable electorate.

22 20 2004 poll.

It comes as no surprise that Bush's credibility is becoming more incredulous on an almost daily basis. This analysis by Andrew Kohut, and Mike McCurry merely points to what everyone knows; you lose a person's trust, and it's difficult to win back.

Here's a bit of the poop:

Some White House aides dismissed that poll as an aberration because it was taken after a run of bad news for the president. But they grew concerned when a second poll, released Thursday by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, also showed Bush's image slipping.

According to Pew Director Andrew Kohut, that image is "at the low point of his presidency."

The most dramatic evidence of a shift came from poll participants' answers when asked to provide a one-word description of Bush. In a survey in May, positive descriptions outnumbered negative ones by a ratio of almost 2-to-1, Kohut said. In Thursday's poll, the numbers of positive and negative responses were even.

Perhaps most troubling to a president who prides himself on being forthright, the most frequently used negative word to describe Bush was "liar" – a word that never showed up in the May survey, Kohut said.

This all comes at a critical moment for the president's re-election strategy. With Kerry the heavy favorite to win the Democratic nomination, the Bush campaign team is poised to launch a multimillion-dollar ad blitz designed to portray the Massachusetts senator as a hypocrite who says one thing but does another.

Looking back on the tactics used in Bush's previous run for the White House, that has almost always been the first move against an opponent showing any strength. When Arizona Sen. John McCain won the New Hampshire primary in 2000, Bush adopted the catchphrase, "John McCain says one thing and does another." Later, in the general campaign, then-Vice President Al Gore got the same treatment.

This time, however, the public's growing unease over Bush's trustworthiness makes the use of such a tactic more complicated.

Lots more at link.

Some pundits have claimed that Kerry is peaking now. I think it more likely that Bush's credilbility is under siege. Finally.

This is the first time I've seen polled Americans use the word "liar" to describe Bush. Yes, it does make me sport a grin..albeit a small one.

I guess Nader's entry into the race is the dominant topic today. My colleagues, both conservative and liberal...they think I'm a neo-Bakunin, are scratching their heads over Nader's decision.

While Nader rightly rails against corporatism, he breaks his own pledge by not getting 4% of the vote in 2000 and now running in 2004.

The man is a hypocrite. Bush has little on Nader. I'm going to remind him of his pledge.

NO! Stop. Yeah, the colors are different, but it's the same ol' bs you're used to. I'm trying to make the site as readable as possible. I think that the left hand column and main section are a bit cleaner, and I'll mess with the rh column later. If you've a comment, please leave it in this post. Thanks!

↓ Comments Here! ↓

Gary North over at Lew Rockwell.com has a good piece up speculating about the "Coming Implosion of the American Empire."

I think he's a bit of a tin-hatter regarding Israel, but his thoughts regarding the U.S./Iraq situation are worth a read.

Salon has bunch of good things up today, but they seem to be having connectivity issues. I can connect with my 3mpbs line, but not with dial-up. :(

Of particular note is WAR ROOM '04

I hope you can read some of their content today..the is horribly slow. They've even got a piece up about the joys of calling tech-support.

Bob Somerby's Daily Howler is a gem of a website. His entries from 02 09 2004 through today's are especially inspired.

Ahnuld for president?

If the U.S. knows of Osama bin Laden's whereabouts, it's too early to nab him. I think the likehood of an actual capture are pretty much nil. They may get the body, but I would bet that's even unlikely. Reuter's is reporting that if we, or the Pakistanis knew of his whereabouts we'd go and get him, so says Lieutenant-Colonel Bryan Hilferty.

This is sort of like Andrew Card's infamous statement to the NYT: "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August.''

Nailing bin Laden now would give Bush a boost in the polls, but as has been shown, these boosts tend to be fleeting.

It makes much more sense to wait until one of the pots on the White House's stove goes aboil, or the election is near to announce the capture of bin Laden.

Oops. Chip giant Intel faces $600 million IRS liability, plus interest for years 1999 and 2000. More color:

Intel said the IRS proposed certain adjustments related to Intel's tax benefits on export sales following the examination, which occurred in August. The IRS has yet to issue a formal assessment on the matter.

Intel said it disagrees with the IRS and will use appeal procedures, if it can.

Also, Intel said the IRS could reach similar decisions in future audits that would concern business results after 2000. Intel said the IRS started last month an examination into tax returns for 2001 and 2002.

If Intel loses its battle with the IRS, the impact to the periods in question would be material, the company said, but that its overall financial position, cash flows or business trends would not be impacted.

This is likely just more financial shenanigans. Sort of a hangover from the wild late '90s, when lots of corporate America was playing fast and loose with the books.

A couple of quick things:

The ever-fruitful Editor & Publisher Notes that Reuters/Prentice Hall has a new book out: Under Fire: Untold Stories from the Front Line of the Iraq War which likely paints a much fuller picture of the Iraq war redux and subsequent occupation than is generally available. Should be a good read as it is allegedly a collection of stories that haven't made it into the consciousness of the American mainstreet.

Definitely one to watch. I'll reserve it at my local library.

Ralph Nader. If the election is as close as it's likely to be from this vantage point..early as it is..Nader needs to swallow his ego and back the Democratic nominee. The Dem's nominee ought to offer Nader a job, and get him to drop out. I have other more sinister options for Mr. Nader, but I'll keep them to myself. :)

That's all for the moment. Duty calls.