Holy Wardrobe Malfunction!

The LA Times, amongst others is reporting on a study conducted by Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that confirms that sex sells. At least on TV.

The Times decided to run with racy headline: Television Awash in Sex, Study Says
The report says 70% of shows include sexual content. The number has risen over the years.(the use if the word 'risen' here is purely coincidental, I'm sure ;))

Let's jump right to the last few paragraphs of the piece where that protector of the Traditional American Family™ Tony Perkins of the reactionary Family Research Council reigns supreme. Here's Tony's take:

Still, Tony Perkins, president of the Washington-based Family Research Council, said the Kaiser study underscored the belief among many parents that television was having a coarsening effect on their kids.

"It's not the same today as when I was growing up and parents left their kids in front of the TV to watch 'Captain Kangaroo,' " Perkins said. "The sex depicted on television does have an effect on kids. If we are what we eat, then we become what we watch."

An odd, but expected obsevation. I know that after being raised on Warner Brothers cartoons, I have a penchant for violence - in particular for throwing coyotes into canyon basins.

There are literally a dozen or so great things for the quote miner to cherry-pick from the article. Go. Read. Learn. Laugh.

Hey, when you've got government officials lying through their teeth, a war going on, erosions of civil liberties, and a global environmental disaster taking place synchronously, it's time to change the subject to what really ails society(heavy sarcasm)

Captain Kangaroo scarred me for life. 'The Cap'n. taught tolerance and respect for others. All others. For this I shall never forgive the late Bob Keeshan - and don't even get me started on Fred Rogers ;)

GOP in Bush League?

Reuters is reporting that the GOP defeats in the really off year elections held yesterday are a referendum of Bush's governance. Bush went to Virginia in an effort to shore up support for Jerry Kilgore. That Kilgore lost the governor's race in a solidly Red State may mean trouble ahead for the GOP.

Of some interest - maybe purely academic: Virginia had a Democratic governor, who is now replaced by a Democratic governor. But this fact is being lost in the ever-present search for spin.

Here's a bit from Reuters:

The loss in Virginia was a personal setback for Bush, who put his declining political capital on the line with an election-eve visit on behalf of Republican former attorney general Jerry Kilgore -- only to see him soundly defeated by Democratic Lt. Gov. Tim Kaine.

With Bush's popularity at the lowest level of his presidency, the results helped giddy Democrats claim momentum one year before elections to decide control of both chambers of the U.S. Congress and 36 governorships.

"Yesterday the election was a shot across the bow to George Bush," said New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, head of the Democratic Senate campaign committee, who called the results "a clear repudiation of Bush" and the Republican agenda.

Republicans cautioned against reading too much into the results, saying the elections produced no signs of widespread anti-incumbent sentiment. Redistricting initiatives that could have hurt incumbents in Ohio and California went down to defeat and no governors' offices changed parties.

The article has more 'fire and brimstone' declarations about the GOP's prospect in the mid-term elections, but let's not forget that much can change in a year.

The GOP loyalists are still saying that Bush can pull his second term out of the fire...But quite frankly, without Bush literally becoming a different person, I don't see this happening. The only press that the White House is getting can only be seen as negative by anyone remotely impartial. Without some sort of uber-dramatic sea-change in policy, and/or a dramatic event on the world stage, things look pretty bleak for Bush. But in the end, Bush will still be Bush - and that has to be a drag ;)

Now that doesn't mean that incumbent congressmen(congresspersons?) and senators will be swept aside in a Democratic tsunami in 2006, but it's most likely causing a lot of hand-wringing even at this early date.

CIA? CTA? What's the 'Diff?'

Okay, the 'CTA' Bit is from a page 31 article in today's Wapo(I'd call it an Op-Ed, but that may be splitting hairs) It's good.

First, a bit of background. I'll just grab some pieces from a non-controversial source, USA Today. *snicker*

In the first piece, we have VP Richard B. Cheney sparring with the Senate over an addition to a defense spending bill The non-torture 'rider,' which Cheney was protesting against, passed the Senate 90-9.

In the second, we have Bush defending American interrogation policy, averring, "We do not torture."

Now we finally get to this post's raison d'être. Jeffrey H. Smith, former general counsel for the CIA writes:

Americans do not join the CIA to commit torture. Yet that could be the result if a proposal advanced by Vice President Cheney becomes law.

When the abuses by U.S. servicemen and intelligence officers at Abu Ghraib surfaced last year, there was understandable outrage in this country and abroad. Internal investigations and congressional hearings revealed several causes of the abuse. One of the most important was confusion in the military and intelligence agencies as to what rules governed interrogations. A root cause of the confusion was the belief at the highest levels of the administration that the Geneva Conventions, which had governed our conduct for 60 years, were outmoded and should not constrain our treatment of prisoners. Regrettably, the career lawyers in the armed forces and the State Department who have guided our compliance with the Geneva Conventions for decades were cut out of these discussions.


In response, Sen. John McCain, himself a victim of brutal torture by the North Vietnamese, introduced an amendment to the 2006 Defense Appropriations Act that would, in essence, require all agencies of the U.S. government to comply with the Geneva Conventions and international law, which prohibit torture. Over strong administration objection, McCain's amendment passed 90 to 9. It will soon be considered by a conference committee with the House, which has no similar provision in its version of the bill. Enter the vice president.

Cheney and Porter Goss, director of the CIA, have proposed a modification of the McCain amendment that would permit the president to exempt the CIA from its strictures. McCain wisely rejected that proposal. So should the conferees.

If the administration's proposal passed, what would be the consequences? Why should we adhere to the Geneva Conventions when our terrorist enemies do not?

The answers are simple. First, we have long championed the Geneva Conventions because we want our citizens treated humanely when they are captured. Second, morally it is the right thing to do. If this amendment passes, what weight will our complaints have when other governments use their intelligence services to torture Americans?

For much more, just follow this link to Smith's excellent piece, and WaPo's exhibition of the headline: Central Torture Agency?

'Fallujah - The Hidden Massacre'

Link to Video(hat tip to The Raw Story)

This is an adjunctive post to this one

Caution: Extremely graphic images of war.

"I Cannot Self-Terminate...

...but my political career may already have."

CIA Wants Probe Into Prison Leak

...But hey, these facilities don't exist. *shrugs*

Getting to the point, WaPo reports that the CIA gas asked the Justice Dept. to look into the leak of classified of information regarding the secret prisons, which of course, do not exist.

WASHINGTON -- At the CIA's request, the Justice Department is weighing whether to open a criminal investigation into the leak of possibly classified information on secret prisons to The Washington Post.

A story the newspaper published on Nov. 2 touched on a number of sensitive national security issues, including the existence of secret CIA detention centers for suspected terrorists in Eastern European democrcies.

A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the issue deals with classified information, said the CIA's general counsel made the referral to the Justice Department shortly after the story appeared last week.

The department will decide whether to initiate a criminal investigation. The leak investigation into the disclosure of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity came about through the same referral procedure and led to a five-count indictment against the vice president's now former chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby.

Post spokesman Eric Grant said Tuesday the newspaper had no comment.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sidestepped questions about possible secret prisons, saying the United States was in a "different kind of war" and had an obligation to defend itself.

"We, our allies, others who have experienced attacks, have to find a way to protect our people," said Rice, who would not confirm the existence of secret prisons.

Just what the hell is one to take away from Sec. Rice's comments?

At least it wasn't a flat-out denial. This White House is slowly learning that the facts - at least in some cases - eventually come out.

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

Dear Condi(get me rewrite) Rice,

The CIA has urged the DOJ to investigate the leaking of classified information regarding 'secret CIA detention facilities' to the press.

Would you care to make another statement, Ms. Rice?

Sincerely,

Thinking America

Evolution: In and Out

In what seems to be a clear referendum against the notion of 'intelligent design'(ID does not make the grade as anything but fanciful thinking) the Dover, PA US school board was de-selected by the 'reality based Pennsylvania community.' All eight members up for re-election were defeated.

Background to this story can be found here.

In the other evolution vs. fantasy debate, The Kansas Board of Dis-Information Education voted 6-4 in favor of teaching students 'doubts' about evolution. Obviously, the Kansas Board is blissfully unaware that any real scientist has doubts about their field(s) of study. That's what drives science. Sure, some scientists are dogmatic in thier beliefs..And this is troubling, but others are watchful and impress their colleagues by admitting that they are wrong.

Evolutionary mechanisms are very much in debate. What is rarely debated in the scientific community is that evolution is both a theory and also a fact.

Two giant leaps for American students. One towards real discovery and critical thinking, and the other a dimming of the light that science gives us to make the most reasoned and best informed ideas about the universe in which we all live.

This is How to Win

via Time

Democrat Timothy M. Kaine's quick and convincing victory in the Virginia Governor's race Tuesday night gave his party a huge morale edge and fund-raising boost heading into next year's midterm congressional elections, and perhaps a lesson for the next Presidential race of '08: Democrats can talk about religion too.

The first ad that Kaine bought in his quest for the statehouse in Richmond was on a Christian radio station in rural Virginia. His first television spot of the fall told about his experience with Catholic missionaries, when he took a one-year leave from Harvard Law School to service as principal of a vocational school teaching carpentry and welding to teenagers in Honduras. Red, white and blue "Catholics for Kaine" bumper stickers proliferated in the Old Dominion. David Eichenbaum, Kaine's media strategist, tells TIME that he sees a recipe for national Democrats in Kaine's victory in Virginia, a GOP stronghold that President Bush won by 8 points in 2000 and 9 points in 2004. "Talking about his faith gave people a comfort level that he wasn't a big, scary liberal," Eichenbaum said. "We're trying to show voters that God isn't a Republican." Kaine echoed that in his acceptance speech: "We proved that faith in God is a value for all, and that we can all share, regardless of our partisan label."

It was a discouraging night for the White House. The other marquee contest was for Governor of New Jersey, where Sen. Jon S. Corzine, a Democrat, drubbed Republican benefits-management executive Doug Forrester. Across the Hudson, Republican Michael Bloomberg was easily reelected Mayor of New York City in a blowout of Democrat Fernando Ferrer.

I suppose a win is a win. I've made no secret of the fact that I have no god belief; nor any supernatural beliefs whatever. Yes, I'm well aware that most of my fellow Americans hold some form of religious belief..By some accounts, as much as 90%.

If this is a template for winning at any level of government, I cannot support such a scheme.

While it is a rational way to woo the religious right, 'running on religion' is, at face value, irrational.

Open the bubbly, and celebrate today. But if you're truly part of the 'reality based community,' you'll see this victory as a win-at-any-cost approach to which I do not ascribe.

If this post seems harsh, that is not my intention for making this entry. I'm neither sorry, nor apologetic for my non-belief. It seems to me that playing the god card to election victory leaves you an obligation to your constituency to do the 'godly' thing during the proposal, enactment, and veto, of legislation. To me, this is not the way to move the country forward. In fact, I could make a strong case that this is the way to move it in the opposite direction.

But today, we celebrate :)

Monitoring 'Willy Pete'

The CS Monitor has a well balanced article about the possibility of the US military using white Phosphorus(Willy Pete), as well as a newer napalm formula(MK77) in the assault on Fallujah, Iraq during a raid in November 2004.

It's quite balanced, and allows you to weigh the available evidence, and decide for yourself if the allegations are plausible - if not likely. Lots of good links and reading.

A caveat: The link to uruknet.info found in the text: 'new napalm formula' contains highly graphic imagery. Images of war are never pleasant, and these are exceptionally graphic!

With that, I'm off to moonlight!

John Boy At The UN

PNAC poster-child and US Ambassador, John R. Bolton again today demonstated just what a swell guy he is. In not voting to lift the 43 year old trade embargo against Cuba, he stood with the rest of the world nearly alone as a believer that we're still fighting the Cold War.

Sure, I saw the Cold War rationale for the blockade. We'll keep Communism out of the Western hemisphere. Is that really a threat anymore?

Bolton's vote followed the new line that Cuba is a human rights issue, and in the ever-changing rationale for maintaining the Cuban embargo that almost sounds plausible.

Bolton: Human Rights Warrior

Nah.

Why less than a month ago, he blocked a UN "envoy from briefing the Security Council on possible human rights violations" stating that "the council had to act against atrocities and not just talk about them."

I'm convinced.

Aw, heck. I'll leave it to the women again.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MADRE, An International Women's Human Rights Organization

August 2, 2005-New York-MADRE, an international women's human rights organization, strongly condemns the appointment yesterday of John Bolton, an extremist who has made a career of undermining the United Nations, to the position of US Ambassador to the UN. The underhanded appointment, made while the Senate was in recess, was a fitting reflection of the impatience for public scrutiny or dissent that has characterized both the Bush presidency and Bolton's career. Bolton's appointment is another step to the extreme right, taken with no regard for public opinion in the US or the world.

As US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton poses an alarming threat to human rights around the world. He is contemptuous of international law and unapologetically supportive of the use of force-pre-emptive or otherwise-by the United States. The UN Charter defines the organization's most fundamental purpose as saving "succeeding generations from the scourge of war." But Bolton has argued for the US to have unrestricted "discretion in using force to advance its national interests," and has expressed support for using military force to overthrow the governments of North Korea, Syria, and Iran. He also opposes any limits on civilian access to weapons and has fought against restrictions on small-arms trade, landmines, biological weapons, child soldiers, and nuclear-weapons testing.

For non-governmental organizations like MADRE, Bolton's appointment will mean an escalated struggle to make the voices of community groups heard at the UN. Bolton has said, "we do not support the promotion of international advocacy activity by international or non-governmental organizations, particularly when those political or policy views advocated are not consistent with the views of all member states."

MADRE

The voting at the UN today to lift the trade embargo against Cuba was 182 to 4.

The four against votes were from the US, Israel, the Marshall Islands, and Palau(no joke) with Miconesia abstaining.

It was grand for Bush to install this Cold War throwback into the UN during a senatorial recess. Bolton is clearly the best person for the job.

Damned sad.

Please Note: I need to apologize for my recent rambling, incoherent entries. Things are a bit emotionally demanding here, and I know it's affecting not only my work, but also my blogging.

Just Plain Wrong

The Hill is reporting on an attack on an aide to Senator Chuck Grassley who chairs the Senate Finance Committee.

Emilia DiSanto, chief investigator for committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), arrived at her suburban Virginia home after work Wednesday about 6:30 p.m. As she was unloading belongings from her car, a 6-foot-1-inch white man dressed in black struck her repeatedly with an unidentified object believed to be a baseball bat.

After she screamed to her family inside the house, the assailant fled. DiSanto was transported to Inova Fair Oaks Hospital, where she was treated for significant upper-body injuries. Nine staples were needed to close her head wound.

DiSanto, who declined to comment, has reported back to work.

I wish Ms. DiSanto a quick and full recovery. Hopefully, the perpetrator will be found, and justice served.

There's a lot more weirdness, so read the full article. Grassley, and/or Di Santo may be being targeted for their work - they've been pretty aggressive at investigating some pretty powerful groups.(hat tip to the ever-resourceful Josh at TPM)

Nobody deserves this kind of treatment. Jeebus.

"There Ought To Be Limits To Freedom"

That oft-quoted bit of sage advice was GW Bush remarking on what he apparently saw as crimes against his - I dunno 'manliness?' - on a now defunct non-pro-Bush website FKA gwbush.com(the link still works, but is a redirect to gwbush.com's module at stickergiant.com)

Either Bush is truly prophetic, or it is through his administration's 'initiatives' that we US Americans are demonstrably less free than prior to his taking office.

Our 44th ranking in the annual "World Press Freedom Index" taken alone is a dumb figure, but since the US fell "more than 20 places" in this years index, the trend isn't one that can be sanely viewed as positive.

Then there is the FBI's massive expansion of the use of 'National Security Letters', as well as Enemy Non-Combatant Status..Ad infinitum...And I just pulled those links from this front page.

Sorry about that introduction. It was long and tiresome.

To the topic at hand..

Bloomberg is reporting on a textile importation limiting agreement between the US and China. It's no secret that I'm no fan of WTO policy, but the so-called 'free-traders' are only interested in free trade if they are reasonably assured to be able to leverage it into personal/corporate profits for themselves without too much political fallout. These are of course the very people that pushed for the establishment of the WTO and it's many adjunctive 'trade normalization' treaties and agreements.

The article merely points out what the US position regarding textile trade is with China, and some background as to how and why we arrived at the new agreement.

If you follow this sort of thing, there may be nothing new for you. But, if you need a primer on just how protectionist the US can be - while still espousing the overwhelming benefits of REALLY FREE TRADE™ - the article may pique your curiousity into a more in-depth study of the relevant topics.

Note: The off-site Little Lefty Resource Center will soon have a vast array of neo-liberal trade policy sources for future exploration.

Just Vote!

You on the map?

I live in a small town outside of the small town of Concord, NH. I vote at town meeting.

Yes, they still do exist.

If you've an option that you can exercise today, just do it. It won't hurt...Much ;)

Women Drivers: It's the Estrogen

Far from being a disparaging post about the fairer sex, this is a post positively fair ;)

The BBC is reporting on a study that may indicate that women are better drivers due to biology.

From across the pond:

The female hormone oestrogen could give women the edge when it comes to tasks such as safe driving, say researchers.
Tests showed attention span and ability to learn rules were far better among women than men.

The Bradford University scientists told a hormone conference in London how tasks requiring mental flexibility favour women over men.

A woman's oestrogen levels may prime the part of the brain involved in such skills - the frontal lobe - they said.

They asked 43 men and women aged 18-35 to perform a battery of neuropsychological tests that assessed skills such as spatial recognition memory, rule learning, attention, planning and motor control.

The women were far better at being able to shift their attention from one stimulus to another, making it easier for them to perform everyday actions like driving and reading.

This might explain why girls find it easier than boys to concentrate at school and why women are more careful drivers, the researchers hypothesise.

Of course there is more at link. It's worth a read, as other research is also cited - and lo, it indicates that men may be better at, "spatial skills such as map reading and parking may be difficult for some women because they had too little testosterone in the womb."

Hmmm. Too little testosterone = shitty map reading.

Okay, the obvious question that needs to be addressed is this: Has a man ever consulted a map - or any means of navigation - other than intuition?

That is one for the ages.

Gitmo Driver Drives Supremes

I know it's a good thing to have Osama's driver in the joint, but I am somehow left wanting.

I should note that I know little about law. I've had attorneys sue a few clients for money owed over the years, but that, and some real estate law are the only things with which I have any experience. I'm not going to play legal expert. Okay? Good.

I'll let the CS Monitor set the table.

WASHINGTON -- A year and a half ago, the US Supreme Court delivered a blunt message to the White House: War is not a blank check entitling the president to violate the constitutional liberties of American citizens.

The decision resulted in the release of Yasser Hamdi, a dual US and Saudi citizen, who had been held indefinitely in a military prison without charge or access to a lawyer.

On Monday, the nation's highest court set the stage for the next major constitutional showdown over President Bush's ongoing war on terror. The issue is whether the president has the authority to put AlQaidaa suspects on trial before military commissions at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

In agreeing to take up the appeal of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, the high court will examine government efforts to empanel a military-run war-crimes tribunal to weigh charges against Mr. Hamdan and three other terror suspects.

Such tribunals mark the first time in a half-century that the US government is relying on ad hoc military commissions to mete out justice rather than civil federal courts or the military justice system.

Of course, this White House appears to ignore 'blunt messages.' Be they in the form of a Supreme Court ruling, or a Presidential Daily Briefing stating that "bin Laden [is] Determined To Strike in US."

Vacationing is so much more fun than national security - unless your accomodations are at Camp X-Ray. But I digress.

A bit more:

The Hamdan case raises fundamental issues, including the scope of the president's power to detain and place on trial any foreign national deemed to be an enemy combatant. In urging the high court to take up the Hamdan case immediately, Hamdan's lawyer, Neal Katyal, drew upon a lesson from American history. He compared the Hamdan dispute to landmark Supreme Court case upholding the supremacy of civilian courts over an effort by President Abraham Lincoln to rely on military tribunals to quickly and efficiently prosecute suspected supporters of the Confederacy.

"At issue is whether the president can supersede established civilian and military judicial systems," Mr. Katyal says in his brief. "No graver question was ever considered by this court, nor one which more nearly concerns the rights of the whole people," he writes, quoting Ex Parte Milligan, an 1866 Supreme Court decision.

Of note to the curious, yet uninformed observer(that would be me):

1) Chief Justice John Roberts has recused himself from the case.

2) Allegedly, Hamdan was Osama's driver(motor vehicle, not camel - Osama only had one driver?) and is charged with being a member of al-Qaida.

Go ahead and read the article. It has lots of quotes from people with actual experience in matters of law. My concern is not only to point out that this White House cherry-picks what is or is not important - hence what to ignore - but to flag this case as one that seemingly has great implications for the governmental separation of powers. A fight which is being waged even as I type.

I also hope to not fall into the legal black-hole reserved for 'enemy non-combatants.'

Lefty Resource Center, Etc.

I'm about to make about another change to the template. I'm putting the "Little Lefty Resource Center" in the left hand column (see bottom left).

Update: I've also just completed a few other minor tweaks for the sake of readability.

Three other minor things.

I'm on a link swapping drive. My Google PR is 5...not bad considering I took over a year off from actively blogging. So, if you've got a site that you think might be a match..or something cool, leave a comment, or drop me an email. Don't make me beg, dammit!

Secondly, Al Franken's new book, The Truth (with jokes) is a great listen..I have the audiobook. I suspect that the print version is a good read. Lots of good stuff in the book to use as a cudgel against Right-Wing BS.

Lastly, well, there is nothing more to say 'cept, "Happy Monday all!"

If You Have Done Nothing Wrong...

..You have plenty to fear. WaPo exposes 'National Security Letter' abuses

No oversight? No sunset clause? If you're the FBI..No problem.

The PATRIOT Act has to be amongst the most onerous pieces of legislation ever to rammed down the throats of a frightened citizenry.

Read the article. Get active!

Intelligent Design Case Now In Judge's Hands

I have really struggled to steer clear of anything religious. I have no religous - or any other supernatural beliefs.

But when religion and science clash on something as profound as evolutionary theory, a stand must be taken.

The NYT has this little that article anyone with scientific training can dissect(no pun intended) in an instant.

Here's the bit:

The scientists who advocate intelligent design explained that the complexity of biological organisms and the "purposeful arrangement of parts" are evidence that there is a designer. They said their theory is not religious because they are not claiming the designer is God, since that is untestable.

Well, I spent 8 years at university learning - in part anyway - what a 'scientific theory' is...and it is above all, testable.

End.
Of.
Argument.

Another Day, Another Poll

This one via ABS News

Flashy title: "Poll: Issues Favor Dems in 2006 Elections"

Then we get to the issues, and there is some odd editorial mixed in with the results. First, the results:

Opportunity is there for the Democrats: Capitalizing on George W. Bush's troubles, the party has a 12-point advantage over the Republicans in trust to handle the nation's main problems, and it leads in nine of 10 individual issues, with some huge gains from three years ago. In the tenth -- Bush's trademark, handling terrorism -- the Democrats run even.

Sampling, data collection and tabulation for this poll were done by TNS.

Indeed, 55 percent of Americans in this ABC News/Washington Post poll say they'd like to see the Democrats take control of Congress in 2006. And if the election were today, registered voters would favor the Democrat in their congressional district by 52-37 percent.

That 15-point margin is numerically the biggest for the Democrats since an ABC/Post poll in September 1984 (they ultimately lost 14 seats), although about the same as a 14-point Democratic lead in one poll in 1996 (when they gained nine).

Okay, great. Then there is this crown jewel of journalistic insight: "The Democrats' advantage on issues extends to some surprising areas -- Iraq and the economy, for example -- and show striking gains from late 2002."

Excuse me? This comes as a surprise to whom exactly? A question that will go unanswered for now.

Onward! To the charts!

Which Party Do You Trust to Handle... 
Democrats Republicans 
Economy   56%   34% 
Social Security   56   29 
Education   55   32 
Health Care   54   29 
Taxes   48   38 
Iraq   48   37 
Federal Budget   48   34 
Gas Prices   47   26 
Terrorism   42   42 
Ethics   42   36 


So does their edge in attributes: They hold a 10-point lead, 50-40 percent, as the
 party that "better represents your personal values."

Party Attributes 
Democrats Republicans 
Is more open to ideas of political moderates   60%   24% 
Is more concerned with needs of people like you   56   33 
Better represents your values   50   40 
Has stronger leaders   35   51

As always, I left the tables as found. No fancy formatting.

Okay, so the GOP is viewed as having stronger leaders, whilst this stronger leadership has fallen flat on virtually every issue? I think I have the interpretation right.

[Short digression]

If you've recently filled out a survey at a major retailer, the survey typically starts off with a general question about your shopping experience. Then the survey progresses to the specifics of your shopping experience. Then - and this is the important bit - the survey brings you back to the general question about your shopping experience after having qualified you by asking you specifics about your experience.

The qualifying questioning may cause inconsistencies between a shopper's initial response and their latter one. This provides the surveyor with a more accurate picture of your shopping experience than asking a simple series of random questions.
[/Short digression]

I'm certain that I'm the only one that finds it ironic that: GOP leaders - Great! GOP policy - Asinine!

With polls, it's the trend that matters. That said, if the GOP can't pull out of their tailspin, it looks pretty good for 'the other party' in 2006.

NYT Intel Bombshell

I was going to title this post: "Damn, damn, damn, damn, damn!" As I purchesed the NYT this morning prior to logging on and checking the front page online..Anyway, the Douglas Jehl piece that E&P referenced here, and we(well me actually) reported here is available online. *sigh*

There goes my coffee allowance for a day ;)

Moving right along, here is the NYT piece. The article is essentially a verbatim review of the information that E&P released yesterday. There is more detail, but the bullet points outlined by E&P are the major, relevant ones.

It'll be interesting to see if this issue is brought up on any of the Sunday 'news shows.' The tie-in to the Democrat's call for a closed session of the Senate makes for the obvious segue.

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

Since I already 'spilled the beans' on the NYT's really big story, here's another from the Grey Lady concerning the White House's attempts to distance itself(themselves?) from the Plame outing case.

No spoiler here, just this bit near the end:

He[President Bush] will be away from Washington for much of the rest of the month. After returning from a trip to South America, Mr. Bush will leave for a week in Asia and then will spend Thanksgiving at his ranch in Texas.

When he returns, allies of the White House said, he hopes to regain traction by moving smoothly ahead with Judge Alito's nomination, shifting the focus to the policies he intends to emphasize next year, including reduced government spending and an overhaul of the immigration and border control systems, and making a more effective case for why victory in Iraq is vital.

The whole reduced gov't. spending issue has to viewed from the vantage point of: from what level? Hey, the National Debt. is only a touch over 8 TRILLION DOLLARS. Not to worry, I'm sure that George has a plan that'll not only cut taxes, but pass the debt onto generations yet unborn. And we know how precious the unborn are to the GOP...If that's not irony, then I don't kno...Okay, I forgot where I was going with that ;)

Remember, The Boondocks tonight.