Economic Viability

Economic Viability

You can't avoid it. The messages, the signs are everywhere. On your television, in your mailbox, on your computer, in your email and found on blogs too! Yep, you guessed it! It is your credit score.

Your credit score is the new black. It is the latest measurement of social and economic viability in the modern world. Your credit score is the new paradigm by which we measure the haves and have nots. Forget terms like upper-class, middle-class, working-class, rich and poor, now you have your credit score to determine where one stands in the heirarchy of social strata.

Surely if you have an excellent credit score the whole world lies at your feet waiting to be explored. And those with poor credit scores have only themselves to blame. Those individuals must lift themselves up by their bootstraps and soldier onward.

And remember, from the homeless to the wealthiest among us the new black has the ability to make everyone look good. Brreeeport


Without a paddle/Hello(Dubai)

Without a paddle

As I drew this cartoon I found myself singing an old classic with a little modification to the verse. Feel free to sing aloud.


You say yes, I say no
You say stop and I say oil, oil, oil, oh oil
You say Dubai and I say hello
Hello hello
I don't know why you say Dubai, I say hello
Hello hello
I don't know why you say Dubai, I say hello

I say high, you say low
You say why and I say I buy, oh no
You say Dubai and I say hello
(Hello Dubai hello Dubai) Hello hello
(Hello Dubai) I don't know why you say Dubai, I say hello
(Hello Dubai hello Dubai) Hello hello
(Hello Dubai) I don't know why you say Dubai
(Hello Dubai) I say hello/Dubai

Why why why why why why do you say Dubai Dubai, oh no?

You say Dubai and I say hello
Hello hello
I don't know why you say Dubai, I say hello
Hello hello
I don't know why you say Dubai, I say hello

You say yes (I say yes) I say no (But I may mean no)
You say stop (I can stay) and I say oil, oil, oil, (Till it's time to go), oh
Oh no
You say Dubai and I say hello
Hello hello
I don't know why you say Dubai, I say hello
Hello hello
I don't know why you say Dubai, I say hello
Hello hello
I don't know why you say Dubai, I say hello hello

Hela heba helloa
Hela heba helloa, cha cha cha
Hela heba helloa, wooo
Hela heba helloa, hela
Hela heba helloa, cha cha cha
Hela heba helloa, wooo
Hela heba helloa, cha cah cah (fade out)


Freedom's March

Freedom's March

Might you be at all familar with the earliest utterance of the statement, "freedom is on the march." As it turns out, there were a few unmentioned caveats with the Bush proclamation regarding freedom's march.

First, any government elected by its people must adhere to the principles set forth by the US government. In Palestine it is all to clear that the phrase, freedom ain't free takes on a whole new meaning when the US decides to punish the Palestinian people for electing a government led by Hamas. If only the people had voted to elect candidates that recieved campaign funding from the US government, they wouldn't have their current problems to worry about.

Then there is Iraq. Freedom is marching in a direction that is not in accordance with what the US had planned. Of course when freedom's march takes a path not in accordance with the US government it starts talking about cutting the flow of cash like it has with another recently mentioned nation. And this will only extend the US invasion and occupation for who knows how long.

It is pretty clear that the best client-states are those led by dictators who rule with a firm hand as evidenced by men like Pinochet, Somosa, the Shah, Noreiga, Marcos and Hussein.

Bush just might end up looking like Richard Nixon did some 30 years ago, standing in the White House claiming victory, followed by the rapid withdrawal of US troops from Vietnam.





I won't waste your time with an additional 2-300 words on this one. It is what it is.

If you can't see it as I suspect some might not, I'll give you a hint. It is said to "set you free."


Of Buddies, Birdshot, and Beer Pt.

Of Buddies, Birdshot, and Beer Pt. 2
(Part 1 can be found here.)

Here are just a few of the titles various media outlets have given following the brief public statement given by Harry Whittington.

Lawyer Shot by Cheney Is Sorry for Veep's Troubles
Man shot by Cheney sorry for VP
Cheney shooting victim calls mishap an accident
Cheney shooting victim 'deeply sorry'
Cheney shooting victim says sorry - to Cheney

Please take the time to notice (with a cursory view with your mouse cursor) that I didn't just rely upon members of the MSM found in the US for these story titles. I went international.

It is really sad to see a bruised and pock-marked 78-year-old man stand in front of a bank of microphones and apologize for being shot. In his effort obsolve Cheney of his already admitted guilt, I was suprised that Whittington didn't also confess that the whole ordeal had been more tramatic to Cheney than himself.

The old man I saw at the podium didn't resemble the proud and confident man in the pictures being shown prior to his release from the hospital. He looks broken in ways that go beyond being shot by a "friend" (see Part 1).

Being highly pessimistic regarding the selfish actions of Dick Cheney, it would not suprise me that on that Sunday evening when Cheney is reported to have visited his victim that there wasn't a confidentiality agreement signed between the two men.

I know, it sounds almost conspiratorial. Again, I haven't much trust in either the witness statements, or the police report. The Associated Press has compiled a list of discrepancies worth taking a look at. The list really puts into perpective, and feeds my ever growing distrust of Bush and Cheney.

Of course, I am just a liberal (thank you very much) and it isn't like there are any Republicans who are critical of Cheney's actions following his shooting of Whittington. Well, I have that covered. Or more like the Turkish Press has it covered. Granted, those quoted in the cited article aren't nearly as critical as I have been, I use it to dispell those rumors of partisanship often affilated with a Bush/Cheney did it story.


Sycophant bloggers for the Bush administration

While I have a regular list of blogs (see Blog-pinions) that I visit on a daily basis, I confess that I derive a guilty pleasure of visiting sycophant bloggers for the Bush administration. I often find myself laughing at the ubsurdities of their arguments, and the blatant hypocrisy employed as reason, logic, empty rhetoric.

Aside from the empty rhetoric I have noticed that many of these sycophant bloggers for the Bush administration employ comment moderation with great regularity. And whilst I was surfing yesterday evening I came across one of these bloggers, by the name of ModerateConservative. The "moderate" has employed a list of rules for posting in his comment section,
Insulting, Immature and repetitive comments will be deleted. I reserve the right to approve or delete any comments for any reason. If you don't like the rules, don't leave a comment."
Well, my rational being got the better of me, so I left a comment with the "moderate." I wanted to know why someone who would not tolerate insulting, immmature and repetitive comments would want to devote blog space to the very insulting, immature and repetitive comments of the following email sent to a Black Republican that he posted under the heading, "Leftist Bigots."
To: __________@yahoo.com
Subject: ___ Feedback
From: “_________” [_______@yahoo.com]
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 21:42:44 -0600

_____ ____ wrote:

Sometimes I really think you were better off an alcoholic. Sadly, you do not realize it, but you are still black and albeit behind your back (and many times even in your face) just a little “Stepin Fetchit” nigger to your white conservative “masters”. Hating your black self and blaming blacks for the current state of their condition, may make your masters proud, but only further enslaves YOU. You need to wake up sista.

From an informed and educated WHITE brother!

_____ ____
Boston, MA
The "moderate" followed up the email with the following editorial commentary.
_____ is the one who needs to wake up. It is his party that refuses to give minorities a proper education. They oppose vouchers, keeping poor blacks in poverty in order to harvest votes.

Leftist racism is alive and well in America. If you are black and do not think like a leftist, they will use every kind of racial slur to denigrate you in public.

How charming.
Putting aside the idiocy of the emails content, I wanted to know how the "moderate" knew that the individual that sent the email was a "leftist" and a member of "his party," the Democrats. (What other party has been accused of "harvesting votes" of Black people?) I was also interested in knowing how a supporter of the party that "preaches" about personal responsibility and accountability permits him to take this one individual and apply his actions to "leftists" like me.

I did not fail to mention that the "moderate" was relying upon the practice of bigots and racists by taking the words of one individual to paint a whole group of "leftists" with his broad brush.

Well, you can imagine my suprise when I learned that my comments were not added to the comment section despite adhering to the "rules" set forth by the "moderate." I suppose if I had left a sycophant, group think response my words would be left emblazened in the comment section.

OK, I didn't really believe that my comments would be posted. But it was fun to poke fun at the "moderate" and his self-serving hypocritical rhetoric.

Of course, if you think that I am wrong, please leave a comment. I don't employ comment moderation.


Of Buddies, Birdshot, and Beer

Of Buddies, Birdshot, and Beer

Well, after several days of silence Dick Cheney has decided to come forward and speak about his role in the shooting accident of Harry Whittington after allowing others, like the ranch owner Mrs. Armstrong and Scott McClelland to speak on his behalf. (I almost felt sorry for McClelland, he was left to look like the propagandist mouthpiece that he is.)

Apparently shooting Whittington was the worst day in Cheney's life, and he wasn't capable of talking with local law enforcement. This is an obvious perk of being the VP, shoot a buddy and you don't have to worry about being questioned by local authorities until you are ready. (Whereas John and Jane Q. Public would be subject to questioning and an breathalizer test.)

It should be noted that Cheney decided to talk about his role in the accident that he didn't choose just any news outlet for the interview. Oh no, Cheney went went to the most magical place in the world to a Republican, Fox News. (Of course, the notion of Cheney having a press conference is laughable. I can imagine watching him grow redder and redder as the press question him about the birdshot of agenda disruption, to claims of weapons of mass destruction, and the insurgency that was supposedly in its "last throes.")

And you know who interviewed him? It was Brit Hume who hasn't read a cue card with a tough question for a Republican in all his time at Fox News. By Humes own admission the only pressing he did was about "leaving McClelland out to dry." Such indepth questioning.

During the interview Cheney says, "[t]he image of [Whittington] falling is something I will never be able to get out my mind. It was one of the worst days of my life."

It is only after a handful of deferments from service in Vietnam that Cheney knows what it is like to shoot another person (albeit not in anger(?)). Imagine if he were to have an ephiphany on his decision and support for sending the husbands, sons, wives, and daughters to die in a war of choice.


Here is the transcript to Brit Humes passive interview with Dick (Watch your step I'm loaded) Cheney. I must commend Cheney for proving that he is even more inhumane than I could have imagined. I know that if I accidentally shot a "good friend," no wait, if I shot "an acquaintance," no wait, make that "my friend," no, more like "my friend, Harry," I sure as hell would be going to the hospital in one of those black SUV's that the Secret Service uses as fast as possible.

But that didn't happen. No Cheney had other things on his mind. Things like, "I thought, to get the story out as accurately as possible, and this is a complicated story that, frankly, most reporters would never have dealt with before." Yeah it isn't like reporters haven't ever covered a shooting before, accidental or otherwise. Just because the Vice President shoots a Bush Pioneer, it doesn't tear a couple hundred little holes in the time space continuum thereby preventing journalists/reporters from covering the story.

Of course, if Cheney was a wee bit inebriated (we won't know about it because the secret Service did their job in preventing Cheney from being questioned by local authorities til the following day) this would be a good reason to send his "physician's assistant" to ride along with the wounded Whittington. It is also good to have someone from your team "embedded" with the ambulance team to cover the on the ground medical attention being given and relay conditions of the victim/patient back to the ground commander.

Now should Cheney find himself being tried in the court of public opinion, (cause it isn't likely that he will face criminal or civil presecution) he has already laid out his media (legal) defense for the accident. Check out that last sentence. It was the sun I tell you, the sun made me pull the trigger.
"He was dressed in orange, he was dressed properly, but he was also -- there was a little bit of a gully there, so he was down a little ways before land level, although I could see the upper part of his body when -- I didn't see it at the time I shot, until after I'd fired. And the sun was directly behind him -- that affected the vision, too, I'm sure."
Of course, I am being extremely critical of a man who has the better part of 4 days to think about what he would say to the the softball questions of Brit Hume. I find that the following portion of the interview to be the most heartfelt response offered by Cheney,
"But the image of him falling is something I'll never be able to get out of my mind. I fired, and there's Harry falling. And it was, I'd have to say, one of the worst days of my life, at that moment."
I can image that it was the worst day of his life (Image how the day ranks on Whittington's list of worst days.) Cheney saw the remaining years of his political life flashing before his eyes. I have to admit, it is a good thing that Cheney has a bad heart, otherwise there would not have been an ambulance on the premises to take Mr. Whittington to the hospital. To say nothing of having to make a call to 911, which would have been picked up by police and the media.

It is pretty clear from reading the transcript that Cheney didn't have any ephiphany like I hoped for.


Hackett hit by "friendly-fire"

Hackett hit by "friendly-fire"

What a week and it has only just begun.

Cheney accidentally shot a life long friend who then suffered a minor heart-attack. And in an effort to not be outdone, the Democrats have had a little accident of their own. It does appear that Harry Reid and Charles Schumer have taken out Paul Hackett.

Once again the DLC is caught undermining the democratic national committee (dnc) as it seeks to move the party as a whole farther to the "right" were Democrats can run as Republican-light candidates.

It is really interesting to see how quickly one can go from political darling to loser candidate (according to some) and party liability. And lets face it Hackett is/was a liability to the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). The DLC and candidates like Hillary Clinton could ill afford to have somebody like Hackett challenging Bush on the invasion and occupation of Iraq when many of those seeking re-election in 2006 (not to mention possible Democratic Party presidential hopefuls for 2008) are walking in lock step with the administration.

I can only wonder what sort of arrangement has been made between the members of the DLC like Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton should she find herself the first female president of the United States. (Oh, that thought gives me chills.) Does either man have aspirations to serve as VP?

To the DLC, congratulations on taking out Hackett.

To Mr. Hackett, might you reconsider your retirement from politics? There is always 2008.


A Jew, a Christian, and a Muslim...

A Jew, a Christian, and a Muslim...

OK, stop me if you have heard this one before. (Please feel free to construct your own joke.)

When taking into consideration the three religions depicted above, I am starting to believe that Christianity is the false religion. In contrast to the Jews and Muslims, only the Christians seem to worship a god that is kind and loving, a god without wrath. The Old Testament and the Quran are filled with stories about death and violence perpetrated against the unbelievers. Is it really plausible to think that the same god responsible for so much death and destruction is really the father of Jesus? Is Jesus the hippie, the love child of an inebriated god who on a whim decided to impregnate an unmarried Jewish girl?

Was it only after realizing what he had done did god decide that Jesus was to be killed for the sins of all man? (Let's face it, this god did violate at least one of his 10 commandments with Mary.) Remember too, this is the same god that destroyed mankind with 40 days and nights of rain. And then made Mohammad a prophet who righted the wrongs of a loving god with a reign of heavenly inspired violence. And we are to believe that Jesus, the Prince of Peace is the rightful heir to this god?

I am reminded of a Sesame Street skit, where the cast members would sing a little song about three of these items, and one does not belong. It seems rather obvious that Christianity doesn't belong. Of course you may want to differ. Some might want to discuss the role of the Flying Spaghetti Monster at this time.

That godless old socialist Karl Marx was "right" correct, religion is the opiate of the masses.

On a more personal note, I think that there is a future to be had in cartoon representations of the various religious groups that have sought to conquer the world for the purposes of religious indoctrination and eternal salvation. If some are offended, I am not sorry. If others are angry, well that pleases me all the more. If you want to threaten me, I say, worshipper* do thy work.

(*Originally hypocrite, but this didn't seem fair noting the documented violence found among these sects.)





It was quite clear on Friday that Senator Norm Coleman was going to ride Brownie as the designated Katrina scape goat for a the political points he could possibly muster. Of course, in the end he looked like an ass trying to protect the Bush administration from itself.

And having pilloried Brownie in the past, (9/7/2007) (9/9/2005) (9/11/2005) (9/13/2005) (9/16/2005) (9/28 2005) he certainly earned a little respect from me having taken responsibility for his actions and inactions in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. To bad the same cannot be said with regards to the rest of the Bush administration.

Dropping the Ball

Dropping the Ball

Number 299 and counting...

Of course, the real blame rests with Brownie...after all Bush doesn't believe that national disasters like Katrina aren't something that the Department of Homeland Security should be involved with. (Just check the 2007 Budget he submitted to congress.)

It is rather ironic that the self described "compassionate conservative" would end his Crawford vacation early to race back to D.C. to sign into law legislation giving the federal government jurisdiction in the Terry Schiavo case but was not to be seen nor heard from in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. He definately wasn't in any hurry to leave Crawford after the hurricane. Maybe if his brother had been the governor of Louisiana...

Closing Ranks

Closing Ranks

Number 298 and counting...

The Pentagon is closing ranks around Bush and pushing for the use of military force against Iran in concert with his recess appointee, John Bolton at the United Nations. Bush appears to be pushing the world closer to yet another military confrontation. You know, Bush ain't got nothing on those crazy Muslims. From the looks of things, he is a fine example of how Christianity is anything but a peaceful religion.

Rick and Grover

Rick and Grover

Number 297 and counting...

Oh yes, I should mention that Rick Santorium has made some rather ridiculous statements that rival those recently uttered by Bush about not knowing Jack Abramoff. Perhaps Bush got the idea of denying any relationship with Abramoff from Santorum. You see, Mr. Santorum is on the record as denying having knowledge of the K Street Project and Grover Norquist who by "coincidence" knows Tome DeLay and Jack Abramoff.

Lucky for the Republicans that they don't have to worry about an opposition party capitalizing upon the evidence of croynism and corruption.


Religious Extremism

Religious Extremism

It is reassuring to know that only Muslims have an ideology of religious extremism. Of course the rash of church fires in Alabama can't possibly be the work of ideological religious extremists. In Alabama these extremists have clearly resorted to terrorism. Shouldn't these arson investigations be led by the Department of Homeland Security? Shouldn't Alabama raise their threat warning level? Does the terrorist threat warning system not apply to threats originating in the United States?

Interestingly enough, the nine unsolved acts of terrorism (arson) happened to coincide with the passing of Coretta Scott King. One doesn't necessarily have to be related to the other, just as the original 12 cartoons published last fall by Jyllands-Posten are related to the protesting, riots and fires burning in places like Afghanistan, Indonesia, Palestine, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.

According to news reports from outside the US (worthless MSM), the Brussels Journal is reporting that there were three additional images (1 cartoon, 2 zeroxed photographs) that appear to be at the heart of all the protesting, rioting and subsequent violence.

According to the Brussels Journal,
the Danish tabloid Extra Bladet got hold of a 43-page report that Danish Muslim leaders and imams, on a tour of the Islamic world are handing out to their contacts to "explain" how offensive the cartoons are. The report contains 15 pictures instead of 12. The first of the three additional pictures, which are of dismal quality, shows Muhammad as a pedophile deamon [see it here], the second shows the prophet with a pigsnout [here] and the third depicts a praying Muslim being raped by a dog [here]. Apparently, the 12 original pictures were not deemed bad enough to convince other Muslims that Muslims in Denmark are the victims of a campaign of religious hatred.
It is counter-productive to have Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice trying to score points internationally with the UN after the recent IAEA referral, by accusing Iran (and Syria) for all rioting in the Middle East. She serves as a great foil to the earlier pleas by her boss, George Bush, who called for a halt to the violent protests.

Both the rioters and the terrorists in Alabama have a common thread between them. There actions are made possible by the ideologies of extremists.

Brothers in Arms

Brothers in Arms

There is something to be said about two nations that can put aside their differences about uranium enrichment for nuclear energy, supporting Hamas, Israel, the peace process and hegenomy in the Middle East to come together under the umbrella of brotherhood to vote against the admission of two non-governmental organizations (NGO's) the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA) and the Danish Association of Gays and Lesbians (Landsforeningen for Bosser og Lesbiske — LBL). Neither group was afforded a hearing before the votes were cast.


Attorney General Gonzalez Dancing Around

Attorney General Gonzalez Dancing Around

President Washington, President Lincoln, President Wilson, President Roosevelt have all authorized electronic surveillance on a far broader scale.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales

What more needs to be said? Who knew, besides Attorney General Gonzales that Washington possessed the capability to authorize electronic surveillance?

It is a shame that not a single senator called Gonzales on his interpretation of the historical record. Perhaps the reason Ben Franklin was flying kites in electrical storms was to aide Washington in his electronic surveillance program.

Maybe the next time Attorney General Gonzales testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee they can get him under oath and further expand upon the electronic surveillance programs of the first George to serve as president of the United States.

Special Delivery

Special Delivery

It has been reported that the Iraqi insurgency, not to be confused with al Qaeda in Iraq might be benefitting from good ole fashioned, died in the wool democratic principles of government corruption also know as graft.

It is good to know that when the insurgents are profitting from sales of oil on the black market they are busy blowing up oil pipelines and attacking fuel truck convoys.


The Starting Line

The Starting Line

Well, the Bush administration has begun the push for UN sanctions. It starts with the IAEA referral of Iran to the UN Security Council. No doubt that the Bush administration is interested in making sure that Iran is punished because they have upheld the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Like the case made against Iraq, the Bush administration is relying upon alot of would of, could of statements to justify their position and threats against the Iranian government. In response to the US actions, Iran has decided to stop cooperating with the IAEA inspections and has said it will initiate its uranium enrichment program. There is still some hope that Iran will work a deal with the Russians.

As it stands, Ahmandinajad has referred to the West (Bush) and the IAEA as idiots and the referral itself as funny.

Administration War Dance

Administration War Dance

Having appeared before the Senate Intelligent Committee: Hearing on World-Wide Threats (video) last week, Director of Intelligence John Negroponte was testifying about the threat posed to the United States by Iraq, I mean Iran. Well, needless to say, it sounds very familiar to dance that the Bush administration did prior to invading Iraq.

The same dance was being taught by Negroponte, he spoke about the connection with terrorist groups, including their support and training, Iran's weapons (including weapons they don't have, but could have, and might eventually have) that they would use against us and Israel, and the threat posed to the United States sovereignty because of all of these connections.

Unlike Iraq, at least this time around we know that Iran has the infrastructure for a working nuclear energy program.


The Cost of Doing Business

The Cost of Doing Business

I suppose that there are those that haven't heard about all the developments going on over at the Pentagon. And no, I am not talking about those in the Pentagon that have their panties in a bunch over a cartoon either. (Oh to draw the ire of the Pentagon like Tom Toles.)

According to soldiers serving in Iraq (or soon to be) were told that they can't wear the commerically available body armor known as, Pinnacle Dragon Skin. According to the same folks that have their panties in a bunch about a cartoon have decided that soldiers wearing body armor that they have purchased (cause we know that the military hasn't had difficulty in providing the troops with the proper body armor) that they will lose their SLGI benefits.

According to the top brass, any soldier that is killed in the field wearing the commercially purchased armor could lose the $400,000 death benefits. Those not killed, could find themselves facing disciplinary action for wearing armor not issued by Uncle Sam.

And to make matters worse, Halli-(no-bid)-burton subsidiary Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR) provided contaminated water from the Euphrates River that they didn't bother to chemically treat. According to the internal company e-mail from Will Granger, KBR's water quality manager for Iraq and Kuwait,
We exposed a base camp population (military and civilian) to a water source that was not treated. The level of contamination was roughly 2x the normal contamination of untreated water from the Euphrates River.
I suppose the fact that the water was only used by soldiers for laundry, bathing, shaving and making coffee we should say, "What's the problem." It was only a year or so that the soldiers were exposed to the contaminated water. No harm, no foul.

What is the big deal anyway. It wasn't like the no-bid contracts given to Halliburton and KBR were supposed to be followed verbatim. After all this is just government work. I'll bet the guys over at KBR are all familiar with the saying, "Close enough for government work."

Just a thought

I was reading yet another article, this one in Time magazine about the Bush administrations desire to wiretap without warrants. The article mentioned a letter from Tom Daschle published in the Washington Post in December 2005 regarding his opposition to Bush's desire for broader presidential powers in the Joint Resolution to invade Iraq. Including the power to secretly wiretap, without judicial or legislative oversight.

Well, as I continued reading it suddenly made sense why Bush and the Republican Party campaigned so damned hard against Daschle's re-election in 2004. Now I understand why the Republicans broke with Senate protocol and sent Bill Frist to South Dakota to campaign against Daschle. The Bush administration wanted to make Daschle pay for his insolence. Not simply because Daschle was opposed to invading Iraq. More likely because Daschle was against giving Bush unchecked power.




Of course, the president's defenders will come to his aide and say that he didn't lie. After all, what we heard Bush say in the State of the Union is not neccesarily what he meant. So when you read (or hear) his pledge to "move beyond a petroleum-based economy and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past," realize that what he was really saying, or doing was providing the American public with an "example."

What Bush meant by what he said about moving beyond our dependence on Middle East oil is "This was purely an example." At least that is what Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman wants you to believe.

Of course, the change in what Bush meant might be better understood in understanding the context of Bush jawboning the Saudis.

I happened to catch the prevaricator for Bush, former Commerce Secretary Don Evan on Chris Matthews "Hardball." (Sorry the transcript wasn't available at the time of my posting. Should be this after noon.) Lets just say that Evans prevaricating was obscene. Had Matthews been more rigorous in his questioning of Evans we might have heard something different than the talking points covered by Bodman.

Other "Oops" moments from Bush are found by comparing the following statements. The First from 2004.
Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.
This "rationalzation" is no longer applicable. In November, 2005 Bush said,
I don’t give a goddamn. I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way. Stop throwing the Constitution in my face, it’s just a goddamned piece of paper!
This was in response to the concerns being raised by members of his own party about the Constitutional powers of the president. Perhaps Bush had forgot the scripted message. Or maybe he grew tired of lying about lying why he did what he did.

Maybe he was just a little pissed of that members of his staff and his party just didn't understand grasp the sarcasm in his voice when he said in October 2001,
First, we must always maintain the highest ethical standards. We must always ask ourselves not only what is legal, but what is right. There is no goal of government worth accomplishing if it cannot be accomplished with integrity.
There is no finer example of integrity than that of a president who says his administration is doing one thing (as in not eavesdropping on Americans) while doing the exact opposite (in this case eavesdropping on Americans) going back to 2001.

The next time you hear that Bush doesn't lie, remember to say, "Oops he did it again."


Praetorian Guard

Praetorian Guard

The Republicans now control all three branches of government. And here I was under the impression that Republicans didn't believe that the court made laws. Kind of undermines their argument about being against "activist judges" and "activist courts."

And there is of course the State of the Union Address. What a great night for getting in your partisan exercise. I counted some 40 seperate standing ovations. Whew! Imagine that in a nice suit. (You know that a few were starting to get funky from all that exercise.) The Republicans rose to their feet, according to my count 39 seperate times to applaud the vocal stylings of the president. The Democrats stood a mere 25 times by my count. The one time that the Republicans didn't stand came when the Democrats rose to cheer when the president said, "Congress did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security."

Some saw this as disrespectful. Yeah, foolish Democrats, they aren't brow beaten enough for doing nothing. The media should have applauded the Democrats for standing together as a party for the first time in quite some time. The look of suprise on Bush's face was priceless.

OK enough with the fun and games at both parties expense. Now I want to return to focus on Bush. I wanted to focus upon a couple of statements he made that I think deserve some discussion and that haven't been talked about my the MSM (and by that I mean FOXNews, FND (formerly CNN).

Terrorists like bin Laden are serious about mass murder -- and all of us must take their declared intentions seriously. They seek to impose a heartless system of totalitarian control throughout the Middle East, and arm themselves with weapons of mass murder.

Their aim is to seize power in Iraq, and use it as a safe haven to launch attacks against America and the world.

OK, let us accept this as true. When I heard it, and when I read it I come away with the understanding that Bush really doesn't believe that the Iraqis are capable of determining their own future. As I understand it, Bush is saying that the Iraqis lack the ability and the courage to repel the 2-3000(?) foreign fighters that make up al Qaeda in Iraq. According to Bush, without the US, Iraq would be a "safe haven." I have a hard time believing that the Shiites would allow a small groups of Sunnis to "seize power." To say nothing of the Saddam loyalists.

I tell you what, I'd be more comfortable with the conditions in Iraq if Bush had an actual exit strategy. Of course, I don't think he has one. Besides, even if he did it isn't like he really wants to leave. Not with those "enduring bases" in the offing. But I digress.

I was really bothered by the standing ovation for Staff Sergeant Dan Clay. Why is it that both houses of Congress only rise in ovation for this one soldier when there are 2200+ dead that haven't recieved the same sort of recognition? It is most disgusting to watch as both the soldier and the family are used for political theatre by Bush and condoned by the Democrats. How does this act comport with the statement that "[o]ur nation is grateful to the fallen, who live in the memory of our country."

And then there is of course the "compassionate" America that Bush spoke about. The compassionate America with the likes of Bush's "opinion leaders" who call for the death and destruction of all Muslims. To say nothing of those compassionate Americans that believe in shooting those immigrants that cross the border illegally. (Update: See comment section.) Nothing says compassion like threats of violence and a 15 foot high fence.

Then there was Bush's comments on how the line-item-veto would be a wonderful tool to use against earmarks, "because the federal budget has too many special interest projects." Are we to believe that this president (any president) would veto all the pork from the budget? I must be too cynical, because I can see a president not using the line-item as a means to endearing support or to curry political favors.

And if you have come this far, I was curious to know if you knew who these people are preaching their "isolationists" policies that has Bush so concerned that he had to mention them on five seperate occassions. I know it is easy to pin positions to the Democrats, but come on.



Tonight, let me speak directly to the citizens of Iran: America respects you, and we respect your country. We respect your right to choose your own future and win your own freedom. And our nation hopes one day to be the closest of friends with a free and democratic Iran.
George Bush SOTU 2006

Now if only the Iranian people could hear Bush speak. They missed out on hearing that the US respects them so much, and their rights to choose and win their freedom. Of course, this respect is predicated upon whether or not the Iranian government, in whatever form it takes, doesn't want nuclear power and the desire to process their own uranium and complete the nuclear fuel cycle.