I prefer Nine Lives.
Touche!
by John Cole| 8 Comments
This post is in: Humorous
by John Cole| 8 Comments
This post is in: Humorous
by John Cole| 20 Comments
This post is in: General Stupidity
“We’ve heard from the troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they feel betrayed by Senator Durbin. The men and women of the Armed Forces are some of the most generous contributors to this ad campaign,” said Howard Kaloogian, Move America Forward’s founder and other Co-Chair. “Dick Durbin has provided aid and comfort to the enemy by making false accusations against the heroic men and women of our military.”
“Senator Durbin is this generation’s Jane Fonda. At least you could understand Ms. Fonda’s misguided conduct, as she was merely an actress,” Kaloogian continued. “Senator Durbin has failed to honor his congressional oath, for he has become himself a domestic enemy who seeks to lower American support for our troops, and provide verbal fodder for America’s enemies abroad. He should be censured by his Senate colleagues – and held accountable by the people of Illinois.”
And the “Stab in the Back campaign, Summer of 2005” continues, this week with a video special:
Move America Forward, an organization “committed to supporting America
by John Cole| 32 Comments
This post is in: General Stupidity
Not only does Ted Rall ‘draw’ stick-men, but he also writes editorials opinion pieces:
The world hates us more than ever, according to a new Pew Research poll of 16,000 citizens in 15 countries. Most Canadians think Americans are exceptionally rude. The Chinese say we’re violent and greedy. Nearly half of Turks–up from 32 percent a year ago–say they dislike Americans as individuals and America as a nation, according to the survey. Muslims have a “quite negative hostility toward America,” says Pew president Andrew Kohut. Even among our traditional allies, he says, the United States “remains broadly disliked.”
The reason for our declining popularity is no mystery: Bush’s unjustified, illegal war against Iraq. But Iraq, Bush’s doctrine of preemptive warfare and instances of prisoners being tortured and even murdered aren’t completely unprecedented. Cheney’s neoconservatives are merely the latest executors of an aggressive foreign policy that has long prompted fear, hatred and resentment among the leaders and citizens of other nations. Beginning with Theodore Roosevelt’s brutal suppression of Filipino insurgents at the dawn of the 20th century, continuing with the holocaust of two million Vietnamese civilians under LBJ and Nixon’s carpet bombs and recently exemplified by a series of bullying adventures against such defenseless nations as Grenada, Panama and Afghanistan, the U.S. has become, perhaps to its surprise, the biggest danger to peace and stability on the planet.
Many Americans, still taking pride in the memorable image of “Gift of USA” flag logos on bags of grain being tossed to starving Africans, find it difficult to accept the role of international pariah. But the truth is that many people are as scared of us as they were of Germany and Japan in 1939.
Ah, irony. Our rep has gone down the toilet with the Koran, but things are looking up for the Axis powers we defeated in World War II.
So the entire world hates Amerikkka. And most of Amerikkka hates Ted Rall.
That makes Ted Rall the most hated human being on the planet.
by John Cole| 36 Comments
This post is in: Domestic Politics
Newsweek now has published the story about the possible Plame/Rove nexus that was previously mentioned by Lawrence O’Donnell. The story was penned by none other than Michael Isikoff, who no doubtedly will be served a fresh new heap of shit sandwich for being a ‘liberal hack:’
Now the story may be about to take another turn. The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper’s sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House. Cooper and a Time spokeswoman declined to comment. But in an interview with NEWSWEEK, Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove had been interviewed by Cooper for the article. It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove…
Initially, Fitzgerald’s focus was on Novak’s sourcing, since Novak was the first to out Plame. But according to Luskin, Rove’s lawyer, Rove spoke to Cooper three or four days before Novak’s column appeared. Luskin told NEWSWEEK that Rove “never knowingly disclosed classified information” and that “he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.” Luskin declined, however, to discuss any other details. He did say that Rove himself had testified before the grand jury “two or three times” and signed a waiver authorizing reporters to testify about their conversations with him. “He has answered every question that has been put to him about his conversations with Cooper and anybody else,” Luskin said. But one of the two lawyers representing a witness sympathetic to the White House told NEWSWEEK that there was growing “concern” in the White House that the prosecutor is interested in Rove. Fitzgerald declined to comment.
In early October 2003, NEWSWEEK reported that immediately after Novak’s column appeared in July, Rove called MSNBC “Hardball” host Chris Matthews and told him that Wilson’s wife was “fair game.” But White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters at the time that any suggestion that Rove had played a role in outing Plame was “totally ridiculous.” On Oct. 10, McClellan was asked directly if Rove and two other White House aides had ever discussed Valerie Plame with any reporters. McClellan said he had spoken with all three, and “those individuals assured me they were not involved in this.”
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
by John Cole| 17 Comments
This post is in: Media
Bill at INDC Journal takes me to task for this statement:
Pretending that this would not be an issue if only the media had covered more school openings or spent more time talking about the free chapstick, toothbrushes, and playing cards our soldiers will get is simply idiotic. Sure, I would like more positive news coverage out of Iraq. I would also like more positive news.
Bill states:
Presumably, John’s been so busy channeling outrage at wingnut hijinks that he’s just too darn busy to read Chrenkoff’s massive good news updates.
Well, no. I read Chrenkoff, and I link to him when I see fit, although probably not frequently enough. Bill continues:
That’s like defending a police force that arrests murderers, while failing to mention that they let every single other class of criminal roam free.
Well, if all the media reported was casualties, that would be true- but the media reports all sorts of good news. In fact, the very summary of good news by Arthur Chrenkoff is little more than a culmination of, you guessed it- media reports. Featured in Arthur’s summary are links to the Wapo, the Ap, The Times Online, the BBC, Xinhuanet, the CS Monitor, Kurdish Media, Reuters, MSNBC, the Washington Times, the LA Times, and hundreds of other media outlets.
Bill is right- deaths and disaster are featured more prominently, but that is not because of an anti-military bias or because of a desire by those in the media that our Iraqi efforts fail. It is simply the nature of what is newsworthy.
Look at your local news- when a car catches fire in downtown Morgantown during rush hour, it makes front page news. At the same time, you will not find any stories about the 40,000 other cars that didn’t catch fire. When Bill Clinton was immersed in an affair with an intern, the media didn’t report on the hundreds of other interns Clinton didn’t diddle. When the BTK killer was caught, the media didn’t focus on the other 300 million people in the country who aren’t serial killers.
Why? Is it because of an anti-car bias? An anti-intern bias? An anti-people bias? Of course not- it is because one event is news, the other is not.
Arthur does a great job summarizing reports of what we are supposed to be doing- the reasons we are there. But that doesn’t mean it is inappropriate or wrong for the media to cover the deaths and injuries our soldiers are suffering. A better measure of what we need to do to make the situation better will come from a close examination of our failures, rather than cheerleading our successes.
Bill is right, though- both need to be mentioned, and, for the most part, they are. And the media is, in my estimation, lazy, and it is easier to report death and destruction than it is to report the good news. Perhaps if the security situation were better, we would have more good news. More likely, if things were going well, we wouldn’t have much news at all- you don’t read too often about reconstruction efforts in Japan and Germany anymore, do you?
Perhaps a better way of stating what I really want is not more positive news, but less bad news.
*** Update ***
Bill responds, and, quite honestly, I am too lazy to respond right now. Sun, grill, beer are on the agenda. We will have to revisit this tomorrow or Tuesday (Monday being reserved for jingoistic displays of unfettered nationalism, including hot dogs, beer, flags, and pretty shit blowing up). A short response- Bill thinks the media dwells too much on the bad stuff, something I would tend to not disagree with but something I wouldn’t wholly endorse. I think the media has a different sense of what is newsworthy (which may explain why they are losing customers), and that if the area were more secure, we would see fewer stories about death and destruction and more of the good news that is going on. Now, on to grill.
by John Cole| 47 Comments
This post is in: Politics
I think Ed Kilgore may be right on this issue:
This appointment represents the giant balloon payment at the end of the mortgage the GOP signed with the Cultural Right at least 25 years ago. Social conservatives have agreed over and over again to missed payments, refinancings, and in their view, generous terms, but the balance is finally due, and if Bush doesn’t pay up, they’ll foreclose their entire alliance with the Republican Party.
Sure, they care about other issues, from gay marriage to taxes to Iraq, but abortion is the issue that makes most Cultural Right activists get up in the morning and stuff envelopes and staff phone banks for the GOP. And for decades now, Republicans have told them they can’t do anything much about it until they can change the Supreme Court. With a pro-choice Justice stepping down, the subject can no longer be avoided. And thanks to the Souter precedent (and indeed, the O’Connor and Kennedy precedents), there’s no way Bush can finesse an appointment that’s anything less than a guaranteed vote to overturn Roe.
Moreover, if Bush has any willingness to pull a Sister Souljah on the Cultural Right, he’s certainly waited a long, long time to exercise it. Solidifying his conservative base has been the first principle of the Bush/Rove formula all along, and as recently as this week, he proved it again with an Iraq speech that appeared to be aimed almost exclusively at shoring up conservative support for his war policies.
Just examine the rhetoric from Focus on the Family:
“President Bush must nominate someone whose judicial philosophy is crystal clear. And no one has been clearer about this than the President himself, who said during his campaign that he would appoint justices in the mold of Clarence Thomas or Antonin Scalia. We have full confidence that he will carry out that pledge.”
Let’s get it out there: how many here think that if the President nominates Alberto Gonzales to the Supreme Court it would manifest itself as an unmitigated disaster for the President, the GOP, and conservatives?
And if so, how will you react?I do. And if it happens, I’m taking up golf. I’m not going to give any money to any Republican party organization, nor any incumbent.
Let me be blunt. If President Bush nominates Alberto Gonzales to fill O
by John Cole| 4 Comments
This post is in: Open Threads
Interesting study being done by Richard Chapelle, which I found via Majikthise. Basically, he is taking the IPIP-NEO-PI personality test (which is not the same as the Five Factor Model by Costa and McRae) and the Political Compass and asking people to post their results.
My results are below the fold:
(pixnaps97a2)