« Don't Pee On My Leg and Tell Me It's Raining | Main | Dr. Frist, You Could Be Next... »
Rich Scores a Bull’s-Eye
In a column appearing in Sunday’s New York Times Magazine (but available online now), the Gray Lady’s cultural columnist Frank Rich takes up the urgent cause of Media Reform.
In the aftermath of the growing Armstrong Williams scandal, Rich savagely points the finger at his own profession, and even his own newspaper.
But his primary focus in this blistering essay is an embarrassing recent episode of CNN’s Crossfire, featuring Democratic strategist Paul Begala, Republican apologist Robert Novak, and the ethically challenged Mr. Williams. Apparently, there is an unwritten Code of Honor involving both thieves and media pundits (or bloviators, as Rich phrases it). And, as Rich concludes, that’s terrible news for fans of Jeffersonian Democracy. I could say more, but better that I cut to the chase, and let Rich's words speak for themselves.
This was a half-hour of television so egregious that it makes Jon Stewart's famous pre-election rant seem, if anything, too kind. This time "Crossfire" wasn't just "hurting America," as Mr. Stewart put it, by turning news into a nonsensical gong show. It was unwittingly, or perhaps wittingly, complicit in the cover-up of a scandal.
I do not mean to minimize the CBS News debacle and other recent journalistic outrages at The New York Times and elsewhere. But the Jan. 7 edition of CNN's signature show can stand as an exceptionally ripe paradigm of what is happening to the free flow of information in a country in which a timid news media, the fierce (and often covert) Bush administration propaganda machine, lax and sometimes corrupt journalistic practices, and a celebrity culture all combine to keep the public at many more than six degrees of separation from anything that might resemble the truth.
On this particular "Crossfire," the featured guest was Armstrong Williams, a conservative commentator, talk-show host and newspaper columnist (for papers like The Washington Times and The Detroit Free Press, among many others, according to his Web site). Thanks to investigative reporting by USA Today, he had just been unmasked as the front-man for a scheme in which $240,000 of taxpayers' money was quietly siphoned to him through the Department of Education and a private p.r. firm so that he would "regularly comment" upon (translation: shill for) the Bush administration's No Child Left Behind policy in various media venues during an election year. Given that "Crossfire" was initially conceived as a program for tough interrogation and debate, you'd think that the co-hosts still on duty after Mr. Carlson's departure might try to get some answers about this scandal, whose full contours, I suspect, we are only just beginning to discern.
But there is nothing if not honor among bloviators. "On the left," as they say at "Crossfire," Paul Begala, a Democratic political consultant, offered condemnations of the Bush administration but had only soft questions and plaudits for Mr. Williams. Three times in scarcely as many minutes Mr. Begala congratulated his guest for being "a stand-up guy" simply for appearing in the show's purportedly hostile but entirely friendly confines. When Mr. Williams apologized for having crossed "some ethical lines," that was enough to earn Mr. Begala's benediction: "God bless you for that.
"On the right" was the columnist Robert Novak, who "in the interests of full disclosure" told the audience he is a "personal friend" of Mr. Williams, whom he "greatly" admires as "one of the foremost voices for conservatism in America." Needless to say, Mr. Novak didn't have any tough questions, either, but we should pause a moment to analyze this "Crossfire" co-host's disingenuous use of the term "full disclosure."
Last year Mr. Novak had failed to fully disclose - until others in the press called him on it - that his son is the director of marketing for Regnery, the company that published "Unfit for Command," the Swift boat veterans' anti-Kerry screed that Mr. Novak flogged relentlessly on CNN and elsewhere throughout the campaign. Nor had he fully disclosed, as Mary Jacoby of Salon reported, that Regnery's owner also publishes his subscription newsletter ($297 a year). Nor has Mr. Novak fully disclosed why he has so far eluded any censure in the federal investigation of his outing of a C.I.A. operative, Valerie Plame, while two other reporters, Judith Miller of The Times and Matt Cooper of Time, are facing possible prison terms in the same case. In this context, Mr. Novak's "full disclosure" of his friendship with Mr. Williams is so anomalous that it raised many more questions than it answers.
For the complete essay, click here,
I just wonder how much more of this is going to come out over the next few months, and doesnt this violate some FCC rule someplace? If not it should.
"Big business is not dangerous because it is big, but because its bigness is an unwholesome inflation created by privileges and exemptions which it ought not to enjoy."
-- Woodrow Wilson, 1912
Isn't anybody else outraged about this example of Bush stupidity?
http://www.democrats.org/news/200501120004.html
[snip]
During the "town hall" Bush said, "African American males die sooner than other males do, which means the system is inherently unfair to a certain group of people…and that needs to be fixed."
"Graft and corruption are just hollow words to this crowd." battlebob
No in fact they think of it as a badge of honor. In any other adminsitration the Justice Dept would have uncovered the leaker on the very serious Valerie Plame case by now. Its been a year or longer and all we hear is the sound of silence. They would have crucified Clinton if such shannagans had taken place but Tom DeLay has shown us all that this crowd is ethically challenged, to be kind. When in the world is someone in the press or the DNC going to hold their feet to the fire on the Plame case. A year from now,two or never.
Dean Campaign
Made Payments
To Two Bloggers
By WILLIAM M. BULKELEY and JAMES BANDLER
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
January 14, 2005; Page B2
Howard Dean's presidential campaign hired two Internet political "bloggers" as consultants so that they would say positive things about the former governor's campaign in their online journals, according to a former high-profile Dean aide.
Zephyr Teachout, the former head of Internet outreach for Mr. Dean's campaign, made the disclosure earlier this week in her own Web log, Zonkette. She said "to be very clear, they never committed to supporting Dean for the payment -- but it was very clearly, internally, our goal." The hiring of the consultants was noted in several publications at the time.
The issue of political payments to commentators has become hot following disclosures that the Bush administration paid a conservative radio and newspaper pundit, Armstrong Williams, $240,000 to plug its "No Child Left Behind" education policy.
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB110566243803425942,00.html?mod=todays_free_feature
Read the article. There are just too many points to do them justice by posting snippets..
http://www.democrats.org/news/200501120003.html
Barbara WaWa and the Bush interview.
http://www.democrats.org/news/200501130001.html
adios Howard... You and Armstrong make great buddies.
Slight difference b/w Dean and Bush. Dean was a candidate for President using private campaign funds to win a nomination. Bush is President (sort of) using my tax payer dollars. Apples and pretzels.
I know there has been a lot of talk here of late about SS reform. I just finished a couple of hours of research and put together this Blog post on LUTD. There's quite a few links to various committee, left wing think tanks and OP/ED's...
{snip}
Scheming Your Social Security Down the Drain, What Privatization Could Mean to You
The concerns over the Bush administration’s scheme to privatize Social Security grow daily. Just yesterday, puppet master Cheney was out stumping on the misguided fear-mongering notion that Social Security is in a crisis. In his warped view, he tries to sell the concept that privatization would actually help low-income wage-earners.
"Many low-income workers who have nothing to spare after taxes would have a chance to begin saving for their later years," he said at The Catholic University of America.
However, this statement from Cheney seems to contradict a speech given by Bush the previous day:
The idea that Social Security personal retirement accounts would help lift the poor was a new argument for the administration. There was no mention of it at a lengthy White House briefing for reporters on Social Security changes a month ago. In a Social Security speech on Wednesday, Bush did not make such a case.
Cheney’s claim does appear to be an erroneous outlook. To show the effects that privatization could have on low-income workers, I have put together a series of views from various committees, think tanks, and columnists. Read closely, because if you have any concerns about what this could mean to you, there are some answers provided here.
Read more - http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=228
Yeah but if we are going to hold Armstrong accountable for being paid to present a point of view, we have to hold Dean accountable for paying to have his point of view aired without disclosure.
The dollar source difference is valid, but I don't see any real difference in what was being accomplished:
Trying to get the public to accept your views from suposedly impartial spokespeople when in fact they were not impartial.
Now if we could stick it to Fox, CNN, etc the same way, it would be great.
Posted by: Bob Evans at January 14, 2005 01:49 PM
Bob
I've been following this story around the blogs for a couple of days, now.
One the interesting developments in this story is that some are now saying that Bloggers need a code of ethics along the lines of the code ethics journalists use. This is something that I have mentioned here before. I do feel there could be some merit to this concept. If we don't hold ourselves to some sort of standards, we give the right wong more reason to call us crazy liberals. Just a thought...
Posted by: Pamela at January 14, 2005 01:59 PM
thanks,
I sent the referance to blogforaz
Well, no one here is being paid by anyone! SO no worries! We are SQUEAKY clean...
So feel free to donate...:)
Pamela:
Are they suggesting that poor, many being uneducated folks going to be investing in stocks and that is somehow going to lift them out of poverty or perhaps pushing them further into poverty, Pamela? And they think we can take seriously their concerns of poor people? All that will happen is that brokerage firms will now have an opportunity to make more commissions on the backs of poor people.
What really angers me about Dean is he didn't have to pay anybody. There were/are enough blogs that would eagerly air his views.
Posted by: battlebob at January 14, 2005 02:09 PM
Thanks BattleBob!
Posted by: Ira at January 14, 2005 02:11 PM
Ira,
Apparently that is what Cheney was pushing yesterday in his speech, though the AP article I quoted said also that Bush has no mention of this. Furthermore they clearly have no plan as to how this will in any way shape or form help low to middle income earners.
One of the links in the Blog is to Rep. Henry Waxman's Committee on Government Reform, Minority Office. There a great interactive there that if you plug in your income it shows you how much will be used for Gov. spending over the next 10 years under the Bush plan.
The consensus tends to be that the people who will be hurt most by this are ones that need SS the most. It's an ugly mess.
Posted by: Pamela at January 14, 2005 02:05 PM
Pamela,
You're not the only one thinking about it. Dwahzon posted on this topic on the preceding thread:
Something to think about as we're posting here:
A Bloggers' Code of Ethics
Some bloggers recently have been debating what, if any, ethics the Weblog community should follow. Since not all bloggers are journalists and the Weblog form is more casual, they argue they shouldn't be expected to follow the same ethics codes journalists are. But responsible bloggers should recognize that they are publishing words publicly, and therefore have certain ethical obligations to their readers, the people they write about, and society in general.
CyberJournalist.net has created a model Bloggers' Code of Ethics, by modifying the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics for the Weblog world. CyberJournalist.net follows this code and urges other Weblogs to as well.
Integrity is the cornerstone of credibility. Bloggers who adopt this code of principles and standards of practice not only practice ethical publishing, but convey to their readers that they can be trusted.
http://www.cyberjournalist.net/news/000215.php
Posted by: dwahzon at January 14, 2005 11:04 AM
battlebob:
I have never been a great fan of Howard Dean, but to compare what is done in a politcal campaign and what is done by our public servants using tax dollars is not even on the same planet as being equal. Had Bush done that, and I am sure he did worse during the campaign, as he did with the Swiftboat guys during the campaign, it would not smell anywhere as much as using tax dollars to deceptively craft public policies. No they are not the same, and I feel your attacks on Dean are unfounded.
Posted by: Bob Evans at January 14, 2005 02:17 PM
Bob
I saw Dwahzon's post earlier this morning... before I started researching SS reform, yet again.
With MSM quoting bloggers more and more it is certainly something to think about, particularly by bloggers who want to be taken seriously. If you however a blogger who is just in it for fun or bashing, then I suppose that's what you will do. But, if you want your opinion respected, that's a different story.
Ira,
The difference is only in scope? That doesn't sound like a valid argument to me.
Either he hired someone to spread his message in the guise it was an honest opinion or he didn't.
It is a yes or no question.
Where the money came from is noise.
Where is the transparency?
The idea that poor people will do better by investing in a stock market is ludicrous. Financial markets rise and fall. If you bought near the top in 1929, it took you nearly 20 years to get back your investment - assuming that you didn't buy a company that simply folded, and had the ability to hold your positions for a 20 year period. Poor and middle class people cannot hold a losing investment for that long. Furthermore, the long-term prospects for this economy are anything but robust (considering the trade deficit, the debt level of the average American, the trend towards outsourcing of high-paying technical positions, and both the growing size of the budget deficit and the national debt). This is absolutely not the moment to attempt a privatization experiment.
Dubya - doing for America what he did for Harken and Arbusto.
I agree with Ira on this one. While I wish Dean hadn't paid these guys, the statement from the campaign did say that they wanted to keep the guys from being scooped up by the other side. It also said that Kos did disclose. While I still think the whole thing stinks, I think it is exponentially worse when taxpayer dollars are used, and the group committing the propaganda is in POWER.
Neither side should do it, but there is a huge difference.
I guess we can agree to disagree.
This is the wingnuts trying desperatly to shift the focus off of Armstrong Williams. Yesterday on the newsmax site they tried to accuse Ed Schultz of being paid by the Dem party. Of course this is not true but, they are desperate to tar someone from the left with the same brush. I agree with Ira on this, there's a BIG difference between being hired by a candidate & being paid with taxpayer money. Also, I understand that the Dean bloggers did disclose that they were working for the Dean campaign. There are criminal repercussions for what Williams did. I also expect that the wingnuts will keep throwing Dem names at the wall until one sticks & they can shift the focus off mr.williams.
battlebob:
I will let this discussion go but one more argument for Dean and I never supported the man. If the dishonesty had been raised in the democratic primary as an issue of honesty and honest campaigning even if known at the time it would be a legitimate argument.Certainly we want our Democratic politicians to be honest and transparent as you suggest but I am really bothered here that anyone would quote Buckley who is obviously part of the Republican spin machine trying desperately to show a moral equivalency.
Do you remember Bob when the Repubs went absolutely bazirk when Clinton had Friends sleep in the Linclon bedroom. In my mind this should be considered Bribery and criminally prosecuted. Do you not understand that what you are advocating plays right into the Rove tactics of creating a diversion so the media will not focus on Bush and his criminal behavior but instead on Dean. It surprises me that you would be sucked into these Bush apologists arguments. I respect your argument but it really pos me to hear people on this blog taking that position. Sorry Bob, as we have agreed on practically everything else posted here.
Posted by: Cyrano at January 14, 2005 02:27 PM
Cyrano,
The Brit's tried privatizing and it failed. There's a link to a commentary in the American Prospect about this in my blog piece - http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=228
I have not heard one elected Dem come out in favor of this. Even many of the Repubs are against it. It's disasterous!
I posted the WSJ news item on Dean's payments to bloggers, not to make a comparison to the thread topic (I posted without comment), but because the subject is being raised for scrutiny in connection with the MSM scandals, and the subject of a code of ethics had been raised in the preceding thread.
We've seen suggestions for regulation of various aspects of the internet, including web logs, and now we're seeing a code of ethics being advocated by bloggers themselves.
I can't help observing that it's common for an industry to embrace self-regulation in an effort to stave of government regulation, and here the blog "industry" seems to be no different.
In any case, this really is a side issue to the work of the DCP, and it probably would be more appropriate to discuss it in the DCP forums.
Posted by: Ira at January 14, 2005 02:44 PM
Posted by: nancyjane at January 14, 2005 02:35 PM
One of my failings is I tend to sometimes ignore degrees.
I always ask the question did or did not something occur.
If it did occur, it doesn't really matter to me what someone else did. Armstrong is wrong, Clinton was wrong. Dean is wrong. Each is wrong seperately.
What do we do about it?
Let it slide? Is that a moral message?
Tell him it is not acceptable and is reason enough to not allow him to be DNC? Maybe
BTW, I was totally against Clinton and worked against him for eight years. His infidelity was well known for years. He is the greatest speaker and motivator I ever heard. I am in awe of his brilliance. He also had the morals of an alley cat. I almost did but decided not support his impeachment, but did support some kind of censure.
That is why I support full impeachment of Bush and jailing of Rumy.
What the other side does is an hollow argument. If we do something wrong, we deserve to hammered for it. Dean may personally have to answer this. No mouthpiece, no statement from somebody or other. The good doctor himself.
battlebob:
did not know of your hostelity towards Clinton. His private morals I agree were horrible and screwed the country with a Bush Presidency. I brought up the Lincoln bedroom issue to show that Clinton while sexually preverted never enriched himself at taxpayer expense and yet was traeted as such.
Where is kenneth Starr when we have the potential of REAL BRIBERY. Is there a difference b/w cheating on your wife and cheating on the American taxpayer? Where would a Republican Congress be if for instance a President Kerry had Bribed Ed Shultz with taxpayer money to support his policy position as President. I am truly outraged that anyone here cannot understand the hypocrisy or difference. Should Dean be the DNC Chair. No but as I posted many many times it has 0 to do with this.
I want a special prosecutor appointed.Am I alone here in this call? I understand that law lapsed but one can still be appointed. Why is this not bribery but having friends sleep in a Whitehouse bedroom is bob?
I think Clinton did a good job but should not have taken a risk with unprofessional behavior.
Other than that, I was not really that interested in it but he should have known that such behavior, if exposed, would not fly in this country.
Certainly not unique - remember Wilber Mills & the strippers & Bill Bennet & the gambling & on & on ..
In response to April's earlier post, yes, FCC Commissioner Jonathon Adelstein is pushing for an FCC investigation to find out if Williams' contract violated any laws.
http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=7322602
Senators Specter and Harkin are also asking that the Education Department turn over financial records.
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20050113-114515-9927r.htm
As taxpayers, it is our right to know if our money is being used to fund illegal practices. It's that simple.
With distance, I still can't believe the audacity and selfishness of Clinton's lapse, knowing what we all know now about that crowd. Like daring someone to find out. The two of them, Bush and Clinton, playing out their psyches so blatantly.
Yet I think he is truly empathetic, but maybe not as much as he seems.
Give me a grown-up, authentic like Kerry any second.
Posted by: Ira at January 14, 2005 03:28 PM
Posted by: DiAnne at January 14, 2005 03:46 PM
I totally agree that to be consistant, we should go after those who commit the same crimes in the major that Dean did in the minor.
They did something illegal and should be nailed for it.
As I said before, I was a Repub from 80-00. I actively supported Bush1 and Dole. I was not as active for Reagan but was against Carter and Mondale. I was a Dem until 1980.
I always had a real battle with my conscience about the strength of the immoral right and the influence they had with the Repub party.
They finially became too depraved for me which culminated in the South Carolina smearfest against McCain.
This was similar to the smearvet attack against Kerry.
battlebob:
we don't agree about this one and I think that Clinton was a great President and did wonderful things for this country. My life and my family's life was much better then. Most all of us had good jobs, stable incomes, peace, prosperity and social fairness. That is my mark of a good President. I could care less about his private conduct. Kerry was the blend of good private character, intelligence and an advocate of good public policy. Republicans always attack folks like me b/c I judge moral behavior of our chosen leaders on how they handle public affairs not their private business. I would never approve of Clinton's behavior if I saw that in my children wife or family. But that is my family's business. It is b/w memebers of my family and will be judged by my god in my place and in its time. I look at it the same way as judging the right to an abortion.
Bush may be faithful to Laura but I find it much more reprehensible that he has cheated the American public. That effects my life, your life, your neighbors and friends lives and the reputation of this country as a whole. To me that is the most impt character of our public servants.
I just ask that you please back off of your attacks on Howard Dean, please. Is he perfect. Of course not. But his values and personal behavior are miles better than Bush. I don't want him as the face of the Democratic Party b/c I want to win future elections, and he was not the answer last March and he is not the party's answer today.
You Bob are obviously a conservative Democrat. I am thrilled that you have chosen to be Democrat and we all certainly need to hear more from you and less from me on how to attract more conservatives to this party. Thank you bob.
I've been scratching my head for quite a while about the following :
Cyber journalists/ethics/bloggers
- Cyber journalists? A new species.
But how many REAL journalists have you got left?
- Ethics? Sure (here)
You are smothering under Rovian ethics
- Bloggers? Last space of free(dom) talk
This is no time to frame yourself in "politically correct". You can be political AND correct, but pleeaaassse, don't start to look as processed food. Be natural, raw and genuine. Speak your minds, rebel, oppose, dissent, feel free, but never be politically correct.
There are lots of people here who knew the 70's and what opposing meant. They had long hair, dressed as a mess, listened to Bob Dylan and Joan Baez, smoked pot occasionally, went to jail : but they had ethics, and now stand as historical touch stone . Kerry was one of them....
Now, if you want to compete with the best elections blogs, here is the Washington Post selection.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-adv/marketing/blog/
Here they go again with their lies and destortions again. Sounds to me like the story of weapons of mass destruction (Bush's SS Reform plan). Our simple question to Bush is why should we believe anything he or his corrupt adminstration have to say? Senator Reed said as much here.
"WASHINGTON (AP) - Social Security taxes will have to rise by half if lawmakers don't revamp the giant program, President Bush's budget chief said Friday as the administration sought support for its overhaul plans.
The comments by Joshua Bolten came as Democrats accused the administration of hiding the costs of its plans for shoring up the pension system for the elderly and disabled.
The White House has talked about letting workers voluntarily divert part of their payroll taxes to investment accounts they would control but has provided no detail. Democrats say the model most often described would cost more than $2 trillion over the first decade alone and hasten the program's fiscal problems.
"Rather than averting the so-called 'crisis' it decries, the administration's plan will create a crisis where currently only a challenge exists," said Rep. John Spratt of South Carolina, top Democrat on the House Budget Committee.
In remarks Friday to members of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Bolten said the 70-year-old program has failed to change with the times. The number of workers paying Social Security taxes has shrunk compared to the number of retirees whose benefits they are supporting, yet more than 20 tax increases in recent decades have not fixed the imbalance, he said.
"All these tax increases did was push those problems out to be solved another day," Bolten said. "That day has arrived."
Bolten revealed no new information about what Bush will propose. Trustees who oversee Social Security say the program will fall $3.7 trillion short of its obligations over the next 75 years, and Bolten said the problem will grow by $600 billion each year it is not addressed.
"If we do nothing to fix Social Security, we will eventually need to raise Social Security payroll taxes on Americans by about 50 percent," he said.
Such an increase would stifle job creation and prompt employers to lower wages, Bolten said.
"Delay and inaction are not an option," he said, adding later, "This is a crisis."
The White House is considering letting workers divert up to two-thirds of the 6.2 percent paid in payroll taxes into investment accounts, up to perhaps $1,000 to $1,300 a year, administration officials have said.
Bush has said retirees and people about to retire will not see their benefits reduced.
To help make up for lost revenue, the administration is considering reducing the benefits of future retirees, but it has not specified for whom or by how much. That has left an opening for attacks by Democrats.
"We have seen this administration use exaggeration and distortion before in order to advance its ideological agenda, with painful results," said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I. "The kind of plan the president supports only achieves solvency for Social Security through massive cuts in guaranteed benefits. Private accounts actually weaken the solvency of the program."
It is hard for me not to connect Bill’s infidelity with Hillary’s absolute grace and class throughout the entire ordeal. The press and the Repubs tried to make her out to be a victim: the press to make a story and the Repubs to get to Bill as a moral weakling. She never took the victim or sympathy routes and ate an awful lot of crap over it. I really admire her for her grace under fire. She may not be the best candidate for President, but she gets my vote as one of the best people.
My father was similar to Bill except more violent. I undertook martial arts training to stop it from continuing. I can relate to what Hillary and Chelsea went through. The difference is they worked though the problem in public.
Posted by: Ira at January 14, 2005 04:36 PM
OK...back to Bush bashing again...
The Chamber of Commerce was a bastion of Bush support during the last election. I was wondering if there is any indication of support from their members this time around for SS changes.
Posted by: Andrée - France at January 14, 2005 04:35 PM
sorry pard...not all of us dressed as a mess. The other stuff is true though...
Kerry Tries to Improve U.S.-France Ties
1 hour, 40 minutes ago
By ELAINE GANLEY, Associated Press Writer
PARIS - Sen. John Kerry's French connection was treated as a liability during his bid for the U.S. presidency. On Friday, he used his popularity here to try to help rebuild strained ties between Paris and Washington, and expressed confidence that would happen.
The Massachusetts Democrat was in Paris at the close of a tour of Europe and the Middle East that included trips to Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Israel and the West Bank.
In a more than 45-minute meeting with President Jacques Chirac, the former presidential candidate discussed frayed relations between France and the United States.
"I'm convinced there's an opportunity here to bring that relationship closer," he said.
He and Chirac discussed Iraq, Iran and the Middle East peace process, Kerry told reporters.
"Succeeding in Iraq and winning the war on terror will take a global effort, and I have conveyed that in my meetings with heads of state in the Middle East and Europe," Kerry said in a statement. "We all have a stake in the outcome of Iraq, and I believe they have a responsibility to do more."
"This has been a good trip. It was very important for me personally to thank our brave men and women in uniform for their service and assess the situation in Iraq," said Kerry who visited U.S. forces in the volatile northern Iraqi city of Mosul.
Kerry, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, forecast a meeting between Chirac and Bush. "I hope President Bush will have an opportunity to meet the president," he told reporters. "I'm confident that will happen, not just the meeting but the movement in the right direction."
[SNIP]
MORE: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&ncid=535&e=5&u=/ap/20050114/ap_on_re_eu/france_kerry
They did something illegal and should be nailed for it.
Posted by: battlebob at January 14, 2005 04:08 PM
Were Howard Dean's actions actually illegal? Framing of this issue is critical. Just look at the head post for this thread. Frank Rich writes an excellent critique of the media's failures and then the blog melts into disagreements about about Clinton, Dean, and who knows what else. Is a hired consultant who submits posts to a blog in a private organization performing illegal activities if it is not made public? We need to be sure of that. Is the Dept. of Education guilty of breaking the law? I don't know the answer to these questions. But we do know that matters of judgement are in question here. I generally use the sniff test in situations like this. Which action stinks more? You decide.
Was Howard Dean's decison to hire a paid consultant to submit blog posts as manipulative as the Dept of Education? Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I don't think so, but not disclosing both was certainly short sighted.
Posted by: oncall at January 14, 2005 04:54 PM
Illegal, no...questionable practice yes..
I don't do relationships to other activities well. I tend to stand things up on their own first and then try to slot the penalty. I tend to try and avoid dismissing something because somebody else got away with it.
So is it right or wrong and what should the penalty be if it is wrong?
I think Dean has to talk about it...
As far as the Repub activities, we should never let them off the hook until the problem is addressed and resolved. Same question...Is what they did right or wrong and what should the penalty be?
The difference is they worked through the problem in public.
Battlebob,
About Bill...
This is something that always baffled me about American political mores.
A candidate is elected upon his program, no?
Or, should. What does his private life do in the middle of it.?
Chirac (who is not a saint) has been in political life for some 40 years. We knew he had 2 daughters, but ever heard of 1. No problem, that's not our business.
Two weeks ago, Madame Chirac, for the very first time, spoke of Laurence her eldest daughter. Bernadette Chirac is at the head of a Foundation that does a lot for hospitals, and opened the first one for teenagers suffering of anorexia. That was it. We still don't know where Laurence is, how she looks, how she is going and no one will ask. There is China Wall between public and private life.
None of that interferes with the President's role and duties.
In fact, do you know what the Elysées is? It's the former mansion house of Madame de Pompadour, Louis the XVth's mistress. She was was one of the greatest politicians in XVIIIth century. She ruled, while the king had fun. There are often great women behind men.
Posted by: battlebob at January 14, 2005 05:10 PM
I think we are in agreement here. The Bushco has to be held accountable. And Howard Dean does need to talk about it. So let's just blame emmenem (?sp) again, that is more fun.
But the press dragged out the lurid detail, Andree. He should have known they would. That's the lapse.
Had press left them private, we would not have had to see the sleaze of it. Monica Lewinsky was no Madame Pompadour, and her bag line...a line waiting to happen
Seeing the photos of Chirac and Kerry, what a handsome pair. Kerry generally looking more at ease and natural, coif and all.
"The Chamber of Commerce was a bastion of Bush support during the last election. I was wondering if there is any indication of support from their members this time around for SS changes."
The Chambers' main goals for this year are malpractice reform, asbestos litigation reform, class action litigation reform and whatever other tort reforms they can muster and as you have so eloquently mentioned restricting organized labor. Specter is behind these movements for litigation reform and as the new Chairman of the Judiciary will have a lot of clout(why in the world does the AFL-CIO continue to help Specter?)
Good question though about Social Security Reform and the Chamber. Personally I have not heard anything from them about SS. My guess is that if unions are against it they will be for it but I just don't think they have the passion for that policy when they have tort reform, lawyer bashing, union bashing and cutting corp taxes on their plate. We here in Texas are going through major debate over corp and business taxes vs our outrageous property taxes (8-10 times higher than California's) My guess is that those are their priorities not SS Reform except for input from big Bush supporters like Charles Schwab who stand to gain a fortune from it. I expect more individual Wallstreet involvement and less Chamber involvement in the fight. As I stated last week we desperately need to kiss and make up with AARP who I think will determine the outcome, not the Chamber. I would be surprised to see much from the Chamber on this one but their political action committee seems to have an endless amount of money to spend so its a good idea to keep a watch on them. Perhaps we can email their corp office and find their official position which I am sure will show they support it. The question is with how many bucks?
Marjorie G,
Where did you see the pictures?
We may have our own problems with the Dean paid hype, having to battle it for the primary. Evidence of hype everywhere in the media, but no real support in Iowa, and other states, except NH, no one else really knowing him.
We wondered where that money went. Promotional advertising at all levels. Unethical, like lying about the war position to get votes, but not illegal. The journalists should be ashamed, and may have done it all for free.
Off topic, but I had to get this off my mind...
Ever since this summer ive had a Kerry Edwards button pinned to my purse. I did not take it off after the election, and never planned to. Today I went to work with it on, put my purse down, and when I went to pick up my purse again, the button was gone. I don't know if id be more upset to hear that it was a student, or another teacher that took it. But who ever it was, id just like to tell them: "You can steal my button, but you cant steal my voice." ;-)
Anyway, thanks, Bob E, for posting the info about Kerry in France!
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?g=events/pl/021103kerry&a=&tmpl=sl&e=5&na=1&l=&ns=&t=
Kery photos, Andree
Currently 5 or 6 on updating thread, which I've kept on a document for months and months.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?p=news&g=events/pl/021103kerry&i=index&e=3&tmpl=sl&ns=&l=&m=&c=
The better updating Kerry photo thread
Native Texan:
You can look at it 2 ways. One they didn't steal your purse. 2. Maybe they were a Kerry admirer and just wanted a souvenier.
Vanessa is gorgeous. Is that OK to say?
Marjorie G,
Thanks. They look pretty happy.
About press, we have very strict laws protecting private life.
Put them on your program....
Ira, very okay. Classy woman, as is the whole family.
Native,
You're quite welcome! There are some additional links in Pamela's story on the Light Up The Darkness blog:
http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=229
very okay. Classy woman, as is the whole family.
Marjorie G,
I know how to interpretate Chirac's gestures.
He touches, if not grasp Kerry : he is a member of the family for him. As for Alexandra : top. Have you seen the happy faces.
Now I am going to be mean, our decor is much better than the English one.
In fact I'm watching a terrible documentary film about Auswitzch concentration camp, 60th anniversary.
After, we will have the testimony of Simone Weil, who was made prisoner there when she was 17. Her whole family died. In 1974, she became Health Minister, and passed the abortion law in the most hateful National Assembly. But the law passed, and her tears remain.
Today, we are starting to have problems with that law, but she watches.
That woman is such an example.
From MSNBC.com:
Tim Russert is NBC News’ Washington bureau chief and host of Meet the Press. He regularly offers MSNBC.com’s readers his insight and analysis into questions about politics past, present and future.
MSNBC: Tim, President Bush has called the war in Iraq an integral part in the war on terrorism. But now we see this report from the National Intelligence council that says Iraq has become the new training ground for terrorists.
Russert: It realizes his every worst fear.
Afghanistan had been the haven for al-Qaida, with the Taliban protecting them -– we had to go in there and take down the Taliban and try to root out al-Qaida.
If Iraq becomes the new haven, geographically, it is a disaster. It is so much closer to Israel and to other countries in the Middle East.
It is not what George Bush wants to leave behind. His vision was to have a democracy in Iraq, which would, in effect, lead the way for other democracies to follow in that area.
So, now the challenge is two-fold. How do we have an exit strategy, train enough Iraqis in military and security forces to turn over control of that nation so our troops can leave? And, secondly, how do we ensure that those Iraqis can hold down the insurgency and not let Iraq slip into the control of the terrorists.
MSNBC: What about former Secretary of State James Baker’s plan for a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops.
Russert: I think that’s the dream of the policy makers at the Pentagon.
The difficulty is the Iraqis have to step up. If they do not take control of their country by having people join the military and join the police force and, frankly, be willing to hunt down other Iraqis, we are in a situation where we either stay and have a long war of terrible attrition, or we get out and the insurgents and the terrorists take over.
It’s Catch-22, in the worst sense of the word. I think we’ll have a much better idea of how the Iraqi people feel about their future when we see the result of the elections on Jan. 30.
[SNIP]
MORE:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6826160/
Sorry, but I think how we conduct ourselves speaks about our self-control and discipline. These are the attributes that get you through the tough times. I never had confidence that Clinton would be the one to stay with a tough problem. I thought that Clinton did not have a strong central core. I actually thought that Hillary had the cajoles in the family. However, we are electing political leaders, not saints. Clinton’s wanderings in Arkansas were well known prior to the election. The good that Hillary did was not as well known.
To argue against myself…Clinton went into Kosovo when no one else wanted to. I had business contacts there and we were screaming for help against the death squads. The conventional wisdom was it was Europe’s problem. Because of past history, Europe couldn’t do it. Only the US could and after a little pushing from people like Bob Dole, Clinton did get us involved. It also took daily video footage of mass graves, Clinton pretty much did it without support either here or abroad. Foreign involvement came later after Clinton made it politically safe to get involved.. The Repubs never supported him at all. I had a lot of shouting matches with Repub leaders who didn’t see – and still don’t see - the need to save the life of strangers.
I think Bush suffers from a lack of self-control, is undisciplined and unprincipled. The fact that he refuses to take responsibility for his actions is one of many serious character flaws
Like all people, Clinton has good points and bad points. The economy was great under his watch. I think his economic policies had a lot to do with it. He also put a lot of really good people on his staff. The Repubs think he just got lucky. The bad side, besides his sexual wanderings, was often bowing to the wishes of the last person he saw.
From my own dealings with the Clinton government (I was on several big ticket government projects and on some very large social programs), it was often yes, no, yes, no…on and on and on. We were always sending someone to meet with one of the Clintonites and often with cabinet members. Sometime, we would get an agreement and then have it change after someone else made their pitch. It drove us nuts. But that was common during the Clinton years. It was enormously difficult for us to get things done through the Clinton administration.
Is that preferable to the lying, murderous gang of thieves we have now? I would take Bill back in a heartbeat.
Guess we are all having trouble with the abortion law, pendulum swings across the pond, also.
True, the press supports Bush, which means the lowest common denominator of all things. Pretty graceless, as well as evil bunch.
The French may have too many stikes in the name of liberte, daily, but looks pretty good to us now, over here.
Or is your pendulum swinging back on all that, too?
Late leaving for salad with my husband, so adieu, Andree
Dean paying bloggers really doesn't compare in any way to Williams paying people who write columns in major newspapers in this country and who have access to the radio and television airwaves.
After all, a candidate setting up his own blog (as Kerry did, Dean did, Clark did etc., is all part of the campaign, and we can pretty much all assume that the info that goes out on those blogs is going to be in favor of that particular candidate, or we wouldn't bother to go to them.
Professional journalists are held to higher standards because they're professional journalists- it's ASSUMED that bloggers are offering their own opinions, and, even when bloggers offer facts, they really shouldn't be assumed to be true without some verification. We're private citizens out here- we're pretty much fooling ourselves if we think we're part of the professional media.
Dean was campaigning, that's all. It's no big deal. What Armstrong Williams did is a totally different thing. And, by the way, if I wanted to spread propaganda and used my own private money for it, it would be perfectly legal. You'd have the right to believe me or not, but I wouldn't be affecting you one way or the other. This was OUR TAX MONEY!!!!!! That's why it was wrong, and YES, it is illegal .
Sorry- should have been a period after that first sentence. Williams-period. And it should have said "it's not the same as paying."
ARgh- my mind is out of gear. It's Friday.
On the pictures of JK in Europe, did you all see the one where JK and Tony Blair look so very chummy... http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050114/481/lab10101141108
"W" is probably throwing darts at it!
Vanessa looks so lovely in the photos... it's great to see her with her dad having a good time.
Thank you for so eloquently making my point Linda. The only people that should complain about Dean's expenditures are his campaign contributors or his political opponents. Its a political smoke screen Linda by the Rovians. How many times have we seen that diversion to get Bush out of trouble. Attack your opponents and hope everyone totally forgets what you did wrong. Do we forget Bush's avoidance of his reserve training. Send out the swift boat goons and suddenly we all forget that he was awoll. Its a tried and true formula by this Whitehouse that works like a charm. But you are right Linda these are only my opinions and if I want to pay you to spread my theory that somehow makes me the same as Williams.
"Dean was campaigning, that's all. It's no big deal. What Armstrong Williams did is a totally different thing. And, by the way, if I wanted to spread propaganda and used my own private money for it, it would be perfectly legal. You'd have the right to believe me or not, but I wouldn't be affecting you one way or the other. This was OUR TAX MONEY!!!!!! That's why it was wrong, and YES, it is illegal ."
Posted by: NativeTexan4Kerry at January 14, 2005 05:28 PM
Don't feel bad. I took the K/E signs off both our vehicles because my wife was harassed.
I put them back on my truck which I always drive alone.
When people ask me why I respond that within 6 months you will want them also.
I am actually getting favorable responses now. Buyers'remorse anyone?
battlebob:
You need one of those Don't Blame I Voted for Kerry/Edwards stickers. $6.95 is rather steep though.
We just can't afford to get my car repainted (cars still being keyed) so I am being careful with my stickers down here in the deep deep south.
As usual, I have a sightly different take, but we went all over that. Letting someone off completely because of another far greater and serious crime is a little hollow. Whether this is a Rovian trick or not is irrelevant. It happened and Dean should explain it..
If he doesn't, it will stay in the air and get in the way of any future move on his part. I want to hear it from him.
He may answer as you do and we'll debate it.
The details are extremely graphic and may open up old wounds about abu graib.
Is this part of Gonzales's masterpiece?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9343-2005Jan14.html?referrer=email
Posted by: Ira at January 14, 2005 06:36 PM,
Thanks but if you saw my truck, the stickers are the best looking part on the vehicle.
The paint came off a long time ago because of a factory defect. Primer looks pretty good in the dark.
Posted by: Ira at January 14, 2005 06:36 PM
I should have asked because you mentioned the south..
Where do you live anyway?
You are right Bob you don't distinguish. That's like saying that a child that takes a cookie out of a cookie jar they are told not to touch is the same as Ken Lay stealing 10s of millions, bankrupting a company, putting thousands out of jobs and financially hurting investors as being the moral equivalent.They are both theft under your theory and deserve the same consideration. Not in my book.
Leave it alone already bob. We get your point. You don't like Howard Dean. Great.
I think it being a Rovian trick is a lesson that all of us involved in the campaign are not willing to tolerate. Its the way Bush operates.
I gotta go...chat with you all later...
Excuse me, BB, but what Zephyr (sour grapes)Teachout says to total CRAP. She is trying to make herself queen of the blog world by saying that ALL bloggers should adopt jounalistic standards of some sort or another.
here's are the facts of the matter: the bloggers that were hired by the Dean campaign DID in fact disclose the information, PROMINENTLY, as in BIG LETTERS at the tops of his blog, and that was Kos. The other blogger, Jerome of MyDD didn't blog during the period in question.
And here is my final question to Zephyr, whose main bitch is that she didn't get hired by Kos AFTER the Dean campaign folded (and peddled this crap to the WSJ, which should tell you something about HER ethics): Zephyr was the one who was attempting to BRIBE the two bloggers in question. As you see that she admits, they were never told they were being hired to do that. That was just HER intent from the internal point of view.
Given the facts of the matter, who the HELL is Zephyr Teachout to tell anyone, anything about ethics or standards?
IMHO, leave the blogsphere alone. Net Darwinism seems to do a fine job of managing problems.
Zephyr, the attempted briber-turned Wall Street Journal snitch, should sit down and shut up.
This whole matter is completely irrelevant to Dean.
And because I know the fact of the matters, has put me in the really annoying position of a.) defending Kos (*sigh*) and defending Dean (double *sigh*).
Argghh.
And this diatribe was not directed at you Bob or at anyone on the blog BTW. The whole thing is just annoying BS, create out of whole cloth to try to shut blogs and bloggers up.
I think the "outside world", so to speak. would like to make a TON of regulations and rules for blogs to follow in order to shut them up. I really do think that is at the bottom of what is happening here. The MSM is feeling threatened by the blogs exposing how corrupt and lazy they are.
I'm a native Houstonian.We used to be proud Democrats. Conservative but tolerant. This place now really scares me and that truly makes me sad.My family has been actively involved in this community for a generation. Its turned into a bunch of self centered reactionaries and I blame the DNC for walking away from our state party. My theory is that if the national DNC does not at least have a presence in the 4th largest city in the country it becomes a vacuum filled with right wing reactionaries. We won a State Senate Senate by 42 votes over a 20 year influential Republican on the state finance committee. I am friends with the person who ran that campaign and she is stunned that while the Republicans are trying to get the State Senate to overturn that election the DNC has not said a word or sent a sole down here to help. Moveon sent out emails on this race but the DNC has been totally silent. They talk about changing the south but don't walk the talk. I think that indy and Native Texan know exactly where I am coming from.
Posted by: spinnaker at January 14, 2005 06:55 PM
Spinnaker,
I will take you at your word. I have no reason not to. Given what you posted, there is absolutely no reason for Dean to make any kind of statements except that Zephyr is a pandering blog whore.
I think you are correct, the MSM is concerned that they are loosing their grip. They should have thought about that before they decided not to tell the whold truth about a variety of issues. It is their own fault, and the public is sickened by them. Doesn't matter what end of the political spectrum one stands in. The press is reviled for its self serving, xenophobic, prejudical "infotainment"
Ira-
lol your comment about my missing Kerry Edwards button made me smile. "always look on the bright side of life," i guess. ;-)
As a native Texan, though im not exactly sure what I think is the main cause of/solution to the "southern issue," i definately see where you're coming from.
hahaha!
i know a guy who is a disgustingly radical and hateful repug who worships bush. i started sending him all those pics of JK with Blair and Sharon... he got so jealous/upset! i must say, it was fun.
Posted by: oncall at January 14, 2005 07:22 PM
LOl--pandering blog whore was exactly the phrase that escaped me.
Also, all of this was brought up over a year ago. Not only is it BS, it's old BS at that.
MSM=pathetic attempts to hold on to crumbling empire. Kind of like the Bush family.
Ira,
It's thanks to Houston that I discovered Kerry.
Each time I sent my daughter there, my friends went : oh my God! They were frightened.
I wondered about what life might be for Democrats in Texas, got on their site, went up to DNC, read about the candidates and made my pick : Kerry.
Ever since, I've been getting mails from the TDP. I know exactly what has been going on, and how much they asked and implored to the DNC to be paid attention to, and have Kerry or Edwards dropping by. Nothing.
I have been attacked recently by a Houstonian, who praises herself to be CONSERVATIVE, for supporting Kerry and saying that she was not surprised I supported his loophole policies.
Too bad for her. She badly needs me for her business, and I'm not moving a finger anymore. I'm too stupid. I get apologies, cards. I remain mute.
Posted by: oncall at January 14, 2005 07:22 PM
And to give everyone some idea of the journalistic standards of the Wall Street Journal's devotion to accuracy, they refer to Markos Moulitsas of the Daily Kos as Markos Zuniga.
Which means that they didn't do even the most cursory of research into the friggin' story.
And if you really want to be sickened by a lack of research and televised display of idiots on parade, how about Paul Begala comparing this story to Armstrong Williams, calling it sloppy standards on the liberal side. This after practically French kissing Armstrong Williams on Crossfire last week during Armstrong's fainthearted mock mea culpa.
Excuse me, I have to brush my brain out. I have mentioned Crossmorons twice in one post.
I cannot WAIT until those asshats are gone.
With friends like Begala, who needs two bit whores around, anyway.
Tonights rant is now concluded. Please continue with the rest of tonight's previously scheduled grown up type blogging.
Andree
I think we can get you some blue business!!
There are some Democrats with money & they'd be glad to do business internationally, I'm sure!
PS Your daughters are welcome in Seattle - we have already had young guests from Paris & London & they are now like family!! I love them like my own son.
Kerry Tries to Improve US-France Ties
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/france_kerry
Now if only Bush hadn't destroyed the value of the dollar v the Euro ..
Andree: Now I am going to be mean, our decor is much better than the English one.
LOL That is so French
If you want to see tacky, look at the "worst dressed women" list which just came out. People like Courtney Love & Britney Spears could be expected to keep their bad taste even if they get money but Paris Hilton should know better.
Yes - Vanessa looks great. When we were at the DNC in Boston, Vanessa & Alixandra were staying in the hotel where the Kerry HQ was & they were so cute - look much smaller & younger in person. I photography everything & everyone but not them - I wanted to give them some space & some privacy.
Patti F was talking to a woman in the bar - she said, "You look so much like Elizabeth Edwards - you could be her sister." The woman said, "I AM her sister."
My favorite pictures in the portrait book done by the guy who did "Going UpRiver" are the ones of John on the grass laying down & looking up at Vanessa, & the one of him with Eugene McCarthy, the lst politician I ever worked for (in my teens). He is still alive & a grand old man.
DiAnne,
That's not the problem. It's those red Houstonian people who need me.... which is fun somewhere.
If you saw their New Years greeting card! They are crawling under the carpeting, begging and acting lovingly.
I'll go to Houston (they have it ready) and as my daughter told me : pick as much money as you can from those Rethugs.... I'll be quite happy to do that.
It's just the fact that they acted as if they were in Texas, but overseas they went one big step too far.
I can oppose without being harmed, so I do it.
Blue I am, Blue I stay.
back again..
In Phoenix, when Kerry pulled out, the air went out of the balloon. Bush stopped ads also. We were left with MoveOn and they had the smearvets. I know a lot of folks curtailed their involvement. A lot of the populace was less responsive to our side as they didn't see Kerry as that concerned about us. They ignored the fact that Bush pulled out also. I didn't see a great McCain influence here. He ran virtually unopposed so he took it easy. I think they thought Arizona was in the bag. It turns out they were correct.
The trouble is, I don’t know if we can do better without changing our strategy and direction. There were a lot of us who called, rang doorbells, spoke to anyone who would listen, put up signs. I know a whole lot of dedicated people who gave everything they had to this election. It seemed we were going to do great especially with the minority vote.
With the growth of the extended suburbs, we need to push out away from city centers. This is a tough sell as their needs are much different then central city needs. The ‘burbs have a different view on important city issues like public transportation, crime and education. We are working on problems common to all of us like clean air, abortion and civil rights, deficit spending, insurance needs to counteract the 3G’s the Repubs float out there. They have no other issues and we are trying to force the dialog to our strengths. The Repubs are pretty quick to falsely categorize where we are on the political number line and we can use that to our advantage. We need the ‘burbs to win and the Repubs are already established. They are like a bunch of locusts. I think we won the Phoenix, Tucson and the Indian Reservation vote. I think Bush won everything else.
What I wouldn’t have given for a visit by Wes Clark. He finished second in the primary and the senior and military voters love him. It certainly would have made it closer.
There are a lot of Dem web sites and blogs in this state. I hope we can have some semblance of an organized attack. But maybe our forte is being disorganized. It is hard to hit a moving target. Maybe we baffle them with diversity.
I talked to a lot of repubs and their response about Bush stopping the ads was so what?
So maybe our fortitude was a bit weak after all. It is easy to say that after a victory.
This is no time to frame yourself in "politically correct". You can be political AND correct, but pleeaaassse, don't start to look as processed food. Be natural, raw and genuine. Speak your minds, rebel, oppose, dissent, feel free, but never be politically correct.
Posted by Andree - France.
I agree. That is what freedom is all about. With that being said, I feel I myself was trying to restrict what others were saying about all people of the Christian religion here a few threads back. And I apologize for the element in my comments that were trying to control the freedom of thought and expression here. I want to learn more and relish the opportunity to, but I realize that it is the very essence of freedom of speech that gives everyone the opportunity to teach and share on the blog. Sometimes not teach or share, just rant.
I care about this being a place where religious right people can come and be exposed to the truth, and besides being offended myself I also desired to keep this a "safe" place for conservatives to come. I know there is much more to a blog environment than being diverse enough for everyone and being careful not to offend anyone at all given times.
I realize after the discussion today that when we start to censor one we censor all.
Again, I apologize, and I beg your pardons.
Posted by: Andrée - France at January 14, 2005 08:38 PM
Is BULL still around? I spent a lot of years with them in your country (Also Italy and England)
A strategy that worked pretty well for me last time was ask what are the five most important issues and talk about them. If you can get someones attention and discuss specific issue by issue we do well.
After those five are discussed, ask what the next five most important issues are. I would often do this in a group to maximize my time. In a group setting, people will often be courteous enough to listen.
Asking people to choose the problem is analogous to the business verison of the vital few. Solve problems in the order of importance picking a few at a time.
Kinda goes with yesterday's marketing theme.
"And that [Democrats] are the Party of fiscal responsibility, which we have not seen from a Republican since 1968. Not one Republican has balanced the budget in this country since 1968. You can't trust Republicans with your money. If you want to hold onto your wallet, then you better elect Democrats." Howard Dean
Wise words from Dean. We should make a flyer of this info with glossy pictures of people being evicted from their middle class homes due to the dangerous, self-serving fiscal politices of this administration. We should make sure that flyer gets into every home in America.
I've always liked him, but I'm liking him better and better.
During the "town hall" Bush said, "African American males die sooner than other males do, which means the system is inherently unfair to a certain group of people…and that needs to be fixed."
Posted by: battlebob at January 14, 2005 01:49 PM
Jon Stewart showed the clip a couple of times on one of his shows this week. What made it even more pathetic was that Bush was sitting on a stool next to an African American male (who was there to shill for Bush so I didn't feel too much pity). As Bush is mumbling and fumbling with his delivery, the guy had the most pathetic and stunned look on his face. Then after a moment of brain freeze and panic - the guy started nodding his head in the affirmative.
It was one of those moments that Stewart does so well - where you're laughing so hard you're crying - at the same time in despair because our country is being run by an insensitive dolt.
"It was one of those moments that Stewart does so well - where you're laughing so hard you're crying - at the same time in despair because our country is being run by an insensitive dolt."
Dubya - doing for America what he did for Harken and Arbusto.
Andree
I get the picture - take the money & run - come to a blue state such as mine, to spend it. Be my guest!!
I have this Catholic friend who is on this kick with a priest about Bush being the antiChrist.
Hi all,
It has been confirmed. Today I ran into a girl from Armenia who lived there till she was 11 and spoke Russian. When I asked her to translate Chertoff's name she said Chert means devil and off means of. So when Mike Malloy got that e-mail from Russia that stated Chertoff means of the devil, it is true.
So we wil have Michael of the devil as our new Secretary of our Homeland Security if approved.
Just to let you know. Take care!
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0114-05.htm
Daddy Bush is telling Junior to get out! Maybe that will work!!!
Hey Cyrano,
Thanks for posting the Frank Rich piece because I had heard about it but still hadn't read it. (I still am having trouble reading the Sunday Times, which saddens me no end. I used to love to have a good lie-in on Sunday morning, drinking coffee, reading the Times. But the election has made me so adverse to reading or watching the news - I'm having trouble getting back into my beloved Sunday morning routine.)
Anyway, Rich doesn't hold any punches - and I'm glad he doesn't. If I were Paul Begala, I would be too embarrassed to show my face in public. How compromised is he now? Someone told me a few weeks ago that he was running for chair of the Dem party and I hit the roof. He has sold his soul for celebrity and doesn't have an ounce of integrity anymore.
There were a few sections of Rich's piece I thought were particularly stunning and right on the money. One was, in reference to the Williams appearance on Crossfire,...
"That almost no one would notice, let alone protest, is a snapshot of our cultural moment, in which hidden agendas in the presentation of "news" metastasize daily into a Kafkaesque hall of mirrors that could drive even the most earnest American into abject cynicism. But the ugly bigger picture reaches well beyond "Crossfire" and CNN."
Doesn't that pretty much sum up why we're so disgusted with the media and the supposed Democratic voices on shows like Crossfire. Media reform is an absolute must.
(from an otherwise depressing article)
Edward Kennedy, the senior senator from Massachusetts, sought to rally spirits this week, urging Democrats to hold firm to their principles rather than clone their rivals. "The last thing this country needs is two Republican parties," he said, calling for a "newly revitalised American dream" around tolerance and fairness and policies to deliver universal healthcare and access for everyone to a university education. "We as Democrats may be in the minority in Congress," he said, "but we speak for the majority of Americans."
Daddy Bush is telling Junior to get out! Maybe that will work!!!
Posted by: DiAnne at January 14, 2005 09:50 PM
I don't know, DiAnne, Dubya has such a complicated relationship with his father - and he's so much like a recalcitrant thirteen-year old - reverse psychology might be a more effective way to go. Maybe they should signal to Dubya that our troops should never leave - that way he'd be sure to pull them out sooner rather than later.
I don't know if anyone has posted this yet, but from Josh Marshall comes this tidbit:
Statement of Michael K. Powell, FCC Chairman: "In response to recent reports regarding potential violations of the "payola" and sponsorship identification provisions of the Communications Act, I have instructed the Enforcement Bureau to open two investigations: One into issues regarding commentator Armstrong Williams; and the other into issues regarding station WKSE (FM), Niagara Falls, New York, licensed a subsidiary of Entercom Communications Corporation. These provisions govern disclosure and sponsorship identification regarding payments or other consideration in connection with broadcast programs."
-- Josh Marshall
Good night all.
Resolute
Yes that supports the idea that he is more like a rebellious adolescent than the "strict father" he is framed as (using Lakoff's model).
I've just read this thread and heard for the first time about Dean's purported faux pas regarding paying bloggers during his campaign. I understand after doing some digging that the blogger in question actually DID disclose that Dean was a contributor. My take on it all is this: Dean is smart. Very, very smart. Maybe we could use some of that....
It's obvious to me from the MSM's murder of Dean's reputation during the primaries and from this allegation that the Republicans are extremely afraid of Dean. Perhaps with good reason.
===============
Every issue large or small that is raised by BushCo is a way of avoiding something else, diverting attention. I've posted this before, but it bears repeating - Hammer Home the War. Don't let BushCo distract us the way it does the media.
All Americans are concerned about the war. Their children are dying, it's costing us a fortune, it's ruining our international reputation and it's putting all of us at increased risk of terrorist attack.
Wakeful Republicans, honest economists and hopefully all Democrats will work to undermine the SS distraction, yet another invented "crisis." And we minions can certainly talk truth about it at every opportunity.
But I hope that Dems on the ground continue to put the best of our energies into exposing the lies and unacceptable circumstances surrounding the Bush Invasion. It's his, he created it, he owns it; over a hundred thousand innocent people have died, but he's still not talking "exit strategy."
Okay, almost saying good night, but I had to sahre this. i had never heard this name before for Count Novakula but it is both accurate and priceless: Bob Nofacts
And I thought this part of the Rich piece was so horrifying in its implications - it makes my blood run cold...
"Or is Mr. Williams merely the first one of his ilk to be exposed? Every time this administration puts out fiction through the news media - the "Rambo" exploits of Jessica Lynch, the initial cover-up of Pat Tillman's death by friendly fire - it's assumed that a credulous and excessively deferential press was duped. But might there be more paid agents at loose in the media machine? In response to questions at the White House, Mr. McClellan has said that he is "not aware" of any other such case and that he hasn't "heard" whether the administration's senior staff knew of the Williams contract - nondenial denials with miles of wiggle room."
Night Spinnaker
Today I had the pleasure of visiting an auto shop. Not just any auto shop, however.
There is a home which backs onto the freeway I travel every day. Before the election, the back yard contained a 4x8 sign on fibreboard that read in hand painted, red letters "Say NO to Bush!" During the election the backyard was taken up with two huge lighted Kerry signs - you could see them for miles. I kept meaning to stop in and thank the homeowners, whom I assumed were professionals, or creative types, for their patriotism.
Well, now there is a new sign on fibreboard, with red, hand painted letters, that reads "Don't Ask, Do Tell."
Finally I remembered to get off the highway and knock on the door to thank this obviously educated couple for their support of democratic values. It took me a half hour to find the house, the roads are that convoluted. I made several wrong attempts off the highway and had to go back on and retrace my steps. I ended up in a rather curious neighborhood with abandoned cars and other cues that usually keep me away.
I drove up and realized that the house itself was actually not in use, only the garages were. I went to the garage door and asked the greasy old guy working on a car inside "Is this your house?" He said "Yeah." I said "I just stopped by to thank you for putting the signs up in your yard."
He said "Well, that's why I moved the shop. Saw the fore sale sign from the highway, got ta thinkin'. The house is worth sh*t, but the garage'd do, so I bought the f*cker and moved the sh*t over. The kid brother paints the signs- I ain't artistic."
Sheesh. Every day some f*ckin' American blows me away with his patriotism.
As I left I noticed the bumper sticker on his beat up old pick-up: "Hate is not a family value."
We've got a plan now, he and I - I'm going to provide him with signs, and he's going to put them up. I've got about 24 4x8 sheets of fibreboard in my shed. We're going to change the signs every week or so.
Any and all sign suggestions welcome. Fewer words work best at that location. At least 50,000 cars, maybe twice that, go by there every morning, same at night.
to borrow from a fellow blogger:
NO SURRENDER!!!
Amy
Nice antidote to that rightwinger that has his own marquee between Seattle & Portland! & that horrible garish blinking thing that almost causes car wrecks outside Tacoma. It's on the Indian reservation & rightwingers lease it to showcase words like "Christine Concede".
I will not take my 9 Kerry bumper stickers off. I figure that every single day I either give someone hope or piss someone off & in any event, it's not a neutral message!
http://www.freewayblogger.com/
As I left I noticed the bumper sticker on his beat up old pick-up: "Hate is not a family value."
Posted by: Amy at January 14, 2005 10:42 PM
Hilarious!
Posted by: DiAnne at January 14, 2005 10:48 PM
I remember when you posted this link on the Kerry blog. I still tell people about the sign:
"Real soldiers are dying in their Hummers so you can play soldier in yours."
I also loved the one that uses that obnoxious "W" bumpersticker - "W_idownmaker"
Posted by: Amy at January 14, 2005 10:42 PM
Amy, you are a jewel.
I am sorry to say the ELCA came out very lukewarm against gay rights.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0114lutherans14.html
[snip]
Trying to walk a line that will preserve unity, a panel recommended Thursday that the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America officially maintain its positions against same-sex blessing ceremonies and gay and lesbian ministers in relationships but to tolerate dissenters.
Posted by: Amy at January 14, 2005 10:42 PM
That is the funniest post I have ever seen!
Still ROFLMAO!!
Amy...
Clean air is a moral value
_____________________________________
New THREAD - quite some time ago
______________________________________
Amy:
Put this in the forum! So you can give updates easily and retrieve suggestions more easily.
I think that for the good of the country (President Bush) should resign and let someone more capable take over the reins of the country. The big question is how do we do it?