« How To Succeed In Business... | Main | BUSH TO OFFER TELEVISED DISTRACTION FROM CIA LEAK TONIGHT »
What Would it Take?
Being a college student during the Watergate hearings was an exhilarating time for me--a young radical in her early undergraduate years at San Francisco State University, worried about the draft, about the war--SF State was a place of great political unrest during the late sixties and early 70s during the Vietnam War.
Deeply imbedded in my generation's psyche is the ghost of the historical events of 1972-74, the Watergate Hotel break-in, the special prosecutor, the Watergate hearings and the bringing down of a Presidential administration. It goes without saying that the events of the past two weeks have made me reflect more deeply on this prescient article, written by Eric Francis, on the history and meaning of Watergate in this country's history and how it impacts us today.
I posted his piece on the DCP forum mid June. The full text of the article can be found in the DCP forum.Scroll up when you hit this page to get to Eric's article.
These are excerpts from Eric's article.
...While we have a lot to thank Deep Throat for, I think it's a good time to go over what else it took to bring down old Dick Nixon. I do so for the benefit of everyone who sees all the parallels between then and now: the war, the paranoia, the secrecy, the crimes and the lies, and the intense frustration with 'we the people' having no impact on government -- but who is wondering 'when something will happen'.
(snip)
Nixon was elected (if you can call it that), in part, because he had a "secret plan" to end the Vietnam War. Whatever that plan was, what actually happened was that Nixon secretly stepped up bombing campaigns and spread the war to Laos and Cambodia, laying both countries to ruin and opening up Cambodia to the atrocities of someone named Pol Pot, a man on the level of Hitler. Though the war had officially begun just four years earlier in 1964, Nixon's secret plan to end it dragged U.S. involvement in the war on for another six years.
Two short years after he took office, in the spring of 1970, Nixon made his infamous speech announcing that he had, behind the nation's back, been bombing Cambodia, a neighboring country of Vietnam. U.S. campuses erupted in protest and fully one third of them were either closed down before the semester ended, or came close to being closed. This was the spring of the Kent State shootings: when the National Guard opened fire and killed four students, all of whom were either passers-by or photographers.
(snip)
The next year came the Pentagon Papers story -- a series of articles in The New York Times that proved, through secret government documents, that the Nixon administration knew about the atrocities of Vietnam, that Eisenhower had been warned by his generals not to get involved, and much else. The Nixon administration sued the Times to keep the stories out of print using the old national security argument, but the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the First Amendment. But the Vietnam War, tearing the country apart, dragged on.
This was the incredible backdrop for the events of the spring of 1972 -- when five burglars with sophisticated bugging equipment, a lot of money and the phone numbers of very powerful people in their pockets, were arrested early one morning in the Watergate Complex, attempting to place eavesdropping devices in the Democratic National Headquarters. Quickly, this bugging was connected to an organization called Creep -- the Committee to Re-elect the President. The thing I love most about the Watergate crooks is that at least they had a sense of humor.
(snip)
And as for Vietnam, numerous people were aware of what was going on --despite our beloved Internet, far more than today. It was much more emotional, politically charged and polarized. Still, Nixon, his war and his scandals marched on.
Then, one bit at a time, the **** hit the fan. There was a lot of help from Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein, Mark Felt and the editors of the Post, who kept up a stream of reporting that could not be avoided by politicians, the media or the public. And though it took a long time, the blood-soaked soil of the country was fertile.
Under the combined pressure of these developments, one by one, the "president's men" -- the top men of the Nixon administration -- resigned, and some were convicted of felonies associated with Watergate. Some went to prison. Many spilled the beans on the whole affair. There was the issue of the Nixon tapes and the long gap in one of them. Google the story. It's shocking.
(snip)
For those wondering what it takes to bring down a president or an entire administration, you now have a basis for comparison. The past is not always a good predictor of the future, and sometimes it's a terrible one, but it's usually the best one we have. By that method, it's going to take a long time for people to gain their focus and find their voice. And the world scene may need to get a lot uglier.
Or, something, some factor we have not considered, may intervene. We live in different times than the mid-1970s and while activism is not what it was, there are other ingredients in the social mix, and the psychic environment, that help move energy faster than history would have us predict. The energy within us and surrounding us is quicker; time is moving faster. But at the same time, there are greater pressures. Some are personal: it was easier to get an education and to make a living 30 years ago. Few people needed to work three jobs to survive; people literally had more time for themselves.
Some of the pressures are collective: there is a very serious issue about how, once we start acknowledging the systemic problems for real, the list seems like it will never end. And we can't exactly tear down the house and start over.
But we have to start somewhere, and here we are. As a community, be it world or local, we're not in a particularly easy spot. The people who are aware are surrounded by many who don't want to know. Those who tell the truth are swimming in an ocean of media that distorts everything and kills even the most important stories in four days. Our information comes from two main sources: a mind control machine called the commercial media, and the Internet, which has somewhat less credibility and far less short-term impact.
But in truth, nobody forces down our eyes. We know what we want to know, we have the choice to maintain awareness, and we are free to decide what we want to decide. We are free to acknowledge what is so. It's a big job, I know. And it's hard to take personally. It's hard to carry the weight of the world. Fortunately, we're here together. We really are. Let me put it another way. It's not about them. It's all about us.
today's WH Press briefing, after Bu$h moved the goal posts.
WH press corps, fully awake now:
White House press briefing: What the hell is going on?
White House Press Briefing. Edited for Rove-specific content, though almost all is about Rove; Monday's briefing exhibited perhaps the most vitriol from the press yet over the White House's refusal to answer questions -- at one point one reporter seething with irritation, saying, 'What the hell is going on?'
transcript:
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/White_House_press_briefing_Whathellgoin_0718.html
Nixon and Bush: Presidential Parallels?
by Pete McCloskey Published July 17, 2005 by the Sacramento Bee (California)
The eerie parallels between the Richard Nixon and George W. Bush administrations continue.
Once again the famous words of Lord Acton in 1887 come to mind: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
continue~
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0717-19.htm
WH press corps, fully awake now:
Posted by: on.to.victory4Dems at July 18, 2005 10:34 PM
Wonder how long they'll stay awake?
Joe Wilson suggested today that all the emphasis on the plame outing is yet another smoke screen - the neocons don't want the press to ask the real questions, about the real issue - how the hell did this whole WMD thing happen anyway? It was all a ruse - who orchestrated it? who is responsible for the forged documents? who is responsible for the cherry-picking of intelligence? who is responsible for "fixing the intelligence" to fit the policy?
There is a huge cover-up going on here; we're only seeing the tip of the iceberg with rovergate.
Case for Impeachment
Editorial
Published July 16, 2005 by the Brattleboro Reformer (Brattleboro, Vermont)
The Downing Street Memos have faded from the headlines, overshadowed by the furor over Karl Rove and whether he leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to reporters.
We know it's tough for the Washington press corps to focus on more than one story at a time, but we'll make it easy for them.
Both the Downing Street Memos -- the secret documents from Britain's intelligence agency on the Bush administration's preparations for invading Iraq -- and the ongoing scandal involving President Bush's most trusted advisor are both tied together. They show the lengths that the Bush administration will go to in convincing Americans to accept a unnecessary war. They also show how the White House bullied and discredited anyone who got in its way.
continue~
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0716-21.htm
2/3 believe London Bombings are Linked to Iraq War (in UK - despite govt claims to contrary)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1531387,00.html
More than 200 Foreign Scientists Barred from Working in the UK
http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/research/story/0,9865,1531463,00.html
This American source now discusses the Clatham study we were kicking around the pdf for earlier (that Andree had found linked to La Liberacion article):
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8613709/
Study says UK at Risk - disagrees with what their government said. So Guardian story in last post goes along with this too.
Fe,
Thanks for the article! It is really interesting.
OTV,
Ted Kennedy was interviewed briefly on CNN this evening, about the Rove/Plame affair. Kennedy quickly said "What makes this so important is that it involves a cover up of misinformation that was given by this administration as a reason to go into war with Iraq. Our people have suffered the consequences of it."
It's ALL about the cover-up. The DSM, Rove/Plame/Cooper.
Rove also spoke of some classified information that would "soon be declassified" to Cooper, showing it was not just a casual innocent bit of chit chat.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/071805.html
Posted by: DiAnne at July 19, 2005 12:44 AM
Thanks for the email of that PDF file. I started to read it, it is quite lengthy, as you know. Will finish it tomorrow.
I now have a full screen, but I still have a very weird looking desktop. Pitch black with white huge letters. O.M.G. I have to have help with it.
SUZ,
If you see this, and if PC DOC, or DWAHZON have 5 or ten minutes tomorrow, could you give somebody my cell number and maybe they can help me reset it? It is 50 miles to the next repair shop. Thanks. Suz, it's okay to give Dwahzon or PC Doc my cell number, if they have time to call me tomorrow. Thanks.
Truth:
The reason I thought it important to reprise posting this article is its prescience (written mid-June). AND I believe looking back at Watergate now, it makes us more acutely aware of what an active and truth-seeking press can do, especially today, when its not an office break-in, but a war which has claimed too many lives and the basis of that war a total lie.
A truth-seeking press is one of the BIGGEST differences between now and Watergate, and THAT is one of the biggest things we can do on the grassroots level--keep the cattle prod on the media to make them jump and jump high for the truth. And keep being skeptical, and keep asking questions. And more questions. And more. The press' complicity with this Administration since 9-11, makes them as culpable as accomplices in a crime. Its about time they started asking the REAL rough questions of this WH.
Ironically enough, back during the Watergate Era, it was a much younger Teddy Kennedy who dropped a serious, half-joking aside on the Dick Cavett show in the 70s, that hinted that something was about to break on the "Plumbers" and the fake burglary at Watergate, in the old Democratic Party Headquarters offices.
Funny how he shows up again--almost as if its his role once again to shine the spotlight this new bunch of crooks.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071805Q.shtml
Waxman: Bush Statement on Rove Conflicts with Executive Order
By Rep. Henry A. Waxman
YubaNet
Monday 18 July 2005
Dear Mr. President:
In June 2004, you said that you would fire anyone found to be involved in the disclosure of Valerie Wilson's identity as a covert CIA agent. [1] Today, you significantly changed your position, stating that you would remove Karl Rove or other White House officials involved in the security breach only "if someone committed a crime." [2]
Your new standard is not consistent with your obligations to enforce Executive Order 12958, which governs the protection of national security secrets. The executive order states: "Officers and employees of the United States Government ... shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly, willfully, or negligently ... disclose to unauthorized persons information properly classified." [3] Under the executive order, the available sanctions include "reprimand, suspension without pay, removal, termination of classification authority, loss or denial of access to classified information, or other sanctions." [4]
Under the executive order, you may not wait until criminal intent and liability are proved by a prosecutor. Instead, you have an affirmative obligation to take "appropriate and prompt corrective action." [5] And the standards of proof are much different. A criminal violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, which Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald is investigating, requires a finding that Mr. Rove "intentionally disclose[d]" the identity of a covert agent. [6] In contrast, the administrative sanctions under Executive Order 12958 can be imposed without a finding of intent. Under the express terms of the executive order, you are required to impose administrative sanctions - such as removal of office or termination of security clearance - if Mr. Rove or other officials acted "negligently" in disclosing or confirming information about Ms. Wilson's identity. [7]
I have enclosed a fact sheet on Karl Rove's Nondisclosure Agreement and its legal implications, which provides additional detail about the President's national security obligations. I urge you to act in compliance with Executive Order 12958 and your responsibility to safeguard national security secrets.
Sincerely,
Henry A. Waxman
Ranking Minority Member
[1] Press Conference: President Discusses Job Creation With Business Leaders (Sept. 30, 2003).
[2] Bush: CIA Leaker Would Be Fired if Crime Committed, Reuters (July 18, 2005); Bush: Any Criminals in Leak to Be Fired, Associated Press (July 18, 2005).
[3] Executive Order 12958, sec. 5.5(b)
[4] Id. at sec. 5.5(c).
[5] Id. at sec. 5.5(e).
[6] 50 USC sec. 421(a).
[7] Executive Order 12958, sec. 5.5(b).
Top Aides Reportedly Set Sights on Wilson
Rove and Cheney chief of staff were intent on discrediting CIA agent's husband, prosecutors have been told.
By Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten
Top aides to President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were intensely focused on discrediting former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV in the days after he wrote an op-ed article for the New York Times suggesting
the administration manipulated intelligence to justify going to war in Iraq, federal investigators have been told.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9500.htm
Matthew Cooper | "What I Told The Grand Jury"
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071705X.shtml
I told the grand jury something else about my conversation with Rove. Although it's not reflected in my notes or subsequent e-mails, I have a distinct memory of Rove ending the call by saying, "I've already said too much." This could have meant he was worried about being indiscreet, or it could have meant he was late for a meeting or something else. I don't know, but that sign-off has been in my memory for two years.
Karl Rove Had a Secret
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071705A.shtml
In public, he was masterminding President Bush's reelection and brushing off suggestions he had played any part in an unfolding drama: the unmasking of CIA operative Valerie Plame. In private, the senior White House adviser was meeting, on five occasions, with federal prosecutors to tell what he knew about the matter.
Frank Rich | Follow the Uranium
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071705B.shtml
Well, of course, Karl Rove did it. He may not have violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, with its high threshold of criminality for outing a covert agent, but there's no doubt he trashed Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame. We know this not only because of Matt Cooper's e-mail, but also because of Mr. Rove's own history.
Cheney's Chief of Staff Was Another Source for Cooper on Valerie Plame Story:
Until last week, the White House had insisted for nearly two years that vice presidential chief of staff Lewis Libby and presidential adviser Karl Rove were not involved in the leaks of CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity.
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB5RCZF9BE.html
Cheney's Chief of Staff 'Second Source for CIA Leak'
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071805J.shtml
When Matthew Cooper named Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, "Scooter" Libby, as a second source, the Time reporter undercut repeated White House denials.
Rove, Dems, Iraq: Sidney Blumenthal vs. Norman Solomon
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071805K.shtml
Two frequent truthout contributors - Sidney Blumenthal and Norman Solomon - duke it out on Amy Goodman's Democracy Now.
Bush Changes Parameters on Plame Punishment
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071805Y.shtml
Danny Schecter | Searching For Truth In The Karl Rove Story
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0718-22.htm
FBI Builds Huge File on Antiwar, Rights Groups
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071805Z.shtml
FBI Terrorism Unit Eyed Web Protest Sites:
FBI agents monitored Web sites calling for protests against the 2004 political conventions in New York and Boston on behalf of the bureau's counterterrorism unit, according to FBI documents released under the
Freedom of Information Act.
http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20050717220621204
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050718/ap_on_re_us/governors_id_cards
Governors: Drivers License Costs to Soar
By ROBERT TANNER, AP National Writer Mon Jul 18, 2:34 AM ET
DES MOINES, Iowa - In the name of homeland security, motorists are going to see costs skyrocket for driver's licenses and motor vehicle offices forced to operate like local branches of the FBI, the nation's governors warn.
Georgia Women's Clinic Bomber Sentenced to Life
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071805A.shtml
Eric Rudolph was sentenced to life in prison Monday for his role in a deadly women's clinic bombing. After he angrily denounced abortion, one of his victims called him a "monster." His diatribe - and the emotional statements of his victims - came as he was sentenced under the plea deal that spared his life.
Kids Safe Chemical Act Empowers EPA to Require Chemical Testing
http://www.truthout.org/issues_05/071805EA.shtml
A new government report outlining the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) inability to protect humans and the environment from hazardous chemicals due to legal hurdles has given lawmakers the ammunition they need to empower the agency. US Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, held a news conference Wednesday to announce the Child, Worker and Consumer Safe Chemicals Act, coauthored with Vermont Independent Senator Jim Jeffords.
Public Citizen: Approval of Device to Treat Depression Is One of Most Questionable FDA Decisions in Recent Memory
http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0718-11.htm
Top British ex-diplomat blasts US invasion of Iraq:
One of Britain's most senior former diplomats has branded the US invasion of Iraq "politically illegitimate" in an incendiary new book that the government has moved to block, a British newspaper reported.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9494.htm
Former diplomat's Iraq book censored :
BRITAIN's former special representative in Baghdad has been told he cannot publish a book that describes the invasion of Iraq as "politically illegitimate".
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1643272005
William Bowles : Ordinary Fascism:
For the bottom line is a state that is itself based upon violence and that, as history reveals, always has been. To talk then of criminalising those who “attack…the values of the West” is not only hyperbole but utter hypocrisy.
http://www.williambowles.info/ini/ini-0349.html
Study cites seeds of terror in Iraq: War radicalized most, probes find
New investigations by the Saudi Arabian government and an Israeli think tank -- both of which painstakingly analyzed the backgrounds and motivations of hundreds of foreigners entering Iraq to fight the United States -- have found that the vast majority of these foreign fighters are not former terrorists and became radicalized by the war itself.
http://snipurl.com/gb9o
Plan Called for Covert Aid in Iraq Vote:
In the months before the Iraqi elections in January, President Bush approved a plan to provide covert support to certain Iraqi candidates and political parties
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9489.htm
Seymour M. Hersh | Did Washington Try to Manipulate Iraq's Election?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071805I.shtml
"The election clock was running down, and people were panicking," said one of Hersh's inside sources. "The polls showed that the Shiites were going to run off with the store. The Administration had to do something."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/18/politics/18contracts.html
Public Relations Campaign for Research Office at E.P.A. Includes Ghostwriting Articles
The strategy includes writing and placing "good stories" about the E.P.A.'s research office in consumer and trade publications.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/18/opinion/18herbert.html
An Empty Apology
President Bush has been as devoted as an acolyte to the Republican Southern strategy, which, racist at its core, still lives.
Congressman says bomb Mecca if US attacked:
A Republican congressman said in a radio interview aired by a Florida station that if a multiple-city attack happened in the United States in the next 90 days, as predicted by an Israeli expert, and was found to be the work of extremist Muslims, then “we should take out their holy sites.”
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_18-7-2005_pg1_8
Iraq: A Permanent Presence:
We're building some 14 military bases there now, and some people say they've got a rather permanent concept to them."
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/outrage?bid=13&pid=2132
Sardinia Says It's Time for the U.S. Navy to Leave Port :
"The real issue for us is, after 30 years, we still have an American base here in our archipelago. Is that necessary?"
http://snipurl.com/gc3j
DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN
Rory O'Connor, AlterNet
The new public broadcasting boss is another GOP donor who bragged about forcibly removing a journalist found 'editorializing.'
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/23602/
Bush Again Vows to Act if Aides Are Guilty of Leaks
WASHINGTON-President Bush said Monday that he would fire any member of his administration who was found to have broken the law in revealing information about a covert CIA operative.
By By Edwin Chen and Richard B. Schmitt.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-rove19jul19,0,1358206.story
GOP Senator in Democrats' Cross Hairs
WASHINGTON-A conservative favorite, Rick Santorum's blunt take on cultural issues may give ammunition to opponents in the battle for his seat next year.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-santorum19jul19,0,3187492.story
Iraqis Press Donors for Billions More in Reconstruction Aid
Iraqi officials pressed a major meeting of donor nations for billions to repair a country that remains in a state of physical and economic collapse.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/19/international/middleeast/19donors.html
{{Ah...! Now the neoCons are calling the nations that backed off from reconstruction in Iraq the "donor" nations.... I heard a blurb on MSM about "donor nations" yesterday and it took me a bit to figure out what the heck they were talking about....}}
Bush Plans Interviews With Court Candidates
President Wants Confirmation by October
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/18/AR2005071801252.html
Bu$h Quote:
"I will sit down with some and talk to them face to face, those who I have not known already," he said. "You know, we've got some people that [are] perhaps in contention that I've already spent time with, that I know. . . . And so I don't need to interview those."
{{Notice it's Bu$h who wants a confirmation by Oct. He's betting we will forget the terms of O'Connor's resignation: she will stay on until a replacement is found.... I'd be willing to bet that once he names nominees, he will immediately press for a rush up-or-down vote with little chance for the Senate to do any questioning....}}
Law Requires Lessons on Constitution
Federal Workers, Students Affected
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/18/AR2005071801585.html
MSNBC Question of the Day:
Based on what you now know, do you think Karl Rove broke the law? * 17992 responses
Yes 80%
No 20%
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080261/#survey
Bush Aims to Expand System of Merit Pay
Unions Criticize Plan Based on DHS Model
By Christopher Lee
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 19, 2005; A02
The administration wants to abolish the General Schedule pay system by 2010 and require that at least part of every pay raise for the government's 1.8 million civilian employees hinge on an annual performance evaluation, President Bush's top management guru said yesterday.
Clay Johnson III, a deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, laid out a proposal to expand government-wide the kind of pay-for-performance systems being implemented at the departments of Defense and Homeland Security as part of the recent restructuring of civil service rules at those agencies.
"The federal government, as a rule, is pretty bad about managing people," Johnson said yesterday in a meeting with Washington Post reporters and editors. "We tend to treat people and manage our people as if they are bureaucrats. 'They are all the same, let's treat them all the same.' The goal is to treat them, and to think of them, as professional public servants, not as bureaucrats. . . . Until we can tie some small portion of pay to it, it will never happen."
The administration's draft bill, which it is circulating on Capitol Hill, was criticized by federal employee unions. They have complained that the changes at DHS and Defense undermine employee rights and strengthen the hand of political appointees.
The proposal "is meant to erode federal pay and future retirement security for middle-class federal workers over time," said Brian DeWyngaert, chief of staff to John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees. "They have no data whatsoever to indicate that this will improve organizational performance."
More... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/18/AR2005071801476_pf.html
{{I think this is not quite what progressive bloggers here and on the old Kerry blog were talking about when they mentioned a wish for a progressive TV/Radio station.... I, for one, couldn't ever take the "music" that 18-34 yr. olds currently listen to, and it's the reason I usually hit the mute button for commercials the few times I watch TV, so this whole idea is a total turn-off, and wouldn't get me to order cable....}}
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050719/ap_en_tv/gore_tv_channel
Gore: New TV Channel Won't Be Partisan
By LYNN ELBER, AP Television Writer
BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. - Former Vice President Al Gore, co-founder of a new television channel launching next month, said he's shunning politics — and so is his media venture.
"I consider myself a recovering politician. I'm on step nine," Gore told a meeting Monday of the Television Critics Association.
The 2004 Democratic candidate for president was asked if he was concerned the 24-hour news and information channel, called Current, would be perceived as having a political slant. It's scheduled to launch Aug. 1.
"I think the reality of the network will speak for itself. It's not intended to be partisan in any way," said Gore, Current's co-founder (with businessman Joel Hyatt) and chairman of the board.
Aimed at an 18-34-year-old audience, Current has loftier goals in mind than party politics: Gore said it will engage young people in the "dialogue of democracy" by providing stories that interest them, and will involve them in the channel's content.
Using Web parlance, Gore said he wants Current to be the channel of choice for young adults.
"We want to be the television home page for the Internet generation," he said.
Viewers will have the opportunity to contribute their own filmed reports and features, such as a look at underground youth culture in Iran, said Gore and David Neuman, Current's programming president.
The young staff of reporters, producers and hosts includes Gotham Chopra, son of self-help guru Deepak Chopra and Laura Ling (Channel One News, MTV).
Preparing to launch Current in 20 million homes on DirecTV, Time Warner Cable and Comcast in limited markets "has been a blast," Gore said. The five-year plan calls for it to reach 50 million homes.
He declined to talk about a current hot topic in Washington, the speculation about Bush administration figures Karl Rove and Lewis "Scooter" Libby and the federal investigation into the leak of a CIA officer's name.
"I'd rather not," he said. "I'd rather keep the focus on Current."
I think the Gore network may be kind of cool.
I'm 53 but I'm "long-eared" when it comes to music & it all depends on the content not the age. It is not unusual for me to be one of the older people at an event so I just ignore it.
Let's keep our eyes on Bush. What kind of deals is he making with nuclear-power India? It's strategically located (near Pakistan) & has alot of cheap labor, many English speakers & engineers & programmers. Wonder if they'll be urged to join some sort of "coalition"? There have got to be "strings" attached.
(He's no Dick Durbin)
Tancredo: No apology
He believes bombing of Muslim holy sites has been discussed
By M.E. Sprengelmeyer, Rocky Mountain News
July 19, 2005
WASHINGTON - The remarks were hypothetical but the outrage was real.
Facing mounting criticism, Rep. Tom Tancredo on Monday refused to apologize for suggesting the United States could target Muslim holy sites if radical Islamic terrorists set off multiple nuclear attacks in American cities.
"It's a tough issue to deal with," Tancredo told reporters at a Capitol Hill news conference. "Tough things are said. And we should not shy away from saying things that need to be said."
Tancredo is known for his fiery rhetoric on immigration and other issues, but his words are coming under more scrutiny because he has started traveling to test the waters for a possible presidential candidacy in 2008.
A spokeswoman for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called Tancredo's remarks irresponsible.
"They do nothing to advance our national security and protect Americans from terrorists," Pelosi spokeswoman Jennifer Crider said.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which calls itself the largest Islamic civil rights group in the United States, demanded an apology Monday, after the Rocky Mountain News published an account of his Friday interview with WFLA radio in Florida.
In the interview, talk show host Pat Campbell asked Tancredo what the United States should do if terrorists were to strike several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.
"Well, what if you said something like - if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites," Tancredo answered.
"You're talking about bombing Mecca," Campbell said.
"Yeah," Tancredo responded.
He went on to say that he was "just throwing out some ideas" but that an "ultimate threat" might have to be met with an "ultimate response."
Tancredo later said he was not advocating such a response, but merely discussing what could happen in a hypothetical situation.
"I was talking about what we could maybe do as a preventative," Tancredo said. "I simply throw that out there as a thing to think about, although it is horrendous to think about. So is having one or more cities destroyed in the United States."
CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper called Tancredo's remarks irresponsible, inflammatory and "unworthy of an elected official."
"These kinds of . . . comments just serve to fuel negative perceptions of the United States in the Muslim world that create a downward spiral of hostility," Hooper said.
"He needs to go far beyond a clarification and apologize, not only to the people of Colorado, but to the American-Muslim community."
Tancredo rejected the idea of apologizing at his news conference, where the controversy overshadowed the topic he wanted to address, his introduction of comprehensive immigration reform legislation. His bill would create a limited guest worker plan for immigrants but only after beefing up border security.
Last week in Iowa, home of the nation's first presidential caucuses, he pressed his immigration reform agenda to members of the Christian Coalition. At each stop, he also spoke briefly about what he sees as a clash of civilizations and war against "radical Islam."
Hooper said it was a "quantum leap" for Tancredo to go a step further and suggest destroying Muslim holy sites that are at the center of a faith for one-fifth of the world's people.
"Unfortunately, there's a veritable cottage industry of anti-Muslim rhetoric now in our society, and it seems to be growing," Hooper said. "I don't know where it's taking us, because if people really do believe we're in conflict with the faith of Islam, what does that mean? What are the implications of that? Unending civilizational and religious war? It's too much to contemplate."
In an interview, Tancredo said he did not intend to offend moderate Muslims, whom he calls the "best hope" of bringing terrorists to justice.
"When we bombed Hiroshima, when we bombed Dresden, we punished a lot of people who were not necessarily (guilty)," Tancredo said. "Not every German was a member of the Nazi Party. You do things in war that are ugly."
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_3937059,00.html
Nonny, DiAnne, others who have been posting lists of links to good articles, THANK YOU! These are incredibly useful for a number of reasons. And having had a bad experience on the Kerry blog with following a link and then being spammed incessantly with Republican propaganda, I now don't follow any links that don't have accompanying explanatory text, so thank you for taking the time to do that, too.
Great list this am, Nonny!
Do you agree with bush's handling of the CIA leak?
yes- 23%
no- 77%
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080261/#survey
'The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides with the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who in the name of charity and good will shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon those with great vengeance and with furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know that my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.'
- Samuel L. Jackson, Pulp Fiction
(This is actually not directly from Ezekiel 25:17 and in fact, only the last sentence and part of the second last sentence will be found there.)
Bush's Supreme Ct. Choice Likely to Come from the ACTIVIST Conservative Fifth Circuit. My guess, Edith Jones, one of the most controversial b/c that is what W likes to do especially now to get the media attention off of Rove. The more controversy in this selection, the less time the media will have to focus on the Rove story.
"As both sides dig in for what is expected to a be contentious ideological struggle over a successor to Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court, five of the judges mentioned as possible nominees are on the 5th Circuit: Edith Brown Clement, Emilio M. Garza, Edith Hollan Jones, Priscilla R. Owen and Edward C. Prado.
"A court is made up of more that just individual judges. It has a tone or a mood. The fact that the president is looking at so many judges from the 5th Circuit tells us more or less what he may be looking for," said University of Pittsburgh law professor Arthur D. Hellman. "He may not want just a conservative judge, but one that comes from a conservative environment and is more likely to think in those terms."
The five judges will face varying degrees of opposition. Democrats say two, Jones and Garza, are unacceptable because the judges have denounced Roe v. Wade , the 1973 decision establishing a woman's right to an abortion. Clement has fewer opinions on social issues to parse, and Prado, who was appointed by Bush, is considered moderate by many Democrats.
The court -- which covers Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana -- is known for its independence, and the Supreme Court has reversed it in a number of high-profile cases. The high court has also openly rebuked the 5th Circuit in death penalty cases, signaling that the appeals court crossed the line in denying defendants' rights.
On one occasion, O'Connor, writing for the majority, accused the lower court of applying its own "restrictive gloss" to the standard set by the Supreme Court for establishing a condemned convict's retardation. In another recent capital case, the Supreme Court reversed the 5th Circuit 6 to 3, stating that the appeals court was wrong not to order a new trial in the face of strong evidence that prosecutors deliberately excluded blacks from the jury. The majority opinion, by Justice David H. Souter, said the 5th Circuit decision was a "dismissive and strained interpretation" of how the Supreme Court had previously ruled.
In that case, some legal analysts said, the high court expressed its frustration because it had sent the same case back to the circuit court two years earlier with an 8 to 1 majority, directing the court to review its decision.
In another key case, the Supreme Court voted unanimously to reverse the 5th Circuit and overturned the conviction of accounting firm Arthur Andersen over jury instructions."
"Last week in Iowa, home of the nation's first presidential caucuses, he pressed his immigration reform agenda to members of the Christian Coalition. At each stop, he also spoke briefly about what he sees as a clash of civilizations and war against "radical Islam.""
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_3937059,00.html
Posted by: monkey at July 19, 2005 10:00 AM
Here is the real problem. He's talking to Christians! And he's saying what they want to hear. This is what Christianity in America is fast becoming - a vehicle for violence-advocating anti-Islamists who want to eradicate the heretics.
I'd like to think Tancredo is an extremist, outside the mainstream of the Republican party. Unfortunately, that is proving to no longer be the case. It's not just this administration anymore - more and more, these nutcases are making it into elected positions and powerful roles within the party. Tancredo is no longer the exception, he's the rule with Republicans. This kind of inflamatory rhetoric was once the domain of the Rushes and Sean Hannities - not politicians, just talking heads; now, it's a cancer that has infected the whole Republican party - elected officials and bureaucrats alike. And the party is going to lose the few remaining rational and reasonable people left in it.
Yes, the Republican Party has contracted a terrible cancer, and given the wimpy nature of our "free press" these days, it's going to take a long time to beat it.
Amy... you are absolutely correct. That's why I posted the article, it is clear that the "way" to the mainstream Republican heart these days (if you can find one) is thru the Pearly Whites of the morally righteous... ya know, those non-judgmental, peace-loving, ever-so-tolerant lucky ones who think because they have salvation, they can act any damned way they please.
But again, who am I to judge?
"The time is now," said a Republican strategist close to the White House of Bush's announcement.
A leading candidate is Judge Edith Clement of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans, the Republican said.
In a sign an announcement may be near, Bush met Monday night with Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record) of Pennsylvania, who as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee would oversee the confirmation process.
Republicans believe that nominating a woman -- or someone who is Hispanic -- might help Bush avoid a bitter partisan battle over his choice for the court, which rules on many social issues like abortion and civil rights.
Sources said the timing of an announcement had been moved up in part to deflect attention away from a CIA leak controversy that has engulfed Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove.
A Republican strategist with close to the White House described Clement as the leading candidate. "She's pretty untouchable," he said. "Plus, it helps take Rove off the front pages for a week."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050719/ts_nm/bush_court_dc_11
Posted by: monkey at July 19, 2005 10:00 AM
IMHO, he's looking for a genuine crusade. He hasn't read enough history.... It was a horrible time, and the crusaders ultimately lost....
I hope his constituents vote him out of office....
Posted by: Amy at July 19, 2005 10:04 AM
Velbekomme, Amy.... (also, I do not go to Republican web sites... :-))
A Republican strategist with close to the White House described Clement as the leading candidate. "She's pretty untouchable," he said. "Plus, it helps take Rove off the front pages for a week."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050719/ts_nm/bush_court_dc_11
Posted by: monkey at July 19, 2005 10:54 AM
~~~~~~~~~
I heard that on some infotainment morning show, too... that it would take people's minds off of outing a CIA agent... and other associated criminal activities which may or may not be part of Fitzgerald's Grand Jury investigation.
What? Do they think Democrats are incapable of multi-tasking?!? Think again...!!!
Anyway, if the PreziNitwit nominates some of the women who have right wingnut agendas (a few names have been bantered around), I (for one) will be busy writing my Dem senator and any others who are receptive to start filibustering.... I'm tired of Dems catering, kow-towing, and otherwise compromising themselves into being good little girls and boys while the Bu$hCo administration runs roughshod over this nation....
Edith Brown Clement, 57
Clement was nominated by President George H.W. Bush to serve as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in 1991 and was elevated to her current post by the current President Bush in 2001.
Clement, a graduate of the University of Alabama and Tulane University Law School, worked as a lawyer in private practice in New Orleans for 16 years before beginning her tenure on the federal bench. She specialized in civil litigation involving maritime law, ***representing oil companies***, insurance companies and the marine services industry in cases before federal courts. She is a member of the Federalist Society, an influential conservative legal organization.
As a district judge, Clement presided over such high-profile cases as the 2000 trials of former Louisiana governor Edwin W. Edwards (D) and former state insurance commissioner Jim Brown (D) on fraud charges. Edwards was acquitted; Brown was convicted of lying to the FBI and sentenced to six months in prison.
Lawyers who know Clement or have tried cases before her describe her as a judicial conservative who leans toward the defense in civil cases, and as a no-nonsense judge who is strict about deadlines and insists on professionalism from lawyers.
Analysts say Clement has not attracted attention for her judicial opinions, so it is unclear which of her decisions, if any, might become the focus of a confirmation battle.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/01/AR2005070100756.html
FYI for Moyers fans and for those who love stories about inspirational women from the past....
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/
Wide Angle is a new show on PBS and premieres tonight. Bill Moyers is the host......
Pease Is A Woman's Job: The Journey of Jeannette Rankin
http://www.peaceisawomansjob.com/
History comes alive in the life and times of Montana's Jeannette Rankin, the first woman elected to the United States Congress. This lively tale begins when a contemporary young woman meets Jeannette Rankin's ghost and is taken on a journey through her early career up to her controversial No vote against U.S. entry into WWI. The rest of Rankin's life, including another term in Congress in 1940 and another No vote against U.S. entry into WWII, is conveyed in a montage of archival stills. Filmed entirely in Montana, the rich and colorful locations and costumes give this docu-drama a true western flavor.
{{BTW, Rankin was first elected to the US Congress in 1916 before women had the right to vote.... and she is the only one who voted against both world wars..... Check your local listings... it will be shown in our local market on Thurs. night on PBS.}}
I was quite bemused to see - beginning earlier this month and going through at least the end of this month - the neoCon Journal Editorial Report has been changed from early Fri. evening to 1 a.m. Sat. morning, and WA Week in Review has been changed to 2 a.m. Sat. morning, with Tavis Smiley between the two, and Tucker Carlson has been removed from the local PBS lineup completely. It's been replaced with mini-movie shows.... :-) That all seems to indicate to me that there's some leeway for local producers to change the hours of the shows to time slots that are "unfavorable" to neoCons when they know they're dealing with mostly Dems in a blue state.... :-)
Edith Brown Clement: ***representing oil companies***
Posted by: monkey at July 19, 2005 11:25 AM
That, IMHO, is a deal-breaker.... The other name I heard this a.m. was Edith Jones, who has already come out and said she's against Roe v. Wade..... another deal-breaker. Gonzales as the author of torture memos/legislation is also a deal-breaker....
how many times can we scream that is a deal breaker?
Choice seems to come down to a social conservative or a business conservative. Personally I am more afraid of the former. I represent injured folks and union folks and don't have much use for the chamber crowd, but I think that there is enough balance on the court as long as Stevens hangs in there to keep a sense of balance with a business conservative. I truly fear the Edith Jones, Ludding , Owens and Brown social conservative group much more. If we simply oppose every propsective nominee, then we will end up with Jones or Brown. My concern with Edith Clements is her close association with the Federalist Society. Perhaps someone here can post the agenda of the Federalist Society and their association with Ted Olson,Scaife and Bork.
My hope is that W's selection turns out to be a conservative(which the selection will certainly be) like Souter with an open mind who will intelectually grow in the job over 30 years.
Call me crazy, but there seems to be an awful lot of 'leaking' that Clement is the one to get the nod. With the word and action 'leak' being so volatile right now, I'd tend to doubt that Clement's name being leaked right now would be a chance any of the insiders would chance right now. Then again, unless they were TOLD to leak, kind of as a trial balloon, just to see how much of the spotlight they could take off Rove, why not 'leak' just a little. Which means she isn't the real nominee, she is a diversion. If Scotty gets asked all about Edith, and says not commenting on a 'ongoing search' that gives him a breather about not commenting on an 'ongoing criminal investigation'
tutterfly: haven't heard from you in a while good to see you back. sorry, but I always seem to agree with you. W's numbers are in the toilet and he is doing a p.r. tour acting like he really cares about the Senate's advise and consent and acting like he cares what Specter, Leahy or others want and throwing names like Clements trying to show he is 'considering' more mainstream jurists. Note I used the word 'considering'. All of those who have watched W pick judges know that Dobson has more influence on him then the Chamber and Clements as well as Gonzalez will be opposed by Dobson. I still see him picking a more controversial choice like Jones or Luddig to placate Dobson The Federalists and the Cheneys(especially hsi right wing wife)the group we all know is pulling W's strings. But who knows.
Did you see the LA Times story about Santorum's cataloging Kerry and Kennedy clips opposing him as some sort of badge of honor. Have you had any contact with the Casey campaign operation yet tutterfly? None of my emails to their office have been returned to volunteer.
Ira:
I agree on the nomination thing. We know a nominee will be right-of-center. As long as a nominee is not radical -- e.g. doesn't want to over-turn seventy-some years of progress and precident -- then that's the best we can do. I also agree that a business-oriented judge will be much more amenable to reason and practical concerns than someone driven by other right-wing agendas that I could imagine. On this particular person, the Federalist SOciety is bothersome:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2000/0003.landay.html
The main thing that concerns me about the chamber-of-commerce types is this drive to cap liabilities in general, and specifically take away the incentive of large companies to keep their collective eyes on the ball with respect to health, safety and environmental issues. Having said that, these issues can be addressed legislatively more easily than other types of issues. In fact, they are the sort of issues that favor us in grass-roots campaigns. At least that is my sense of it (hope to find out someday).
Again, we have a Senate and Executive Branch controlled by a fairly radical right-wing bunch right now, and there really isn't anything we can do about it until 2006 (and the run-up to same, of course).
In that sense, I think we either settle for a moderate right-winger, if such is put forward, or fight a radical, knowing we will loose the court put using it to perhaps win the Senate, if not in 2006, then in 2008.
Chuck in Houston
From John Kerry:
The President should not wait to find out whether Rove is convicted in the end for his leak. Either Rove lied to the President about this matter of national security, which means he should be fired immediately, or the President is not being straight with the American people about his own involvement in this case.
With all the dissembling coming out of the White House, it's clear that the only way the American people can get to the bottom of this is through full Congressional hearings. I will call for hearings this week -- and you can strengthen this call by adding your name to our petition today:
http://www.johnkerry.com/firerove
With both the House and Senate in Republican hands it will be difficult to force Congressional hearings on the Bush White House. Having as many statements as possible from people in every state will help my colleagues and me show that this is what America wants.
Ira--as of yet, I have no contact within the Casey campaign. It seems that the 'machine' isn't yet revved up, and I don't know if that is a good thing or not. Santorum keeps running his mouth, and people in my nook of the state are about as disgusted with him as they can possibly be. his book and his comments on Boston are not doing him any good. A recent article asks Santorum to understand if other conservatives in the state stop standing so close to him, if he continues his current talks. I'm convinced that Santorum is truly ill over his religion.
As far as Clement goes, I'm just not convinced by the 'leaks' of the last 24 hours. It's too neat, isn't it? She is a conservative Federalist, but is that really enough for the preznitwit to 'leave his mark' as it were? Isn't it safe to say that if W. wants to up one again on daddy, he needs to nominate someone who will out Thomas, Thomas?
Do you think the figure of 25,000 civilians killed in Iraq since the start of the war is accurate?
Yes 22% 7319 votes
No, too high 20% 6624 votes
No, too low 59% 19706 votes
Total: 33649 votes
http://www.cnn.com/
CNN announces that the nitwit will make his nominee known at 9:00 pm tonite......
Chuck in Houston with more Arm-chair Strategizing (for what it's worth):
Boy, if we just had a Federalist Society of our own, we could be circulating talking points about what questions ought to be asked to the nominee and target the answers and the confimration votes on Senate races in 2006 and 2008 in ways that advance the causes that the DCP supports. Just so the folks get a better idea of what their getting for their votes.
Chuck in Houston
Also---today's press briefing scheduled at 1:15 has now been cancelled.
chuck you know that I do liability claims as well as criminal defense so I am sensitive to the Supreme Ct.in regards to protecting consumers and unions. But from what I have seen the threat to consumer safety seems to come more from State Legislatures like the '91 Texas Legislature destroying W.C. claims, state caps on med mal claims, and Congress' actions regarding asbestos claims coming up for a vote soon and class action restrictions. I just don't see that many pieces of State Legislative tort legislation or even Congressional caps or restrictions being reviewed by the US Supreme Ct. Most of those actual claims are tried in State District Cts. or US Federal ts like the 5th Circuit and ususally end at the State Supreme Ct. Level.
Again that is why I continue to urge our bloggers to get involved in their governor's races like DiaAne did or with their state legislators. And that is why we need to defeat Zrnold and Kilgore. I see more threats at the Supreme Ct. level with social issues, death penalty cases and church state issues although there are business issues that come to the Supreme Ct.
My litmus test for a nominee: Are they someone that James Dobson approves of?
I would hope that we can discuss the influence of the Federalists on any potential nominee and what that means to civil justice, first amendment rights and civil rights and privacy rights which are at the top of my concerns.
The Iraq Body Count -- a London-based group comprising academics and human rights and anti-war activists -- said on Tuesday that 24,865 civilians had died between March 20, 2003 and March 19, 2005.
The group said 42,500 injuries were recorded as well.
--snip--
But recent figures issued by the Interior Ministry -- saying that 8,175 have been killed in the first six months of this year -- signal a high number of civilian deaths.
U.S. and Iraqi officials, asked to respond to the report, have not yet issued reactions.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/07/19/iraq.bodycount/index.html
A Dossier of Civilian Casualties in Iraq
Author: Iraq Body Count
Published on July 19, 2005, 07:18
Findings include:
Who was killed?
* 24,865 civilians were reported killed in the first two years.
* Women and children accounted for almost 20% of all civilian deaths.
* Baghdad alone recorded almost half of all deaths.
When did they die?
* 30% of civilian deaths occurred during the invasion phase before 1 May 2003.
* Post-invasion, the number of civilians killed was almost twice as high in year two (11,351) as in year one (6,215).
Wo did the killing?
* US-led forces killed 37% of civilian victims.
* Anti-occupation forces/insurgents killed 9% of civilian victims.
* Post-invasion criminal violence accounted for 36% of all deaths.
* Killings by anti-occupation forces, crime and unknown agents have shown a steady rise over the entire period.
What was the most lethal weaponry?
* Over half (53%) of all civilian deaths involved explosive devices.
* Air strikes caused most (64%) of the explosives deaths.
* Children were disproportionately affected by all explosive devices but most severely by air strikes and unexploded ordnance (including cluster bomblets).
How many were injured?
* At least 42,500 civilians were reported wounded.
* The invasion phase caused 41% of all reported injuries.
* Explosive weaponry caused a higher ratio of injuries to deaths than small arms.
* The highest wounded-to-death ratio incidents occurred during the invasion phase.
http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/printer_22955.shtml
Chuck in Houston for madame defarge:
I know it's not a popular thing to say in today's America, but but I find it somewhat disgraceful that here in my country the issue of how many Iraqi civilians have been killed by our weaponry gets no attention at all. It makes it look like we just don't care. I suppose it's natural for us to spend more attention looking at our losses, or those of our close allies, like in London or Madrid, but we don't seem to be asking for ANY accountability at all when it comes to people we kill or maim. Regardless of whether or not a war is just, these sorts of tragic costs should be front and center to drive home the value that even in the most worthy cause, to paraphrase someone, "war is hell," and therefore must only be undertaken as a well-considered last resort to a demonstrable military threat to our national security.
Chuck in Houston
Chuck in Houston for Ira:
Ira, I agree with you just about 100% on the issue of how to evaluate nominees to SCOTUS and how to act on that evaluation. My sense of it is the regulatory issues are grist for the grass-roots mill, with respect to all three branches of government. Since we have to trade-off somewhere, I think that is the most honorable concession. Like you, I see SCOTUS as the venue of last resort primarily for the protection of individual rights, especially the rights of individuals that may be thought of as part of an unpopular minority. I think that is the essential counterbalance to a free-wheeling, "democratic" "Tyrrany of the Majority."
Chuck in Houston
Chuck in Houston in the interests of full disclosure:
I suppose I should mention that I work in the oil and gas exploration and production sector. I guess if would be fair to infer that I am biased in favor of the industry (I guess it's also fair that I would dispute that characterization). On the other hand, it would be fair to infer that I know a lot about matters in that sector, and by extension in large corporations anywhere, and perhaps due to that familiarity I do not see business issues as so much a cause as an effect of what ails our polity. In other words, its up to us as family members, neighbors, consumers, voters and workers to set community standards for behavior and see to it they are met through democratic processes. Insofar as business in and of itself is a proximate (rather than ultimate) cause of dysfunctions in our democratic processes, to my mind that is better dealt with at the ultimate level -- e.g., electoral and campaign finance reform and information access issues.
Chuck in Houston
Posted by: Chuck at July 19, 2005 01:30 PM
I agree, Chuck. We seem to feel that only our American/Christian/Anglo-Saxon lives have value and are therefore worthy of counting.
If it's tit-for-tat in this war (assuming people still subscribe to the theory that Saddam was connected to 9/11), how do you justify 3000+ lives from 9/11 or 50+ lives against the estimated number of 25,000 Iraqi lives lost to date? (And I do believe that the number of Iraqi casualties is low.)
I regularly monitor this anti-war site http://antiwar.com/casualties/#count to help me keep my perspective.
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/us/supreme_court
Bush to Announce Court Nominee Tonight
WASHINGTON - President Bush has decided whom to nominate to succeed Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court and was poised to announce his pick in a prime-time Tuesday night address. White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the Bush administration was asking television outlets to broadcast the speech live. Bush's spokesman would not identify the president's choice. But there was intense speculation that it would be Judge Edith Clement of the U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
{{{{ Why only ONE nominee??? Why Prime Time to announce his nominee??? We're big kids and we can take the bad news any time of the day. Jeez.... if he seriously thinks the SCOTUS nomination will take our minds off of PlameGate, he's got another think coming!!!}}}}
Posted by: Truth Shall Prevail at July 19, 2005 12:56 AM
Truth...I sent you an email, and i will also copy the response here...hope this helps :)
Hi Truth, just got back in, and found you’re having troubles with your windows. I seem to remember you saying you were still running windows 98. “Safemode” is a condition that can occur when a “driver” has been corrupted. If you recently installed some device, or software…uninstall or remove it, then try to start windows normally.
Honestly, you need to upgrade to windows XP a.s.a.p. to avoid these kinds of issues. Windows 98 becomes corrupt after a few years of use, and is recommended to be reinstalled (by Microsoft) every 2 years, and it would be silly to reinstall win98 when XP is so much better. I hope this helps you…if you have more questions, just drop me an email…I’ll try to find some solutions for you :) doc
Chuck in Houston for madame defarge:
When you wrote: "We seem to feel that only our American/Christian/Anglo-Saxon lives have value and are therefore worthy of counting..." I couldn't help but reflect on something. I've lived and worked and travelled a lot outside of G7 countries, and that little tendency of ours that you alluded to does not escape people's notice around the world, and goes a long way toward damaging our national security interests in the bigger picture, especially when we get preachy, as we tend to do. More actions and less words would help us a lot. Again, that's why I believe that the US should only go to war as a last resort when confronted with a demonstrable threat to our national security. I would make an exception for an overwhelming and catastrophic human rights situation as well, but I guess I could fold that into my liberal view of what constitutes our national security.
Chuck in Houston
warning: installing xp over your corrupted system will in all likelihood wipe out all of your data files, truth. Hope you have previously backed up your computer, something our friends in the Columbus Ohio Democratic office have not yet figured out to do.
Update on CNN poll
Created: Tuesday, July 19, 2005, at 10:53:21 EDT
Do you think the figure of 25,000 civilians killed in Iraq since the start of the war is accurate?
Yes .............. 22% 14447 votes
No, too high ..... 20% 13359 votes
No, too low ...... 58% 38798 votes
Total: 66604 votes
Truth,
If you can afford it, get a Mac. Something that can run OS X. Look at the mac mini if you already have a key board and monitor. A used mac laptop may be a good bet too.
Ira and Oncall...both excellent suggestions...If I were doing it, I would backup all data files from the old OS, and then do a 'clean install' of XP...and as I hear it...the new Mac's will run Windows XP from a folder, so you get the best of both worlds :) Either way...its all about the money you have to spend...an 'upgrade install' of XP works about half the time for me (Back up your files first!)and would be the least cost to Truth ;)
Oh oncall... please... no 'Macs are so superior' stories. ;)
Posted by: Fe at July 19, 2005 01:17 AM
Fe,
Yes, I saw the parallels of then (Nixon) and now (W. Bush), and the enormous difference in the press between now and then.
You are completely correct about them being as responsible as the administration for letting things go in the interest of safety, security, and a dependable pay check. Interesting, this just made me think of something.
You know how Rove is always saying the opposite of what the truth is? And planning, and plotting, how to manipulate the masses through the media? Well, he has tried to pull a fast one with this Plame affair. On one hand, the woman journalist goes behind bars to "protect her sources", while Rove "encourages" Cooper to come forward and tell all he knows. He is talking out of both sides of his mouth again. (Or should I say both cheeks, because that is really what he is speaking out of.) That adds to the confusion for Joe Citizen out there in media land, because the sympathies start to go toward Miller, because, after all, she is only protecting a "deep throat". That is how it appears. In the meantime, he is so "innocent" he tells Cooper to go ahead and spill the beans.
We must keep on the media. It has seemed to help. I wrote letters about the DSM, and asked the media if they would rather tell the truth, or be assured of their paycheck. We need to tell them too, that the blood of this nation, as well as the Iraqis that have paid dearly for this administration's "misinformation" and subsequent cover-up is also on their hands, as long as they sit up and do tricks for this administration.
What a mess.
Truth...if you can, jump on the IRC...Ill try to walk you through the backup process for your critical data files :) doc
Chuck in Houston Computer kibitzing:
I've been trying to abstain from the computer discussion but Macs? Oh! You liberals! By the way it may be possible to reinstall the old Win98 without damaging the data files if the computer has a recover disk, or even with a new install using the Win98 that came with the machine(just don't repartition) but then the drivers might be wrong for the machine. In either case, once 98 is working, it shouldn't hurt the data files to then upgrade to XP, which will sovle some driver issues. HOWEVER, reloading all the old other software is a TEDIOUS task (I speak from painful experience and still can't get my old DVD-drive to work right -- but I've got an old computer -- 1999).
Chuck in Houston
PS: Only doctors and architects and academics and literary-types like Macs!
If you can afford it, get a Mac. Something that can run OS X. Look at the mac mini if you already have a key board and monitor. A used mac laptop may be a good bet too.
Posted by: oncall at July 19, 2005 02:44 PM
And Macs are Democratic.
The most popular PC maker these days - Dell - is HARDCORE Republican. I'd even go as far as describing Dell as the Wal-Mart of the PC manufacturing world. PCs also use Republican operating systems (Windows).
If you must go the PC route though, I'd suggest Gateway, which is pretty Democratic. (And also based here in SoCal.)
thanks, Doc.
Sry folks...i REALLY didnt mean to highjack the thread with this 'geek talk' :D
Chuck in Houston for Dwazhon:
Thanks for posting that CNN poll. Obviously, not a valid sample but it is reassuring to know that many of us have a good understanding of the magnitude of the cost of the war in terms of Iraqi casualties (civilian and combatants), despite the lack of any official figure and despite the glaring lack of MSM reporting on this issue in other than an anecdotal fashion.
Chuck in Houston
Chuck in Houston with my last geek post (I hope)
I think HP is blue too and I think they offer a model with Linux instead of Windows for an OS. Together with the productivity suite at openworks.net (I think), this Linux solution may finally lower the cost bar to personal computing. I think it's a very health development. Message to Brother Bill: You've got plenty monopoly rents already! Do something incredibly altruistic and even revolutionary like making standardized OS's and productivity suite software public domain!
Chuck in Houston (getting down off the soap box and back to work)
Link to Cheney Deepens ‘leak-gate’ Scandal
by Derrick Z. Jackson Published July 19, 2005 by the Boston Globe
The news that Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff was the second possible source in the leaking of the identity of a CIA agent to Time magazine elevates the scandal to a whole new level. It is bad enough for Karl Rove to be accused of being a leaker, since he is President Bush’s chief political strategist.
But if Time’s story holds, I. Lewis Libby’s involvement represents an even more insidious abuse of power.
snip~
Bush would invade Iraq over weapons of mass destruction that were never found. But Libby, Cheney, and the other influential right-wing hard-liners, such as Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, Richard Perle, and Douglas Feith, saw their dreams come true. Back in the administration of the senior President Bush, Cheney was defense secretary and Libby and Wolfowitz were two of his aides who, after the first Gulf War left Saddam in power, drafted a document advocating ‘‘preemptive’’ war against possible threats.
snip~
According to Vanity Fair, Cheney himself urged Powell to go ahead and stake his national popularity on the nonexistent evidence by saying to Powell, ‘‘Your poll numbers are in the 70s. You can afford to lose a few points.’’
America and Iraq would go on to lose more than a few points. Libby may end up as a symbol of a government so driven to ignore the truth it was willing to resort to dirty tricks to stop anyone from telling it.
continue~
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0719-20.htm
{{{ IMHO, in these two articles Ray McGovern explains this whole PlameGate better than anyone else.... }}}
Why Plame Matters
by Ray McGovern, TomPaine.com
When you sift through the hype, the Plame affair is about how the Bush White House deceived America into a war.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050718/why_plame_matters.php
by Ray McGovern, TomPaine.com
Karl Rove may well have leaked the identity of an agent, but was he covering up a trail that leads to the vice president.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050719/cheney_and_plame.php
Oil-Control Formula
by Robert Dreyfuss, TomPaine.com
The United States didn't invade Iraq for the commercial benefits of oil. It invaded to control the black gold as a strategic commodity.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050718/oilcontrol_formula.php
Stem Sellouts
by Jesse Reynolds, TomPaine.com
In their rush to support stem cell research and counter religious zealots, too many liberals are ready to cozy up with the biotech industry.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050719/stem_sellouts.php
EPA Paid Weather Channel for Videos
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071905N.shtml
The EPA's payments to a commercial news organization to further its public relations efforts reinforce recent concerns that the administration sometimes has cloaked its promotion of executive branch policies in messages that resemble news stories and do not always fully disclose the government's role.
{{{This is as "educational" as the 'no child left behind' people paying out taxpayer dollars to spout propaganda....}}}
Chuck in Houston for NonnyO:
I'd say you are right -- those first three articles are very good and succinct summaries that put this "Rove" issue in the proper context. Before we can fix the situation in Iraq, maybe we need to get into this issues first since the administration is being so aggressive. If the administration was being reasonable, a civil discussion of where we went wrong would be a good starting point for discussing where we need to go from here. However, if they are going to continue to aggressively engage in denial, maybe a useful discussion of where we go from here cannot take place until we get to the bottom of such things. It's very unfortunate that this administration puts political power and naked partisanship in front of an open and candid dialog with the American people about fundamental issues of national security. And maybe as long as we let them get away with it, they'll keep on doing it. For that reason, perhaps more focus should be put on this "Rove" thing so we can get everything out in the open, face facts, and then move on to figuring out an end-game.
Chuck in Houston
Hey, I like that, what I wrote -- could almost be a slogan:
"'Fess Up and Move On"
Chuck in Houston
I check the CNN site sometimes just to see what dribble they're posting. But if you look right now, you'll notice what a "flattering" photo they posted of Georgie... Wonder what they mean by that...
http://www.cnn.com/
Okay, thanks all you sweetie pies, for all the input and help ideas today. I just now got to read all your posts.
PC Doc helped me over the phone, and I am pretty sure we came to the conclusion that I still have use of my windows, but that a color card needs replaced. He is helping me back up my most important files, and then we will go further.
I can buy a new unit in Sept., but right now I am concentrating on getting a flight home to see my folks as they are ill.
Thanks all! ;)
new thread