CBS White House correspondent John Roberts has apologized for saying this during today's gaggle time:
Roberts: "Scott, you said that- or the President said, repeatedly. that Harriet Miers was the best person for the job. So does that mean Alito is sloppy seconds, or what?
Roberts: "I apologize to anyone who took offense to my poor choice of words. I can assure you I meant none."
"I'll be going as FEMA's Michael Brown -- which means I'll be coming to the party late, bringing no refreshments, offering no help, and ordering the National Guard to use lethal force if any poor people touch the toilet paper."
U.S. Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Pa., generally isn't considered to be a liberal. But she sure does a convincing impression of a pandering progressive when the topic turns to economics, particularly the economics of natural gas prices.Far be it from me to get between a conservative member of Congress and a conservative blowhard at The Trib, but it IS fun to watch, isn't it?
Tuesday last, Ms. Hart urged the House Agriculture Committee "to investigate what actions the Congress may take to ensure that Americans are not subjected to unwarranted volatility and price gouging in the natural gas market."
Particular attention must be paid to "excessive speculation" and the role futures trading plays to "artificially raise prices" and cause "unwarranted changes," she said, adding that "unpredictable (price) swings hit hardest on those that can least afford it, such as farmers, seniors and American businesses."
Indeed, this winter's heating bills will be no bargain for most Americans. Some could pay upwards of 70 percent more than last year.
But Hart is allowing her altruistic side to cloud her commonsense instincts. And if that's not the case, well then it's just fundamental ignorance.
As my buddy Don Boudreaux, chairman of the Nobel Prize-holding economics department at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., put it, "Ms. Hart is way off base."
Courtesy of Mr. Boudreaux, a tutorial for Missy:"Prices reflect underlying conditions of supply and demand." "The reason the prices of gasoline and natural gas have risen so dramatically lately are not mysterious: hurricanes and more than usual uncertainty in the Middle East." "That these prices are variable is also no mystery. Uncertainty waxes and wanes with more frequency than does, say, actual supply capacity." "(W)hen uncertainty becomes a larger part of the price of a commodity, the price of that commodity fluctuates more than it does when conditions of relative certainty and security prevail." "The fact that prices fluctuate means that they go up and down -- the latter movement being powerful evidence against suspicions that energy companies are monopolistic." "As for speculation, it actually smooths out prices over time. Speculators who anticipate the price of, say, oil to rise will buy oil today (raising today's price higher than it would be) and sell oil tomorrow (lowering tomorrow's price lower than it would be). Vice-versa for speculators who expect the price of oil to fall." "Without such speculation, prices through time would be more, not less, variable."
Congresswoman Hart needs to study the matter a little better before her next press release. Better yet, she needs to sit down with Professor Boudreaux. And I'd be glad to make the connection.
Collectivism is so ingrained into liberalism's psyche that apologists probably don't even realize how easily and automatically they invoke it. Take, for example, the recent editorial in The New York Times that calls on the federal government to "capitalize on the end of the era of perpetually cheap gas."Now I'm not going to venture into the Little Red Book of the wingnut slogans such as "Collectivism is so ingrained into liberalism's psyche..." but I do want to point out something about the last sentence. Mr McNickle grumbles about how pas prices are "still about what they were 25 years ago" when adjusted for inflation.
Never mind that gas prices right now are, adjusted for inflation, still about what they were 25 years ago.
Never mind that gas prices right now are, adjusted for inflation, still about what they were 25 years ago.Gee, d'ya think some members of McNickle's audience read that gas prices have been steady for the last 25 years? The prose is murky enough to assume so.
This is the last meetup before the November election and various candidates will be speaking.
Democracy for Pittsburgh is somewhat unique among the local progressive groups because it both endorses candidates and encourages and supports its own members to run for office AND it does service projects such as collect phone cards for wounded vets (matched by Democracy for America); participates in neighborhood clean-ups; as well as lobbying elected officials for better government.
This month, we're back on the South Side (I say "we" because if it isn't obvious already, I'm a member).
Event Date: Wednesday, November 2, 2005
Event Time: 7:00 PM
Venue Name: Mario’s South Side Saloon (upstairs in the back)
Address: 1514 E Carson St
City: Pittsburgh
State: PA
Zip Code: 15203
Phone Number: 412-381-5610
Please R.S.V.P. at:
http://tools.democracyforamerica.com/link/event.php?id=1935
Some Past Meetups:
August 2005:
Judicial Candidate Kathryn Hens-Greco spoke (not pictured).
April 2005:
Voting on endorsements for May primary.
January 2005:
Candidate Bill Peduto speaks to the group.
Some Past Actions: 
Members of Democracy for Pittsburgh and members of Tonya Payne’s campaign staff participated in a Neighborhood Clean Up Day on the North Side.
Ricky’s Redskins let Pennsylvanians attending the Steelers-Eagles game know that Rick Santorum doesn’t represent them, let Santorum know that his days in the Senate are numbered, and let Virginians know that until we get two Senators of our own, we’re claiming their football team!
Democracy for Pittsburgh member, Joy Sabl, discusses Santorum Homestead Tax Exemption issue with District Attorney Stephen Zappala, Jr.
Meeting with Congressman Mike Doyle’s District Director Paul Dellasandro during a National Day of Action to preserve Social Security.
(All photos by yours truly.)
A spokesman for Mr. Santorum, who is chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said the senator was unavailable for questions because he was traveling.But what, if anything, does he think of perjury?
Mr. Santorum, who is facing a difficult re-election campaign that could be compounded by the problems of the Bush administration, released a decidedly neutral statement saying any indictment was "a serious matter" and that he had confidence the legal system would provide a "thorough review of the facts and evidence and render a fair and deliberative decision in this case."
You can certainly argue ... that someone who breaks the law in not upholding and not telling the truth under oath and someone who obstructs justice does, in fact, threaten the republic.Cool. It's good to know where Rick stands.
Harriet Miers withdrew this morning as a nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.
In announcing the decision, Miers and President Bush cited their concern with the requests of members of the Senate Judiciary Committee for documents dealing with her work as White House counsel that the administration has chosen to withhold as privileged.
[snip]
Some of them, most notably columnist Charles Krauthammer, had proposed using the documents dispute as a face-saving reason for withdrawal. In fact, negotiations over the documents had barely begun when the withdrawal was announced this morning.
My blog is worth $48,550.44.
How much is your blog worth?
Only one in 10 Americans said they believe Bush administration officials did nothing illegal or unethical in connection with the leaking of a CIA operative's identity, according to a national poll released Tuesday.
Thirty-nine percent said some administration officials acted illegally in the matter, in which the identity of Valerie Plame, a CIA operative, was revealed.
The same percentage of respondents in the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll said administration officials acted unethically, but did nothing illegal.
Indictments Coming Tomorrow; Targets Received Letters TodayAnd then there's this from CBSNews:
An uber-insider source has just reported the following to TWN (since confirmed by another independent source):
1. 1-5 indictments are being issued. The source feels that it will be towards the higher end.
2. The targets of indictment have already received their letters.
3. The indictments will be sealed indictments and "filed" tomorrow.
4. A press conference is being scheduled for Thursday.
The shoe is dropping.
More soon.
Lawyers familiar with the case think Wednesday is when special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will make known his decision, and that there will be indictments. Supporters say Rove and the vice president’s chief of staff, Scooter Libby, are in legal jeopardy.Wow. But it's NOT a good idea to count the chickenhawks before they hatch, is it?
************
Pittsburgh, PA - Carnegie Museum "Dinosaur"
Organizer: David Meieran
Pittsburgh Organizing Group (POG) is asking that people join us for an emergency counter-recruitment rally and march starting at 7PM at Carnegie Museum Dinosaur in Oakland. Bring candles, flashlights, drums and whatever else you feel will help express your outrage over the tremendous loss of life in this pointless and costly war and the lies that sustain it.
ALSO NOTE: Before coming to the POG rally, consider attending a women\'s march through Oakland that Pittsburgh chapters of the American Friends Service Committee, the Women’s League For Peace and Freedom and Code Pink are organizing. Their silent candlelight march starts at 5:30 PM, at the Friends Meeting House, 4836 Ellsworth Ave. Wear black.
Both events will take place on the day after the 2,000th U.S. death in Iraq is reported.
The Carnegie Museum Dinosaur is located across from the University of Pittsburgh\'s Cathedral of Learning at Forbes Avenue and Schenley Drive.
R.S.V.P. here.
Not in Pittsburgh? Find a Friends events in your area here:
http://www.afsc.org/2000/
Just a reminder that ULYP and PUMP are co-sponsoring a mayoral candidate debate at the Kelly Strayhorn Theatre, 5941 Penn Avenue in East Liberty (412.363.3000 http://www.kelly-strayhorn.org/) from 6:00pm to 8:00pm today. Joe Sabino Mistick, a law professor at Duquesne, will moderate. Six candidates will spar--Titus North (Green Party), Jay Ressler (Socialist Workers Party), David Tessitor (independent), Les Ludwig (write-in), Joe Weinroth (Republican), and Bob O'Connor (Democrat).
At The Nation, John Nichols explains what "What Rosa Parks Gave America"In 1776, the Continental Congress awarded the first Congressional Gold Medal of Honor to General George Washington, a bold and determined man who had the courage to lead his country into battle for its freedom but who lacked the wisdom to recognize that the promise of the American Revolution would never be fully realized for so long as African Americans were second-class citizens. |  Rosa Parks (1913 - 2005) |
[snip]
It was not merely appropriate that Rosa Parks receive the same recognition as George Washington had been accorded. It was essential, for without Parks and those who joined her in forging the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, Washington's promise of freedom would have remained forever constricted by the overt chains of slavery and the covert chains of segregation.
WASHINGTON, Oct. 24 - I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.
Notes of the previously undisclosed conversation between Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2003, appear to differ from Mr. Libby's testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, from journalists, the lawyers said.
The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson's husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration's handling of intelligence about Iraq's nuclear program to justify the war.
Lawyers involved in the case, who described the notes to The New York Times, said they showed that Mr. Cheney knew that Ms. Wilson worked at the C.I.A. more than a month before her identity was made public and her undercover status was disclosed in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak on July 14, 2003.
If this is true, it is the end of the Bush administration. It means that Libby flipped. We can ask why did he flip? In my opinion, the only thing that could flip him is the threat of something close to the death penalty, which means some one died as a consequence of the revelation of Ms Plame's job. Perjury alone wouldn't do it, since he could expect to do time in a minimum security prison with time out for good behavior and a good job at the end of it for keeping his trap shut. So Fitz must have something that really hurts, and the only thing that could really hurt is a certified death.
Doesn't this make the Rethuglican Talking Points TM that it was journalists who outed Plame to the White House a bunch of bull?
If Cheney was the leaker, doesn't it make Bush's stance that he would "find" the leaker a bit like O.J. saying he would find the "real" killers?
Jeffrey Goldberg has written a critique in The New Yorker of the Bush White House that equals Ron Suskind's devastating critique of Bush before the last election titled "Without a Doubt."And some interesting quotations:
In "Breaking Ranks: What Turned Brent Scowcroft Against the Bush Administration?", Jeffrey Goldberg coaxes Brent Scowcroft to delineate his differences with the foreign policy proclivities of George W. Bush, Condoleeza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Cheney, and others.
And in the piece, George H.W. Bush is interviewed about Scowcroft -- and while Bush 41's comments are more elliptical, he stands clearly by Scowcroft's side in clear criticism of the decisions his son made.
A principal reason that the Bush Administration gave no thought to unseating Saddam was that Brent Scowcroft gave no thought to it. An American occupation of Iraq would be politically and militarily untenable, Scowcroft told Bush. And though the President had employed the rhetoric of moral necessity to make the case for war, Scowcroft said, he would not let his feelings about good and evil dictate the advice he gave the President.And then there's this on Secretary of State Rice:
It would have been no problem for America's military to reach Baghdad, he said. The problems would have arisen when the Army entered the Iraqi capital. "At the minimum, we'd be an occupier in a hostile land," he said. "Our forces would be sniped at by guerrillas, and, once we were there, how would we get out? What would be the rationale for leaving? I don't like the term 'exit strategy' -- but what do you do with Iraq once you own it?"
The disintegrating relationship between Scowcroft and Condoleezza Rice has not escaped the notice of their colleagues from the first Bush Administration. She was a political-science professor at Stanford when, in 1989, Scowcroft hired her to serve as a Soviet expert on the National Security Council.Go read the piece at Washingtonnote, then head out to your local newsstand to pick up The New Yorker (I'll be doing that today).
Scowcroft found her bright -- "brighter than I was" -- and personable, and he brought her all the way inside, to the Bush family circle. When Scowcroft published his Wall Street Journal article, Rice telephoned him, according to several people with knowledge of the call. "She said, 'How could you do this to us?'" a Scowcroft friend recalled. "What bothered Brent more than Condi yelling at him was the fact that here she is, the national-security adviser, and she's not interested in hearing what a former national-security adviser had to say."
Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., has more than $1.2 million in campaign funds, according to his report to the Federal Election Commission.Then there's this from the October 8 US News:
In contrast, Sen. Thad Cockran, R-Miss., reported having $495 in campaign funds last month, but his re-election race is not until 2008.
Lott has not declared whether he will run again, but said he would like to be the whip, a position currently occupied by Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.
The repercussions over President Bush's pick of little-known Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court are now moving into the upcoming Senate leadership elections set for the end of this year. In the latest twist, former Majority Leader Sen. Trent Lott is picking up strong support from conservatives for a return to the leadership, likely as the No. 2 position of whip, because of his sharp questioning of the president's pick. Some are even talking about having him challenge his friend, Assistant Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who backs Miers, for the top job being vacated by retiring Sen. Bill Frist.And here's how the National Review online sees things. First Senator Lott:
While few Senate insiders expect the three-term Mississippian to challenge McConnell, conservatives energized and angered by the Miers nomination are talking about encouraging him for leadership as a way to police the president's agenda from a more conservative view. It also comes as fears grow that the current conference chair, Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, is in an uphill re-election battle. A loss would take Santorum out of the fight for the whip post.
"Lott may be back in leadership in 13 short months. Santorum goes down; Lott goes up to whip," says a Senate GOP strategist.
Perhaps the strongest statement from the Senate has come from former Majority Leader Trent Lott. In an MSNBC interview on Wednesday, Oct. 5, Lott said that Miers is ''clearly not the most qualified person for the job" — something that seems pretty clear.And now Ricky:
Rick Santorum, junior senator from Pennsylvania, may be the Republican with the most to lose if Harriet Miers is not the next Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas — and if it is not clear she is one of the aforementioned before November 2006. He is the senator the Left would most like to unseat in the midterm elections, and being double-digits behind in the polls, he's not in a position to lose any friends right now.I almost feel sorry for the guy. Well, not really.
Even so, last Thursday in an interview, Santorum criticized the president's "trust me" approach to the nomination: "I am concerned President Bush nominated someone who is a blank slate. I'm disappointed that he wanted to nominate someone like that instead of someone with a record.'' Santorum said, "It is what I term the president's second faith-based initiative, which is 'trust me.' I think, candidly, we deserve better than that."
In the White House, that had to hurt.
Kanye West declared "George Bush doesn't care about black people." Sunday, before Kanye's concert a coalition of Pittsburghers will gather before the concert to show that the people of Pittsburgh —black, white, young, old—DO CARE about each other and our city. The hip-hop generation has been portrayed as violent, disaffected, disenfranchised, but in reality hip hop has always been about activism and community. We get together to show that the hip hop generation can be a positive force of community action and change. This rally represents cooperation amongst a number of grass roots organizations including:
DEGUERIN: The latest thing on MoveOn.org’s website, they are trying to raise money by selling t-shirts with Tom DeLay’s mug shot on the t-shirts. And I just don’t think that it looks right for the judge sitting on Congressman DeLay’s case to have contributed to an organization such as that.
According to MoveOn’s Washington director Tom Mattzie, this claim is false. Mattzie told ThinkProgress this morning that MoveOn has “never sold any t-shirts with Tom DeLay’s mug shot” on their website or otherwise. You can go to their website and see that he’s right.
Citizens for Principled Conservatism is a coalition of individuals and organizations dedicated to the proposition that Conservatism can only endure as a viable and vibrant movement if it maintains a commitment to the core character traits of honor and integrity, honesty and virtue.I can't speak for the other Political Junkie, but I heartily applaud the above proposition. I wish the CPC the best in this project.
However, these character traits are not exclusively conservative in nature and cannot be co-opted by a single political party. Consequently, this coalition reaches across party lines to all those who believe that those core character traits are necessary ingredients for the public square and all those who inhabit it.
Citizens for Principled Conservatism (CPC) is currently in-production of a documentary named The Truth About Ann which aims squarely at political and religious hypocrisy of Rightwing commentator and author, Ann Coulter.Cool.
“Speaking the truth in love is a Christian imperative,” says Borchers, "But both truth and love – core Christian concepts – are foreign to Ann Coulter."Truth and Love are foreign to Ann?? Whudda thunk it?
Smoking Gun has it all here.
***Well, OK, maybe he wasn't actually wearing the red nose.
| Perhaps the most disturbing thing about this article from The Onion is that we see no information about this study in the local MSM: nothing in the Post-Gazette, or the Tribune Review or on any of the local Pittsburgh TV channels. Typical! We had to learn about the article from other local bloggers who found it: |  |
PITTSBURGH—A zombie-preparedness study, commissioned by Pittsburgh Mayor Tom Murphy and released Monday, indicates that the city could easily succumb to a devastating zombie attack. Insufficient emergency-management-personnel training and poorly conceived undead-defense measures have left the city at great risk for all-out destruction at the hands of the living dead, according to the Zombie Preparedness Institute.The article mentions that Pittsburgh is "a prime target of the undead." Something of which all Pittsburghers are well aware.
"When it comes to defending ourselves against an army of reanimated human corpses, the officials in charge have fallen asleep at the wheel," Murphy said. "Who's in charge of sweep-and-burn missions to clear out infected areas? Who's going to guard the cemeteries at night? If zombies were to arrive in the city tomorrow, we'd all be roaming the earth in search of human brains by Friday."
(more here)
Democrat Bob Casey has widened his lead over Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), according to a GOP poll to be released today.While is bad bad news for Rick, this followed in the article:
The poll, conducted over the weekend by the Atlanta-based firm Strategic Vision, shows Casey, the state treasurer, capturing 52 percent versus Santorum’s 36 percent — a 16-point gap.
Polls released by the same firm showed Santorum trailing by 14 points in September and nine points in August.
“There’s no doubt about it: Rick Santorum is in trouble,” Casey Campaign Manger Jay Reiff said.And who is this "Strategic Visions"? Here's their policial polling webpage. They recently completed a poll of Pennsylvania residents. The very interesting results are here.
Reiff also cautioned that the Casey campaign expects the race to tighten considerably.
“A two-term incumbent with $25 million is not going to lose by double digits. We expect this to be a very close race.”
Do you approve or disapprove of United States Senator Rick Santorum's job performance?And then question 14:
Approve 40%
Disapprove 47%
Undecided 13%
If the election for United States Senate were held today, and the choice was between Robert Casey, Jr., the Democrat and Rick Santorum, the Republican, whom would you vote for?Strategic Visions also says that by a margin of 55-to-30 percent, Pennsylvanians approve of the way Arlen Specter is doing his job.
Robert Casey 52%
Rick Santorum 36%
Other 2%
Undecided 10%
Rudy Guliani 42%See that? Rick got 2% of that vote. Six times as many Pennsylvania Republicans responded as "undecided." Geez, Rick scored lower than the guy being investigated by the SEC, Bill Frist.
John McCain 28%
Newt Gingrich 7%
Bill Frist 3%
Mitt Romney 2%
Rick Santorum 2%
George Pataki 2%
George Allen 1%
Chuck Hagel 1%
Undecided 12%
Contributors would be exempt from any city efforts to "assess a tax or fee" on charitable institutions. The city also would be required to treat their requests for applications, permits, licenses and other approvals "no differently than those requested by for-profit or government entities," according to the contract.The nonprofits side is being presented in the media as: We don't OWE anything; the city is being ungrateful toward our generous donation (at a time when nonprofits face their own cutbacks); and the city is sticking it to groups like The Little Sisters of the Poor. The Post-Gazette chimed in to advise that City Council should take the money and run; calling it a "no-brainer."
Nonprofit organizations contacted yesterday would not say what they pledged, but emphasized their willingness to help.
UPMC Health System spokeswoman Jane Duffield said that UPMC had contributed $23 million to the city from 1989 to 2002.
During that time, many organizations made contributions to fend off city challenges to their nonprofit status. In 1997 the state reduced municipalities' ability to file such challenges.
President Bush's Supreme Court nominee, Harriet E. Miers, pledged support in 1989 for a constitutional amendment that would ban abortions except when necessary to save the life of the woman.The White House response to this revaluation?
Ms. Miers expressed her support for such an amendment in an April 1989 survey sent out by Texans United for Life. The disclosure virtually guarantees that Ms. Miers will be questioned heavily during hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee on abortion rights and whether she can separate her personal views from legal issues.
As a candidate for a seat on the Dallas City Council, Ms. Miers answered "yes" to the following question: "If Congress passes a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution that would prohibit abortion except when it was necessary to prevent the death of the mother, would you actively support its ratification by the Texas Legislature?"
Ms. Miers answered "yes" to all the organization's questions, including whether she would oppose the use of public money for abortion and whether she would use her influence to keep "pro-abortion" people off city health boards and commissions.
"The role of a judge is very different from the role of a candidate or a political officeholder," Mr. McClellan said of the 1989 document. "What she was doing in that questionnaire was expressing her views during the course of a campaign. The role of a judge is to apply the law in a fair and open-minded way."
Article VI of the Constitution states that “No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” As the New York Sun pointed out recently, it is the single most absolutist and emphatic sentence in the entire Constitution. For those who would say that just because President Bush considered Miers’ religion in nominating her, that doesn’t necessarily mean he was imposing any kind of “religious test,” I would implore you to think of it this way: if part of the reason the President nominated Miers was her religion, then that necessitates the fact that part of the reason other prospects were not nominated was because they did not have the same “quality” of religion that Harriet Miers did. Thus, they were subjected to a religious test by the President in considering them for an appointment to the Supreme Court. This is grossly unconstitutional, and if it is allowed to stand, it will be a tacit admission that the “Religious Test” clause has become outdated and inoperable, and we will be one major step closer to theocracy.I'm going to assume that Miers has the same finely tuned understanding of our Constitution that our Glorious Leader has -- after all, Miers has stated that Bush, "was the most brilliant man she had ever met."
Criminalizing conservatism
Mark Kleiman has the goods and the picture to prove it.
"I am running because I am concerned about the direction the Township is taking in terms of over-development and the lack of an open government in our community. If you want a change of faces and ideas, or if you feel as if your concerns about our neighborhood are not being addressed by the current administration, then you should seriously consider supporting my candidacy."Who is Andrew Wagner?
Andrew Wagner is a freshman at Duquesne University. He has been an active volunteer in politics, and was instrumental in helping organize students for the Kerry/Edwards campaign in 2004.Yep, he's young and he's got fresh ideas and he's ready to turn an R into a D.
Cheney May Be Entangled in CIA Leak Investigation, People Say
Oct. 17 (Bloomberg) -- A special counsel is focusing on whether Vice President Dick Cheney played a role in leaking a covert CIA agent's name, according to people familiar with the probe that already threatens top White House aides Karl Rove and Lewis Libby.
The special counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, has questioned current and former officials of President George W. Bush's administration about whether Cheney was involved in an effort to discredit the agent's husband, Iraq war critic and former U.S. diplomat Joseph Wilson, according to the people.
Fitzgerald has questioned Cheney's communications adviser Catherine Martin and former spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise and ex-White House aide Jim Wilkinson about the vice president's knowledge of the anti-Wilson campaign and his dealings on it with Libby, his chief of staff, the people said. The information came from multiple sources, who requested anonymity because of the secrecy and political sensitivity of the investigation.
(More here)
MR. RUSSERT: Let me share with you some attitudes of Americans towards the war in Iraq, and here's our latest Wall Street Journal-NBC poll: 51 percent say removing Saddam Hussein was not worth it; 58 percent said we should reduce the number of U.S. troops; 56 percent feel less confident the war will be successful. Majorities now raising huge anxieties, expressing huge anxieties over the war in Iraq.Let me see if I can clarify the Secretary's words. The "choice," she says, was between deciding that al-qaeda was the "proximate" cause of 9-11 and deal with it as such OR deciding that "the root causes of the kind of terrorism" were threatening enough for the country to take a "bolder approach" and try to change the political landscape of the Middle East (by invading Iraq).
SEC'Y RICE: I'm quite certain, Tim, that when the American people see every day what they see on their screens, which is violence and, of course, the deaths of Americans and coalition forces, it's very difficult to take. We mourn every sacrifice. But the fact of the matter is that when we were attacked on September 11, we had a choice to make. We could decide that the proximate cause was al-Qaeda and the people who flew those planes into buildings and, therefore, we would go after al-Qaeda and perhaps after the Taliban and then our work would be done and we would try to defend ourselves.
Or we could take a bolder approach, which was to say that we had to go after the root causes of the kind of terrorism that was produced there, and that meant a different kind of Middle East. And there is no one who could have imagined a different kind of Middle East with Saddam Hussein still in power. I know it's difficult, but we have ahead of us the prospect, and I think the very good prospect of a foundation for a democratic and prosperous Iraq that can solve its differences by politics and compromise, that becomes an anchor for a Middle East that is changing.[emphasis added]
Q Ari, part of the reason for the war was WMD. Now, well into the war, WMD has not been found. The American public is going to the television every morning, listening to the radio every morning, trying to find out if, indeed, WMD was found. Does the administration feel there's some awkwardness right now with these statements of they're professionals at hiding, and we know it's there? I mean, is there some sort of awkwardness about the fact that this has not been found as of yet?The war was presented as a "no-choice-but-now situation." We had to stop Saddam Hussein from giving WMD (that we knew he had) to al-qaeda (through the channels we also knew he had) in order to stop al-qaeda from attacking us with them. Every day the pre-war weapons inspectors wasted on looking for what we already knew was there was another day for Saddam and Osama Bin-Laden to collectively plan for our destruction. We had no choice in the matter, we were told.
MR. FLEISCHER: No. We know Saddam Hussein is there, but we haven't found him yet, either. The fact of the matter is we are still in a war, and not everything about the war is yet known. But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found. [emphasis added]
As 2003 comes to a close, we at City Paper bid farewell to one of our unlikeliest colleagues: radio “personality” Jim Quinn. You may know Quinn from his weekday morning screeds on WRRK-FM, where he raves about feminists, environmentalists, the United Nations, and so on. But here at work, we know him as the guy who walks around the office with a sidearm strapped to his waist.Wait-there's more:
Quinn doesn’t even have a book out this Christmas season, but when it comes to groundless rumor-mongering, he can hold his own: Quinn once claimed that physicians of Middle Eastern descent were openly celebrating the Sept. 11 attacks in McKeesport. He based his report on an e-mail from a listener, but despite that ironclad evidence, the story turned out to be utterly groundless. Quinn had to apologize for it later.And here's Dimitri Vassilaros (of the Trib) had to say in 2002. The article was published right after the two DC-area snipers were arrested and Vassilaros was writing about how some local radio talk-show hosts were presenting the story:
"I think he is an Islamist looney-toon who thinks God wants him to murder anyone who is not a Muslim in return for 72 virgins and a key to the celestial Playboy Club," says Jim Quinn, WRRK (96.9 FM) morning talk host. Quinn says he is not legally mandated to say "alleged," but "I think people understand he is innocent until proven guilty."Good thing the police actually caught the right guy. Imagine if they'd made a mistake. I wonder what the warroom would have said about the "looney-tune criminal" then.
Rose Somma Tenant, Quinn's morning show partner, is not as fair and balanced."In my mind, it is obvious he is guilty of many things," she says. "I consider him a criminal right now just based on what he has done. You notice there have been no more shootings now that he has been arrested."
John Cloud, a homosexual activist who writes for Time magazine has recently written the cover story for Time (Oct. 10, 2005) on “The Battle Over Gay Teens.” The article does not reveal that Cloud is a promiscuous homosexual who admits enjoying anonymous sex.Now I have no idea about John Cloud's personal life, but that's a helluva way to start a "fair and balanced" report, isn't it?
Gay-activist attorneys say the presence of a few gays wouldn't keep Scout officials from maintaining anti-gay views, since the vast majority of scouting activities never involve discussions of sexuality or politics. They say the issue isn't so much a group's right to exclusivity--no one is arguing that the Ku Klux Klan must admit Jews--as it is whether a group like the Boy Scouts, which generally welcomes every boy, can claim that being anti-gay is part of its core values. (As a practical matter, the N.A.A.C.P isn't worried: it has filed a brief against the Scouts.) [emphasis added]That's it. The "comparison" hinges on each group's right to exclusivity. But the paragraph itself says that that's not really the issue at hand, doesn't it?
The poll also revealed overwhelming opposition to Bush among African-Americans. Only two percent said they approved of his performance as president, the lowest level ever recorded in that category, NBC television reported.Can you say "Katrina"?
Can she maybe "pray and pray" for world peace, or an end to hunger, or a river of chocolate to suddenly appear behind my house, or something far more useful than the prayers God has been apparently answering for her up to now?
I really don't believe that, and I think you got it from one of those documents Mary Mapes handed to Dan Rather.In short, she made a joke out of Pat Tillman's death.
It must have been quite a moment for Coulter, who upon Tillman's death described him in her inimitably creepy fashion as "an American original--virtuous, pure and masculine like only an American male can be." She tried to discredit the story as San Francisco agitprop, but this approach ran into a slight problem: The article's source was Pat Tillman's mother, Mary.And we should probably take a look at the context of Coulter's quotation. It was from an "end of the year" column. Take a look at it here. The woman who claims that liberals are destroying civil discourse makes a number of interesting insults in her thousand or so words. Some examples:
an America-bashing trophy husband and his blow-dried, ambulance-chasing sidekick.And then there's this complete paragraph:
Surprisingly, Teresa [Heinz Kerry] never became a major campaign issue. It turned out that supporters of a phony war hero who preyed on rich widows were also OK with the notion of a first lady who might use the F-word during Rose Garden press conferences. By the same token, anyone who was put off by the not-so-affable Eva Peron of American politics already didn't like John Kerry - thanks largely to John O'Neill and the Swiftboat Veterans.John Kerry: an America-bashing trophy husband and phony war hero who preys on rich widows. Yea, it's the liberals who are debasing civil discourse in Murika
American hero Pat Tillman won a Silver Star this year. But unlike Kerry, he did not write his own recommendation or live to throw his medals over the White House fence in an anti-war rally.Hmm - all I can do is quote something that the San Francisco Chronicle points out:
Tillman was an American original: virtuous, pure and masculine like only an American male can be. The stunningly handsome athlete walked away from a three-year, $3.6 million NFL contract with the Arizona Cardinals to join the U.S. military and fight in Afghanistan, where he was killed in April.
He wanted no publicity and granted no interviews about his decision to leave pro football in the prime of his career and join the Army Rangers. (Most perplexing to Democrats, he didn't even take a home movie camera to a war zone in order to create fake footage for future political campaigns in which he would constantly palaver about his military service and drag around his "Band of Brothers" for the media.)
Interviews also show a side of Pat Tillman not widely known — a fiercely independent thinker who enlisted, fought and died in service to his country yet was critical of President Bush and opposed the war in Iraq, where he served a tour of duty.He fought and died in service of his country - even when he disagreed with the policies that put him there.
