Royally Kranked

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Always so fun to throw something else into the mix to consider-namely, with the Ports deal, Dear Leader W's claims about how the US will still call the security shots, as his remarks earlier today show

Q Mr. President, since you're the final arbiter of the Dubai Ports deal, are you still inclined to approve it? And do you stand by your veto threat?

PRESIDENT BUSH: My position hasn't changed to my message to the Congress. And I appreciate the fact that the companies concerned have asked the Congress for a review of all the security implications.

Let me just make something clear to the American people. If there was any doubt in my mind, or people in my administration's mind that our ports would be less secure and the American people endangered, this deal wouldn't go forward. And I can understand people's consternation because the first thing they heard was that a foreign company would be in charge of our port security, when, in fact, the Coast Guard and Customs are in charge of our port security. Our duty is to protect America, and we will protect America.

On the other hand, this company is buying a British company that manages the ports. And by the way, there are a lot of foreign companies managing U.S. ports. And so my question to the members of Congress as they review this matter is, one, please look at the facts. And two, what kind of signal does it send throughout the world if it's okay for a British company to manage the ports, but not a company that has been secure -- been cleared for security purposes from the Arab world?

That's interesting, especially when considering that the President can waive those same security standards, say, for well-connected cronies-and the best part here?

Well, President Bush Jr has done just that, when he waived rules pertaining to US ports already, namely, back right after Katrina hit

Another challenge we face is that the downed pipelines are causing the need to transport gasoline to needed markets by ship. Under current law, shipping between American ports can only take place on American ships, and there are currently not enough American ships to move the oil and gasoline to where it's needed. So today I've instructed Secretary of Homeland Security Chairman Chertoff to temporarily waive this requirement, so foreign ships can also help distribute oil and gasoline to where it's needed. Today's action will further help us move gasoline to accommodate the demands of the American citizens.

So the President can order any requirements waived as it relates to any aspect of US ports

Does anyone doubt This President WOULDN'T waive security requirements on behalf of a major campaign contributing crony, especially as how he did just that with Katrina

I'd say there needs to be restrictions written into the deal that allows the President to waive ANY requirements needed to run US ports ONLY with a congressional okay

Once again, Dear Leader W has left me stumped, and I'm wondering just what the hell he was blathering about

For a quick recap, Before leaving later today on a trip to India & Pakistan, President Jr hosted a White House Meeting with his most ideological brother in arms, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, and at one point, Dear Leader was questioned about the Ports Deal that blew up in his face a week ago

One part of his response really stands out though, especially when viewing his exact quote

First, from Forbes via the AP

On another subject, Bush said "my position hasn't changed" on support for transferring control of management of some U.S. port facilities from a British company to a Dubai-based one, despite his administration's agreement to launch a fresh 45-day re-examination of national security issues.

"Please look at the facts," Bush urged Congress, where the deal has drawn substantial bipartisan opposition and skepticism. After his remarks on port security, Bush told the translator not to translate his answer into Italian, unlike his other responses.

I couldn't quite beleive that President Jr actually said out loud NOT to translate his latest public statements about the Port deal for the Head of State standing nearby during a joint press conference

So, I looked it up, and sure enough, he really DID say that publicly, and I'm still trying to figure out what on earth he meant by his justification for such an odd request

Caren.

Q Mr. President, since you're the final arbiter of the Dubai Ports deal, are you still inclined to approve it? And do you stand by your veto threat?

PRESIDENT BUSH: My position hasn't changed to my message to the Congress. And I appreciate the fact that the companies concerned have asked the Congress for a review of all the security implications.

Let me just make something clear to the American people. If there was any doubt in my mind, or people in my administration's mind that our ports would be less secure and the American people endangered, this deal wouldn't go forward. And I can understand people's consternation because the first thing they heard was that a foreign company would be in charge of our port security, when, in fact, the Coast Guard and Customs are in charge of our port security. Our duty is to protect America, and we will protect America.

On the other hand, this company is buying a British company that manages the ports. And by the way, there are a lot of foreign companies managing U.S. ports. And so my question to the members of Congress as they review this matter is, one, please look at the facts. And two, what kind of signal does it send throughout the world if it's okay for a British company to manage the ports, but not a company that has been secure -- been cleared for security purposes from the Arab world? So I look forward to a good, consistent review. You don't need to interpret. That's a U.S. question.

How the hell does "That's a U.S. Question" justify NOT translating the remarks for the Italian Prime Minister?

Does Dear Leader really think that Berlusconi didn't notice something was up when the translation didn't occur?

Is Dear Leader SO thin-skinned at this point that he actually thinks he avoids embarrassment in front of an ally if the ally can't understand the President's answer to a troublesome political problem?

I doubt this will get much attention, but I'd sure like to hear how Dear Leader W justify his insistence that his remarks about the Ports Deal not be translated for the visitng ally standing right next to him in front of the White House Press Corps

Monday, February 27, 2006

An absolute lack of empathy

This screed originally was going to be in the comments section for a post from Shakespeare's Sister

Who knew there was even going to be a report on Bush’s bike accident in Scotland last year when he crashed into a Scottish police constable while cycling in the grounds of Gleneagles Hotel? I certainly didn’t.

Another so-dead-on-target post from SS, this one dealing with the Administration's fetish for covering up any & all incidents that make the Dear Leader & his Retinue look less than honorable

It was in her comments section that SS made this observation

Yeah, waterhouse, it was, except that Prez. Bartlet ran into a tree, not a police officer.

Right. I mean, like I was kind of chuckling until I got to the part where the guy was off work for 14 weeks. That doesn't sound like a "very minor" injury - and original reports didn't even mention that the guy struck his head. It sounds like it was a lot worse than we were told, which makes it not funny because someone really got hurt and not funny because we were lied to. Again.

My reply

For Dear Leader W & Cheneyburton, it's not so much a matter of covering up that shows their true nature, it's the fact that they both lack ANY empathy for anyone else outside their brittle Bubble Worlds-namely, some immediate family only

They weren't thinking about covering up or how they'd respond when pressed publicly about their miscues & misfires, because they weren't worried in the least about what they'd done, and even less worried about their physical harm of others

But with Dear Leader W, there's also an anger at both others and himself when it comes to how President jr handles problems that have popped up on him before

Such as using political connections to leapfrog over 500 more qualified applicants for that TANG spot that kept him completely out of harm's path and active duty in Vietnam

Dear Leader W saw nothing wrong with doing everything he could to stay off the battlefield, and it makes him angry when anyone else calls him a coward who used the ultimate form of affirmative action-politicial power

Yet, in his deepest soul, Dear Leader W acknolwedges his cravenly actions, it shreds him that he can't, factually, dispute his critics' negative assertions

He's decided that being a hardass politically makes up for not being a hardass on the battlefield OR in the world of business, a record worth noting in that he NEVER ran a successful business from the ground up, based on his own actions & decision, EVERY single business venture he headed failed miserably

Listen to how often the Dear Leader trots out that obvious, psychologically self-reassuring blather of "I'm A War President"

Dear Leader W figures if he repeats that "I'm A War President" mantra long enough, he'll set his own gnawing doubts about his own character to permanaent rest.

Even more astonishingly, he figures that by repeating the "War President" claim enough times, even his critics will finally give him his bonafides as someone who's more than made up for their past lack of spine for anything hostile-combat related

Isn't it amazing what a great War President & Military Stragetist Dear Leader W's become since first refusing to serve in active combat?

Forget all the BS that W wanted to take out Saddam Hussein because of a fialed assassination plot against Bush Sr, Bush has no real love for his father in the least, best example of that was W's reply to a question about whether he'd sought his father's advice regarding the Iraq invasion & occupation, W responding that he listened to a HIGHER father

Did Mr. Bush ask his father for any advice? “I asked the president about this. And President Bush said, ‘Well, no,’ and then he got defensive about it,” says Woodward. “Then he said something that really struck me. He said of his father, ‘He is the wrong father to appeal to for advice. The wrong father to go to, to appeal to in terms of strength.’ And then he said, ‘There's a higher Father that I appeal to.’"

And while we haven't seen or read much about it, I would venture that it's driving Dear Leader W absolutely CRAZY that it appears that Clinton has a better relationship with Bush Sr than Bush Jr does

Even though W seemingly has no love for his father, he's no doubt told himself that Clinton being on better terms with Bush Sr has somehow caused Bush Sr to love Jr less than he would have otherwise

It's that complete lack of empathy thing, it allows W to insist on emotions & tributes from those he refuses to treat in the same fashion.

Yet, as sociopathic as Dear Leader W's mindset is, he's given to temper tantrums when his self-aggrandizing mythology can't completely drown out harsh & unpleasant self-realities

If that core of unpleasnt self-reality didn't intrude in W's thoughts in the least, we'd have no reports about temper tantrums, he wouldn't care what he said in public as it wouldn't bother him in the least to be scolded as a complete & utter hypocrite no matter the issue, a logical impossibility given the Administration's determination to spin all things to make the Dear Leader TRULY great, and in that pursuit are cover-ups perpetrated

Nothing, absolutely NOTHING showed Dear Leader's mindset & self-delusional brittle bubble of monumental ego as much as W's answer to a question of what mistaes did President Jr think he'd made as President, to which W famously responded that he couldn't think of a single mistake he'd made as President

John.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. In the last campaign, you were asked a question about the biggest mistake you'd made in your life, and you used to like to joke that it was trading Sammy Sosa. You've looked back before 9/11 for what mistakes might have been made. After 9/11, what would your biggest mistake be, would you say, and what lessons have you learned from it?

THE PRESIDENT: I wish you would have given me this written question ahead of time, so I could plan for it. (Laughter.) John, I'm sure historians will look back and say, gosh, he could have done it better this way, or that way. You know, I just -- I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with an answer, but it hadn't yet.

*******************************

I hope I -- I don't want to sound like I've made no mistakes. I'm confident I have. I just haven't -- you just put me under the spot here, and maybe I'm not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one.

Besides a foolish belief in his overarching perfection, something else gnaws at Dear Leader as well: the well-deserved perception that if it wasn't for the truly loathsome Karl Rove, W would have been as successful at politics as he's been in his business endeavors, all of which failed when W was calling the shots

It drives President Jr crazy to accept advice from someone he'd have beat up on if they'd gone to the same school at the same time, as W figures that Rove hogs far too much credit for Bush's political acumen, and that he needs W as much as W needs him

Lets face it, once Dear Leader is out of the White House, him & Rove will NEVER speak to each other again, let alone visit or send Christmas cards

Which brings up a final point

Just how many REAL friends does Dear Leader W TRULY have?

Does anyone really think that W will actually sit on Trent Lott's porch?

Does anyone really see Dear Leader W & Cheneyburton getting together once the Administration's gone?

It's a lack of empathy that ensures W will only ever have pragamatic relationships, as opposed to REAL, unalloyed friendships

Make no mistake, President Jr lacks a heart, and that lack of empathy, more than any other flaw, fault or shortcoming is W's Truest character trait

Saturday, February 25, 2006

So I've realized the obvious-that for those of us who really really dislike Dear Leader W, the actual White House site itself, with the official transcriptions of every word the President utters in public-is nothing but pure gold, a true gift from the Gods of Political Mockery

I've read through numerous speeches now, and there's absolutely NO way to underestimate this President's intelligence

We're talking true blithering country here, and then, every once in a while, the stars align just right and one sees something truly hysterical to behold

And here we are

The Dear Leader is to pay a visit to India soon, and holds a roundtable interview with various reporters from India

Apparently an early version of the visit would have had President jr visit the Taj Mahal with with Laura Bush

But because there were "scheduling" problems, that part of the itinerary was scrubbed away, and one of the members of the Indian Press pushes hard-& hysterically-for a response by the Dear Leader about the change in plans

And then, comes a wrap up the likes of which is usually available only on any 3 stooges scrum, and a perfect example of how this President is truly in the Village category when it comes to idiots

Q But Mr. President, you're going to India, but you're not visiting the Taj Mahal.

THE PRESIDENT: I know. It means I'm going to have to --

Q Have you broken a promise to the First Lady?

THE PRESIDENT: No, it means I'm going to have to come back. It's a -- I am disappointed with that. People who have seen the Taj Mahal say that it's -- pictures don't do it justice. It's one of the great magnificent sites of the world. And look, if I were the scheduler, perhaps I'd be doing things differently. But you want me doing one thing. I'll be the President, we've got the scheduler being the scheduler. I'm going to miss a lot of the really interesting parts of your great country. I know that. I would hope that I would be invited back sometime after this trip.

Q You could be in trouble with the "Desperate Housewife."

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Well, she's certainly the star of the family. She's really looking forward to going with me.

Q Mr. President, what is your earliest memory of India.

MR. McCLELLAN: We've got to go to the next one. (TOO LATE!!! President Jr misheard & commented before you could hustle everyone along, now the "fool" card will be played yet again)

Q What is your earliest memory of India and Indians?

THE PRESIDENT: My best memory?

Q Earliest.

THE PRESIDENT: At least memory?

MR. McCLELLAN: Earliest.

THE PRESIDENT: Earliest. (Laughter.)

Q Earliest.

THE PRESIDENT: Ghandi. It's my first memory, as I think about India. You know, a person who was so spiritual that he captured the imagination of the entire world. He's proof positive that -- throughout history there have been individuals that have had the capacity to shape thought and to influence and -- beyond border. And he did that.

Q You watched the movie? (One of the greatest questions EVER!)

THE PRESIDENT: I watched that, too. But that's -- but my memory was earlier than that.

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Thank you.

Q Thank you, very much.

THE PRESIDENT: Enjoyed it.

So did we Dear Leader W

Just for giggles, lets take EVERY public pronouncement from Dear Leader W about the Ports Deal, and see how often he actually identifies-BY NAME-the two companies involved

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

All Quotes Taken Straight From The White House Site Itself

There's NO Higher Expression Of Patriotism Than Quoting Our President

Feb 21, 2006, Part 1

I do want to talk about this port issue. A foreign company manages some of our ports. They've entered into a transaction with another foreign company to manage our ports. This is a process that has been extensively reviewed, particularly from the point of view as to whether or not I can say to the American people, this project will not jeopardize our security. It's been looked at by those who have been charged with the security of our country. And I believe the deal should go forward. This company operates all around the world. I have the list somewhere. We can get you the list. They're in Germany and elsewhere -- Australia.*

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

They -- in working with our folks, they've agreed to make sure that their coordination with our security folks is good and solid. I really don't understand why it's okay for a British company to operate our ports, but not a company from the Middle East, when our experts are convinced that port security is not an issue; that having worked with this company, they're convinced that these -- they'll work with those who are in charge of the U.S. government's responsibility for securing the ports, they'll work hand in glove. I want to remind people that when we first put out the Container Security Initiative, the CSI, which was a new way to secure our ports, UAE was one of the first countries to sign up.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

In other words, we're receiving goods from ports out of the UAE, as well as where this company operates. And so I, after careful review of our government, I believe the government ought to go forward. And I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British [sic] company. I'm trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to people of the world, we'll treat you fairly. And after careful scrutiny, we believe this deal is a legitimate deal that will not jeopardize the security of the country, and at the same time, send that signal that we're willing to treat people fairly.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

Q Mr. President, leaders in Congress, including Senator Frist, have said that they'll take action to stop the port control shift if you don't reverse course on it. You've expressed your thoughts here, but what do you say to those in Congress who plan to take legislative action?

THE PRESIDENT: They ought to listen to what I have to say about this. They ought to look at the facts, (Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned) and understand the consequences of what they're going to do. But if they pass a law, I'll deal with it, with a veto.

************************

Q The understatement today, and one of the concerns of lawmakers seems to be that they want more of a briefing, and they want more details about the things that you know, that have given you confidence that there aren't any national security implications with the port deal. Are you willing to either have your staff or to give any kind of briefing to leaders of Congress --

THE PRESIDENT: Look at the company's record, Jim, and it's clear for everybody to see. We've looked at the ports in which they've operated. There is a standard process mandated by Congress that we go through, called the CFIUS process. I'm not exactly sure if there's any national security concerns in briefing Congress. I just don't know. I can't answer your question.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

Q What's the larger message that you're conveying by sticking to this UAE contract, by saying that you're not going to budge on this, or you don't want to change policy?

THE PRESIDENT: There is a process in place where we analyze -- where the government analyzes many, many business transactions, to make sure they meet national security concerns. And I'm sure if you -- careful review, this process yielded a result that said, yes, a deal should go forward.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

One of my concerns, however, is mixed messages. And the message is, it's okay for a British company, but a Middle Eastern company -- maybe we ought not to deal the same way. It's a mixed message. You put interesting words in your question, but I just view -- my job is to do what I think is right for the country. I don't intend to have a fight. If there's a fight, there is one, but nor do I view this as a political issue.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

Q I say it because you said you'd be willing to use the veto on it.

THE PRESIDENT: I would. That's one of the tools the President has to indicate to the legislative branch his intentions. A veto doesn't mean fight, or politics, it's just one of the tools I've got. I say veto, by the way, quite frequently in messages to Congress.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

Feb 21, Part II-Impromptu remarks to the White House Press Corps after arriving back in DC

And I also want to address another issue I just talked to the press about on Air Force One, and that is this issue of a company out of the UAE purchasing the right to manage some ports in the United States from a British company. First of all, this is a private transaction. But it -- according to law, the government is required to make sure this transaction does not, in any way, jeopardize the security of the country. And so people responsible in our government have reviewed this transaction.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

The transaction should go forward, in my judgment. If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward. The company has been cooperative with the United States government. The company will not manage port security. The security of our ports will be -- continue to be managed by the Coast Guard and Customs. The company is from a country that has been cooperative in the war on terror, been an ally in the war on terror. The company operates ports in different countries around the world, ports from which cargo has been sent to the United States on a regular basis.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

I think it sends a terrible signal to friends around the world that it's okay for a company from one country to manage the port, but not a country that plays by the rules and has got a good track record from another part of the world can't manage the port.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

And so, look, I can understand why some in Congress have raised questions about whether or not our country will be less secure as a result of this transaction. But they need to know that our government has looked at this issue and looked at it carefully. Again, I repeat, if there was any question as to whether or not this country would be less safe as a result of the transaction, it wouldn't go forward. But I also want to repeat something again, and that is, this is a company that has played by the rules, that has been cooperative with the United States, a country that's an ally in the war on terror, and it would send a terrible signal to friends and allies not to let this transaction go through.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

Feb 23, Dear Leader W takes questions as his Administration's report of the Katrina response is released

Caren.

Q Sir, do you wish you had known earlier about the Dubai Ports deal and were you surprised by the controversy over it?

THE PRESIDENT: The more people learn about the transaction that has been scrutinized and approved by my government, the more they'll be comforted that our ports will be secure. Port security in the United States will be run by Customs -- U.S. Customs -- and the United States Coast Guard. The management of some ports, which, heretofore, has been managed by a foreign company will be managed by another company from a foreign land. And so people don't need to worry about security. This deal wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security for the United States of America.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

What I find interesting is that it's okay for a British company to manage some ports, but not okay for a company from a country that is also a valuable ally in the war on terror. The UAE has been a valuable partner in fighting the war on terror. A lot of goods are shipped from ports to the United States managed by this company.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

And again, I repeat to the American people, this wouldn't be going forward if we weren't certain that our ports would be secure. But I also want to remind folks that it's really important we not send mixed messages to friends and allies around the world as we combine -- put together a coalition to fight this war on terror.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

And so we'll continue to talk to people in Congress and explain clearly why the decision was made. Many of those doing the explanations are around this table, and I want to thank them for bringing a sense of calm to this issue, as people understand the logic of the decision.

Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.-owned by Britain, proposed sale to DP World-UAE owned

So when speaking specifically about this deal, the one Dear Leader W has threatened to use his first ever Veto over, he still hasn't ONCE named the companies involved

Ouch!

Friday, February 24, 2006

Addressing The Supremely Arrogant & Imbecilc Assery Of Bill O'Reilly, AKA Ted Baxter But Without The Wit & Wisdom

Please enjoy this image-linked montage of the Arrogant & Imbecilic Ass himself-who knew there were so many non-flattering images of our Man Of The Hour? Or Man Of The Post anyways?

Bill O'Reilly's been on even more of a buttheaded blast than usual

For instance, it's no doubt only in the spirit of the most selfless altruism possible that Bill O'Reilly wants MSNBC to bring back Phil Donahue, via a petition at his site

Dear Chairman Wright:

We, the undersigned, are becoming increasingly concerned about the well-being of MSNBC and, in particular, note the continuing ratings failure of the program currently airing weeknights on that network at 8:00 PM EST.

It is now apparent to everyone that a grave injustice has been done to the previous host for that time slot, Phil Donahue, whose ratings, at the time of his show's cancellation three years ago, were demonstrably stronger than those of the current host.

Therefore, in an effort to rescue MSNBC from the ratings basement and to restore the honor and dignity of Mr. Donahue, who was ignobly removed as host three years ago, we ask that you immediately bring Phil Donahue's show back at 8:00 PM EST before any more damage is done.

See, doesn't that sweetness just seep through every one of Bill O'Reilly's pores?

I mean, such concern from The Saintly Bill O'Reilly was truly touching considering the Bitchslapping Donahue gave him the last time they met

O'REILLY: In the past Miss [Cindy] Sheehan has criticized Israel, saying it is occupying Palestine, has called Iraqi insurgents "freedom fighters," has accused Americans of killing people ever since we stepped on this continent, has threatened Hillary Clinton with the loss her job unless she calls for a pullout of US troops from Iraq and has called the US action against Afghanistan a failure. Quite a resume and with us now is Phil Donahue, who supports Miss Sheehan's "dissent."
So, I'm assuming you don't - you don't support all her positions that I just chronicled.

DONAHUE: Let's understand what's happening here. Once again we have a woman who got to be just a little too famous for the people who support this war, a minority of the American population, by the way, and so the effort to marginalize this woman is underway and you're helping out.

O'REILLY: I'm the leader of the pack!

DONAHUE: You're suggesting ...

O'REILLY: I'm the leader of the pack!

DONAHUE: First of all, Cindy Sheehan is one tough mother and nothing you say or anyone else is gonna slow her down.

O'REILLY: That's fine. She has a right to ...

DONAHUE: You can't hurt her. She's already taken the biggest punch in the nose that a woman can take.

O'REILLY: How?!

DONAHUE: She lost a son.

O'REILLY: Oh. OK.

DONAHUE: She's lost a child.

***************************************

O'REILLY (very angry, pointing): My nephew just enlisted in the Army. You don't know what the hell you're talkin' about!!!

DONAHUE: Very good. Very good. Congratulations! You should be proud ..

O'REILLY (starts to lose it, shouting, pointing finger, hand shaking): And he's a patriot, so don't denigrate his service or I'll boot you right off the set!!!

DONAHUE: I'm not ... I'm not ...

O'REILLY (very, very loud): That boy made a decision to serve his country!!! Do not denigrate him or you're outta here!!!

DONAHUE (calmly): I'm not Jeremy Glick, Billy.

O'REILLY: That's right!!

DONAHUE: You can't intimidate me!!

O'REILLY: You're a little bit more intelligent that he is!!

DONAHUE: I'm not somebody you can come and just spew all your ...

O'REILLY: Don't tell me I wouldn't send my kids.

DONAHUE: Loud doesn't mean right!

O'REILLY: My nephew just enlisted. You don't know what you're talkin' about!!

DONAHUE: Your nephew is not your kid. You are like ...

O'REILLY: He's my blood!

DONAHUE: You are part of a loud group of people who wanna prove they're tough ...

O'REILLY (shifts angrily in his chair, under his breath): Aw fer ...

DONAHUE: ... and send other people's kids to war to make the case.

O'REILLY (very loud): You have no clue ...

DONAHUE: This ..

O'REILLY: ... about how to fight a war on terror or how to defend your country. You are clueless! So is Miss Sheehan and for Miss Sheehan to say that the insurgents have a right to kill Americans and you're shakin' her hand! You oughta just walk away.

DONHUE (quieter): How many more young men and women are you gonna send to have their arms and legs blown off ...

O'REILY: Hey, this is a war on terror!

DONAHUE: ... so that you can be tough (points his finger at O'Reilly) and point at people in a kind of cowardly way..

O'REILLY (disgusted, under his breath): Oh, yeah.

DONHUE: Take people like Jeremy Glick who comes on to - in memory of his parents ...

O'REILLY: Oh bull.

DONAHUE: ... and you go off on him.

O'REILLY: Jeremy Glick accu ...

DONAHUE: ... like a big bully.

O'REILLY: Hey!

DOAHUE: Billy, you hafta be - you hafta feel sorry ...

O'REILLY: Mr. Donahue, with all due respect ...

DONAHUE: Have you apologized to him for that?

O'REILLY: Baloney!

DONAHUE: Do you know ...

O'REILLY: Jeremy Glick came on this program ...

DONAHUE: Do you know what I'm talking about?

O'REILLY: ... and accused the President of the United States ...

DONAHUE (sarcastically): Oh, and you had to ..

O'REILLY: ... of orchestrating 9/11. That's what he did. Right after 9/11!! Do you know what the pain that brought the families who lost people in 9/11?

Or was it maybe that Bill O'Reilly actually despises Donahue's replacement, Keith Olbermann, a guy who knows how to properly deal with pompous, willfully ignorant twits?

So, just what is it with Bill O'Reilly's fixation with all things ass-related?

Bill O'Reilly kisses his own ass, most notably when starting a 2004 interview with Dear Leader W-this is the VERY first statement-IN A PRESIDENTIAL INTERVIEW-from Bill O'Reilly -notable media martyr who rarely finds anyone willing to appear on his program-Also notice that even Dear Leader W doesn't have as thin a skin as Bill "Woe Is Me" O'Reilly

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: OK. First of all, I want to thank you for talking with me, since so few people will.

(LAUGHTER)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES : Well, it's a big gamble on my part.

O'REILLY: No, it isn't, not really though. You, we talked four and a half years ago...

BUSH: I'm teasing.

Christ, when even President Jr's less than subtle wit is able to overwhelm Bill O'Reilly's pomposity, you know the meaning of "Blowhard" has been taken to a whole NEW level

Being an ass, in this case, Bill O'Reilly is calling for the firing of a fellow employee at the Fox News network, "Christmas Under Attack Fantasy Despoiler" Neil Gabler, a panelist on one of the very few shows on Fox that has any real guts & countering opinions to the usual Fox-News Mindset, "Fox News Watch"

Here "Fox News Watch" Host Eric Burns gets the Party Line

Hey Eric, you gotta come down on this Gabler guy, I mean he's just out of control and I'll tell you why...you have Gabler picking up a far left blog (Bill shows no proof) conspiracy theory-spitting it out there and you guys sit there---like humpty dumpty.---I'd fire him in a heartbeat.

Nice to know the talent can dictate to Boss Ailes what needs to be done here-let's see if Ailes has spine a bit stiffer than overcooked pasta

Or even fantasizing about his own-Bill O'Reilly's -Ass-while talking dirty to former producer Andrea Mackris

The complaint then alleges that on August 2, 2004, "after interviewing two porn stars on 'The O'Reilly Factor,'" O'Reilly telephoned Mackris at her home. Apparently "excited," O'Reilly allegedly "launched into a vile and degrading monologue about sex." He told Mackris to buy a vibrator and name it, saying he "'had one shaped like a little cock with a battery in it' that a woman had given him. It became apparent that Defendant was masturbating as he spoke. After he climaxed, Defendant O'Reilly said to Plaintiff, 'I appreciate the fun phone call.'"

You know, Bill O'Reilly if that's what gets you off, then you'll be SO gratified & relieved to learn that there's definitely a profitable future should you decide to pursue this particular fetish for money

Thursday, February 23, 2006

Ever-So-Satisfying

The joys of watching Dear Leader W stammer & whimperingly rage, at both his most stupid & arrogant, and that it's been the one successful arrow in his political quiver since the Sept 11, 2001 attacks makes this bitchslapping ever-so-satisfying

And even better, the GOP doesn't see the problems it's walking right into either, which would make it so ironic if they now foolishly try and play the "National Security" card in the elections later this year

This absolutely could not be playing out any worse for President Jr

Forget the Dems-although give them the obvious credit for seizing on this opportunity and running with it as quickly as possible-the damage to Dear Leader is coming from his formerly iron-clad loyal retinue of the rest of the National GOP Leadership and the Wingnuttia Extremeis fringe base

From here & there, hither & yon, and pay close attention to one minor fact we learned about only hours earlier today-And to make this a big Double Bonus of a post, we'll be playing yet another fun-filled edition of

"Laugh....Or...Bitchslap?"

with not just one, but TWO media dealings with Dear Leader W & the White House Press Corps, so most of President Jr's reactions won't be covered with the first media roundup here

bypass registration with this Bug Me Not link

In undoubtedly one of the best Headlnes today, one that doesn't parlay an image of strength, just the ames stupid stubbornness one gets from a balky jackass

White House Says Bush Played No Role in Port Deal

The White House said today that President Bush had not been aware of the pending takeover by a state-owned company in Dubai of port terminal operations in several American cities, but that the deal had been thoroughly reviewed by a dozen or more federal agencies.....As soon as Mr. Bush became aware of the growing furor, Mr. McClellan said, he interviewed all Cabinet officials whose departments had to review the transaction. "And each and every one expressed that they were comfortable with this transaction going forward," Mr. McClellan said.

That's right, the Dear Leader apparently hadn't learned most of the details of this deal until AFTER he'd made his foolish Veto threat

Such strong leadership undoubtedly scattered his political opponents to the political winds, correct?

Uh, well, maybe not so much when you're polling under 40%, and this is LESS than a month after any supposed bounce Dear Leader W received for his Annual Mass Re-education Lesson For The Worried Serfdom Populace Folks-AKA State Of The Union

The White House was taken by surprise when Mr. Frist and Mr. Hastert joined Democratic leaders in Congress and other prominent Republicans, including Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Gov. George E. Pataki of New York, in calling for the government to stop the deal from closing next week as scheduled.

"We have not received the necessary assurances regarding security concerns," Mr. Bloomberg wrote in a letter to the president on Tuesday evening. He said he was joining New York's two Democratic senators, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles E. Schumer, in calling for a 45-day investigation of the deal under a federal law that governs the review of foreign investments.

In fact, it appears that Terri Schiavo Video Diagnostician ExtraOrdinaire Bill Frist has decided that pandering to the GOP's Wingnuttia Extremis base is more important than sucking up-yet again-to Dear Leader W, and the quicker the better

Mr. Frist gave the White House only an hour's notice before breaking ranks and saying that "the decision to finalize this deal should be put on hold." He said that if a delay did not occur, he would "plan on introducing legislation to ensure that the deal is placed on hold until this decision gets a more thorough review."

Truly, nothing says "Successful White House Campiagn" in Frist's future more than giving the Dear Leader & his Retinue no more than an hours notice before doing that popular DC dance, the "Throw 'Em Under The Bus Boogie"

And the business interests whose agenda can usually be successfully brokered by Dear Leader W were completely taken aback as well, stunned that Dear Leader's usually persuasive arguments of "Because I Said So" bore seemingly no weight in this upcoming humiliating defeat for President jr

The opposition to the deal brought expressions of befuddlement from shipping industry and port experts. The shipping business, they said, went global more than a decade ago, and foreign-based firms already control more than 30 percent of the port terminals in the United States. They include APL Limited, which is controlled by the government of Singapore and operates terminals in Los Angeles; Oakland, Calif.; Dutch Harbor, Alaska; and Seattle....."This kind of reaction is totally illogical," said Philip Damas, research director at Drewry Shipping Consultants of London. "The location of the headquarters of a company in the age of globalism is irrelevant."

Yes, it is totally illogical to expect that anyone with the Royal Retinue apparently pays any attention to their jobs or responsibilities in the least-as we'll see with the next link

bypass registration with this Bug Me Not link

This next bit is going to be slightly out of chronological order

Republicans Split With Bush on Ports


In a bid to defuse the controversy, Bush has instructed aides to brief members of Congress on Dubai Ports World, its operations and the intelligence community's findings that the firm poses no risk to national security. The briefings began yesterday.

See, turns out that Dear Leader W isn't the only one in his Administration who had no idea about any aspect of this deal before the firestorm it generated

A senior White House official, who discussed internal strategy under the condition of anonymity, said Bush realizes that Republicans are dug in and that he may have to compromise. "We are sensitive to the fact that people have taken firm positions," the official said. But that effort was complicated by the disclosure that Bush and Treasury Secretary John W. Snow were unaware until this week about the purchase agreement and the administration's approval of the transaction last month.

The punchline here is truly astonishing, especially in that this deal was supposed too have been overseen by Treasury Sect John Snow

Snow, whose department chairs the secretive executive branch panel that reviewed the proposed sale, told reporters in Torrington, Conn., that "I learned of this transaction probably the same way as members of the Senate did, by reading it in the newspapers."

(Insert Appropriate Palm-Smack To Forehead "CLONK!!!" Sound Effect Here, along with mandatory "D'OH!!!")

Doesn't anybody in this Administration EVER know what the hell is going on in the White House, The Congress & The Senate, seeing as how, you know, the GOP controls ALL 3 branches listed?

Good God, is Karl Rove REALLY this brain-dead politically now?

Even better, with as widespread opposition as this deal has engendered, how Does Dear Leader react, how does he show his munificence, what reasonable compromise does he offer?

Well, NONE actually, he just says that maybe he should have consulted Congress earlier

One day after threatening to veto any attempt by Congress to scuttle the controversial $6.8 billion deal, Bush sounded a more conciliatory tone by saying lawmakers should have been given more details about a state-owned company in the United Arab Emirates purchasing some terminal operations in Baltimore and five other U.S. cities.

Notice, he's NOT propsing to hold up the sale, nope, it's STILL a done deal, but he thinks maybe he should have given The House & Senate a Heads Up before the final vote

And his own party is getting pushed by their constituents, the ones Dear Leader W's been so successful in pandering to when it came to blathering about how the GOP is stronger on National Security than any of it's rapidly growing number of critics

But congressional Republicans renewed their vow to prevent the sale from being finalized next month and warned Bush, sometimes in taunting terms, that an overwhelming majority of lawmakers will oppose the sale on national security grounds. "Dear Mr President: In regards to selling American ports to the United Arab Emirates, not just NO but HELL NO!" Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) wrote to Bush in a one-sentence letter......Republican lawmakers have been flooded with phone calls and letters from constituents encouraging them to fight Bush over the port deal, even at the expense of GOP unity on combating terrorism -- possibly their best political issue. As a result, Bush and Republicans are divided over a national security issue as never before and bracing for a possible showdown that could force Bush to either delay the sale or veto a Republican bill against it, according to congressional and White House officials.....House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter T. King (R-N.Y.) said political pressure from constituents is driving the debate. Lawmakers, he said, are "responding to incredible local political pressure."

And even another current GOP Pariah is able to give Dear Leader W a bit of a face-saving smackaround as well

bypass registration with this Bug Me Not link

DeLay joins chorus opposing ports contract

U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay warned Wednesday that President Bush is making a "huge mistake" defending a deal for a Middle Eastern company to manage American ports.

Calling it a serious national security issue, the Sugar Land Republican and former majority leader said the Bush administration's approval of the arrangement is "pretty outrageous" and predicted the decision would be overturned by Congress.

Undoubtedly DeLay is happy to throw some of his ethical-woes stress onto someone DeLay probably feels has been pampered all his life, whereas DeLay thinks he actually earned his way to all that graft he was used to with no outside help or influence either

But in this one instance, DeLay's got the bad news that Dear Leader hasn't yet experienced too often in his political career

Absolute & total defeat, with a much harder time & craftier effort to re-energize his base than he needed with the Alito nomination to replace the disastrous Meirs Supreme Court Nomination

"When it's a matter of national security, the president will be overturned," DeLay told an audience of Houston real estate executives at a campaign stop. "We will overturn it within the next few weeks."

The writing is on the wall for this Port deal, the question is how much damage will Dear Leader W's own stupid stubbornness cost him in further lost "political capital"?

But wait, the damage will NOT be limited to President Jr alone, oh no, even the party pushing away from the Dear Leader W table wfirmly with both hands have walked into a trap that they don't see yet, and one that should absolutely blow up in the smug visage of uberstrategist Karl Rove should the GOP take his now toxic advice of running hard on the issue of Homeland Security

And the withering view of someone who thinks the deal should be argued for harder than it has been so far

Republicans can't distance themselves from Bush on security issues. He's not only the head of their party; he's the commander in chief. By pouncing on this issue so quickly and joining Democrats like Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton, Republican leaders send a global message: They don't trust Bush. They don't trust him enough to even wait to understand the facts of the deal. They don't trust him enough to even worry that they might have their facts wrong and wind up embarrassed.

Maybe Republicans have valid reasons for not trusting Bush, but it's foolish for them to think they can separate their fortunes from his on this issue. When Republican-leaning voters go to bed at night, they don't find comfort in the fact that Bill Frist is protecting them. They pin their hopes on George Bush. If Bush is weakened, they're not likely to be comforted by the fact that Bill Frist is still at the helm of the Senate defending the homeland.

And maybe, we'll finally see that supposed temper of Dear Leader W's erupt at the most inopportune time for his political career, at just such a point as the Iraq War, the occupation & now thriving insurgency now make the social situation much more unstable between the Shiites & Sunnis

Dear Leader W held his tongue and took a hard one deep for the team when it came to kissing up to the Wingnut GOP base in terms of replacing Miers with Alito for the Supreme Court nomination-Will he be willing to do so again, or will his thin skin get the better of him?

The squabble will also irritate the president. He's tired of congressional second-guessing—especially in a case like this where GOP leaders willfully refuse to acknowledge the complexity of global diplomacy and the value of global capitalism. You don't hear the deal's critics explaining who exactly will control port security if not Dubai Ports World. (And why are there not more pro-market conservative commentators pointing out that in the global war on terror we must embrace countries like the United Arab Emirates in the interest of winning hearts and minds in the Middle East?) The president did go too far when he hinted that critics were motivated by prejudice. This is similar to the administration's mistaken effort to turn Harriet Miers' conservative opponents into sexists. It will leave a lasting blemish on his party. If Bush was so quick to make such a serious claim about anti-Arab sentiment, he must have had broader grounds to do so. But that's what Republicans always accuse Democrats of doing—playing identity politics when they don't agree with your policies. Bush didn't like it very much when, after the administration's bungled response to Hurricane Katrina, Democrats charged that he didn't like blacks. Why does he hint at the same kind of thing now?

I can't see any way that this doesn't hurt the GOP, both President jr & the party as well,as was pointed out above, the GOP has tied itself SO firmly to the image of Dear Leader W as the Grim Warrior of Righteousness that there's no way to cast off the figurehead now without doing real, structural damage to the GOP's November election efforts

And, let's now play the next edition of "Laugh.....Or...Bitchslap?"

You know the rules-with the delivery set to the cadence of Howie Mandel's uttering of his game show's signature line, "Deal.....Or...NO..De..al", the game where you decide the proper response for something said that's so appallingly stupid that the only proper reaction is to either Laugh at or bitchslap the offender

And for today, we have TWO good examples from Dear Leader W himself

There's NO Higher Expression Of Patriotism Than Quoting Our President

And for Dear Leader W's 1st Example, let's take a look at comments he made during a roundtable interview with the White House Press Corps he did on Air Force 1 in which he made his first public statements about the Dubai Deal

I do want to talk about this port issue. A foreign company manages some of our ports. They've entered into a transaction with another foreign company to manage our ports.

And which two companies would those be Mr President?

And what's interesting here is what's important according to Dear Leader W

This is a process that has been extensively reviewed, particularly from the point of view as to whether or not I can say to the American people, this project will not jeopardize our security.

Yes, what's vital is that President Jr can tell the "American People" that the deal won't jeopardize safety, as opposed toletting the ACTUAL "American People" make the decision of just how secure they think the ports are with this transaction

And then, in one of those glorious moments that should get much wider play, Dear Leader W goes COMPLETELY offscript and leaves one wondering just what in the hell he's talking about now-in this case, the term "Grocery List" humorously leap to mind

This company operates all around the world. I have the list somewhere. We can get you the list. They're in Germany and elsewhere -- Australia.*

Yes, a missing list, Germany & Australia, very well played indeed Mr Presaident, a definite & firm graso of the minute detail that takes up so much of the President's time

And so I, after careful review of our government, I believe the government ought to go forward.

Well, Mr President, it's good to know that the Govt you reviewed carefully should go forward, but weren't you talking about the Deal instead?

And how goofy have things gotten for the Dear Leader, why, apparently, if it's not in the budget for Halliburton then there's no money for trifles like people who clean up the President's grammatical mistakes on the White House website itself-Sheesh, what kind of Dear Leader doesn't have a web-site cleaner upper?

And I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British [sic] company.

And what's key in the next line is the word, "NOW"

I'm trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to people of the world, we'll treat you fairly.

Oh yeah, that word "FAIRLY" jumped out as well

And after careful scrutiny, we believe this deal is a legitimate deal that will not jeopardize the security of the country, and at the same time, send that signal that we're willing to treat people fairly.

Yep, there's that "FAIRLY" word again

Who are you trying to convince about being fair, us or yourself Dear Leader?

And now, Dear Leader W is reduced to sputtering impotently about being listened to-keep in mind, at the time he made thses statements, we still didn't know that Dear Leader W himself wasn't aware of the aprticulars, like say the anem of the companies involved

Q Mr. President, leaders in Congress, including Senator Frist, have said that they'll take action to stop the port control shift if you don't reverse course on it. You've expressed your thoughts here, but what do you say to those in Congress who plan to take legislative action?

THE PRESIDENT: They ought to listen to what I have to say about this. They ought to look at the facts, and understand the consequences of what they're going to do. But if they pass a law, I'll deal with it, with a veto.

And if they don't listen to what you say, what's next, holding your breath until you trun blue?

Yeah, that'll work all right, it's working so wonderfully so far with this issue

Okay, all kidding aside, this next passage shows that the Dear Leader really DOES consider himself the dear Leader, and that no other political entity EVER enters his calculations

Q The understatement today, and one of the concerns of lawmakers seems to be that they want more of a briefing, and they want more details about the things that you know, that have given you confidence that there aren't any national security implications with the port deal. Are you willing to either have your staff or to give any kind of briefing to leaders of Congress --

THE PRESIDENT: Look at the company's record, Jim, and it's clear for everybody to see. We've looked at the ports in which they've operated. There is a standard process mandated by Congress that we go through, called the CFIUS process. I'm not exactly sure if there's any national security concerns in briefing Congress. I just don't know. I can't answer your question.

Yes, you DID read that right, the President isn't sure there's ANY national security concerns worth briefing Congress about with this deal

Okay, back to the mocking, as in what the hell did the President think this reporter was asking about in the next exchange?

Q Why is it so important to you, sir, that you take on this issue as a political fight? Clearly, there's bipartisan --

THE PRESIDENT: I don't view it as a political fight. So do you want to start your question over? I view it as a good policy.

Q Why is it -- clearly --

THE PRESIDENT: Are you talking about the energy issue?

Q No, I'm sorry, the ports issue.

No icon/smiley can possibly do this stupidity the justice it truly deserves

And, now, Part Two of

"Laugh.....Or...Bitchslap?"

This is from Dear Leader W to the press after Air Force 1 landed, and at this point it still hadn't been released publicly that Dear Leader W OR Treasury Sec Snow-charged with overseeing the deal for this Administration-weren't even aware of this deal until the uproar that resulted when news of the deal was disclosed publicly

And I also want to address another issue I just talked to the press about on Air Force One, and that is this issue of a company out of the UAE purchasing the right to manage some ports in the United States from a British company.

Okay, nothing noteworthy there, well, until THIS, a fact that seems odd for the Dear Leader to state first about this deal with this impromptu press briefing

First of all, this is a private transaction.

And there's a very easy reply to the points Dear Leader W raises next

The company is from a country that has been cooperative in the war on terror, been an ally in the war on terror. The company operates ports in different countries around the world, ports from which cargo has been sent to the United States on a regular basis.

I think it sends a terrible signal to friends around the world that it's okay for a company from one country to manage the port, but not a country that plays by the rules and has got a good track record from another part of the world can't manage the port.

QUICK!!! NO LOOKING!!!

Which countries & which companies?

Ane we're WAY over long with the program and analysis, Good Night Everyone

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

I haven't kept up with the stories of Muslim riots over the inflammatory cartoons that are so antagonizing them, and one reason is that I don't know enough about Islam to speak authoritatively about it

Usually

But this is one of those exceptions

There's no way to put this gently

No peaceful religion is worth killing for

No cartoons are worth killing for

No cartoons are worth damaging property & rioting over

Period

And there's an absolute first rate posting about it that deserves to be read by as many people as possible, preferably those whose faiths are being smeared and given black eyes here by the most extreme of their adherents

Laugh Riot

In addition to killing people, the demonstrators also expressed their reverence for Allah by burning down a KFC, a couple of movie theatres, and a bus station run by a South Korean company, and trashing a couple of cell phone companies’ offices. An excellent rebuttal to the message implied by the now-famous but largely unseen Mohammed-bomb drawing, that Muslims are violent.

Of course, the common perception that these raging throngs and their poorly translated banners represent most Muslims is false. It looks like a lot of people on TV, but 99 times as many Muslims are at home scratching their heads. Despite the drumbeat rhetoric of nearly every conservative this week, the large majority of Muslims are just trying to get along like anyone else. They observe their religion, like a lot of Christians, in a somewhat half-assed manner. They don’t want to kill anyone, and think, like the rest of us, that these guys running around burning effigies of Danish politicians are just nuts.

And that's one of the things riling me up about this, the fact there will be so many in this country who push the whole religion of Islam as one that won't advance peacefully, but requires blood from heretics & unbelievers to fuel it's rapacious expansion

Islam is no more or less bloodthisty than Christianity at it's base, and neither are more pacifistic as practiced by their pilgrims than the other

But really, there's no excuse for killing in the name of one's supposedly "peace loving faith"

I respect any person’s right to think insane thoughts, but not to commit insane acts. Fantasize about shooting up your workplace all you want, but if you bring a Glock to work, here’s hoping the security guard takes you down first. The people burning embassies, and those offering money for the murder of cartoonists, deserve no respect at all.

Not a single bit of respect in the least

And part of a superbly written finish-hard edged, but I agree with every single word written here

Freedom of speech is not a guideline or a suggestion. It is not the freedom to say things that don’t upset people—there’s no need for a constitutional amendment ensuring that. It is nothing less than the freedom to be arrogant, disrespectful assholes, or it isn’t anything at all. Suggesting that the press shares blame in this is self-castrating cowardice, or at best a reflexive reaction to the Right’s sudden embrace of the first amendment. To make the obvious comparison yet again, if Pat Robertson’s followers were destroying property and advocating the assassination of cartoonists over some similar disparagement of Jesus, I doubt that the Nation’s editors would be so understanding.

We don’t need to be more sensitive to their culture, not this time. Freedom of expression is so clearly a better value than faith-based murder that there’s no debate to be had about it. There are legitimate responses to the offense—peaceful demonstrations, for instance, or boycotts. When Tom Toles ran a great cartoon a couple of weeks ago involving a limbless vet in a hospital being attended by "Dr. Rumsfeld," he offended the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They wrote a letter. And yes, even the holocaust cartoon contest the Iranian paper Hamshahri is running is an acceptable form of protest. But for crying out loud, you can’t excuse encouraging murder. Asinine religious crap is asinine religious crap, no matter which culture excretes it. Murderous fanatics are to be ridiculed, shamed and subdued—not consoled.

Scorn, mockery & ridicule are, indeed, the ONLY appropriate responses to those who kill, riot & destroy in the name of their peaceful religion, be they Jew, Muslim or Christian

But there's also a flip side to this issue, the side that doesn't get reported as often as possible, those whose religious faith & beliefs-atheistic or secular-push them to work tirelessly to truly relieve suffering in the world

I wrote about this at one of my favorite playgrounds, the CTV forums, and it fits in perfectly here

While I bash the extremist's that I feel are calling the shots at the national level for the GOP, and that will NOT stop, I don't praise or mention those whose faith leads them to try and make the world a truly better place anywhere near enough

I've even posted this type of message before, and I have to take to heart my own statement that

"The worst do NOT speak for the rest or even a majority when it comes to religion"

It's so easy to forget that point when opinions get heated over politics & religion

Perfect example here

The Catholic Church scandals

As far as I'm concerned-and I speak as someone who did the readings at my church on Saturday Night mass for years-it's absolutely unconscionable to not only allow pedophile priests to serve mass, but it's even more appalling when the leadership then tries to cover it up by reassigning these priests to other dioceses without a clear "heads up" about who's coming their way

I think the Church has earned every bit of scorn for how it's handled this scandal, and how it's pushing a very extreme agenda-especially in terms of vilifying homosexuals

That said however

There's no getting around the fact that the Catholic Church is also the LARGEST Non-Governmental agency in terms of social services for the poor, and the people they help are growing in number

And the fact that donations have dropped to the worthwhile aspects of the Catholic Church is truly sad at a time when more people than ever need their services

Yet another aspect of the Church that could DEFINITELY use all the help it can get is The Covenant House, a group dedicated to helping out children living on the streets with no questions asked or judgements rendered

I know about this group personally as I tried to join them way back in 1986

I saw myself just how hard those people work to serve some of the neediest people around, and since the great majority of those helpers do it with no paycheck in return, it's obvious their hearts move them to try and bring about positive changes in the lives of those at the very bottom of our society

When Father Bruce Ritter-the founder of CH-was found to have embezzled CH money and, even worse, preyed upon the very children he said he wanted to help, it was a crushing blow-I was angry at being duped, and was even angrier at what such transgressions would do to a GREAT cause & group of people, both the helpers & the helped

Thankfully, CH weathered the storm and is now stronger than ever

It would have been so easy for the rank & file of the CH to give up and go home

But they didn't

Their faiths, their beliefs required them to keep up the good fight for those who had no one else to turn to

It's this faith, this belief, that we in general-and myself in particular-either take for granted or refuse to acknowledge as the positive social force it really is

And that zeal to do good for those who need it the most is constant, with far more adherents & believers trying to make the world a truly better place than there are trying to set an extreme, power-driven agenda that enriches themselves materially & politically

It's these people who should get MUCH more praise & publicity, those whose beliefs require them to push for a greater good society where there's as little poverty or misery as possible

So, while I will continue to bash away on those I feel are completely antithetical to their stated beliefs-and I will continue to bash HARD-I'll try to make more of an effort to point out the good that so often goes overlooked at the real-life level

Monday, February 20, 2006

It's always so enjoyable when the GOPbots eat their own young

bypass registration with this Bug Me Not link

Republicans go after front-runner

With a month to go until Election Day, Republican candidates for governor Bill Brady, Ron Gidwitz and Jim Oberweis teamed up today in an aggressive attack on front-runner Judy Baar Topinka, questioning her ethical credentials just a day after she proposed a sweeping reform package.

Following a mostly genial debate on public radio, Brady, Gidwitz and Oberweis bashed Topinka, the state's three-term treasurer, for taking hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions from firms that do business with her public office.

Topinka said she'd "love" to promise not to take contributions from firms that do business with the treasurer's office but said she couldn't, given the fact that her three major opponents in the GOP primary are millionaires. She also said the firms go through a competitive bidding process to receive work with her office.

Good observation about her opponents all being millionaires, and a good reason why campaigns should be publicliy financed only, but that's another issue for another post

And more of the circular firing squad this primary campaign is sure to engender

The attacks on Topinka occurred mostly with the front-runner in the Republican primary out of the room immediately after the hour-long debate aired on WBEZ-FM. After about 20 minutes of the three major opponents questioning her qualifications to lead on ethical issues, Brady said aloud, "Judy should answer these questions. Where is she?"

Topinka's handlers had escorted her out of the room after the debate and for about 10 minutes said she wouldn't reenter until after her opponents had cleared the area. Seizing on that, Jim Oberweis yelled, "What is she afraid of? If she can't handle this, how can she take on (incumbent Democratic Gov. Rod) Blagojevich?"

**********************************

During the debate, Topinka challenged her opponents to release their personal tax returns for the last 10 years.

Brady, a state senator from Bloomington who made millions as a developer, said he would only release his 2004 tax returns, while Gidwitz, former CEO of Helene Curtis, and Oberweis, head of Oberweis Asset Management and Oberweis Dairy, said they would consider Topinka's challenge.

But there is one good reason Topinka should win the Primary

Topinka defended her support of gay rights, including the state's anti-discrimination law, which other candidates have said they oppose. She said her support of gay rights doesn't set her apart from other Republicans.

Striclty from a "taxation without representation" argument, Topinka's EXACTLY right

But since the US Taliban are firmly in control of the GOP at almost all levels, that view probably won't stand if she wishes to be the GOP Primary Winner

From the POV of a Dear Leader W basher, I'm always torn between laughing or cringing anytime the President opens his mouth, and once again, that's the case here

Bush: U.S. on Verge of Energy Breakthrough


While Bush is highlighting his budget proposals to help wean America from foreign oil, the lab he visited is meeting a $28 million shortfall by cutting its staff by 32 people, including eight researchers.

Amazing, with all the brain-power used to push Dear Leader W's Glorious Image at every possible opportunity, they couldn't come up with another location to push this issue, one where actual researchers weren't fired because of multi-million dollar shortfalls.

Of course, mocking the issue by NOT insisting on improved fuel mileage requirements, or by approving of huge tax breaks for gaz-guzzling SUV's probably won't add any legitimacy to a cause the Dear Leader is now pushing-and Heaven forfend anyone suggest that this issue is getting pushed because so many other of Dear Leader W's agendas just keep smacking him in the face politicially

Such As

Iraq is going fine & jim dandy, and thanks to Dear Leader W's overwhelming commitment to bringing "Freedom" to a long oppressed people, the Freedom of suicide bombers-so ruthlessly suppressed by Saddam Hussein-to liberate Iraqis and US troops of their lives, limbs and mental stability is now at a pace unenvisioned by even the most optimistic of Dear Leader W's retinue of neocon war planners

Deliberately sending US troops into battle without enough effective body & vehicle armor is the best way to show support of those same troops-along with cutting Veterans benefits at every possible opportunity with the end result bveing to permanently extend tax cuts which benefit only those already at the top of the economic ladder

Warrantless wiretapping & spying on US citizens is the best way to defeat al-Qaeda-well, other than actually finishing bin Laden & al-Qaeda off in Afghanistan would have been

Raping the environment at every opportunity is the best way to show responsible environmental stewardship

And with the next paragraph, just exactly what is this "new energy technology" that will "startle the American people"?

Better yet, why is this Administrative push limited to apparently only ONE "energy technology", can't this group contemplate multiple enregy technologies?

"Our nation is on the threshold of new energy technology that I think will startle the American people," Bush said. "We're on the edge of some amazing breakthroughs — breakthroughs all aimed at enhancing our national security and our economic security and the quality of life of the folks who live here in the United States."

Yes, I hear rickshaws & bicycles are quite the rage of promising ideas pushed by the more forward thinking energy experts in this Administration, and just the ticket to solve our energy problems

But instead of saying, "the quality of life of the folks who live here in the United States," couldn't he just say "US Citizens"?

Well, if you're Dear Leader W, the term "citizens" would imply a group with more legal rights & powers than terms like "folks" or "serfs" or "peasants"

Of course, Dear Leder W didn't stop there, here, truly, is a man of vision, a man committed to pushing the Big Plans and Large Agenda

Solar roofs

And yes, I find it amusing that President Jr seems to be unaware of the concept of Solar Panels, unless that's what he's mistaking for "Solar Roofs"

"Roof makers will one day be able to make a solar roof that protects you from the elements and at the same time, powers your house," Bush said. "The vision is this — that technology will become so efficient that you'll become a little power generator in your home, and if you don't use the energy you generate you'll be able to feed it back into the electricity grid."

How does the solar roof produce energy when it's cloudy, raining or snowing?

And more importantly, how does a person become "a little power generator in your home"?

Better yet, how will I, as a "little power generator", feed my energy from my body "back into the electricity grid"?

Oh dear God, the damage just never stops when Dear Leader W speaks

About anything

Well, now that I've read this story, I feel completely confident that Dear Leader W is even more concerned with civil rights than ever before, obviously top of his agenda

bypass registration with this Bug Me Not link

Privacy Guardian Is Still a Paper Tiger
A year after its creation, the White House civil liberties board has yet to do a single day of work


For Americans troubled by the prospect of federal agents eavesdropping on their phone conversations or combing through their Internet records, there is good news: A little-known board exists in the White House whose purpose is to ensure that privacy and civil liberties are protected in the fight against terrorism.

Someday, it might actually meet.

Initially proposed by the bipartisan commission that investigated the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board was created by the intelligence overhaul that President Bush signed into law in December 2004.

More than a year later, it exists only on paper.

Well, these things take time, I mean, you have to put the right people together, people who will put duty to country above loyalty to those who put them there

Like these kinds of people

The board chairwoman is Carol E. Dinkins, a Houston lawyer who was a Justice Department official in the Reagan administration. A longtime friend of the Bush family, she was the treasurer of George W. Bush's first campaign for governor of Texas, in 1994, and co-chair of Lawyers for Bush-Cheney, which recruited Republican lawyers to handle legal battles after the November 2004 election.

Dinkins, a longtime partner in the Houston law firm of Vinson & Elkins, where Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales once was a partner, has specialized in defending oil and gas companies in environmental lawsuits.

***************************************

The board also includes a conservative Republican legal icon, Washington lawyer and former Bush Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson, whose wife, Barbara, died in the Sept. 11 attacks. The fifth member is Francis X. Taylor, a retired Air Force general and former State Department counter-terrorism coordinator, who is chief security officer at General Electric Co.

Yep, a truly winning cast in terms of strictly & zealously guarding our civil rights & liberties, I mean President Jr says so

The board, which is within the Executive Office of the president, operates at the behest of the administration.

Don't we all feel better already?

Take that Usama bin Laden & al-Qaeda, You'll never destroy our freedoms with Dear Leader W in charge of things

Ripping, destroying and raping freedoms from the constitution is President Jr's job, and no one can hold a candle to him in this regard

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Since I have an aversion to people who can't admit their own mistakes, I have to guest on my own program if the post below this is as wildly inaccurate as I think it might be

So, read the post below and if I'm wrong, then I say about my comments

"Laugh.....Or...Bitchslap?"

If I'm wrong, I figure coming clean is the best way of inoculating myself from too much ridicule

If I'm right, then there's reason to worry

UPDATE:

There's a chance I've got this wrong, and if it's a tin hat foily thing, then I blew it as badly as both Dear Leader W & Rush Limbaugh in the two posts below

The simple explanation is that it's possible that the links page stays the same, but the info changes when someone else is nominated or approved, so Rapadas would either move up or down a number of pages

If checking this out-as I commented about it everywhere I could think of, I apologize for wasting anyone's time, but that naturally goes with saying that it's a mistake only-and I haven't made up my mind on that score yet

But how that would explain the altered google search results page itself I don't know

**************************************

And the fucking links have been redirected AGAIN

For the whole story, go here

http://royallykranked.blogspot.com/2006/01/boy-i-was-pissed-off-yesterday-with.html

So now there's no doubt, someone is DEFINITELY redirecting links from this site

So THIS link

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/nominations/1152.html does now NOT connect to who it's aimed at

Neither does THIS link http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/nominations/1153.html go where it's supposed to

So, we'll do this again

HERE are the new links with the information about Leonardo Rapadas-currently serving as US Attorney for Guam and the Northern Marianas islands

Link 1

Link 2

And to whoever's pulling this attempted censorship

Fuck You, I'll just keep tracking down the right links everytime they're redirected

And the reason I won't stop with this is because the ONLY way to eliminate this embarrassing bullshit is to completely remove the info about Rapadas from the WHite House site itself

Which would be really funny if that happens while Rapadas is still serving at the US Attorney for Guam and the Northern Marianas islands

Stupifyingly Stupid Statements & More Mocking Of Same-Part 2

Welcome again everyone to the new episode of

"Laugh.....Or...Bitchslap?"

On our last episode, we dealt with the first cabinet meeting called by Dear Leader W in particular-his first Cabinet get-together after Katrina hit

And let's introduce today's inductee on

"Laugh.....Or...Bitchslap?"

That's right, Come on Down Rush Limbaugh

And on a personal aside, I thought that linked ditty about Limbaugh is best described as the liberal version of South Park's Cartman singing "Kyle's Mom Is A Stupid Bitch"

They're both toe-tapping little tunes

Now, on with the show

Okay, a short entry today, but one so ASTOUNDINGLY idiotic, in the truest Blithering sense possible, that it's unreal to see how ANYONE can make an argument anymore ignorant-in the most appallingly racial way no less-than the one Limbaugh uses to absolutely destroy whatever image of media savvy he likes to portray himselfas possessing in overwhelming abundance

On his radio show, Limbaugh rips the New York Times for not pointing out that the Dem candidate to run against Ohio GOP Senator Mike DeWine, Sherrod Brown, is black

"And don't forget, Sherrod Brown is black. There's a racial component here, too," adding that "the newspaper that I'm reading all this from is The New York Times, and they, of course, don't mention that."

The problem is that Sherrod Brown is White

Understand, Limbaugh slams the NYTimes for not broadcasting that Sherrod Brown is Black

In other words, Limbaugh bashes an entity for NOT being wrong

And for a possible explanation as to why Rush would make such a spectacularly stupid argument & insult, let's consider pronunciation from Limbaugh's mindset

Sherrod, despite Limbaugh’s dumb-ass assumptions about the race of a man with the first name ‘Sherrod’ and the last name ‘Brown’, Sherrod Brown is indeed a white guy.* He’s a Congressman, and has been for quite some time. His name is pronounced SHER-rod, not sher-ROD. A simple Google search would have returned http://sherrod.house.gov/ with a photo of his über-white mug in the upper right corner (White folks, even y’all have got to admit, Sherrod has the goofy-looking Midwestern white guy thing down cold).

Oh look, the mirth & merriment continues, as Limbaugh starts to flopsweat so bad he forgets he's talking about the Democratic Candidate For Senator

From OHIO

"Laugh.....Or...Bitchslap?"

Uh, Sherrod Brown's a white guy? Then I'm confusing him with somebody. OK, I'm sorry. I thought Sherrod Brown was -- I'm -- I'm confusing him with somebody then. Must be somebody in New York has got a similar name.

Perhaps, but it's not someone in New York who's running for Senator from Ohio

And then, Rush smartly whittles down his argument from New York to the entire United States

I erred when I said that Sherrod Brown is black. I'm confusing him with somebody with a similar name in the Democratic Party somewhere.

Yes Rush, you're confusing a Democrat by the name of Sherrod Brown with a Democrat by the namne of Sherrod brown

And then-yes, there's MORE-Limbaugh panics to the point he implies his own race is a bad thing

I'm not gonna apologize, 'cause I don't think it's an insult to be black. But -- but I did err. He is -- his is -- he is -- he is not black.

You;re so right Rush, it's NOT an insult to be black

But Sherrod Brown is NOT black, he's white

And then, realizing that White is something he can deal with, Limbaugh's faculties somewhat realign themselves with THIS bit of underreported historical context

He's one of these white European descendents in Ohio.

As opposed to all those white non-European descendants in Ohio

And with that, we're all out of time for this episode of

"Laugh.....Or...Bitchslap?"

We'll Play Again, REAL Soon

I've just been informed that we've got enough time to show the one military action Limbaugh EVER participated in

Operation Human Shield