If the collection of warmongers shrieking about the necessity of a preemptive strike get their way.
Poor Wee Husble
Mr. Shakes is home with the stomach flu today. The only thing that’s making him feel better is some furry cuddling. (Yes, he’s wearing a Dark Wraith Forums t-shirt, because, per his just-issued statement: "I'm the king oof cool." He has also informed me he doesn't say "oof," but "euf.")
It’s a freckle explosion!
See, here’s the thing…
Most people aren’t dumb. There are a lot of ignorant people, and there are certainly, especially in politics, a lot of people who like to play dumb, but most of them aren’t. And when they play dumb, what they’re really doing is treating us like we’re dumb, which is why we should always look behind the innocent façades and the claims of gosh-darn-shucks-stupidity, because when we do, we find things like the Downing Street Memo, and Dick Armitage’s signature on the PNAC letter, and George Allen’s long history with the Council of Conservative Citizens, a group which was created from the mailing list of the old white supremacist White Citizens Councils and has been noted as becoming increasingly “radical and racist” by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which classifies the CCC as a hate group.
Asked whether Allen supports or deplores the CCC, John Reid, his communications director pleaded ignorance. "I am unaware of the group you mention or their agenda and because we have no record of the Senator having involvement with them I cannot offer you any opinion on them," Reid told me in an e-mail response.
In 1996, when Governor Allen entered the Washington Hilton Hotel to attend the Conservative Political Action Conference, an annual gathering of conservative movement organizations, he strode to a booth at the entrance of the exhibition hall festooned with two large Confederate flags--a booth operated by the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC), at the time a co-sponsor of CPAC. After speaking with CCC founder and former White Citizens Council organizer Gordon Lee Baum and two of his cohorts, Allen suggested that they pose for a photograph with then-National Rifle Association spokesman and actor Charlton Heston. The photo appeared in the Summer 1996 issue of the CCC's newsletter, the Citizens Informer.Yeah. There’s a lot more at the link.
People like George Allen—and George Bush—aren’t fools. They just like to play us for fools. The soft bigotry of low expectations indeed.
If we learn anything from this reign of heinous miscreants, let it be that if something whiffs of shit, that’s probably because it’s emanating from someone who’s full of it.
Recycled Cronies: Second Verse, Same as the First!
Total frigging dickhead and partisan wanker Kenneth Tomlinson, whose disgraced ousting from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting after rules violations (trying to turn PBS into a GOP mouthpiece) wasn’t seen as a bad thing by the White House, but evidence that he was fit to be appointed instead as the head of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (which oversees government broadcasts to foreign countries), has now made a mockery of that post as well, by using his office to run a horse racing operation and putting a friend on the payroll. He also “repeatedly used government employees to perform personal errands and that he billed the government for more days of work than the rules permit.” What a charmer.
A spokeswoman for the White House, Emily Lawrimore, said President Bush continued to support Mr. Tomlinson’s renomination.Of course he does.
Armitage Admits to Being Plame Leaker
At least, the bloke who leaked it to Novak:
Richard L. Armitage, a former deputy secretary of state, has acknowledged that he was the person whose conversation with a columnist in 2003 prompted a long, politically laden criminal investigation in what became known as the C.I.A. leak case, a lawyer involved in the case said on Tuesday.A forthcoming book, Hubris, the Inside Story of Spin, Scandal and the Selling of the Iraq War’, by Michael Isikoff and David Corn, reports that “Mr. Armitage told a few State Department colleagues that he might have been the leaker whose identity was being sought,” which explains the timing of Armitage’s admission.
…Mr. Armitage did not return calls for comment. But the lawyer and other associates of Mr. Armitage have said he has confirmed that he was the initial and primary source for the columnist, Robert D. Novak, whose column of July 14, 2003, identified Valerie Wilson as a Central Intelligence Agency officer.
In the accounts by the lawyer and associates, Mr. Armitage disclosed casually to Mr. Novak that Ms. Wilson worked for the C.I.A. at the end of an interview in his State Department office. Mr. Armitage knew that, the accounts continue, because he had seen a written memorandum by Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman.So Armitage was privy to a memo written by the Under-Secretary of State, after Libby (probably at the behest of Cheney, though he claims otherwise) requested a “fact-finding mission” (ahem) on Valerie Plame.
Mr. Grossman had taken up the task of finding out about Ms. Wilson after an inquiry from I. Lewis Libby Jr., chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney. Mr. Libby’s inquiry was prompted by an Op-Ed article on May 6, 2003, in The New York Times by Nicholas D. Kristof and an article on June 12, 2003, in The Washington Post by Walter Pincus.
The book quotes Carl W. Ford Jr., then head of the intelligence and research bureau at the State Department, as saying that Mr. Armitage had told him, “I may be the guy who caused this whole thing,’’ and that he regretted having told the columnist more than he should have.All just a big mistake, eh? That’s quite a convenient goof for a partisan hack who is a former foreign policy advisor to George W. Bush and one of the signers of the Project for a New American Century’s letter to Bill Clinton in 1998, urging the removal of Saddam Hussein. Considering that the whole purpose of outing Valerie Plame was to discredit her husband, Joe Wilson, who was challenging the administration’s case for war in Iraq, I find it spectacularly coincidental that Armitage made such a colossally convenient mistake in telling bigmouth Novak “more than he should have” about an issue that served to undermine a key administration critic on the war.
Funny how Armitage had to “regret being a total boob” during Iran-Contra, too.
Liberal Oasis has a good piece on What We Know About PlameGate, and Taylor March notes: “Armitage now advises John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign (TimesSelect link). I would say that McCain loses credibility on national security issues when he takes counsel from someone who has twice admitted to leaking national security secrets (the other being Iran-Contra).” I would say that, too.
President Bush Is Doing a Heck of a Job in the Wake of Hurricane Katrina
As reasonable conservative I have been invited by this very open-minded blog to crosspost this piece from my very modest blog, which presents the conservative view of the job President Bush has done in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. I hope you will be persuaded by my extremely reasonable arguments:
President Bush is doing a heck of a job in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, but the liberal media won't give him credit. Just as they ignore all of the successes in Iraq, the media refuses to acknowledge that all of the amazing progress on the Gulf Coast since Hurricane Katrina has been due to the President's remarkable leadership. From the way the glass-half-empty pundits spin the situation there you would never know how great things are actually going. A year ago much of New Orleans was under water but now it is as dry as any other American city. After Katrina there was no electricity, except for a brief moment when the President gave his speech in Jackson Square, but now only a year later power has been restored to more than 50% of residents. Before Katrina many people lived in ramshackle houses in some of the poorest areas of New Orleans, but those hovels are steadily being replaced with shiny new trailers and mobile homes. What homes were not destroyed have skyrocketed in value bringing potential financial windfalls to their owners. And the person who perhaps lost the most because of Hurricane Katrina, Trent Lott, whose 19th century mansion was reduced to rubble, is well on his way to rebuilding a new and bigger mansion as soon as his lawsuit against his insurance company makes it through the courts. All in all there is no denying that things are trending upward for people in the Gulf region.
President Bush campaigned for office as a "compassionate conservative" and the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina gave him the opportunity to show us exactly what that meant. Compassionate conservativism, which I once described as "deeply sympathizing with peoples' problems and sincerely hoping that private enterprise will be able to do something about them," has left the Gulf region stronger and more self-reliant than it was before Hurricane Katrina. Despite the nay-saying of critics, many local people were genuinely touched by the sympathy the President showed as he toured the area this week and his message of hope that someone would help them rebuild.
Everything that has happened there is the result of President Bush's estimable leadership from Day One. From the moment he heard that there might be a crisis looming, the President remained calm, steady and resolute. He didn't immediately leap up in a panic and draw up complicated unworkable plans to give the appearance of doing something. Just as he took a moment to reflect when he first heard about the attack on the World Trade Center, after being briefed on Hurricane Katrina, the President retreated to his Crawford, Texas, ranch where he could contemplate in an environment that was most conducive to clear thinking, taking only one brief break to appear at a previously scheduled political fundraiser, and then he delegated all responsibility to people working for him. And as the President showed in Iraq, he does not like outlining elaborate plans that only hamstring the ability of people to react spontaneously to events and remain flexible. Planning requires the ability to predict the future, which everyone knows is impossible.
Other Presidents might have immediately mobilized the National Guard or sent in FEMA to deal with the approaching hurricane. Think how many lives would have been lost with that approach! Just as he stood up to Pentagon generals who urged him to send in more troops to Iraq, which might have been killed, the President resisted the pleas of local officials to send in large numbers of government personnel prematurely, which would have resulted in many unnecessary casualties. Instead, he patiently waited until it was safe and sent in a more maneuverable smaller force that could react more quickly and with greater precision than a large, lumbering force. He knew that ultimately it was best to let local officials handle the crisis without too much meddling from the Federal government.
Some conservatives criticized President Bush for the promises he made in his speech in Jackson Square to do whatever was necessary and spend whatever money was needed to rebuild New Orleans. What they didn't know at the time was that the President actually had no intention of spending a great deal of money all at once. A year later most of the money he promised has not even arrived yet, giving the people there a chance to set themselves up on their own two feet first. This strategy has had the effect of weaning a region that was once overly dependent on government handouts from the crutch of government largesse. Meanwhile, much of the rebuilding is being handled not by corrupt and inefficient government bureaucracies but by private enterprise, which has been lured to the area with such incentives as no-bid contracts.
There has also been criticism of the deliberate pace of the clean-up. Some impatient people believe that we should have rushed into putting everything back the way it was without analyzing the situation first. By taking things slowly it gives us time to consider whether it might be preferable not to rebuild certain neighborhoods, especially the poorer ones. Perhaps a smaller, more compact New Orleans would work better. Some are even suggesting that we think about whether we should even rebuild New Orleans at all, especially since it was always a socio-economic drag on the rest of Louisiana anyway. We might also think about moving it somewhere safer, far away from water, perhaps to a place like like Kansas. Instead of seeing Hurricane Katrina as a negative thing, some people are looking at it as an opportunity.
Regrettably, some people are also trying to claim that racism had something to do with the response after Hurricane Katrina. While some people might want to inject race into everything, the President, who is as color-blind as a bat, doesn't see the world in terms of such categories as black and white or Shia and Sunni. He sees the world only in terms of self-reliant hard workers and lazy and shiftless people who depend on the government for everything.
The most important legacy of Hurricane Katrina is that President Bush proved once and for all that people cannot depend on the government to solve their problems and that the best kind of government is very limited government or even no government at all. That is the same lesson he is teaching the people of Iraq today. FEMA's response to the disaster was a vindication of what conservatives have been saying for years--that big government can't do anything right. Ultimately, the American people are going to be better off knowing that they cannot depend on the government to save them. If the people of New Orleans and the Mississippi coast do manage to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and rebuild, they will be much better off the next time a hurricane destroys everything they have, knowing that no one will save them but themselves.
Crossposted at Jon Swift
Blogswarm Update
I'm still updating the Katrina blogswarm. I've been adding links to the NOLA blogs, and I'm about halfway through the list. I'll continue to update through the day. I really encourage you to check them out and read some of the personal experiences of these bloggers.
Question of the Day
What’s the best film you’ve seen so far this year?
(To all those who will answer Little Miss Sunshine, I’m tres jealous you’ve seen it already. It still isn’t playing in our local theater. Stinks!)
I Blame Al Gore for This
You know how Gore keeps saying (and I keep repeating, because I am the GoreBot 3000) that his most fervent desire is to raise awareness about global warming so that no matter which party wins in 2008, they’ve got to address the issue, because the public will demand it?
To wit, my Republican Senator Dick Lugar:
Who is this radical politician named Dick Lugar? Reported to be a quiet, solid conservative from quiet, solid Indiana, Lugar came out today with an aggressive plan to make the nation more energy independent.Oh my Flying Spaghetti Monster. I do declare! That there is a Republican Senator not only saying we need radical steps to address the energy crisis, but tying the energy crisis to our foreign policy.
And he had the temerity to criticize our political leadership on the energy question, which may seem a bit odd since he is a GOP senator from Indiana.
But Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, made it clear in a speech at Purdue University that the nation is in danger on the energy front and that "advancements in American energy security have been painfully slow during 2006, and political leadership has been defensive rather than pro-active."
Was he talking about his own party--and President Bush? What has been done so far (energy bills) are "small steps," he said. The senator wants to be bold, because he says that is what is required to protect our national security.
Lugar proposes expanding ethanol production to 100 billion gallons by 2025, put a $45 a barrel floor under the price of oil, and require one-quarter of all US filling stations to have E85 pumps (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline), while also requiring all new US cars to be E85-ready. He claims these steps would save 6.5 million barrels of oil (or 1/3 of current use) a day.
Now, I’m not sold on his plan for a couple of reasons, mainly because my general understanding is that we’d have a hard time growing enough product to convert into the amount of ethanol his plan would require. I’m sure those who are more hip to the specifics of ethanol production will put in their much-appreciated $0.02 in comments. But wev. The point is not that his plan is spectacular, but that we’re reaching the tipping point, slowly but surely. And Lugar is placing the responsibility for not moving more quickly solely at the administration’s dragging feet, by pointing out that we have the financial, industrial, and technological ability to get this shit done, but “What we are lacking is coordination and political will.” Snap, Senator.
News from Shakes Manor
Last night, lying in bed before falling asleep, Mr. Shakes and I were playing “Exchange a Letter.” Ps had to be replaced with Gs.
Shakes: Nice genis.
Mr. Shakes: Thanks, I like your googies.
Shakes: You just said that you like my poopies. Ha ha! You like my poopies!
Mr. Shakes: I meant boobies! Argh. I like your niggles!
Shakes: No, you like my poopies!
Mr. Shakes: Shut ug.
Looking Back
Throughout the week, Crooks and Liars is going to be posting videos as Hurricane Katrina unfolded last year. The first clip is up, from Countdown, August 30, 2005.
Caption This Photo
U.S. President George W. Bush (R) receives a blessing as he takes part in a church service commemorating the first anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, at St. Louis Cathedral in New Orleans, Louisiana August 29, 2006. REUTERS/Jim Young (UNITED STATES)
In other news, St. Louis Cathedral was struck by lightning and burned down today…
LOL!
Fucking hell, the balls on this guy:
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Tuesday accused critics of the Bush administration's Iraq and counterterrorism policies of trying to appease "a new type of fascism."I don’t even know what to say. It’s doubleplusgood, bitchez!
In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administration's critics as suffering from "moral or intellectual confusion" about what threatens the nation's security and accused them of lacking the courage to fight back.
In remarks to several thousand veterans at the American Legion's national convention, Rumsfeld recited what he called the lessons of history, including the failed efforts to appease the Adolf Hitler regime in the 1930s.
"I recount this history because once again we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism," he said.
Defending bad judgment
Kevin Drum gets it wrong regarding the media's walkback on John Mark Karr:
Look. Any news channel that didn't cover JMK 24/7 would have seen its audience defect en masse to a channel that did. Any media star that ignored the story would have seen the public stampede to a competitor who was covering it. Blaming the media is a little disingenuous, no?
Ah, no. Look (to employ Drum's tough-guy realism): to give the media a pass for reducing news judgment to the act of wetting a finger and sticking it in the air is to ignore the same practice when the press corps ignores, en masse, stories of genuine national concern. Just because bad judgment is understandable - de rigeur, even - hardly makes it excusable.
Now if Drum's intent is to criticize the media for employing a "shocked, shocked!" stance on JMK worthy of Captain Renault, that's another thing altogether. But far from that, it seems that Drum seeks to defend the press for being blind to any consideration apart from ratings. No?
Related: Shakes' post on Karr and the media.
(Cross-posted.)
The Lowe Down
"It's so devastating, it's so sad. It looks like it happened last month. It's so depressing." — Rob Lowe on the “still decimated Ninth Ward of New Orleans.” (Lowe is there shooting a movie; he was offered Canada or New Orleans and took a pay cut to go to NOLA so he could help bring business back there.)
Aside: Does anyone else consider it the height of bitter irony that debris clean-up is still unfinished a year later, under the leadership of a president who spends his plentiful vacation time clearing brush?
Saddam and South Park
Take this for whatever it’s worth, considering the dubious sourcing—although I must admit I don’t find it particularly difficult to believe.
DEPOSED tyrant Saddam Hussein has been taunted in custody with repeated screenings of a South Park film lampooning him as a gay nymphomaniac.
British tabloid The Sun reported that US Marines have been forcing the former Iraqi dictator to watch an offensive caricature of himself in low-brow animated film South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut – on repeat.
The film was banned in Iraq when it opened seven years ago, not least for its depiction of Hussein as a flamboyant and libidinous homosexual.
In the film, Hussein’s evil counterpart is none other than Satan, with whom he shares an erotic relationship.
Hey Satan, I got some new luggage for our trip up to Earth. Let's fuck to celebrate!
Matt Stone says the Marines told him they were torturing Saddam with the film, and he “boasted the story at the Edinburgh International Television Festival,” then the story was picked up by The Sun. As I said, thin sourcing, but nonetheless believable, considering some of the stuff going on over there.
Supposing for the moment that it’s true, what do you think? Acceptable? Unacceptable? In an abstract sense, I find it completely hilarious, but in the real world with real people—even heinous despots—I’m fairly certain this would fall under cruel and unusual.
Huh
No DNA match in Ramsey case. What was it I said almost two weeks ago, when saying it looked like Karr was just an insane crackpot? Oh yeah: “The Report First Ask Questions Later paradigm of the modern media is dreadful, simply dreadful. They've evidently learned nothing from their shameful complicity in taking a nation to war under the same flawed premises.” Way to go, media. Again.
