"Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast"
-Oscar Wilde
Brilliant at Breakfast title banner "The liberal soul shall be made fat, and he that watereth, shall be watered also himself."
-- Proverbs 11:25
"...you have a choice: be a fighting liberal or sit quietly. I know what I am, what are you?" -- Steve Gilliard, 1964 - 2007

"For straight up monster-stomping goodness, nothing makes smoke shoot out my ears like Brilliant@Breakfast" -- Tata

"...the best bleacher bum since Pete Axthelm" -- Randy K.

"I came here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum." -- "Rowdy" Roddy Piper (1954-2015), They Live
Saturday, October 02, 2004

Saturday Cat Memorial Blogging
Posted by Jill | 4:21 PM


Because it's my blog and I can do what I want.



Oliver - 1986 - 2000

I still miss you, Bunny.

Bookmark and Share

Does Bush even want the job anymore?
Posted by Jill | 7:43 AM
You have to wonder. After using variants on the phrase "hard work" no fewer than 9 times in Thursday night's debate, it seemed that George W. Bush, lifetime slacker and chronic fuckup, who went AWOL from the National Guard because it was hard work, who lost other people's money in his many failed businesses because it was hard work, may have had enough of the "hard work" of being president:


In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard.

There's a lot of good people working hard

I work with Director Mueller of the FBI; comes in my office when I'm in Washington every morning, talking about how to protect us. There's a lot of really good people working hard to do so.

It's hard work. But, again, I want to tell the American people, we're doing everything we can at home, but you better have a president who chases these terrorists down and bring them to justice before they hurt us again.

...because Tommy Franks did such a great job in planning the operation, we moved rapidly, and a lot of the Baathists and Saddam loyalists laid down their arms and disappeared. I thought they would stay and fight, but they didn't. And now we're fighting them now. And it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work.

It is hard work. It is hard work to go from a tyranny to a democracy. It's hard work to go from a place where people get their hands cut off, or executed, to a place where people are free.

I think about Missy Johnson. She's a fantastic lady I met in Charlotte, North Carolina. She and her son Bryan, they came to see me. Her husband PJ got killed. He'd been in Afghanistan, went to Iraq. You know, it's hard work to try to love her as best as I can, knowing full well that the decision I made caused her loved one to be in harm's way.

There are 100,000 troops trained, police, guard, special units, border patrol. There's going to be 125,000 trained by the end of this year. Yes, we're getting the job done. It's hard work.

We've done a lot of hard work together over the last three and a half years.


Does he really think being President shouldn't be hard work?

John Nichols at The Nation has more.
Bookmark and Share

Ed Helms: Seer
Posted by Jill | 7:26 AM

Remember a couple of days ago, when Jon Stewart and Ed Helms had that masterful skit in which Helms reports on what he's going to report?

You know that "eye rub" thing Jon Stewart does when another news talking head tells him how influential he is? He's about to do it again.

Corrente reports that ABC News posted a recap of the debate FIVE HOURS BEFORE the debate even took place!

The text of the story was posted on Democratic Underground, but alas, the story has been scrubbed from ABC News' site. Corrente, however, has Google caches of the headlines and introductory text. Go check it out, then think about David Broder chastising bloggers for not having the same standards of journalistic integrity that "real" journalists have.

I guess next we can expect ABC News to announce the hiring of Carl Cameron to head up their newly formed Department of Making Shit Up.
Bookmark and Share

Fake news from Faux: Where is the outrage?
Posted by Jill | 7:15 AM
I'm still waiting to see the same kind of outrage that's been directed against Dan Rather over the Killian memos directed against Faux News for publishing on their web site fabricated quotes attributed to John Kerry (but actually written by virulent anti-Kerry "reporter" Carl Cameron.

Josh Marshall has the scoop.

So where are the calls for Cameron to be fired? Where is the 24x7 media coverage?
Bookmark and Share

There he goes again
Posted by Jill | 6:49 AM
Looks like Karl Rove is up to his old tricks again.

First, some background for those unfamiliar with Rovian tactics:

In October of 1986, Rove was working for Republican Bill Clements in his race against then-Gov. Mark White. A few days before the candidates were to debate, Rove discovered a listening device that had been planted behind a needlepoint picture of an elephant hanging on his wall. The FBI investigated. Accusations and counteraccusations were made. But no charges were ever brought, and the matter slowly dissipated, amid general speculation that Rove had planted the bug himself.

The latest dirty trick took place earlier this month, when a videotape was apparently taken from the offices of Bush media advisor Mark McKinnon. The tape, along with copies of other debate briefing materials, was then mailed to the office of Gore ally, lobbyist, and former U.S. Rep. Thomas Downey, where it arrived on Sept. 13. Only a handful of Bush campaign staffers had access to the materials, including Rove, McKinnon, communications director Karen Hughes, campaign manager Joe Allbaugh, campaign chairman Don Evans, and policy director Josh Bolten.

Although no suspects have been named, the FBI, which is investigating the matter, has told several media outlets that it believes the tape was sent by someone inside the Bush camp, presumably in an attempt to entrap the Gore campaign. And given Rove's history, which includes more than a passing familiarity with dirty tricks, many pundits believe Rove is the chief suspect. Rove did not return calls from the Chronicle.


Given that Rove has a track record of wiretaps and thefts for his candidates that he then blames on the opposition party, you don't have to be a genius to do the math on this latest adventure, coming as it does on the heels of Bush's disastrous debate performance:

The Washington state headquarters for the president's re-election campaign was broken into last night, and police are investigating the theft of three computers from the Bellevue office.

Missing are laptop computers used by the campaign's executive director, the head of the get-out-the-vote effort and one that had been set for delivery to the campaign's Southwest Washington field director, said Jon Seaton, executive director of the state's George W. Bush campaign.

Seaton said data on the computers was backed up and available elsewhere. But, he said, the loss creates a potential security breach about the campaign's so-called 72-hour plan, the Bush get-out-the-vote effort.

"Obviously there's some stuff there we wouldn't want our opposition getting their hands on," Seaton said.

The campaign has spoken about the importance of the 72-hour plan in swing states across the country. Bush campaign officials say it could make the difference in a close election if Republicans are able to make sure their voters get to a polling place on election day and don't sit home as many did four years ago.

[snip]

State Republican Party Chairman Chris Vance called it a "Watergate-style break in" and said he suspects Democrats are behind it.

[snip]

"To me there is some scary stuff going on from liberal radicals whose Bush hatred is out of control," Vance said.


"...whose Bush hatred is out of control", eh?

Wanna see hatred out of control? Here:



After first denying it, the Republican party admitted on September 23 that it sent this flyer accusing Democrats of planning to ban the Bible to Arkansas and West Virginia voters. It said the mailings were part of its effort to mobilize religious voters for President.

But back to Rove...The use of the expression "Watergate-style break-in" is interesting, because according to James Moore and Wayne Madsen's book Bush's Brain, the exact same spin was put on the bugging of Rove's office.

The FBI had their own investigation on the bugging and discovered that contrary to Rove's accusation that the Democrats bugged Roves office several weeks earlier, the FBI found that the battery in the so-called "planted wiretap" only had enough juice to power the thing for a much shorter period of time and that out of the 6 volts potential in the battery, 5.6 volts still remained. It was their conclusion that the bug had only been activated for a couple hours at most. Either the bug had been put in that office that morning, or someone turned it on only that morning -- or there was someone on the inside who kept changing the battery. Hardly the stuff of a "Watergate-style break-in", eh?

In the FBI's final conclusion, they concluded that either Karl Rove bugged his own office, or else the security firm he hired to detect it installed the bug themselves.

Do the math, folks. Bush bombs in the debate, and a day later computers are taken from one of his campaign offices in a swing state. Given Karl Rove's track record, who do YOU think did it?
Bookmark and Share
Friday, October 01, 2004

Dying to protect the right to vote
Posted by Jill | 3:03 PM
Bob Herbert:

Viola Gregg Liuzzo is not a name that rings many bells anymore.

Mrs. Liuzzo, a white woman who lived in Detroit, was 39 years old, married and the mother of five when she decided, early in 1965, to head south to volunteer her services in the brutal struggle to get blacks the right to vote. She told her husband it was something she just had to do.

She participated in the now legendary march along Route 80, the Jefferson Davis Highway, from Selma to Montgomery, Ala. The march was led by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. When it was over, Mrs. Liuzzo offered to drive some of the marchers back to Selma in her two-year-old Oldsmobile.

On the return trip to Montgomery on the night of March 25, Mrs. Liuzzo was accompanied only by a black teenager. On a desolate stretch of the highway, they were overtaken by a car filled with enraged Ku Klux Klansmen and an undercover F.B.I. agent. Mrs. Liuzzo was shot in the face and killed. The car ended up in a ditch. The teenager survived by pretending he was dead.

[snip]

Now, in the 2004 presidential election, we're already seeing widespread vote-suppression efforts, from the failed attempt by the Jeb Bush administration to use bogus, biased lists of alleged felons to efforts in many parts of the country to prevent the registration of new voters, especially African-Americans.

The people trampling on voting rights today are following the same ugly tradition that resulted in the disenfranchisement of millions of black Americans and led to the murder of Viola Liuzzo and others.

At one time it was the Democratic Party that produced the grandmasters in the art of disenfranchisement. Now that torch has been passed to the Republicans. President Bush could put a stop to it, but so far he's chosen not to.


Because disenfranchisement is what put George W. Bush in the White House, and disenfranchisement is the only thing that will keep him there. From Republican hacks in Detroit advocating suppression of black votes, to First Brother Jeb Bush attempting yet another so-called "felon purge", to the harassment of elderly black voters in Orlando, the Republican party of George W. Bush is the party of voter intimidation.

At the same time as Bush talks about elections in Afghanistan and Iraq, he and his henchmen are doing whatever they can to make sure that as many voters right here in the USA who disagree with him as possible are deprived of THEIR right to vote.
Bookmark and Share

Probably the only time Andrew Sullivan will ever make my day
Posted by Jill | 2:21 PM

An e-mail received by Little Roy Cohn [/Alterman]:

"Last night about 40 minutes into the debate my son, a paratrooper with the 82nd Airborne, called from his barracks room. He let me know Kerry had just earned 5 votes from him and 4 other troops watching the debate in his room. He got back from Iraq in April. He was at a FOB just south of Fallujah when he was there."


I have lots of warm fuzzies from that. How about you?

Bookmark and Share

Right on cue
Posted by Jill | 1:55 PM
Are those my cues?

Yes, and they must be dry by now. Why don't you pull them up out of the cellophane before they scorch. [/Catherwood]

=Ahem=

This really is getting entirely too predictable.

From the "Run For Your Lives!" file, right on schedule, here's today's Dire Terrorism Warning, right on the heels of Our Pet Goat's Pet Goat hour and a half last night, otherwise known as the first Presidential debate of 2004:


DUBAI, United Arab Emirates - An audiotape purportedly released by Osama bin Laden’s deputy calls for attacks on U.S. and British interests everywhere, according to a broadcast Friday by Al-Jazeera television.

The Arab station said the speaker on the tape was Ayman al-Zawahri, an Egyptian-born surgeon and the closest aide to the al-Qaida terrorist group leader. The U.S. government has offered up to $25 million for information leading to his killing or capture.

It was not immediately possible to verify the authenticity of the recording or determine when it was taped. In Washington, a U.S. official said the CIA was aware of the tape and was looking at it.

The tape emerged one day after a campaign debate between President Bush and Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., discussed the U.S. war on terror and the search for bin Laden.

The voice sounded like past recordings of al-Zawahri, but it also made an unusual reference to the possibility that al-Qaida’s top leaders were not invincible.


Sounds like Bush's friends in Al-Qaeda are making sure he knows who's his daddy.
Bookmark and Share

Debate: The Day After
Posted by Jill | 7:08 AM
ModFab has a good rundown of the immediate post-debate spin; go check it out.

I don't know about all of you, but I slept like a baby last night. And yet, I knew that by the time I awakened this morning, the TKO of John Kerry over Elmer Fudd last night would be spun and spun and spun. Atrios has the polling results, which make me weep for the future of this country. 37% thought Bush won the debate in the CNN/Gallup poll? 30% in the CBS poll thought it was a frickin' TIE? 36% in the ABC poll throught Bush won? On what planet are these people living?

Never in my life have I seen a president embarrass himself on national television the way George W. Bush did last night. Anyone fortunate enough to have eschewed the Fox feed on the networks and cable news in favor of C-SPAN's true no-spin zone, which featured split-screen through the entire debate, saw perhaps the best contrast betweeen a leader and a dilettante that you will ever see. (Anyone dying for a tape, go to send me an e-mail with a snail mail address. Or, you can catch the video at C-SPAN's site.) Bush looked like every unflattering political cartoon ever drawn of him...hunched over the lectern (which made him look more simian than ever), rolling his eyes, smirking, constantly directing his glance and mouthing comments at someone off to the right of the screen (Rove?). He looked as if he'd rather be anywhere but on that stage. No matter what the question, the answers were always the same. Saddam bad guy. Saddam had capability to think about considering to build weapons of mass destruction. Bush sounded like Captain Ahab talking about Moby Dick -- if Captain Ahab had been an inarticulate fool.

Look, I may be a commie Jewish liberal from the northeast, but I do understand the "regular guy" meme that so many people think is important. I think that people who believe that the president should be a guy you want to drink beer with are wrong, but I understand where they're coming from. But why people think that it's more important to have a beer buddy than someone who can truly keep you safe from terrorists is beyond me. I wish someone could explain to me on what basis they think Bush won.

The John Kerry we saw last night was the closer people have been talking about since early in the campaign. As recently as yesterday, Chris Suellentrop at Slate was interviewing TNR editor Peter Beinart having buyer's remorse after helping to savage Howard Dean out of the race in favor of the more "electable" Kerry. NOW Beinert tells us that Dean would probably be a better nominee. Until last night, I would, and in fact, did agree. Now I'm not so sure. Don't get me wrong, I still luv the guv, but after seeing John Kerry last night -- tall, confident, articulate, intelligent -- I'm starting to believe that I may not have to hold my nose as tightly as I'd thought I would.

Now let's see how many days it takes for the spin machine to turn Bush into the victor. My guess is Tuesday October 5. And 10 bucks says there'll be no mention of the SIGHING that those of us who saw the split-screen version saw coming out of Bush for 90 full minutes.

UPDATE: Links to other blog post-mortems that you should read:

Ezra Klein at Pandagon: The Emperor Has Too Many Clothes

Digby on the spin battle that starts today.

Brad DeLong's point-by-point debunking of Bush's claims about having brought to justice 75% of Al-Qaeda's leadership.
Bookmark and Share
Thursday, September 30, 2004

Thank you, C-SPAN
Posted by Jill | 9:15 PM
only C-SPAN is showing full split screen. Bush's head looks like he's going to explode. Someone did a crappy job on makeup; Kerry looks green; Bush orange. But thank God for C-SPAN for showing us just what an adolescent Bush is.

More tomorrow.
Bookmark and Share

Why indeed
Posted by Jill | 4:45 PM
Bookmark and Share

I take back everything mean I ever said about Rebecca Romijn
Posted by Jill | 4:42 PM
Not that I ever actually SAID anything mean about her, I mean hell, even a good, straight middle-aged, overweight, 4'10" woman like me can tell she's hotter'n a two-dollar pistol.

But how cool is it that she's in this ad?

Mystique rocks, man.
Bookmark and Share

The REAL no-spin zone
Posted by Jill | 4:24 PM
Real people, real impact, Real Voices. Go watch their new TV ad that's running in swing states, then go giv them some turkee so they can run more of them.
Bookmark and Share

Jon Stewart Is a Golden God
Posted by Jill | 10:30 AM


I know, I sound like a groupie, don't I? But DAMN, The Daily Show just keeps getting better and better.

Here's a transcript from another classic bit from last night's show, courtesy of Fact-esque, which manages to skewer the entire mainstream press at one shot. Masterful, masterful stuff:


John: Ed, thank you so much. I know the weather's been rough down there. You know these men well. You served as Skull and Bones pledge master for both. In tomorrow night's debate, how do you see things going?

Ed [Helms]: John two men will take the stage and shake hands. I believe in an attempt to shed his cautious image, the senator will wear a cape and punctuate every sentence with the word "be-otch." The president, meanwhile, buffering his image as a strong leader, will more than likely squeeze the juice out of an orange with his bicep. He will then lick this juice. People will find it disturbing, yet erotic. And that's when the fucking starts.

John: Alright, Ed. I'm sorry. Let me just jump in here real quick. None of that is going to happen.

Ed: I know, John. Just trying to have a little imagination is fun...

John: Can you seriously talk a little about what's really going to happen at the debates tomorrow?

Ed: Okay. This is the report I'm going to file:

The two candidates exchanged poin barbs about our Iraq policy and the war on terror. Senator Kerry made strides in shedding what some of his analysts call a "patrician image" yadda yadda yadda. But the president with his plain-spoken words was more effective in communicating his vision ...

John: Alright, Ed. I'm sorry. You've written your report as though it's already happened.

Ed: Yeah. I wrote it yesterday.

John: You write your stories in advance and then put it in the past tense?

Ed: Yeah. We all do. That's ... all the reporters do that.

John: Why?

Ed: We write the narratives in advance, based on conventional wisdom and then whatever happens, we make it fit that storyline.

John: Why?

Ed: We're lazy? Lazy thinkers?

John: But what happens if actual news happens?

Ed: Well, that's what bloggers are for.

John: Alright, Ed. Why are you even bothering to watch the debate then?

Ed: To see if someone sighs or sweats, because that could cost someone the election, bee-otch!


That these guys manage to crank this stuff out four days a week is just astounding.
Bookmark and Share

Pop Quiz
Posted by Jill | 10:23 AM
Anyone still undecided about whether to vote for Bush or Kerry is hereby required to take this pop quiz. Please pass it on to all those inexplicable people you know who still can't tell the difference.
Bookmark and Share

Rep. Scott Garrett: accountable to no one
Posted by Jill | 10:08 AM
The arrogance of Scott Garrett, our freshman Congressman from the NJ 5th district, is breathtaking.

The League of Women Voters is hosting a debate among 5th Congressional District candidates next month. This should be an opportunity for voters in the district to find out the very real differences between the candidates, which include Democrat Anne Wolfe and three third-party candidates.

But Scott Garrett won't say if he'll show up. "Given Congressman Garrett's congressional responsibilities and often changing congressional schedule, we cannot commit to the debate at this time", says his campaign manager.

Anne Wolfe has pretty much been abandoned by the state party, which has weaselly decided to cede the seat, which was occupied by moderate Republican Marge Roukema for 25 years, to this dangerous, preposterous wingnut. Choosing your battles is one thing. Abandoning a district in this state to the likes of Scott Garrett is another. Anne Wolfe doesn't show up on Blogads, she's not one of the candidates chosen by Kos (though she is a Dean Dozen candidate, which just goes to show ya how on the mark the good doctor is). This isn't one of those Blogistan glamour races like Joe Hoeffel's or Ginny Schrader's, but Anne Wolfe is no less deserving of your support.

If the idea of someone like Scott Garrett running on a moderate platform and then voting 100% in lockstep with the most extreme elements of the Republican party, using his franking privileges to send glossy campaign literature that frankly misrepresents his record, offends you, please consider tossing some turkee in Anne Wolfe's direction.
Bookmark and Share

And now, a post the average American might just read
Posted by Jill | 7:40 AM
After all, what's the future of the nation weighed against gossip about who's marrying whom?

So, via Oliver Willis, comes this little tidbit:

Texas marriage records:
BUSH GEORGE W 31
WELCH LAURA L 31
11/5/1977
MIDLAND 137552

BUSH GEORGE W 23
HILL SUE E 21
12/27/1970
EL PASO 138376


We now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion of the debates, the Iraq war, and separation of church and state.

Bookmark and Share

Not much of a choice, is it?
Posted by Jill | 6:45 AM
Dick Cheney is fond of articulating the dire and painful deaths he believes await all of us if we don't vote for him and his AWOL blow-monkey faux-Christian puppet. Only they can keep us safe from terrorist attacks, he claims, conveniently ignoring the fact that they weren't able to do it three years ago.

Well, Frank Rich reports (via Corrente) that a new DVD, George W. Bush: Faith in the White House, designed to be a counterweight to Fahrenheit 9/11, is being distributed to church groups all over the country. The film purports to reveal "the President’s extraordinary faith and prayer life".

Extraordinary indeed, for this is a man who believes that God wanted him to be President. If this is the case, then it's a logical extension that he believes himself to be God's infallible instrument -- but of what? Given the continuing tendency for Bush surrogates to refer to the Iraq war as part of a Crusade, and his own general, William Boykin, referring to Bush as God's chosen leader to head up an "army of God" against "a guy named Satan", it's not all that great a leap to assume that Bush regards himself as God's own anointed instrument to deliver Christians to the Rapture. As Frank Rich points out:

It's not just Mr. Bush's self-deification that separates him from the likes of Lincoln, however; it's his chosen fashion of Christianity. The president didn't revive the word "crusade" idly in the fall of 2001. His view of faith as a Manichaean scheme of blacks and whites to be acted out in a perpetual war against evil is synergistic with the violent poetics of the best-selling "Left Behind" novels by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins and Mel Gibson's cinematic bloodfest. The majority of Christian Americans may not agree with this apocalyptic worldview, but there's a big market for it. A Newsweek poll shows that 17 percent of Americans expect the world to end in their lifetime. To Karl Rove and company, that 17 percent is otherwise known as "the base."


I understand that people are afraid, but I have to wonder just how many Americans really believe that George W. Bush is God's chosen instrument to bring about the end times. It seems to me that at one time, when people did terrible things because God told them to, they were John List and they merely murdered all of their own family members. Now we call them "Mr. President" and blindly accept his policies designed to bring about the deaths of all of us.

Taking this thinking at face value, here's your choice. Death by terrorists if we vote for Kerry, death by religious insanity if we vote for Bush. Not much of a choice, is it?
Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, September 28, 2004

Hey, Joisey! Wake the F*** Up!!
Posted by Jill | 9:58 AM
My fellow Amjersicans:

What on earth are you thinking? Are you seriously thinking of allowing the thugs in Washington to screw our state for another four years? Why? Do you honestly think he'll "make us safer"? Do you feel one bit safer today than you did on September 11, 2001? If not, why not? Maybe it's because your president doesn't know what the hell he's doing, and doesn't give a rat's ass about the Communist homosexual black Jewish feminist industrial northeast?

Why would you reward people who take your money and give very little back?

Did you know that New Jersey RECEIVES LESS FEDERAL MONEY FOR EACH DOLLAR WE PAY IN THAN ANY OTHER STATE IN THE COUNTRY? Even less than New York? You didn't? Well you do now.

Here are the 10 states that see the least in Federal spending per dollar of taxes paid:

1. New Jersey ($0.62)
2. Connecticut ($0.64)
3. New Hampshire ($0.68)
4. Nevada ($0.73)
5. Illinois ($0.77)
6. Minnesota ($0.77)
7. Colorado ($0.79)
8. Massachusetts ($0.79)
9. California ($0.81)
10. New York ($0.81)

7 out of 10 of them are "blue states."

Of the top 10 recipients of Federal largesse, 8 are "red states."

Why would you vote for a government that regards you as somehow less American and therefore less worthy than those in the West and in the South? You want to know why you have the highest property taxes in the country? Want to know why you pay a state income tax AND sales tax? THAT's why. Because the largesse is all going to Mississippi and Alaska and Alabama and West Virginia and Montana.

Are you going to sit and take it, or are you going to vote for change?



Bookmark and Share

A sad commentary
Posted by Jill | 6:08 AM
Former Texas governor Ann Richards on George W. Bush (in the context of Thursday's debate:

"we see issues in less simplistic terms than the president. The president speaks in terms that are so simple on the most complex issues that it sort of leaves you with your mouth hanging open,"

"It is one of the slickest political machines that I've seen in my lifetime, and I've been in politics for over 50 years," she said. "I think it is without question the most difficult (to counter) when it comes to the misrepresentation of facts."

"Here we are in a war where we have committed $200 billion, shortchanged education, shortchanged health care, shortchanged job training, and the reason we were told we had to go to war was because (Iraq was) a threat to the safety and security of America.

"But now it turns out, with the simplistic responses that George Bush gives, that we were there to get rid of a bad man, Saddam Hussein. There's no discussion about what he's going to do about all of the other bad men in the world.

"But if he can answer the questions with those simple little terms, he has avoided answering the tough questions, like how many more men and women will it take? How much more money? What is the Pentagon telling you? And why don't you believe the CIA reports you're getting now that this thing doesn't look solvable?"

"If we in this country have become the kind of people that we don't want to know anything more than some simplistic answer or non-answer to questions, then God help us," she said. "If we want to elect people to public office whose whole purpose and goal is to avoid controversy and avoid answering the tough questions about government, then we're in terrible shape."


Memo go Gov. Richards: We're in terrible shape. Look how this guy is polling!
Bookmark and Share

Never Mind
Posted by Jill | 6:03 AM
ModFab points out this morning that Iraqi conman and former Great White Hope of the Bush Administration is suddenly off the hook, whereby he becomes the Iraqi Oliver North. It's nice to have friends in high places.
Bookmark and Share
Sunday, September 26, 2004

The sins of the father....
Posted by Jill | 6:40 PM
...shall be redeemed by the son.

Ron Reagan, in an interview with the Sunday Herald (UK):


“This administration will use whatever they can – they will try to hijack that legacy, they will pretend that Mr Bush is the reincarnation of my father. I don’t feel terribly happy about that; I certainly don’t remember Bush being at any Thanksgiving dinners.”

“I don’t know Mr Bush well, but from what I can gather, he’s nothing like my father as a man.”

“The reality of this administration is so ugly that most Americans, even those who are more or less opposed to the administration, really don’t want to come to grips with that.

“This is an administration that has cheated to get into the White House. It’s not something Americans ever want to think about their government. My sense of these people is that they don’t have any respect for the public at large. They have a revolutionary mindset. I think they feel that anything they can do to prevail – lie, cheat, whatever – is justified by their revolutionary aims.”

“If Laura Bush went back and did her homework, she would see that nobody thinks there is a cure around the corner for Alzheimer’s.”

“Diabetes, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries will come first in the search for therapies. It was thought that stem cell research would help Alzheimer’s, but it’s clear other things will come first. Mrs Bush was either uninformed or disingenuous in her comments, but perhaps, with federal funding, we could address the issue properly.”

“September 11 was a huge opportunity for the Bush administration. When you read accounts of insiders who were close to the top of the administration on September 11, it’s shocking. Within hours of this terrible atrocity they were looking for opportunities to take advantage of it. They turned it into a situation where they could attack Saddam, who had nothing to do with September 11. This wasn’t a wake-up call for them.”






Bookmark and Share

When all else fails, blame the bloggers!
Posted by Jill | 4:19 PM
Who knew that those nice young people like Kos and Jesse and Ezra and Atrios and Josh and the others profiled in the New York Times Magazine today were to blame for the whole CBS mess?

Not only that, but bloggers are singlehandedly responsible for the ENTIRE DOWNFALL OF AMERICAN JOURNALISM.

Ah, the power. I can almost smell it.

And here I thought that everything was the fault of the Clenis(TM):

David Broder, boy dinosaur:


We don't yet know who will win the 2004 election, but we know who has lost it. The American news media have been clobbered.

In a year when war in Iraq, the threat of terrorism and looming problems with the federal budget and the nation's health care system cry out for serious debate, the news organizations on which people should be able to depend have been diverted into chasing sham events: a scurrilous and largely inaccurate attack on the Vietnam service of John Kerry and a forged document charging President Bush with disobeying an order for an Air National Guard physical.

[snip]

The common feature -- and the disturbing fact -- is that none of these damaging failures would have occurred had senior journalists not been blind to the fact that the standards in their organizations were being fatally compromised.

We need to be asking why this collapse has taken place.

[snip]

When the Internet opened the door to scores of "journalists" who had no allegiance at all to the skeptical and self-disciplined ethic of professional news gathering, the bars were already down in many old-line media organizations. That is how it happened that old pros such as Dan Rather and former New York Times editor Howell Raines got caught up in this fevered atmosphere and let their standards slip.


I'll wait till you clean the Diet Coke off your monitor.

What Mr. Broder is saying is that the reason the Swift Boat Liars' documentably false claims were reported as news, the reason why CBS News didn't vet the Killian documents thoroughly, the reason that people like Bill Hemmer and Paula Zahn and Daryn Kagan and the Bubbleheads of Fox News' morning show spend their days talking about Hurricane Frances and Scott Peterson and Kobe's semen is because of BLOGGERS?

I only wish we had that much clout.

Bookmark and Share

Buttle.
Posted by Jill | 11:10 AM
Terry Gilliam was prescient:


You Say Yusuf, I Say Youssouf...

The Cat Stevens incident has its origins in a spelling mistake
By SALLY B. DONNELLY

The Yusuf Islam incident earlier this week, in which the former Cat Stevens was denied entry into the U.S. when federal officials determined he was on the government's "no-fly" antiterror list, started with a simple spelling error. According to aviation sources with access to the list, there is no Yusuf Islam on the no-fly registry, though there is a "Youssouf Islam." The incorrect name was added to the register this summer, but because Islam's name is spelled "Yusuf" on his British passport, he was allowed to board a plane in London bound for the U.S. The Transportation Safety Administration alleges that Islam has links to terrorist groups, which he has denied; British foreign minister Jack Straw said the TSA action "should never have been taken."

The incident points up some of the real problems facing security personnel as they try to enforce the "no-fly" list. One issue is spelling; many foreign names have several different transliterations into English. And the sheer size of the list is daunting; thousands of names have been added in the last couple months, says one government official, bringing the total up to more than 19,000 names to look out for. That makes it difficult for airlines and government agencies to check all passengers. Within the past six months, several people on the no fly list have been mistakenly allowed to fly.

Still, the TSA is learning. It recently acknowledged that a Federal Air Marshall, unable to fly for weeks when his name was mistakenly put on the "no-fly" list, was in fact not a threat, and removed his name from the list.


(Thanks to Cinemarati Roundtabler RaJa)
Bookmark and Share

The final nail in traditional journalism's coffin
Posted by Jill | 9:47 AM

Viewers of late-night comedy programs, especially The Daily Show with Jon Stewart on the cable channel Comedy Central, are more likely to know the issue positions and backgrounds of presidential candidates than people who do not watch late-night comedy, the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey shows.

Polling conducted between July 15 and Sept. 19 among 19,013 adults showed that on a six-item political knowledge test people who did not watch any late-night comedy programs in the past week answered 2.62 items correctly, while viewers of Late Night with David Letterman on CBS answered 2.91, viewers of The Tonight Show with Jay Leno answered 2.95, and viewers of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart answered 3.59 items correctly. That meant there was a difference of 16 percentage points between Daily Show viewers and people who did not watch any late-night programming.

The campaign knowledge test covered such topics as which candidate favors allowing workers to invest some of their Social Security contributions in the stock market, the income range at which John Kerry would eliminate the Bush tax cut, and which candidate is a former prosecutor.

“In recent years, traditional journalists have been voicing increasing concern that if young people are receiving political information from late-night comedy shows like The Daily Show, they may not be adequately informed on the issues of the day,” said Dannagal Goldthwaite Young, a senior analyst at the Annenberg Public Policy Center who conducted the research. ”This data suggests that these fears may be unsubstantiated. We find no differences in campaign knowledge between young people who watch Leno and Letterman – programs with a lot of political humor in their opening monologues -- and those who do not watch late night. But when looking at young people who watch The Daily Show, we find they score higher on campaign knowledge than young people who do not watch the show, even when education, following politics, party identification, gender, viewing network news, reading the newspaper, watching cable news and getting campaign information on-line are taken into account.”
Bookmark and Share

Gotta get me one o'them intarweb globber thingies
Posted by Jill | 9:19 AM

("Intarweb thingie" copyright (c) 2004 Mary Ann Johanson)

Alas, being a latecomer to this particular party, largely due to other intarweb commitments, such as this and this and a much-needed rework of this, and involvement in the Dean campaign early on to focus my rage, in addition to being far too old for this sort of thing, today's New York Times Magazine article about bloggers doesn't include me. It is, however, somewhat disconcerting, and indicates that I am either too cool for words or am spending far too much time reading blogs, that I am a regular reader of every left-of-center blog mentioned and am therefore familiar with all the names mentioned.

Aside from the author's obvious lubriciousness at spending time with Wonkette, compared to the regular-guy earnestness of the blogmales profiled, and an unfortunate accreditation of the odious Mickey Kaus as being some kind of Godfather of Blogging, it's not a bad piece. However, I'll leave it to folks like Steve Gilliard to do a more accurate deconstruction than I'm qualified to do.

Those of you who actually watch the Sunday morning version of Good Morning America were treated to a gee-whiz-bang-what'll-they-think-of-next introduction to them globber thingies that are popping up all over the on that intarweb. It was quite a hoot, even if there were some glaring mistakes, such as:

Earlier, during the Republican convention in New York, a Republican congressman decided to drop his bid for re-election after a blog suggested he was gay.


Said blog didn't just suggest that Virginia Congressman Ed Schrock is gay, Raw Story actually has posted on its site the recording of a phone call the anti-gay Congressman made to a phone sex service. Transcript here.

Another example of the story playing fast and loose with the facts is the claim that:

This past week, bloggers pushed hard on the story about controversial documents uncovered by CBS that spoke to President Bush's National Guard service. Many analysts believe all the talk on Weblogs played a part in forcing CBS to re-examine the issue and ultimately issue a statement.


First of all, Free Republic is hardly a blog, and second of all, Harry MacDougald (code name "Fuckhead"....I mean "Buckhead"), who posted his infamous font post on Free Republic a mere four hours after the 60 Minutes 2 story about the Killian memos, is hardly a blogger. He is, in fact, a conservative attorney, as revealed by the Los Angeles Times on September 18, who was instrumental in the disbarment of President Clinton and who is a mucky-muck in various conservative causes.

Once again, mainstream journalism gets it wrong.
Bookmark and Share

The Pro-Life President
Posted by Jill | 8:28 AM
I'm so glad that the President is so reverent towards the sanctity of human life....as long as it's still just a blastocyst:

Operations by U.S. and multinational forces and Iraqi police are killing twice as many Iraqis - most of them civilians - as attacks by insurgents, according to statistics compiled by the Iraqi Health Ministry and obtained exclusively by Knight Ridder.

According to the ministry, the interim Iraqi government recorded 3,487 Iraqi deaths in 15 of the country's 18 provinces from April 5 - when the ministry began compiling the data - until Sept. 19. Of those, 328 were women and children. Another 13,720 Iraqis were injured, the ministry said.

While most of the dead are believed to be civilians, the data include an unknown number of police and Iraqi national guardsmen. Many Iraqi deaths, especially of insurgents, are never reported, so the actual number of Iraqis killed in fighting could be significantly higher.


Yup, that's our President. Loves life, hates death. So why does he inflict it on so many people?

Now that we know that "liberation of the Iraqi people" means "liberating them from this mortal coil", what are we going to do about it?

Right now much of the world sees us as being held hostage by a gang of ruthless thugs who stole the 2000 election. If we send them back to Washington with a resounding victory, it WILL be our responsibility, and I believe there'll be hell to pay.

Think about THAT when you think about who will make your kids safer.
Bookmark and Share