Saturday, March 13, 2004
Those whacky GOoPers
Have a look at what our elected officials are promoting on the taxpayer dime:
Just for fun, here's what the U.S. Constitution (which this bill purports to "restore") says on the matter:
So, basically, the "Dominionists" (who promoted this bill, and who are literally pushing to transform America into a theocracy) want to push a law such that all someone has to do is claim "God made me do it" and they can do whatever they want.
I have a suggestion: this bill should be renamed "the Psycho Government Official Promotion Act of 2004" ("Psycho-GOP")...
Have a look at what our elected officials are promoting on the taxpayer dime:
Constitution Restoration Act of 2004
HR 3799 IH
108th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 3799
To limit the jurisdiction of Federal courts in certain cases and promote federalism.
. . .
(1) AMENDMENT TO TITLE 28- Chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`Sec. 1260. Matters not reviewable
`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.
Just for fun, here's what the U.S. Constitution (which this bill purports to "restore") says on the matter:
Article III, Section 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
So, basically, the "Dominionists" (who promoted this bill, and who are literally pushing to transform America into a theocracy) want to push a law such that all someone has to do is claim "God made me do it" and they can do whatever they want.
I have a suggestion: this bill should be renamed "the Psycho Government Official Promotion Act of 2004" ("Psycho-GOP")...
Thursday, March 11, 2004
A few thoughts on Spain
My heart goes out to the wounded, the families of those killed, and all other Spaniards this evening. Today's contemptable bombings were horrific, cowardly and solved precisely nothing, regardless of who was responsible.
It might be tempting to say that Spain, in joining with the U.S. on the Iraq War boondoggle, played some part in bringing this bombing about. I don't feel this would be a fair or accurate statement; chances are Spain, like many other countries, was misled by the Bush administration. And the blame for this bombing lies with those who set off the bombs.
But I will say this.
Shortly after September 11, 2001, I must admit I greatly admired a number of George Bush's actions. I loved his speech at Ground Zero, which I felt, was appropriately populist and a sorely-needed rallying cry. I approved of his decision to go after Afghanistan, even though I now know that Iraq was his first choice (thanks, Colin!).
Unfortunately, I've since found myself deeply disappointed and frustrated by his actions:
- His opposition to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the federalization of airline security,
- his systematic underfunding of homeland security, customs and port security, police and fire first responders and foreign aid for Afghanistan,
- his repeated attempts to obstruct an investigation into what went wrong, what went right and what needs changing as regards 9/11,
- his opposition to gun fingerprinting, a basic anti-crime and anti-terrorism step,
- his cuts in pay raises for federal workers and members of the military, education benefits for military families, veterans benefits, and payments to family members of soldiers killed in action,
- his blatant use of "fighting terrorism" as an excuse to pay back fat-cat political benefactors, push economically foolish tax policies, promote "good times" irresponsible energy polices, unnecessarily infringe civil liberties and generally quell any and all disagreement,
- his withdrawal of resources needed to hunt down al Qaeda in order to fight a war with Iraq,
- his deliberately and specifically misleading statements to Congress and the American people to promote war with Iraq,
- his alienation of allies we need for fighting terrorist organizations in order to drive into Iraq,
- his failure to adequately secure locations in Iraq that were supposed to have WMD, and some which did have hazardous and nuclear materials,
- his administration's exposure of the classified identity of Valerie Plame, the wife of a political opponent and CIA operative involved in anti-proliferation, as an act of political payback, followed by his lack of a sincere committment to finding the perpetrator(s),
- and now word that he vetoed the targetting of known al Qaeda terrorists in U.S.-patrolled northern Iraq because it would have undercut the case for war, resulting in some 700 innocent people killed by said terrorist...
...all of these things have convinced me that that George Bush can, at most, be counted on to make a few good speeches in the War on Terrorism. His actual actions, when push comes to shove, belie very little interest in actually making America safer.
In summary, no one is to blame for the heinous attacks on Spanish civilians today other than the bombers themselves. But George Bush dropped the ball early on in this war, and likely gave al Qaeda a chance to regroup. Had Bush done the right thing and dedicated sufficient resources (diplomatic, political and economic) to fighting terrorism, this might not be the case. I can only pray that the world is not now beginning to pay the price of his "steady" misleadership.
UPDATE: After thinking about this issue further, I've had a bit of a change of heart. See "Lessons from Madrid", above.
My heart goes out to the wounded, the families of those killed, and all other Spaniards this evening. Today's contemptable bombings were horrific, cowardly and solved precisely nothing, regardless of who was responsible.
It might be tempting to say that Spain, in joining with the U.S. on the Iraq War boondoggle, played some part in bringing this bombing about. I don't feel this would be a fair or accurate statement; chances are Spain, like many other countries, was misled by the Bush administration. And the blame for this bombing lies with those who set off the bombs.
But I will say this.
Shortly after September 11, 2001, I must admit I greatly admired a number of George Bush's actions. I loved his speech at Ground Zero, which I felt, was appropriately populist and a sorely-needed rallying cry. I approved of his decision to go after Afghanistan, even though I now know that Iraq was his first choice (thanks, Colin!).
Unfortunately, I've since found myself deeply disappointed and frustrated by his actions:
- His opposition to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the federalization of airline security,
- his systematic underfunding of homeland security, customs and port security, police and fire first responders and foreign aid for Afghanistan,
- his repeated attempts to obstruct an investigation into what went wrong, what went right and what needs changing as regards 9/11,
- his opposition to gun fingerprinting, a basic anti-crime and anti-terrorism step,
- his cuts in pay raises for federal workers and members of the military, education benefits for military families, veterans benefits, and payments to family members of soldiers killed in action,
- his blatant use of "fighting terrorism" as an excuse to pay back fat-cat political benefactors, push economically foolish tax policies, promote "good times" irresponsible energy polices, unnecessarily infringe civil liberties and generally quell any and all disagreement,
- his withdrawal of resources needed to hunt down al Qaeda in order to fight a war with Iraq,
- his deliberately and specifically misleading statements to Congress and the American people to promote war with Iraq,
- his alienation of allies we need for fighting terrorist organizations in order to drive into Iraq,
- his failure to adequately secure locations in Iraq that were supposed to have WMD, and some which did have hazardous and nuclear materials,
- his administration's exposure of the classified identity of Valerie Plame, the wife of a political opponent and CIA operative involved in anti-proliferation, as an act of political payback, followed by his lack of a sincere committment to finding the perpetrator(s),
- and now word that he vetoed the targetting of known al Qaeda terrorists in U.S.-patrolled northern Iraq because it would have undercut the case for war, resulting in some 700 innocent people killed by said terrorist...
...all of these things have convinced me that that George Bush can, at most, be counted on to make a few good speeches in the War on Terrorism. His actual actions, when push comes to shove, belie very little interest in actually making America safer.
In summary, no one is to blame for the heinous attacks on Spanish civilians today other than the bombers themselves. But George Bush dropped the ball early on in this war, and likely gave al Qaeda a chance to regroup. Had Bush done the right thing and dedicated sufficient resources (diplomatic, political and economic) to fighting terrorism, this might not be the case. I can only pray that the world is not now beginning to pay the price of his "steady" misleadership.
UPDATE: After thinking about this issue further, I've had a bit of a change of heart. See "Lessons from Madrid", above.
What's Going on With Equatorial Guinea?
Do you think there is connection between this:
Today, U.S. oil firms dominate the Equatorial Guinea landscape. ExxonMobil, Amerada Hess, Chevron Texaco and Marathon Oil have the largest share of the country’s oil production. Based on new discoveries, analysts expect their total collective investment of $3 billion to approach about $5 billion by the end of 2002.
and this:
Sources also indicated that the aircraft, which Zimbabwean officials alleged also carried military equipment, had arrived from the Pope Air Force Base in North Carolina, United States, before its stop-over in Barbados.
Further reports stated that the plane, originally a commercial PanAm Airways aircraft up until a week ago, was being operated by the American Air Force, but international Press reports stated it had been sold to a South African company.
With the history of coups and overthrows of governments around the globe being attributed to U.S. agencies, Zimbabwe accused US, British, and Spanish spy agencies yesterday of involvement in a plot to topple Equatorial Guinea's government.
Do you think there is connection between this:
Today, U.S. oil firms dominate the Equatorial Guinea landscape. ExxonMobil, Amerada Hess, Chevron Texaco and Marathon Oil have the largest share of the country’s oil production. Based on new discoveries, analysts expect their total collective investment of $3 billion to approach about $5 billion by the end of 2002.
and this:
Sources also indicated that the aircraft, which Zimbabwean officials alleged also carried military equipment, had arrived from the Pope Air Force Base in North Carolina, United States, before its stop-over in Barbados.
Further reports stated that the plane, originally a commercial PanAm Airways aircraft up until a week ago, was being operated by the American Air Force, but international Press reports stated it had been sold to a South African company.
With the history of coups and overthrows of governments around the globe being attributed to U.S. agencies, Zimbabwe accused US, British, and Spanish spy agencies yesterday of involvement in a plot to topple Equatorial Guinea's government.
The Man Who Would Be King
But Settles for Dictator
Seems as though the taxpayers get to foot the bill for His Royal Highness.
For days now, the job at Eisenhower Park in Nassau County has been to follow the order from the White House through the Secret Service and down to the park workers:
"The president's feet are not to touch the dirt.".
Such a shame that he doesn't worry about the mess on anything but his feet.
This year the federal government will borrow about $477 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Cumulatively, the Treasury Department puts the official national debt at $7.1 trillion, 45 percent of which is held by foreigners. With future unfunded commitments and liabilities, that brings total U.S. debt to about $30 trillion, or $100,000 for every American, David M. Walker, the U.S. Comptroller General, notes in a new report.
But Settles for Dictator
Seems as though the taxpayers get to foot the bill for His Royal Highness.
For days now, the job at Eisenhower Park in Nassau County has been to follow the order from the White House through the Secret Service and down to the park workers:
"The president's feet are not to touch the dirt.".
Such a shame that he doesn't worry about the mess on anything but his feet.
This year the federal government will borrow about $477 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Cumulatively, the Treasury Department puts the official national debt at $7.1 trillion, 45 percent of which is held by foreigners. With future unfunded commitments and liabilities, that brings total U.S. debt to about $30 trillion, or $100,000 for every American, David M. Walker, the U.S. Comptroller General, notes in a new report.
Wednesday, March 10, 2004
"Between now and the end of the year."
Am I the only one who finds this just a tad revealing?
So, why is our time horizon for "making it very painful" for al Qaeda to the end of the year? Is there some reason why this year (as opposed to 2002, or 2003) is a better time for going after Osama bin Laden? And why not continue the efforts in 2005?
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not accusing the General of planning on ending the hunt on November 2. And I'm aware that the question he was asked pertained to this year. But his statement does seem to go further and illuminate the current focus, one which happens to coincide with George Bush's election prospects. And, to me, that reeks of misplaced priorities.
Am I the only one who finds this just a tad revealing?
When asked if he thought bin Laden would be captured this year, [Gen. John Abizaid] said he had no way of knowing.(Abizaid is the Commander of the U.S. Central Command.)
But he said, "I think that we will make it very painful for al Qaeda between now and the end of the year."
So, why is our time horizon for "making it very painful" for al Qaeda to the end of the year? Is there some reason why this year (as opposed to 2002, or 2003) is a better time for going after Osama bin Laden? And why not continue the efforts in 2005?
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not accusing the General of planning on ending the hunt on November 2. And I'm aware that the question he was asked pertained to this year. But his statement does seem to go further and illuminate the current focus, one which happens to coincide with George Bush's election prospects. And, to me, that reeks of misplaced priorities.
Pollkatz
Up until the turn of the new year, the incomparable Dr. Pollkatz's site was the reference point for polling statistics regarding the Bush administration. At that point, the graphics ended. However, I have reason to suspect that the good Doctor will soon be updating his work once again. And given Bush's tanking ratings, it's none too soon!
In his honor, here are a few stabs of my own at some similar graphics: approval, disapproval and geometric mean approval/disapproval ratio of 12 polls (Pollkatz's own graphics have 13, but that's data I don't have).
Up until the turn of the new year, the incomparable Dr. Pollkatz's site was the reference point for polling statistics regarding the Bush administration. At that point, the graphics ended. However, I have reason to suspect that the good Doctor will soon be updating his work once again. And given Bush's tanking ratings, it's none too soon!
In his honor, here are a few stabs of my own at some similar graphics: approval, disapproval and geometric mean approval/disapproval ratio of 12 polls (Pollkatz's own graphics have 13, but that's data I don't have).
Who's Been Sleeping in My Bed?
Do you think Judicial Watch will launch an investigation into the high cost of a night in the Lincoln Bedroom over these high dollar donors?
It's a darn shame that the liberal media seems to only hound the Democrats. Wonder why that is?
Do you think Judicial Watch will launch an investigation into the high cost of a night in the Lincoln Bedroom over these high dollar donors?
It's a darn shame that the liberal media seems to only hound the Democrats. Wonder why that is?
Tuesday, March 09, 2004
How Quaint Are You?
The "new economics" have revealed that they should be reviled. I found out that auto-cannibalism should be considered for the money you live in.
He continued, "Those worry-mongers who are always complaining about debt are laboring under the quaint notion that debt is supposed to be repaid. The purpose of going into debt is so that you can acquire more debt in the future. Governments have known this for a long time, but in a democracy, why shouldn’t ordinary people be able to take advantage of this as well?"
The "new economics" have revealed that they should be reviled. I found out that auto-cannibalism should be considered for the money you live in.
He continued, "Those worry-mongers who are always complaining about debt are laboring under the quaint notion that debt is supposed to be repaid. The purpose of going into debt is so that you can acquire more debt in the future. Governments have known this for a long time, but in a democracy, why shouldn’t ordinary people be able to take advantage of this as well?"
Monday, March 08, 2004
Irony is Dead - Long Live Irony!
Perhaps cynicsm has overcome my better sense of humor, but you really need to read this to believe it.
Chalabi has been on the CIA payroll since before 1992.
Makes that all saying "no honor among thieves" have a whole new meaning.
Perhaps cynicsm has overcome my better sense of humor, but you really need to read this to believe it.
Chalabi has been on the CIA payroll since before 1992.
Makes that all saying "no honor among thieves" have a whole new meaning.
What's That Sound
I can almost hear ZZ Top singing in the background - that buzzing noise -- is it She's Got Legs?
Seems like Rove may be deeply involved in the outing of a CIA operative - hmmmm ... Didn't RayGun sign H.R. 4 also known as Public Law 97 - 200 making that a felony?
I can almost hear ZZ Top singing in the background - that buzzing noise -- is it She's Got Legs?
Seems like Rove may be deeply involved in the outing of a CIA operative - hmmmm ... Didn't RayGun sign H.R. 4 also known as Public Law 97 - 200 making that a felony?
Sunday, March 07, 2004
Thinking Individuals
It was nice to see that someone in Richmond, Virginia, has been paying attention to the way that the Bush Administration has attempted to withhold information regarding their failure prior to September 11 and its attempt to stop the 9/11 Commission.
I hope their readers appreciate that they are seeing a rarity within our country, as dissenting opinions and views are having a hard time being heard.
The RNC is attempting to silence MoveOn.org commercials. Although there are a few wealthy contributors to MoveOn, most of their funding comes from regular people. So if you see a MoveOn.org commercial and you like what you hear, tell a friend - spread the word.
It was nice to see that someone in Richmond, Virginia, has been paying attention to the way that the Bush Administration has attempted to withhold information regarding their failure prior to September 11 and its attempt to stop the 9/11 Commission.
I hope their readers appreciate that they are seeing a rarity within our country, as dissenting opinions and views are having a hard time being heard.
The RNC is attempting to silence MoveOn.org commercials. Although there are a few wealthy contributors to MoveOn, most of their funding comes from regular people. So if you see a MoveOn.org commercial and you like what you hear, tell a friend - spread the word.
Memogate
Josh Marshall has some really good observations regarding relevant questions that the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms wasn't empowered to ask in preparing his recently released report on pilfered Democratic computer documents. Such as, "What did the White House know, and when did it know it?"
It would be nice to see an independent investigation regarding the possible felonies involved.
On a related note, I've often felt had Bush been in office under the Congressional mix the Nixon administration faced, he would have been impeached and removed long ago. For that matter, given the partisan extremists currently in Congress, Nixon would have gotten a free pass.
Sort of puts things in perspective, doesn't it?
Josh Marshall has some really good observations regarding relevant questions that the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms wasn't empowered to ask in preparing his recently released report on pilfered Democratic computer documents. Such as, "What did the White House know, and when did it know it?"
It would be nice to see an independent investigation regarding the possible felonies involved.
On a related note, I've often felt had Bush been in office under the Congressional mix the Nixon administration faced, he would have been impeached and removed long ago. For that matter, given the partisan extremists currently in Congress, Nixon would have gotten a free pass.
Sort of puts things in perspective, doesn't it?
Marching to War - Summer 2002
When will our mainstream media wake up to the lies of this administration? Will it be soon enough to expose the complete dishonesty that they have foisted off on the citizens of this country? I can only hope that will be the case.
After taking command of the 101st during the summer of 2002, Petraeus had been preoccupied with 1003 Victor, code name for the U.S. military's secret plan for conquering Iraq. But because of the political and diplomatic byplay in Washington over the winter, the 101st did not receive a formal deployment order until Feb. 6, 2003.
1003 Victor
When will our mainstream media wake up to the lies of this administration? Will it be soon enough to expose the complete dishonesty that they have foisted off on the citizens of this country? I can only hope that will be the case.
After taking command of the 101st during the summer of 2002, Petraeus had been preoccupied with 1003 Victor, code name for the U.S. military's secret plan for conquering Iraq. But because of the political and diplomatic byplay in Washington over the winter, the 101st did not receive a formal deployment order until Feb. 6, 2003.
1003 Victor
Rupert Murdoch's Rag
The laugh lines keep pouring in for this election year. Today in the Telegraph (a UK publication that lists the Hon. Henry Kissinger and the Hon. Richard Perle as directors) we find out that John Kerry "failed" at attempting to defer his participation in the Vietnam "conflict" where over 58,000 US military died. I guess when "success" means that you avoid serving and fail to complete your term of avoidance, as did George W. Bush, that they are attempting to create an illusion of "lack of patriotism". To say that Kerry, who received injuries on the battlefield of Vietnam, should be derided is more dunderheaded than anything since Ann Coulter attempted to denounce the patriotism of Max Cleland, who lost both his legs and an arm in Vietnam.
The best line in the article was a quote from Lucianne Goldberg (you must remember that she was the friend of Linda Tripp's that promoted the "Clenis" scandal).
"This means that Kerry didn't jump into all that heroic service until he was pushed, and it is a very nice piece of information," said Lucianne Goldberg, a prominent Republican campaigner.
Anyway, go read it for yourselves at
PNAC Spin
The laugh lines keep pouring in for this election year. Today in the Telegraph (a UK publication that lists the Hon. Henry Kissinger and the Hon. Richard Perle as directors) we find out that John Kerry "failed" at attempting to defer his participation in the Vietnam "conflict" where over 58,000 US military died. I guess when "success" means that you avoid serving and fail to complete your term of avoidance, as did George W. Bush, that they are attempting to create an illusion of "lack of patriotism". To say that Kerry, who received injuries on the battlefield of Vietnam, should be derided is more dunderheaded than anything since Ann Coulter attempted to denounce the patriotism of Max Cleland, who lost both his legs and an arm in Vietnam.
The best line in the article was a quote from Lucianne Goldberg (you must remember that she was the friend of Linda Tripp's that promoted the "Clenis" scandal).
"This means that Kerry didn't jump into all that heroic service until he was pushed, and it is a very nice piece of information," said Lucianne Goldberg, a prominent Republican campaigner.
Anyway, go read it for yourselves at
PNAC Spin
The SCO strategy
This tactic of the RNC in trying to make trouble for MoveOn reminds me strongly of the legal buffoonery being thrown about right now by the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO), a failing UNIX company that has engaged in extremely questionable legal tactics in an attack on the Linux operating system. SCO's basic approach seems to have been to use legalistic threats to coerce businesses into paying them for Linux code SCO doesn't own. There's more than a little evidence that Microsoft is behind the whole deal, funding SCO in the hopes that the widespread adoption of the freely-available Linux code can be slowed.
Although I'm not a lawyer, I would imagine MoveOn has its ducks in a row financially, and keeps its large (soft-money) and small donations separate, at least from an accounting point-of-view. Changes in the law have been much in the news lately, so it's not as though they wouldn't have been aware of what's going on.
So, to me, this tactic by the RNC appears to be little more than legal bluffing. Until I hear otherwise, I think I'll refer to it as The SCO Strategy, just to keep things in perspective.
This tactic of the RNC in trying to make trouble for MoveOn reminds me strongly of the legal buffoonery being thrown about right now by the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO), a failing UNIX company that has engaged in extremely questionable legal tactics in an attack on the Linux operating system. SCO's basic approach seems to have been to use legalistic threats to coerce businesses into paying them for Linux code SCO doesn't own. There's more than a little evidence that Microsoft is behind the whole deal, funding SCO in the hopes that the widespread adoption of the freely-available Linux code can be slowed.
Although I'm not a lawyer, I would imagine MoveOn has its ducks in a row financially, and keeps its large (soft-money) and small donations separate, at least from an accounting point-of-view. Changes in the law have been much in the news lately, so it's not as though they wouldn't have been aware of what's going on.
So, to me, this tactic by the RNC appears to be little more than legal bluffing. Until I hear otherwise, I think I'll refer to it as The SCO Strategy, just to keep things in perspective.
And now, the real dirty tricks campaign begins...
Looks like the RNC can't win without gaming the system. But we all knew that, didn't we?
The RNC (that sterling source for impeccably sound, non-biased legal advice) is warning TV stations not to air MoveOn.org's anti-Bush ads. Evidently, the RNC and the Bushies are so berift of anything truthful to run on or any issues with which the American people will identify that they have to try and shut down any and all opposition. Even if it has only 1% of their funding. But hey, if I had Bush's record, I'd be scared, too.
The RNC is clearly trying to tie up MoveOn.org -- the only entity that, at this point, can counter Bush's huge campaign fortune -- with legal wrangling and controversy. And hey, maybe they can even fool a couple of TV stations into not running the ads, too.
Pretty pitiful -- and pretty remarkable. Sounds to me like they're in full panic mode. But you know what they say about a trapped, wounded animal.
This is going to be very, very nasty, folks. And I'm betting we haven't seen anything yet. If the RNC had its way, I truly believe they'd have John Kerry thrown in jail until after the election. Always remember with whom we're dealing.
Looks like the RNC can't win without gaming the system. But we all knew that, didn't we?
The RNC (that sterling source for impeccably sound, non-biased legal advice) is warning TV stations not to air MoveOn.org's anti-Bush ads. Evidently, the RNC and the Bushies are so berift of anything truthful to run on or any issues with which the American people will identify that they have to try and shut down any and all opposition. Even if it has only 1% of their funding. But hey, if I had Bush's record, I'd be scared, too.
The RNC is clearly trying to tie up MoveOn.org -- the only entity that, at this point, can counter Bush's huge campaign fortune -- with legal wrangling and controversy. And hey, maybe they can even fool a couple of TV stations into not running the ads, too.
Pretty pitiful -- and pretty remarkable. Sounds to me like they're in full panic mode. But you know what they say about a trapped, wounded animal.
This is going to be very, very nasty, folks. And I'm betting we haven't seen anything yet. If the RNC had its way, I truly believe they'd have John Kerry thrown in jail until after the election. Always remember with whom we're dealing.
New hit piece on Kerry?
Well isn't this cute:
Marjorie Williams (the author of the piece) goes on to basically accuse Kerry of taking all of his "flip-flopping" political positions based upon opportunism and political expedience, being a slick politician with no core principles, etc., etc. For someone who is so "anti-Bush", she sure takes an awful lot of her talking points from his campaign.
Contrast Williams' "description" of Kerry with this far more detailed one:
The entire piece (unlike Williams' fluff) is well worth the read. It paints a picture of a detailed, thoughtful man who consistently tries to do the right thing, and is mad as hell that the Bush administration betrayed him so badly.
Some might fault Kerry and the rest of the Congressional Democrats for having believed Bush. This is a fair criticism. But I'll take someone who can admit to having been played for a fool and said "never again" over someone who utterly refuses to learn from his mistakes, any day.
Well isn't this cute:
I've been trying, really I have. As a charter member of the ABB Society -- Anybody But Bush -- I've tried not to fret over the alarmingly tautological nature of John Kerry's victory. He was inevitable because voters picked him to win because he had won over earlier voters and therefore must be a winner. I've tried not to worry over the fact that he has all the social bonhomie of one of Edith Wharton's ambivalent society stiffs. We know that some crucial part of the presidential electorate votes on impressions of likability, but I've assured myself that between now and November Kerry will warm up.
Marjorie Williams (the author of the piece) goes on to basically accuse Kerry of taking all of his "flip-flopping" political positions based upon opportunism and political expedience, being a slick politician with no core principles, etc., etc. For someone who is so "anti-Bush", she sure takes an awful lot of her talking points from his campaign.
Contrast Williams' "description" of Kerry with this far more detailed one:
...a closer examination of his style, based on dozens of interviews, shows that he makes decisions with simple consistency. He researches and analyzes aggressively before choosing. He always deliberates, even if only for a second. What differs in each case is how close he is to the ground.
The entire piece (unlike Williams' fluff) is well worth the read. It paints a picture of a detailed, thoughtful man who consistently tries to do the right thing, and is mad as hell that the Bush administration betrayed him so badly.
Some might fault Kerry and the rest of the Congressional Democrats for having believed Bush. This is a fair criticism. But I'll take someone who can admit to having been played for a fool and said "never again" over someone who utterly refuses to learn from his mistakes, any day.
Archives
02/29/2004 - 03/07/2004 03/07/2004 - 03/14/2004 03/14/2004 - 03/21/2004 03/21/2004 - 03/28/2004 03/28/2004 - 04/04/2004 04/04/2004 - 04/11/2004 04/11/2004 - 04/18/2004 04/18/2004 - 04/25/2004 04/25/2004 - 05/02/2004 05/02/2004 - 05/09/2004 05/09/2004 - 05/16/2004 05/16/2004 - 05/23/2004 05/23/2004 - 05/30/2004 05/30/2004 - 06/06/2004 06/06/2004 - 06/13/2004 06/13/2004 - 06/20/2004 06/20/2004 - 06/27/2004 07/04/2004 - 07/11/2004 07/18/2004 - 07/25/2004 07/25/2004 - 08/01/2004 08/01/2004 - 08/08/2004 08/08/2004 - 08/15/2004 08/15/2004 - 08/22/2004 08/22/2004 - 08/29/2004 08/29/2004 - 09/05/2004 09/05/2004 - 09/12/2004 09/12/2004 - 09/19/2004 09/19/2004 - 09/26/2004 09/26/2004 - 10/03/2004 10/03/2004 - 10/10/2004 10/17/2004 - 10/24/2004 10/24/2004 - 10/31/2004 10/31/2004 - 11/07/2004 11/07/2004 - 11/14/2004 01/09/2005 - 01/16/2005 10/23/2005 - 10/30/2005 10/30/2005 - 11/06/2005 12/11/2005 - 12/18/2005
