Nobody Could Have Predicted...

When assholes like Kristol are allowed to influence policy...

Breaking News:

A plot to bring down the Golden Gate Bridge was recently thwarted by cooperating agencies of the government. Many of the details remain secret because of the continuing threat to national security, but President Bush gave credit to the highly secretive and technologically complex Terrorist Surveillance Program conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA) for exposing the plot. Bush noted that critics of the program were jeopardizing the government's efforts to secure our greatest landmarks. Additionally, the Golden Gate is vital for the flow of traffic in and out of one of great metropolitan areas of our country. He added, he still has no plans to visit San Francisco any time soon.

Despite the secrecy, some details of the plot have been leaked by traitorous insiders who feel compelled to harm our efforts in the fight against terror. The plot involved the annual Bay to Breakers race which is scheduled for May 21st. Al Queda "sleeper cells" have infiltrated many of the retailers who sell running shoes as well as volunteering to help during the upcoming race. When a runner let it be known that he/she was participating in the race, the sleeper agent would surreptitiously put a radio-controlled shoe bomb in the sneakers. When a sufficient number of runners were on the Golden Gate, the shoe-bombs would be simultaneously detonated, bringing down the bridge.

Un-American critics of the administration questioned whether this was a viable threat or just more "catapulting of the propaganda." The traitorous critics pointed to some significant flaws in the plans. First, that it was idiotic and second, the Bay to Breakers race does not cross the Golden Gate. When confronted with these "flaws," the usual apologists claimed that this criticism demoralized the troops and did irreparable harm the Bush administration's war on a tactic.

Do buy, don't buy, whatever!

[In approving the purchase, the administration chose not to require Dubai Ports to keep copies of its business records on U.S. soil, where they would be subject to orders by American courts. It also did not require the company to designate an American citizen to accommodate requests by the government.]

Source

Working on the premise that omission of these provisions was purposeful and not an oversight, it makes me wonder what was the motivation for the omission. Because the negotiations for the purchase and the approval of the purchase were done so secretively, I can't help but look for some nefarious motive. Granted, given their track record, the omission of these provisions might innocently be attributed to incompetence. Also, given their track record, there may be some agenda upon which the omission serves some other purpose or fits into their future plans.

Perhaps a deep-thinker or strategist can come up with more plausible reasons, but here's some conjecture.

1. Labor unions traditionally support the democratic party. The workers in the ports are unionized. If documents relating to the business of running the ports are unavailable in a court battle or in negotiatoins, it diminishes the power of the unions.

2. Attorneys are a favorite target of the republican party. They don't like it when they are held responsible when they cause injury, damage or death. Attorneys give the "little guy" the power to fight the rich and powerful, and that pisses them off. Keeping the records out of litigation diminishes the power to hold them accountable.

3. There are plans to use the ports to ship cargo to other countries which the government does not want the public to know about. Imagine, being able to ship arms to Venezuelan rebels without a paper trail.

If you have any thoughts or plausible reasons that the Bush administration would negotiate these safeguards out of the purchase agreement, please let me know.

Many decisions we make are in reality calculated risks. We factor in the chances of success and the corresponding rewards and we factor in the chances of failure and the corresponding negative consequences. Rationale people make these kinds of decisions every day.

The greater the reward, the more we are willing to put at risk. The greater the consequences of failure, the more likely we are to avoid that decision even if the odds of failure are remote. This is especially true when failure could result in a catastrophe. Rational decision makers ask themselves, "What if I'm wrong?" They don't allow a false sense of infallibility to cloud their judgment because they are "rational."

Learned Hand, a Supreme Court justice, devised an algebraic formula for just such decision making and the extent of the burden one has to prevent the occurrence of an event. This was in the context of negligence litigation and whether liability could be assessed against a defendant for failure to adequately prevent the occurrence of an event.

Hand's formulation has three variables:

1. What is the probability of the event (P)?

2. What is the gravity of the resulting injury (L)?

3. What is the burden of adequate precaution (B)?

Under this formulation, a burden is imposed when B is less than P times L (B
Decisions of the Bush administration seem to fly in the face of the rational thinking. They don't ask themselves, "What if we're wrong?" Look at two prime examples: Global warming and the decision to allow the United Arab Emirates control over our major ports.

In both instances, (L) the potential gravity of resulting injury, is of such magnitude that (P) the probability can be miniscule and still the product of PL exceeds B.

Not only is it a problem that the administration never admits mistakes, it's also a problem when their decision making doesn't allow for the possibility that they're making another one. George Bush's "instincts," while lauded by the right-wing noise machine, have been proved to be less reliable than reasoned analysis which actually factors in the consequences and the potential for fallibility.

Posted by: Turk / 10:15 AM |

There was some discussion during the roundtable segment on "This Week" about spending money to influence other countries' political makeup through the use of propaganda. Paraphrasing Will, since I don't have the exact quote, said that totalitarian regimes seek a national consciousness by controlling the messages delivered to the populace. After the recent revelation that the Bush administration has spent 1.4 billion dollars on shameless self-promotion through the media, made cash payments to purported jounalists to provide favorable copy and the right-wing noise machine that operates within our borders with players life Fox News, Clear Channel, Sinclair Broadcasting, and the Wall Street Journal, it seems that the irony is lost on old George.

We were out hunting, if you can call blasting small, pen-raised birds, with clipped wings hunting, when we discovered we were down to our last beer. My good friend said that it was his because he'd been keeping count. I said it was my mine because of who I am. We argued like this for give or take 10 minutes when my friend had a suggestion. "Why don't we just split it?" he said as if to mock my penchant for not compromising. So I shot him.

Apologies to Steve Martin

WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney disclosed Wednesday that he has the power to declassify sensitive government information, authority that could set up a criminal defense for his former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

See Yahoo Article Here

So all the uproar about Clinton and Gore purportedly transferring nuclear and/or missile technology to the Chinese was just bull shit since they had the power to declassify sensitive government information according to Mr. Cheney. Who knew? So even if it hurts our country's efforts to curtail nuclear proliferation, Cheney says it's okay.

BTW, I am aware that the whole story about the technology transfer in regards to Reagan and Bush 1 has been ignored by the right-wing hate machine.

He probably would have lived if you hadn't gutted him.

Watching the news report about the hunting anomaly, local and national news are stressing the point that it was accidental. In fact, my local station used the term accident or accidental about a 1/2 dozen times. This must have been part of the blast FAX that everyone stress it was an "accident." Okay, we get it. But why the delay in reporting it. I'm guessing it was to give Cheney time to sober up, but that's just my guess.

This just in from Good Mourning America: Kelly Clarkson not sufficiently appreciative of boost to her career by American Idol.

Later, more lame stories that are complete waste of video tape.

Amazingly, they are continually able to use one of their biggest failures to their advantage.

Q. How do you keep Attorney General Gonzales from lying under oath to a Senate committee?

A. Simple, don't swear him in.

Q. How do you keep new pictures of abuse in prisons in Iraq from surfacing and enraging the public.

A. Simple, ban the use or possession of cameras in the prisons.

Got your own? Leave a comment.

Raise your hand if you routinely miss major events of national consequence and just as routinely use the "we're just too stupid, like everyone else, to have figured it out" defense to avoid accountability.

I don't even like having to ask, but I've got bills to pay too. This blog is nearly all original content and opinion and I could use some support. I know the big guys get and deserve the lion's share of donations but small donations add up and I don't think it's asking too much to throw me a buck or two once in awhile.

Look, it's just impossible to be so wrong about so much without it being on purpose. Even a blindfolded child, disoriented from being spun around, manages to connect the stick to the pinata once in a while..

I'm not a CIA operative whose husband exposed the administration's lie about Iraq's efforts to get "uranium from Africa."

I'm not a senior citizen dependent upon drugs to keep me healthy or alive.
My habitat is not in the pesky, cedar underbrush which threatens to overwhelm Crawford, Texas but for the efforts of the chain saw wielding, Brush Cutter in Chief.

I don't migrate through ANWAR.

I am not the democratically elected leader of a foreign country that Pat Robertson thinks should be assassinated even though that seems to be contrary one of the major tenets of his religion.

I live in a climate where I won't freeze to death if my heat is shut off for non-payment.

I am not a woman whose own life is threatened by my pregnancy.

I'm not a tree in an "old growth" forest.

I don't work in a coal mine.

I'm not a soldier in the line of fire without state-of-the-art body armor that although available, hasn't made it's way to Iraq.

I don't live in a part of the country where there are hurricanes.

The anthrax killer likely doesn't know who I am or that I'm a democrat.

I'm not black.

I'm not poor.

I'm not a veteran in the need of medical care.

I'm not suffering from the effects of the toxins in the air at "ground zero" which the EPA said was safe to breathe.

I am not an Iraqi civilian.

I am not a villager in the remote mountains of Pakistan whose neighbors might be having guests over for dinner.

My name is Osama Bin Laden.

Early this week, Exxon reported record profits of $10.71 billion ($10,710,000,000.00) for the fourth quarter and $36.13 billion ($36,130,000,000.00) for the year – the largest of any U.S. company. While some politicians raised furious objections, Bush had a different reaction.

"I think that basically the price is determined by the marketplace and that's the way it should be," said Bush, himself a failed Texas oilman.

In Bush's first term, the California energy crisis continued to unfold. Consumers suffered rolling blackouts that were more than just an inconvenience, they were life-threatening. Traffic lights were out causing accidents and injury. Patients under medical care dependent on reliable electrical supplies were put at risk. As we now know, many factors were involved in the crisis, not the least of which of the callous market and supply manipulation of large energy companies. Coincidently, large donors to Bush and the GOP.

Back then, Bush administration officials repeated claims by Enron and others that California’s problems were caused by the state’s “flawed” deregulation plan—which was not “free market” enough—and strict environmental standards, which limited the construction of new power plants. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney publicly opposed wholesale price controls by FERC, insisting that any such moves would be a disincentive for power companies to operate in the state. Now, excess profit taxes or any other attempt to rein in this price gouging would keep the oil companies from putting the money back in to research and development. Yeah, that's a good one.

Now, we have to hear this "free market" economic cure-all bull shit once again. Anyone with a lick of sense knows that the "free market" is just an illusion. We have tariffs, market orders, price supports, and subsidies all of which in one way or another take the "free" out of "free market."

Why You Should Not Trust Right-wing Think-tanks When They Talk About "Free Markets" or much else for that matter.


Who's to Blame for California's Shortages: According to the Heritage Foundation

[As political columnist Robert Samuelson noted in The Washington Post on June 13, "the root cause of California's electricity problem is simple: Demand outran supply." In a free market, this imbalance is automatically addressed through changing prices. Prices rise when demand for a product exceeds its supply. These higher prices, in turn, create an incentive for producers to generate more of the product or for consumers to reduce their purchases. Balance is restored because supply grew to meet demand or high prices reduced consumption. In the electricity market, as prices increase, either individual and business consumers restrain their consumption or new electricity supply enters the marketplace until prices begin to fall. ]

Their take, it's all the liberal's and democrat's fault. They completely missed the market manipulation and contrived shortages of the energy companies closely associated with the Republican Party. To further their own political agenda , they conveniently ignore facts. Such as, the so-called "flawed" deregulation was written by republican Jim Brulte with guidance from Enron and the deregulation (license to steal) was signed into law by a republican governor, Pete Wilson.

So when the Heritage Foundation or the American Enterprise Institute come out in defense of the current economic rape of the American people, don't be too surprised.

Here Mrs. Young. Please put on this t-shirt and we'll pretend to escort you out so that our illegal arrest of Cindy Sheehan doesn't look like we're singling out critics. By the way, if can you feign outrage like Dick & Lynne Cheney did over the comment by Kerry about their gay daughter, it would make this charade more believable.