A tribute to Condoleeza Rice and George W. Bush who, despite voluminious evidence to the contrary, said, "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile," adding that "even in retrospect" there was "nothing" to suggest that" and "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees," respectively.

Sunday, March 26, 2006

George Will: Intellectually Dishonest About Global Warming 

Seems whenever George Will is confronted with the overwhelming evidence and opinions about global warming and man's role in the apocalyptic trend, he trots out a 1975 study in which climatologists predict new glaciers forming and even a new ice-age. Thus, he suggests, the scientists were wrong then so there's no reason to accept that they are right now. Further, he concludes that the costs of being wrong about global warming would be costly to economic expansion. His dismissive attitude and his worries about the economics of being wrong show that for him, it's about money.

So, let's look at how intellectually dishonest George Will's conclusions concerning the 1975 study truly are:

First of all, there have been many technological advances in detection, monitoring, satellite imaging and computer modeling unavailable when the study was done in addition to 30+ years of additional data collection.

Secondly, the 1975 study's conclusions may have been right. The world may have been headed for a new ice-age. But Will implies that this shows the scientists' conclusions are not be trusted this time. Another conclusion may be that man's effect on the environment has been so significant that it reversed the trend toward a new ice-age.

Finally, to Will it's about the cost to the economy if global warming is just occurring naturally and not due to man's activities on the planet. This is just plain back-assward thinking. The potential devastation that global warming may bring demands that we bear some costs now to prevent it even if we're wrong. The consequences are just too dire to ignore. The old saying about an "ounce of prevention" certainly comes to mind.

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Note: If Bush use the phrase "by the way," there a 95% chance the next thing to come out of his mouth will be a lie.

Saturday, March 18, 2006


One Bad Decision About the Number of Troops... 

Nobody Could Have Predicted that if you invade a country with too few troops to secure the country after it is militarily defeated, and said invaded country has vast stockpiles of munitions which are left unguarded for months, that those stockpiles would be looted and used against the occupying force, possibly in a device known as an IED.

Now, Bush is claiming some of the components for these IED's are coming from Iran while his commander on the ground says he has no proof that that is the case. Seems to this civilian, that the most difficult "component" to acquire that goes into an IED should be the component that makes it go boom. Past reports say that 650,000 tons or munitions were left unguarded in Iraq including some high-explosives and extensive looting took place. It defies logic that any components would be needed from Iran in order to make these devices and no specifics have been forthcoming about the components just a declarative statement that Iran is involved.

Just so the irony is not lost on the Bush adminstration, perhaps they should reconsider the international ban on landmines which they've refused to sign.

Good Morning America: Your Bias is Showing 

One of the segments this morning was an interview with Cindy Sheehan, the media proclaimed leader of the anti-war movement. The interviewer asked whether the declared success of "Operation Swarmer" shows progress is being made in Iraq and therefore Sheehan should just shut the hell up. Sheehan suggested that the declaration by the military of the success of the operation was not proof that in had in fact been a success.

Since the operation began with much fanfare and media attention, some have viewed the operation as little m0re than a PR stunt, a photo-op, or just a plain ole' wag the dog propaganda effort by an adminstration which adheres to the image over substance approach to governance.

As an example, the Time Online Edition has an article titled, On Scene: How Operation Swarmer Fizzled. The GMA interviewer was apparently unaware that the account being put forth by the military was being challenged for its factual accuracy and its purported results as "progress."

I've wondered about GMA's objectivity for quite some time and their part in image management for this administration. This may seem trivial, because it probably is, but the day after Condoleeza Rice appeared in public wearing knee-high leather boots/shoes, both female anchors on GMA showed up wearing the same thing. Like the never ending propaganda backdrops at Bush appearances, it seems every aspect of image management is choreographed.

I went to the GMA webpage to verify what I had heard this morning, but the video with Sheehan was nowhere to be found. Of course, Sheehan had repeatedly pointed out that George Bush is a liar and the stated mission du jour in Iraq replaced the previous stated mission. It does seem a bit curious that they don't have this video up, but the one about cupcakes is there for all to see.

I can't wait till tomorrow to see which democrat is on This Week for Stephanopolous to interrupt.

Thursday, March 16, 2006

Nobody Could Have Predicted that over a year later, we'd still have no answer as to how Jeff Gannon obtained a coveted press pass to the White House without a security check, what he was up to on the 200+ visits, or why the assembled press corp never questioned his credentials while lobbing nerf-ball questions to Bush and McClellan.

Monday, March 06, 2006

Continuing the Bush tradition of saying one thing and doing another.

Thursday, March 02, 2006

"Completely Engaged At All Times" 

"I hope people don't draw conclusions from the president getting a single briefing," Bush spokesman Trent Duffy said, citing a variety of orders and disaster declarations Bush signed before the storm made landfall. "He received multiple briefings from multiple officials, and he was completely engaged at all times."

Condi was shopping for shoes and taking in a Broadway show; Cheney was on vacation and house hunting; GWB, however, was fully engaged.

Wednesday, March 01, 2006


Delta House Needs to be Expelled from Faber 

Mr. President, it seems the bad news has been coming fast and furious over the last several months. I'll just lay out some of the major events:

The almost universal dissatisfaction with the Medicare Drug Benefit program.

The unexpected election of Hamas in a fair, democratic election in Palestine.

The arrest of Scooter Libby and the ongoing investigation into the disclosure of the identity of a CIA operative in an act of political vengeance which many consider treasonous.

The ongoing reconstruction of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast which has been subject to delays, corruption and incompetence.

The uproar over the sale of port operations to a government owned corporation with which you, members of your family and members of your administration have substantial business and personal ties. Additionally, it appears the process was in violation of standard procedures as well as not requiring customary safeguards.

The bombing of the mosque and the escalating violence in Iraq which many believe is the tipping point in an all-out sectarian civil war.

The billions of dollars which are missing in Iraq that were supposed to provide much need reconstruction but are unaccounted for.

The accidental shooting by the VP of his close friend and the mishandling of the aftermath along with allegations that Cheney was drunk.

The NSA surveillance of American citizens which many have concluded was in violation of the law and the Constitution.

The Katrina response and the statements made about information that your administration had and when they had it that seems to be contrary to the facts.

Your reluctance to end your vacation and pre-planned photo-ops when New Orleans was in desperate need of national leadership.

The mounting evidence that not only did you not win the election in 2000, that the 2004 vote was corrupted as well.

And finally, the new poll results that only 34% of the American people approve of your job performance.

So, what will you do to stem the tide of negative bad new that seems to be plaguing your administration?


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?