Saturday, January 17

President Cheney Hunts Peasants with Scalia 

Anyone can go hunting with the secret president, now. Especially if you are a Supreme Court Justice about to hear a case involving Cheney.

"Vice President Dick Cheney and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia spent part of last week duck hunting together at a private camp in southern Louisiana just three weeks after the court agreed to take up the vice president's appeal in lawsuits over his handling of the administration's energy task force.

While Scalia and Cheney are avid hunters and longtime friends, several experts in legal ethics questioned the timing of their trip and said it raised doubts about Scalia's ability to judge the case impartially."

I called Dick and asked him about this. He said not to worry. He was just making sure that he could sit on the Court himself to decide his own secret energy case, and Scalia agreed to hear him out. Scalia said there was precendent - the 9-11 commisioners investigating themselves (see below). Still, Scalia didn't think it would look good, and just asked Dick how he would decide the case, and offerred to do his bidding for him when the case comes up.

The two killed 14 peasants total, according to anonymous administration officials.

  (0) comments

9-11 Panel Investigates Itself 

The NY Times has a nice story about conflicts of interest within the independent panel investigating what really happened on 9-11.

"The executive director of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks has become a witness in the inquiry and has been interviewed by his own staff about his involvement in shaping the Bush administration's early counterterrorism strategy, officials said on Wednesday.

In addition, one of the 10 commissioners on the panel, a deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration, was also interviewed this week. The unusual dual roles of the director, Philip D. Zelikow, and the commissioner, Jamie S. Gorelick, have raised fresh questions about potential conflicts of interest in the commission, which has been dogged by concerns about its independence since it was created in 2002.

It's actually part of a new system. If you are arrested and put on trial, you can now also be on the jury. If you are rich, of course, and connected. I'm going to trial next week, in fact, and I am on the jury. I plan to be very fair to myself.

Yes, this will be a very fair look into the events leading to 9-11. Conflict of interest? No problem. Why would that be important? Go back to sleep, America. And watch out for all the terrorists. They are a real threat to the country, not these folks on the independent review panel about to concoct a story to cover their own asses.

  (0) comments

Friday, January 16

Howard Dean Gets Special Treatment By Media 

Lucky Dr. Dean. According to a study of media coverage of the Democratic presidential candidates, Howard Dean was singled out for more critical coverage than any of the others.
Howard Dean received significantly more criticism on network newscasts than the other Democratic presidential contenders, who were the subjects of more favorable coverage, according to a study released Thursday.

More than three-quarters of the coverage of Dean's foes by the nightly news programs was favorable, while a majority of attention to Dean was negative, the Center for Media and Public Affairs found.

The study by the Washington-based media watchdog also found that network attention to the campaign was down by 62 percent compared to the last race involving an incumbent president, in 1996.

Researchers examined 187 stories broadcast on the ABC, CBS or NBC evening newscasts in 2003, looking at elements including quoted remarks about candidates and how they were depicted in profiles.

Gee, I wonder why major media is so down on Dean? Could it be that the media's owners are afraid of a grass-roots, populist president, for some reason?

  (0) comments

Thursday, January 15

The problem with poll stories? They are often wrong 

On January 20, 2004, the media pundits will tell you the people were lying. About their answers to poll questions that is. Stephen Hess of the Brookings Institution wrote the following article entitled "The problem with poll stories? They are often wrong". It originally appeared on Ocotober 30, 2000.

"Had you been watching the CBS Evening News on Jan. 31, [2000], you would have heard Dan Rather say the race in New Hampshire's Republican primary between George W. Bush and John McCain was "too close to call," and Al Gore had "a comfortable lead" over Bill Bradley in the Democratic primary.

The next day, McCain trounced Bush, and Gore barely slipped past Bradley. If you hadn't listened to the news media, you wouldn't have been misinformed.

The Republicans went on to South Carolina. Phil Jones reported on how "crossover voters" are expected to produce a McCain victory; Bob Schieffer told us it was "dead even." The next day Bush trounced McCain.

On to Michigan. Again, the polls were wrong.

After each fiasco, journalists explain that polls are only a snapshot of the moment. People change their minds. Or decide at the last minute. Or lie."


Who does Zobgy exclude in its polls? People without phones, people with cell phones, roommates, which means that a lot of high school seniors are not being polled, college students too (college dorm room telephones are not listed in the white pages), and people who live in rented houses or apartments in which there are two or more roommates. When I lived in Boston, MA and had roommates, the phone number was never listed under my name. A lot of people today don't have a home phone, they use cell phones instead.

  (0) comments

Wednesday, January 14

Ground Invasion Planning Began Before Christmas 2000 

The dispute continues between Bush and members of Bush's cabinet over when exactly the ground invasion planning of Iraq began. According to a new ABC News report, "President Bush ordered the Pentagon to explore the possibility of a ground invasion of Iraq well before the United States was attacked on September 11th." The story quoted a White House official who attended the same National Security Council meetings as O'Neill. That official said the president's order "went beyond the Clinton administration's halfhearted attempts to overthrow Hussein without force."

Meanwhile, over at the New York Times, a report written by Saddam Hussein shortly before he lost power, was found among the papers he had with him when he was captured. According to American officials, the document was a directive from Mr. Hussein to the Iraqi resistance warning against "getting too close to Islamic jihadists and other foreign Arabs coming into occupied Iraq". The New York Times writes, "It provides a second piece of evidence challenging the Bush administration contention of close cooperation between Mr. Hussein's government and terrorists from Al Qaeda. C.I.A. interrogators have already elicited from the top Qaeda officials in custody that, before the American-led invasion, Osama bin Laden had rejected entreaties from some of his lieutenants to work jointly with Mr. Hussein."

The case for war against Saddam Hussein seems to be completely crumbling around the President.

  (0) comments

$1.5 Billion - Spent Like a Madman 

We're going to spend $1.5 billion dollars to use everything we have to reach one of man's great goals. Boldly flying high, and dreaming of a better tomorrow, we are going to explore the possibilities of reaching these lofty goals. Using the latest in science and technology, this should provide new excitement and energy to an institution that has weathered difficult events in recent years. Our supreme commander is announcing this initiative with great zeal, most likely at the State of the Union Address.

Of course, we're talking about marriage. For low income people.

"For months, administration officials have worked with conservative groups on the proposal, which would provide at least $1.5 billion for training to help couples develop interpersonal skills that sustain 'healthy marriages.'"

Now, we know of course that theis administration has promised many things, and doesn't fund them at all. But this will be different. Really. It will. Not like No Child Left Behind. Or troop benefits. Or anything else. This isn't just a political ploy to further divide the country.

And we aren't going the inexpensive route, either. $1.5 billion is the minimum. We could just get on TV and tell people marriage is important, but that wouldn't funnel more fund to friends.

  (0) comments
Polls polls polls polls. Business Week's web site has the story on the latest results from a Reuters/MSNBC/Zogby tracking poll : "First the facts... Howard Dean in the lead in Iowa with 26%, followed closely by Dick Gephardt at 23%. Dean's narrow lead seems to be holding up despite a barrage of attacks from the also-rans. The second-tier contenders are John Kerry (16%) and John Edwards (12%)."

Reuters reports the same poll with completely different results Here are their results: Dean (24%), Gephardt (21%), Kerry (21%), and Edwards (15%).

Odd. Same poll. How can John Kerry be tied for second with Gephardt at 21% in one poll, and in the same poll have dropped a whopping 5%? You have Edwards jumping three points in one story as reported by Reuters, Dean dropping two points and Gephardt dropping two points.

Business Week reports Edwards falling behind Kerry into fourth place and Howard Dean holding steady in the lead. Reuters story is deceptively titled "Dean Lead Shrinks In Iowa, Kerry Gains". You see the pattern by now I hope.

The media has twisted the presidential primary like every four years into a horse race for the purpose of winning audience ratings, mostly male. The polls are garbage. They serve no purpose other than to make politics look like a Marx Brothers media event.

By the end of the first week of February, all media focus on the Presidential primaries will drop off dramatically. At least 50%. Trust me. Unless Clark wins South Carolina and other key sun-belt states on February 3, he will not arise as the anti-Dean candidate the media so desparately is counting on.

  (0) comments

Tuesday, January 13

President-in-Hiding Cheney Wasn't Doing Anything Wrong 

Everyone is in an uproar (except for the media and the American people) about Cheney. Good 'ol Cheney. He hasn't done anything you wouldn't do if you were a super sleazy mobster-type businessman.

Counterspin makes such a fuss:

"FRENCH FRIED: Dick Cheney is under criminal investigation by French authorities stemming from bribery allegations involving his former company, Halliburton. He might actually end up being indicted."

Don't you see? It was France. It was only 180 million dollars in bribes. Stolen goods. Way back in 1995-2000. It was oil business. You wouldn't understand.

Pay no attention to that judge behind the bench.

  (0) comments

Cheney faces prosecution 

Here's a story you haven't heard a thing about, but not because it's inconsequential to Americans: International news sources have reported that Vice President Dick Cheney could come under criminal investigation for his role in a massive bribery scandal while he was head of Halliburton.

The story has been discussed in French, British, and Australian papers for at least three weeks. On Saturday, the Dallas Morning News became the first major U.S. newspaper to cover the story -- with a front page article, no less. Yet the other 11 of America's 12 highest-circulation daily papers haven't covered Cheney's inclusion in the investigation at all.

For more information about this investigation, read the international news articles assembled by the Center for American Progress in its daily Progress Report:


  (0) comments

Monday, January 12

Keyes Sends His Love 

From former Republican presidential candidate Alan Keyes comes this message of love and optimism:

"Dear Friend of Liberty:

As the national election cycle begins to heat up, some
fine organizations like RightMarch.com have been informing
you about the radical liberal organization, MoveOn.org. Its support for the
hard-left, especially Howard Dean, is assuming dimensions
that are very dangerous to decent politics.

Funded by deep-pocketed leftists like George Soros,
MoveOn.org has been
steadily advancing their hate-filled agenda against the political and
moral conservative Right, buying national TV ads and full-page
ads in nationally-distributed newspapers.

The feisty conservative activist site RightMarch.com has
steadily countered their moves, supported by thousands of
grassroots Americans nationwide like you.

More and more Americans are finally learning just how much
radical leftists lie, and promote hatred and fear, in
order to advance their political programs.

But now MoveOn.org has exceeded
even the left's usual record of indecency, by repeatedly
equating President Bush with Adolph Hitler.

COUNTERED. The political fray is rough, but those in it
MUST be held accountable! Lying, bigoted, hate-mongering
groups like MoveOn.org MUST feel the heat.

Please go to RightMarch.com, and learn what you can do!
Join with hundreds of thousands of other Americans fed up
with the radical left, and fight back against the LIES of
MoveOn with the TRUTH. CLICK BELOW to learn more!"

His e-mail to me, his close personal friend, touched my heart and pocketbook. All the links in his e-mail go straight to a campaign contribution page. "We're not affiliated with any political party -- we're just the "point man" for grassroots conservatives across this great country," he says.

We all know that MoveOn.org did not make or promote any ads about Bush being a new, arrogant, Hitler-type thug bent on world domination, only out for himself and his greedy capitalist pig, Skull and Bones friends, oppressing the common American at every turn while robbing them of money and rights. Those 1/750th of the entries were losers in the contest. Karl Rove submitted the Hitler entry, anyway. Still, it sounds so great, eh? Something to be disgusted at. And I love being disgusted.

(Note: I added links so you could easily ignore MoveOn.org. Don't go there and see those funny TV spots. I spoke to Keyes about them and he admitted that he is jealous that no one has a contest to make thousands of ads about him, hence his hatred of MoveOn.org.

  (0) comments

We'll Tell You When To Worry 

Why even bother with regulatory agencies? They only get in the way, making worrisome claims about "dangers" from "mad cow" and things like that. Who needs 'em?

"'Under a new proposal, the White House would decide what and when the public would be told about an outbreak of mad cow disease, an anthrax release, a nuclear plant accident or any other crisis,' the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports. 'The White House Office of Management and Budget is trying to gain final control over release of emergency declarations from the federal agencies responsible for public health, safety and the environment. "

The White House, which we now permanently own, will decide when you should be worried.

Don't worry.

  (0) comments

"like a blind man in a roomful of deaf people" 

Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill (2001-2002) tells all in a 60 Minutes interview on January 11.

According to CBS News, O'Neill first spoke to the President a week after the January inauguration and found Bush to be nonengaging and silent throughout what O'Neill termed "a monologue" to the President.

In a new book on the Bush White House called "The Price of Royalty" O'Neill shared thousands of national security memos with the author Ron Suskind. Mr. Suskind interviewed hundreds of people, including several cabinet members.

O'Neil was a permanent member of the National Security Council. According to the CBS web site: "He [O'Neill] says in the book he was surprised at the meeting that questions such as "Why Saddam?" and "Why now?" were never asked. "It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this,’" says O’Neill. “For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do, is a really huge leap.”

Two things you can do right now, write to the producers of 60 Minutes and thank them for airing the exclusive story with Paul O'Neill. Go to www.cbsnews.com and at the bottom of the page, click on "feedback". Select 60 Minutes in the dropdown menu and write a few words of thanks to Don Hewitt, creator and producer of the program, for the courage to run the show.

According to MoveOn.org "Since this story broke, the administration has attempted to discredit O'Neill, claiming that 'the treasury secretary is not in the position to have access to that kind of information.' Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist Ron Suskind, who has worked with O'Neill for a year on a book about the Bush White House, calls that allegation "simply wrong," adding, '[O'Neill] got every file from [CIA Director] George Tenet.' Suskind has reviewed nearly 19,000 internal administration documents provided by O'Neil."

  (0) comments

Supreme Court Lining Up To Help Bush Again 

It's just one case. But it is a tip of the hand to the Bush administration, effectively saying "we've got your back."

"The government grabbed people on thin suspicion, then moved to deport detainees who had no demonstrated link to terrorism but who had violated civil immigration laws, lawyers for Martin's Washington-based group argued to the court.

The government sealed immigration records and omitted detainees' names from jail rosters, among other tactics, to make sure that details of hundreds of arrests remained secret, the lawyers said.

The high court's decision not to review the case represents a victory for the Bush administration."

Wouldn't want to do anything to hurt his chance of being vice-president for four more years. Yes, vice-president. He's out doing all the things a VP does, while Cheney, the president, sits in secrecy 98% of the time, running the cabal. Once again, silly Americans, why not ask about the secret, shadow executive branch set up after 9-11 with hundreds of employees? Aren't you even curious?

  (0) comments

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