Seething in the Wilderness - an Online Magazine

Only you can prevent Bill Napoli

2006-03-08T18:41:00.000-05:00

Hey, I'm back! Possibly only for tonight, but we'll see. I'm cross-posting this from my writing blog . Please spread the word.

You're probably all aware that the South Dakota legislature has passed a bill banning abortion even in the case of rape and incest. What you may not have heard yet are the remarks of State Senator Bill Napoli, on what kind of rape victim might qualify for an abortion:

A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life.

I have no comment on his remarks, due to the fact that they struck me speechless. But it's good to know that I, as a non-virgin (sorry, Mom!), won't be messed up, physically and psychologically, in the event of a brutal sexual assault.

So the gals at Smart Bitches Who Love Trashy Novels (SBs for short) decided to do to Bill Napoli what columnist Dan Savage did to PA Senator Rick Santorum, which was to redefine his name to mean, er, something nasty.

The SBs are using a Google bomb, which simply involves having tons of sites linking to a desired page using specific anchor text, so that when someone types Bill Napoli into Google's search engine, the page with this new definition comes up.

At last count on Blogsnow, the SB Bill Bill Napoli page was the eighth most-linked-to page on all of the Internets.

I encourage all bloggers reading this to join us in spreading the word about just how vile Bill Napoli and his type really are. Simply link to this page:

http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/billnapoli/

using the words "Bill Napoli" (without the quote marks) as your anchor text. "Anchor text," if you don't know (and I didn't until just now), is the term for the words you highlight before you click on the "make link" button.

BTW, it doesn't really help to type it several times; I only did it to be obnoxious.

Hiatus

2005-08-22T12:23:00.000-04:00

I'm taking a bit of a break from this blog. Why? Not because I've grown jaded or cynical or tired of all the bullshit the Bush administration is passing around like so many cheap hors d'oeuvres, though at least one of those is true.

I've signed a contract to work on a short-term project for an organization which, while expressly allowing political participation by its employees as long as they act as private citizens, doesn't explicitly mention blogging as one of those permissible forms of participation. Though I'd never mention the organization by name here on the blog, if one of my associates or managers there Googled me and discovered I was still spouting my very public opinions while under their employment...eh, I'd be less than comfortable with that.

It's an ostensibly nonpartisan organization, but I've decided to play it safe, more out of concern for the reputation of the person on whose project I'm assisting than any concern for my own employment. So it's not as if my silence has been purchased (although I'm willing to entertain offers--we could use a new washing machine).

I'll still be blogging over at jerismithready.com. Hope to see you there, and back here again in three to six months. Until then, please patronize the fine people on my blogroll to get your daily doses of vitriolic insights. If you only have time for two, check out Shakespeare's Sister for up-to-the-minute rants, and Nero Fiddled for well-researched, incredibly written essays.

Seethe On, my brothers and sisters. Seethe On.

The Refresher that Pauses

2005-08-12T09:29:00.000-04:00

In honor of all the Back-To-School sales (must they start so early? I'm not even in school anymore and I find them depressing), here's a short geopolitical history course on how we got where we are now, with Iraq, al Qaeda, and the "War on Terror*." This comes courtesy of Juan Cole, professor of history at University of Michigan, whose recent articles in Salon and other periodicals have shed lots of light and perspective on our current foreign policy situations.

Don't worry--the lesson has lots of pictures so you won't fall asleep from all the hot-weather learnin'.

*which, in my experience, we've won. I no longer have Terror. I just have Rage. And I didn't get it from no monkey, neither.

Tolerate this

2005-08-10T11:56:00.000-04:00

Don't believe in abortion? Don't understand gay people? Sexuality make you rashy? Think Harry Potter teaches kids evil and witchcraft? Don't marry a sexy gay witch abortionist. But don't you dare, based on your limited understanding of God and life, make laws declaring that I can't.

Once again, Mark Morford says it the way I wish I could, except with longer sentences. In this week's column he discusses why, when push comes to shove comes to legislation, liberals shouldn't tolerate the intolerable.

Shuttle Fixed!

2005-08-03T10:02:00.000-04:00

Astronaut Steve Robinson performed the first-ever in-flight repair to the space shuttle Discovery last night when he peeled off some loose fiber strips from the orbiter's belly. The NASA folks worried that the hanging pieces would make Discovery less aerodynamic on reentry, causing the surface to overheat.

After returning to the shuttle, Robinson sent his bill via satellite to the Johnson Space Flight Center:

Removal of fiber strips: Parts $0, Labor $3.5 million
Oil Change: Parts $1.7 million, Labor $7.24 million -- Buy five and get one free!
Tire Rotation: Parts $0, Labor $9.1 million
Naked Biker Chicks Calendar to hang on outside of Discovery while working: Parts $14.95, Labor $4,005.34

This is not America

2005-08-02T14:30:00.000-04:00

Hmm, in today's Archive Dig results from September 2004, we find a note about CBS covering up a story on the fake "yellowcake" documents, as well as a pre-election EPA gag order on its employees. All of which caused me to declare us Back in the U.S.S.R.

Where it all began

2005-08-01T14:57:00.000-04:00

In honor of this month's recess, I'm dusting off treasures found in the blogging basement. Today's edition: my vewwy first blog post, a recap of the Republican National Convention, submitted and subsequently rejected by a fictional fiction editor. Enjoy.

Recess!

2005-08-01T08:25:00.000-04:00

DING-A-DING-A-DING-A-DING!

For better or for worse, I've lived in the Washington, DC, area most of my life, and worked in that wretched city one summer (1999, the longest summer in history). The August Congressional recess has become a part of my own natural rhythm. Everything grinds to a halt around here. Even businesses that don't do government work seem to kick back and not worry too much about getting things done.

Before the advent of air conditioning, the recess was intended to allow our representatives to escape the Potomac swampland the nation's capital turns into every summer. By August the air is so fetid, breathing itself becomes a matter of luck. It's almost as bad as New York City.

More important, the recess offers everyone a respite from the toxic swamp gas of politics. Though machinations and manipulations continue behind the scenes in Crawford and Kennebunkport (after all, Karl Rove would cease to exist if he weren't planning the demise of a Democrat), the tide of Washington news stories should ebb for the next few weeks.

I've decided to take a recess from all the crap, too. I've been blogging more or less every day for nearly a year, venting my opnions on the outrage of the hour. This Administration provides so much good material, it's hard to stop.

But August is a good time to slow down and reacquaint oneself with the things in life that don't drive us crazy. Embrace the inactivity, the boredom. Have a big glass of lemonade or iced tea, a cold bottle of beer or frozen margarita. At least once a day, eat a snowball, Italian ice, slushy, snow cone--whatever they call it in your parts.

August is the yin to the rest of the year's yang. Revel in it.

Besides, we need time to replenish our Reservoirs of Rancor for the coming year: Supreme Court nominee hearings, Karl Rove's frogwalk, and the continuing Operation Charlie Foxtrot in Iraq (it's too bad war can't take a recess).

Though it's only been a year, I thought it'd be fun to dig into the archives and pull out some tasty bits of 2004. Check back here every day or so for a stumble down Memory Lane. Some politics, some nonsense, some Yankee-bashing...

If you can't get enough o' my love, stop by my personal/writing blog, which I plan to update daily.

Stay cool, Seethers, and I'll see you in September.

Birth control couldn't prevent Rick Santorum

2005-07-29T20:27:00.000-04:00

Of the delights of this world man cares most for sexual intercourse, yet he has left it out of his heaven.
--Mark Twain

This week I've been pretty self-absorbed, posting mainly on my personal/writing blog, not getting too riled up over any one headline enough to blog about it.

That all changed a few minutes ago, when I saw this bit (via Pandagon) about PA Senator Rick Santorum's latest edict on What's Good for Women (since he's the expert and all):

I don't think [birth control] works. I think it's harmful to women, I think it's harmful to our society to have a society that says that sex outside of marriage is something that should be encouraged or tolerated, particularly among the young. I think it has, as we've seen, very harmful long-term consequences for society. So birth control to me enables that and I don't think it's a healthy thing for our country.

Because sex, Ladies and Girls, is a bad, bad thing, and if you do it, you should be made to suffer the curse of babies. Except, we love babies, so sex is a good thing, because it makes babies. Babies are good, but sex is bad. Wait, I've got it: Sex without babies is bad, and sex with babies is good. No, no, that sounds perverted. I'll try again:

People, especially the young ones, shouldn't have sex, unless they're married. So young people should get married as soon as possible so they can have sex and babies. Babies are good for women! The more the better! Because the more babies you have, the less likely you are to have sex. And remember, sex is bad. It's the worst thing that can possibly happen to you.

(If you're Rick Santorum's wife, that is.)

Seriously now. You know what's harmful to women, Rick? Life-hating, self-flagellating Puritanism like yours. The conviction that anything that brings us happiness must also bring us pain. The delusion that God would create earthly pleasures only to make us miserable, to tempt us into defying His will so that He could hurl our souls into the lake of fire for all eternity. Nothing harms women more than living in the Shadow of Eve.

As a gender, we've grown out of that trap, thanks in large part to birth control. Santorum wants us to suffer for sex, the way we did in the good old days, when women would die in childbirth or risky abortion attempts, and then the man could go out and get a brand-new baby vessel--I mean, wife.

Over There

2005-07-29T17:45:00.000-04:00

We watched the pilot of this new dramatic series Wednesday night at 10. Though it didn't go into the politics of the war in Iraq, it didn't need to. Just seeing what the soldiers and their loved ones on the home front have to suffer through should make anyone ask, "Is it worth it?"

If you missed it, FX will rerun the pilot tomorrow (Saturday) at 10PM. FX is a regular cable station (not premium like HBO), so it should be available everywhere.

Some of the war "footage" is pretty grisly (one image in particular will live in your mind forever--you'll know it when you see it), but if you can hack it, I highly recommend this show.

Numbskulls to the North

2005-07-27T08:42:00.000-04:00

It turns out that being Canadian doesn't mean you're not an idiot.

The Rotary Club of Chatham, in Miramichi, New Brunswick, is planning to build a new "eco-centre" to raise environmental awareness. Their fundraiser for this noble project is a raffle.

The raffle prize: a HUMVEE. The Club sees no irony in the fact that anyone with environmental awareness wouldn't be caught dead in a Hummer, unless they were driving it off a cliff to save the world from its emissions.

"It's not any more a gas guzzler than anything that's out on the highway now," [Rotary member Leon] Bremner said. "I've had plenty of people that say they'll get better gas mileage with this Hummer than they will their vehicle."

Well, okay, assuming that this is their current vehicle.

Cross your fingers

2005-07-26T06:54:00.000-04:00

If all goes well, the space shuttle Discovery will launch this morning at 10:39 EDT. Chance of good weather: 80%.

Cross those toes while you're at it. It's good exercise.

A brief bwahaha

2005-07-25T13:11:00.000-04:00

Busy with work. Have headache. Can't blog.

So here's your homework for today, class:

Type "failure" (with or without quotes) into Google's search bar.

Still more Downing Street cartoons

2005-07-22T08:46:00.000-04:00

In honor of tomorrow's three-year anniversary of the original Downing Street Minutes (the first ones that were leaked, at least), we Big Brass Alliance members are making sure people don't forget. As Paul the Spud at Shakespeare's Sister says:

With the Rove Carnival 'o Fun, the Supreme Court Nominee from Mattel, and the second attack in London, there's a lot going on in the news right now. The Memo has been pushed to the end of the line... not forgotten, but definitely edging towards the lip of the memory hole.

All across the nation tomorrow, groups will be holding house parties and rallies to raise awareness and remind people how and why we got into this unnecessary, unjust, and destructive war. The Rove/Plame affair, rather than being a distraction, only serves to remind us how desperate the Administration was to bamboozle the country into believing Saddam posed a serious and imminent threat. Check out AfterDowningStreet.org for events in your area.

With that, I'll fulfill my unofficial role as the BBA 'Toon Scout and dish up some new political funnies. Unfortunately, since the topic has cooled off from the front pages, it's also lost the attention of the cartoonists, but here's a few from late last month.

Hail, Dubyus! at Salon.com takes a look at last month's "Primesident Blush" press conference.

The San Francisco Chronicle's Tom Meyer draws an unlikely parallel between Bush and Michael Jackson.

It's not a cartoon, but Too Stupid to be President gives us the Top 11 Reasons to Ignore the Downing Street Memo.

If you're new here, check out my last segment on Downing Street Minutes cartoons, and the one before that. And get to one of those rallies if you can.

Wait and See

2005-07-21T08:07:00.000-04:00

I try not to be a ditto-head, but several others have already expressed my views on the new nominee for the Supreme Court. In case you care what they are, see this Baltimore Sun editorial, or Kos and Jeralyn's posts from Tuesday night.

The legal arguments he made while working for the Government or as a corporate lawyer may or may not reflect his personal values, or how he would rule as a Supreme Court Justice.

I'd like to know more about him before I make up my mind. I don't think it helps that liberal groups are coming out swinging so soon. It has the appearance that they would oppose anyone Bush would nominate. --Jeralyn, Talk Left

(Thanks to The Impolitic for those last two links.)

Scott Adams, political cartoonist

2005-07-21T08:05:00.000-04:00

He may not realize it, but Dilbert has gone to work at the White House.

Bug me not

2005-07-20T20:34:00.000-04:00

I've never put any stock in the Bush Administration's "flypaper theory"--wherein we "fight the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here."

First of all, I want the government to fight the terrorists here--as in, improve homeland security to prevent another attack.

Second, there are many potential terrorists already living in the U.S., and us bombing Iraq is not going to dissuade them from their mission.

Third, we're creating more terrorists through our war in Iraq.

So I'd like to propose what I call the "Bug Zapper Theory" (Patent pending). Remember those heinous electric contraptions that families--okay, dads--used to hang in the backyard to kill insects? While those gathered on the patio try to enjoy their burgers or roasted marshmallows, every half-minute or so a resounding --ZZZZZZZTT!-- would emanate from the zapper, signaling the death-by-frying of a "bad guy." We'd all feel safer, imagining the roasted critter to be a malaria-wielding mosquito or bubonic plague-toting gnat.

A professor of entomology at Rutgers University notes what we all--except our dads--eventually figured out: the zappers are ineffective and tended to kill mostly harmless bugs:

Scientific studies indicate that mosquitoes make up a very small percentage of bug zapper collections. Comparison trapping has also shown no significant difference in mosquito populations in yards with and without the traps. Biting insects, in general, make up less than 1 percent of the insects killed in zappers. Unfortunately, beneficial insects are usually well represented in an average night's catch. The continued popularity of these traps is probably due to the never-ending sound effects, which remind owners that their investment is working. Most trap operators are unaware that their zappers are killing harmless insects that would otherwise serve as food for wildlife.

Lifetips: The Online Owner's Manual for Your Life describes more fallacies of bug zappers:

Female mosquitos (the ones that bite) are attracted to carbon dioxide and body heat (two indicators of fresh blood), not light, so a zapper won't even address the real problem.
Many of the zapped insects feed on mosquitos.
When zapped, the bugs explode into thousands of tiny particles that may contain bacteria and viruses.

So what it comes down to is this: bug zappers (military invasions) do little to address mosquitos (terrorism) and in fact end up destroying populations that are not only innocent but are also one of the best weapons against the beasts themselves. Not only do zappers not solve the problem, they exacerbate it.

Yet people still buy these products because it makes them feel like they're taking action, like they're fighting them "over there" (near the clothesline) so they don't have to fight them "here" (on the picnic table).

They relish the sounds and sights of death, any death, because in their tiny little minds, all insects are bad. Who cares if a few moths (or a few hundred moths) bite the dust? Collateral damage! Who cares if the kids get sick from breathing fly guts? They knew the risks when they signed up! Who cares if more mosquitos thrive as a result? More mosquitos means more mosquitos to kill! Yeeeeeeeee-haaaaa!

This War on Skeeters is hard work, dangit. We won't let any of those pansy-assed "experts" question our tactics. All Americans need is the sound of exploding bugs to tell us we're on the right track.

POP! CRACKLE! ZZZZZZZTTTT! We're Number One!

Untouchable--I hope

2005-07-20T07:43:00.000-04:00

The Baltimore Sun did a nice feature on Patrick Fitzgerald, the Special Prosecutor in the investigation of the Valerie Plame leak.

"At a certain point, we have to yield to law because if we don't, we're lost," Fitzgerald told a judge this month, on the day New York Times reporter Judith Miller went to jail at his request for refusing to testify about her sources.

Whether you agree with his decision to jail Miller or not, one has to admire his Elliot Ness-esque tenacity and adherence to principle. Fitzgerald indicted Osama bin Laden in 1998 and in 1994 sent New York Mafia boss John Gambino to prison.

People on both sides of the party lines seem to have confidence that he'll get to the bottom of these shenanigans, and that he's of an independent mind. And after all, the Bush Administration is cooperating fully with the ongoing investigation.

Wait--where have I heard that last line?

Bush nominates some guy

2005-07-19T20:49:00.000-04:00

Well, that's what Laura gets for opening her little mouth. Last week she told the press that she hoped he would nominate a woman to the Supreme Court. As recently this morning a female name was being circulated, that of appeals judge Edith Clement. Others hoped he would select a minority candidate.

But just now Bush nominated 50-year-old white guy John G. Roberts Jr. That's right: 50 years old. Practically in diapers. He could be around for the next three decades.

According to this AP article:

Roberts did co-write a brief that stated, "We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled." Pressed during his 2003 confirmation hearing for his own views on the matter, Roberts said: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

So at least when everyone's looking, he's not an anti-choice fetus freak. He's considered one of Bush's "non-controversial" choices. But according to Shakespeare's Sister,

Roberts has quite a significant history in trying to undermine abortion rights, including, under the first Bush administration, co-authoring a Supreme Court brief as Deputy Solicitor General for Rust v. Sullivan which argued for the government’s ability to prohibit doctors in federally-funded family planning programs from discussing abortions with their patients.

Among Roberts’ other writings can be found articles in support of a more expansive reading of the Contracts and Taking clauses of the Constitution, holding positions that would restrict Congress’ means for environmental protection.

As far as Bush and apparently most of the Senate is concerned, as long as a judge isn't personally polluting our rivers with the bodies of dead abortion doctors, he's non-controversial.

Hmm, time to go watch Bush's speech. Or, I could just rip out my toenails one by one with a pair of pliers.

Monday's press briefing

2005-07-18T15:04:00.000-04:00

Again, anything not in brackets is a direct quote:

>>>>>>>

Terence Hunt, Associated Press: The President seemed to raise the bar and add a qualifier today when discussing whether or not anybody would be dismissed for the leak of a CIA officer’s name, in which he said if someone was found to have committed a crime, they would be no longer working in this Administration. That’s never been part of the standard before. Why is that added now?

Scott McClellan: I disagree, Terry. I think the President was stating what is obvious when it comes to people who work in the Administration. When someone commits a crime, they’re not gonna be working any longer in this Administration. Now the President talked about how it’s important for us to learn all the facts. We don’t know all the facts. It’s important that we not pre-judge the outcome of the investigation. We need to let the investigation continue, and the investigators are the ones in the position to gather all the facts and draw the conclusions, and at that point we’ll be more than happy to talk about it as I indicated last week. The President directed the WH to cooperate fully, and that’s what we’ve been doing.

[got tired of typing bullshit here. Sorry.]

TH: You had said that anyone involved in this would no longer be in this Administration. You didn’t say, ‘anybody who had committed a crime.’ You had said Sept 2003 that anyone involved in this would no longer be in this Administration.

SM: [I know what I said. Don’t read into anything more than what the President said.] And I think that’s something you might be trying to do here.

[Ed. Note: OOOOOOH! Scotty, you butch, you!]

NBC (but not David Gregory): Does the President equate the word ‘leaking’ to a crime, as best you know, in his mind? Just the use of the word ‘leaking,’ does he see that as a criminal standard, and is the only threshold for firing someone involved being charged with a crime?

SM: We all serve at the pleasure of the President at this WH. You heard what the President had to say on the matter.

NBC: Is leaking, in your judgment of his interpretation, a crime?

SM: I’ll leave it at what the President said.

Helen Thomas: Two years and he can’t call Rove in and find out what the hell’s going on?

SM: Helen—

HT: Why is it so difficult to find out the facts? It cost thousands, maybe millions of dollars, two years, tied up how many lawyers. All he’s gotta do is call him in.

SM: You just heard the President. He doesn’t know all the facts. I don’t know all the facts.

HT: Why? Why doesn’t he just ask him--

SM: All right, I’ll tell you why. Because there’s an investigation that is continuing at this point, and there are appropriate people to handle these issues are the ones who are overseeing that investigation [blah blah].

HT: You talked about it with reporters.

ABC (but not Terry Moran): We don’t know all the facts, but we know some of the facts. That is, we know that Matthew Cooper did speak to Karl Rove and Lewis Libby about these issues. So given the fact that you had previously stood at that podium and said these men did not discuss Valerie Plame or a CIA agent’s identity in any way. Does the WH have a credibility problem?

SM: No. You just answered your own question when you said we don’t know all the facts. [don’t pre-judge the outcome]

ABC: On the specifics, you made statements that have proven to be untrue.

SM: [same bullshit, but said more forcefully, plus saying that the President has faith in the American people. Gee, thanks.]

Bob Franken, CNN: Given the new formulation that if somebody committed a crime, now would that be a crime as determined by an indictment or a crime as determined by a conviction?

SM: [gets testy, has nothing to add]

BF: The importance is, if it is the latter, the strategy would be to run out the clock.

SM: [we all serve at the pleasure of the President, we’re cooperating with investigators]

April Ryan, American Urban Radio: Going back to the President’s statements from earlier, ‘if someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my Administration,’ it makes me go back to my question last Wednesday: is there regret from this Administration as to what has this done to the Wilson family with the CIA leak? I talked to Mr. Wilson prior to going into the East Room, and he basically said, ‘The American people deserve an apology,’ and that his family is basically collateral damage in a bigger picture.

SM: All these questions are getting into pre-judging the outcome of the investigation, and we’re not gonna do that.

AR: The President acknowledged that there was a problem, and it could be a criminal problem. If he acknowledged that, isn’t there some sort of regret?

SM: It’s a criminal investigation.

AR: Is there regret from this White House that it has caused an American family who works for this government to have—

SM: I’ve heard what you have to say, and I’ve already answered.

Ed Chen, LA Times: The President talked about if a crime were committed, but a year ago and beyond, he denounced leaks out of this executive branch and other parts of Washington, he said, ‘this is wrong.’ If it’s only a leak, will he take some appropriate action?

SM: Look back at what the President said. [etc.]

[Goyal from Asia Times—always good for a change in subject–asks about the Indian PM’s visit]

Carl Cameron, Fox News: You’re telling us that we shouldn’t read anything new into the President’s comments today. Should we then take that to mean that if there was criminal activity that person would be fired, but this does not render inoperative those things that the President has said yes or responded affirmative to in the past when asked for instance if he would fire someone involved in a leak?

SM: I wouldn’t read anything into it beyond what he said.

CC: Do the previous statements remain operative?

SM: [We’ll talk about it after the investigation is over]

Lester Kinsolving, WCBM Baltimore: Jack Kelley in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette notes that the Intelligence Identities Protection Act defines a covert agent as someone working undercover overseas. He notes Valerie Plame has manned a desk at the CIA HQ since 1997. Mark Stein of the Chicago Sun-Times notes that Valerie’s husband conceded on CNN that she is not a clandestine officer and hasn’t been one for six years, so leaking her CIA connection did not endanger her life or comprise her mission. Would you or the President or Karl Rove disagree with these two nationally syndicated columnists?

SM: [I’ve said all there is to say]

LK: 19 members of Congress from seven states have written a letter to the President saying that they are still waiting for an answer to a May 26 question: is the President opposed to contraception? Could they now have an answer to my question, do you regard them, too, not to be dignified with a response?

SM: [We’ve talked about federally funded programs that promote abstinence and how those ought to be funded on at least equal footing with other programs]

David?, from?: Scott, with apologies for coming back to this definitional issue that we seem to be dancing around, what I’m having a hard time with is, you’re telling us that there was nothing new in what the President said today, yet you have said before that the President would fire someone if they were involved in the leak. The President seemed to set a higher bar today, if they were convicted of a criminal act. Those are not the same thing on their face.

SM: [don’t read anything more than what he said]

D: Is the WH standard the one the President enunciated, then?

SM: I think I’ve addressed that question.

Victoria Jones, Talk Radio News Service: Backing up to October 2003, you did assure us that you had talked with Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, and Elliot Abrams, and they all assured you they weren’t involved in any of this. So with regard to Libby and Abrams, do you still stand by that?

SM: [ongoing investigation, can’t comment]

VJ: With regard to that, how concerned is the President and you, notwithstanding that you don’t want to talk about it, that Ken Mehlman and other senior Republicans are all over the airwaves doing just that?

SM: You can direct those questions to the RNC.

----

At this point, my hands started to cramp up, and I have to get my cat to the vet, so I had to stop, but it was basically more of the same after this. I would say at least 75% of the questions asked today had to do with Rove. Whenever Scotty was asked a question on another topic, he rambled on and on to kill time. The entire briefing was only 23 minutes, shorter than the usual half-hour.

UPDATE: The cat is fine.

Schieffer rips Bush a new one

2005-07-18T13:50:00.000-04:00

Bush Administration toady Bob Schieffer of CBS got all uppity yesterday with a statement excoriating the President.

Instead of appointing a special prosecutor, what if the President had just called in his top people in the beginning of all this and said, 'Folks, we have a problem here. I need to know who's been talking to Bob Novak, and I need to know today by the end of business.'

The very idea of Bush doing something like that gives me the giggles. I mean, can you imagine? "I want to know the truth, dangit. We need to be upfront with the American people. Our credibility could be questioned. I vowed to restore decency and integrity to this White House, and that means no lying allowed!"

Yeah, even I don't have that kind of imagination. Anyway, Schieffer talks about how Johnson and Nixon knew what was going on their Administrations.

[T]his White House did what it usually does when challenged: it went into attack mode, called charges that White House officials had leaked the name "ridiculous," and allowed the controversy to boil until a special prosecutor had to be appointed. Now two years and millions of tax dollars later, the President's trusted friend and strategist Karl Rove has emerged as the top suspect, and we're left to wonder: Can anything said from the White House podium be taken at face value, or does the White House just deny automatically anything that reflects badly on it?

In a word: duh.

Thanks to Crooks and Liars for the heads-up and video.

Lest we forget

2005-07-18T08:55:00.000-04:00

Mr. Wilson, his mission to Niger to check out Saddam's supposed attempts to secure uranium that might be used in nuclear weapons and even his wife's outing have as much to do with the real story here as Janet Leigh's theft of office cash has to do with the mayhem that ensues at the Bates Motel in "Psycho."
--Frank Rich, op-editorial, New York Times

Read the rest before it goes yonder beyond the pay-wall. I'm too sleepy to expound much, but Rich reminds us that, just like Watergate was about Nixon, this whole hoo-ha is about the Bush--and most importantly, I would add, about Bush and his stupid, evil, pointless War. The one he thought would give him political capital. The one he lied to drum up support for. The one which, studies show, has created more brand-new terrorists bent on killing Americans and our allies. It wasn't Rove's idea to invade Iraq.

Let's never forget that while Karl Rove may be a cunning, power-hungry weasel, he appears to be completely sane, unlike our President. (Thanks to Noah at Nero Fiddled for that link.)

The Ultimate Question

2005-07-18T08:31:00.000-04:00

...of Life, the Universe, and Everything:

What is Bush's latest approval rating?

A good sign

2005-07-15T17:07:00.000-04:00

Jesus has bad Punctuation and Random Capitalization, so do We.

See, I'm an equal opportunity ridiculer.

It's not the same

2005-07-15T17:01:00.000-04:00

Sorry, I just can't work myself into a frenzy of sardonicism over Trent Duffy, who led today's Press Gaggle aboard Air Force We're-Number-One. The press did ask about Rove but since it was McClellan and not Duffy who repeatedly lied to them about the senior White House official's involvement in the Plame leak, they weren't as deliciously snide this morning. Or maybe the lunch was just extra yummy.

In other news, our dog killed a rabbit last night, the first one in the two years we've lived here that could actually run away from her (plucking nestlings out of a hole like cookies from a jar just doesn't count as hunting in my book). Let's just say there's a reason why she retired early from racing.

Gaggle me

2005-07-15T12:46:00.000-04:00

No press briefing took place yesterday, as Scott McClellan was on Air Force One en route to Indianapolis with the President, as Bush once again found time to speak to someone other than the NAACP.

But Scotty did hold a gaggle on board the big airplane. No video, but read the transcript at the White House press site, if you dare soil your navigation bar with their URL.

Looks like the press grilled him again about Rove (emphasis all mine, mine mine!):
>>>>

Q Will Karl come back and talk to us at the event?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I don't expect that today.

Q Why not?

MR. McCLELLAN: I just don't -- there's no plans for him to do that.

Q How long is he going to stay on the staff?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think I expressed the President's views yesterday, when it comes to Karl.

Q Remind me, how long is he going to stay on the staff?

MR. McCLELLAN: That's a nice try to keep bringing up questions relating to media reports about an ongoing investigation. As the President indicated yesterday, we are not going to prejudge an ongoing investigation based on media reports. The President directed the White House to cooperate fully, and that's what we've been working to do. And we will be more than happy to talk about the investigation after it is completed.

But the President -- I again made clear yesterday that when it comes to the President's confidence in Karl and his support for him, I made clear our views.

Q Does the President believe it's appropriate for the RNC to continue to weigh in on this matter? They put out another memo today, with a top-10 Joseph Wilson lies. If indeed it's an ongoing investigation and it's improper for the White House to discuss it, does he think it's proper for the Republican Party to weigh in on it?

MR. McCLELLAN: You know, Geoff, I appreciate the question, and as you heard me say yesterday, we are not going to prejudge the outcome of the investigation based on media reports. And I'm not going to get into --

Q What about the RNC, though, Scott?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I said, I'm not going to get into discussing matters relating to an ongoing investigation. We'll let the investigation come to a conclusion, and then I'll be more than happy to talk about it, as will the President.

Q Does the President -- did he yesterday get his --

MR. McCLELLAN: What I'm telling you is that those are all questions relating to an ongoing investigation.

Q Did the President get his news yesterday about Justice Rehnquist's health from media reports?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, Andy Card and I did, and Andy Card and I informed the President in the Oval Office yesterday, shortly after the news reports came out. I think that that was the case previously, when the Chief Justice went into the hospital, we didn't have any advance notification either.

Q So why is it acceptable for him to base his information about the Chief Justice's health on news reports, but not about an investigation within the West Wing? What's the distinction there?

MR. McCLELLAN: Oh, I think there's a lot of distinctions there. This is relating to an ongoing criminal investigation. There are clear distinctions in that. That's a nice try to get us to discuss an ongoing investigation, but I think we need to let that investigation continue.

Q Let me just try one last thing, Scott, because I wasn't here yesterday.

MR. McCLELLAN: Hang on, hang on. I'll come to your question, Geoff. I'd like an opportunity to be able to talk before you all jump in, too.

We have said for quite some time that this is an ongoing investigation, and that we weren't going to get into discussing it. So that's not something that's new as of this week.

Q But should the RNC be talking about it?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I said yesterday, and we have been through a couple of days of questions relating to this investigation, I said I'm happy to talk about it once it's over, but until that time, we'll let the investigation continue.

Q How about Wilson? He was on the shows --

MR. McCLELLAN: We're trying to be helpful to its coming to a successful conclusion.

Q Wilson was on the shows today. He basically said there was a massive cover-up being conducted by the White House, and that Rove should be fired. What do you say to Wilson?

MR. McCLELLAN: The President said we're not going to get into prejudging the outcome of an ongoing investigation, based on media reports and --

Q I'm talking about Wilson, I'm not talking about the investigation.

MR. McCLELLAN: We'll let the investigation continue and come to a conclusion, and then we'll be happy to talk about it at that point. But these -- Adam, these are all questions relating to an ongoing investigation, and I indicated yesterday that there's really nothing more to add to what we've already said.
>>>>

I'll blog today's briefing, if it occurs, but otherwise I'll catch you tomorrow with any fun news stories that pop up when they think no one's paying attention--what I call the "Saturday Morning Sneakies." Must do that work thing now.

A Little Reflection

2005-07-14T18:11:00.000-04:00

Since my hands aren't all tuckered out tonight from blogging the WH press briefing, of which there was none today (I won't speculate why, because it's not the first day even in the last few weeks that they've skipped a day), I wanted to step back and think a little bit about the issues involved, not just the show we've all been enjoying so heartily.

Former Press Secretary Mike McCurry, the poor sap who had to stand at the podium and repeat "ongoing investigation" during the Clinton-Lewinsky days, wrote an interesting essay for The Huffington Post.

McCurry points out that there's an awful lot of Sturm und Drang (that's German for "shit storm") over this case if all it consists of is one two-minute conversation between Karl Rove and Matthew Cooper.

Unless conversations go well beyond what has been reported, there has to be some other explanation for the zeal with which this investigation is being pursued. Something consequential must have happened because of this leak that we have not yet read about. That's about all I can imagine, because otherwise the whole thing -- leak, story, investigation -- seems a little disproportionate. Maybe a major intelligence operation got botched. Or someone took a real hit somewhere in the world as a result.

He makes a good point I was thinking about this morning driving to work, listening to David Keane of the American Conservative Union shovel the RNC Talking Points manure on the Diane Rehm Show. We may never know the real consequences of this leak if those consequences are classified, a real matter of national security.

McCurry also brings us back to the person who should bear the most scrutiny:

White House press secretaries and deputy chiefs of staff are hired hands. We serve only because it suits the President at that moment. In the end, questions about war and peace, questions about motive and action have to be answered by the President because he is the one who we elected.

Much as we'd like to tout Rove as "Bush's Brain," there's only one actual President. Luckily, the American public seems to understand there's more than one liar in the White House.

You're on your own

2005-07-14T08:16:00.000-04:00

Due to work travel, I won't be able to blog on the WH press briefing today, but I predict spitballs, the passing of notes, and some reporter jamming to Eminem on his headphones in the back row, as Scotty tries to keep order both in the press room and inside his ever-withering soul.

UPDATE (6:05 PM): I guess they knew I wasn't watching, so they didn't bother. Wow, the world really does revolve around me. Wicked.

Fighting Fire with Water

2005-07-13T16:21:00.000-04:00

The drenching Water of Debunkery, that is. The soaking, roiling, basement-flooding Water of Truth. The splashing, spattering, mildew-causing--okay, I'll stop. It's a bit humid here today, can you tell?

Check out eriposte's comprehensive, point-by-point refutation of the GOP's Talking Points concerning how the treasonous Karl Rove didn't leak Valerie Plame's identity, and if he did, he should get a medal for it. Here at The Left Coaster.

Kudos to eriposte: Battling bastardry one lie at a time.

And thanks to Shakespeare's Sister for the heads-up.

Scott McClellan, Hapless High School Teacher

2005-07-13T14:57:00.000-04:00

(patting stomach) It may not look like it, but there’s a little flesh that’s been taken out of me the last few days. – Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 7/13/05 press briefing

The class is getting out of control. What follows is more or less a transcript, but only of the Rove-oriented questions. I have a job, after all, I don't have time to type it all in when someone else is going to do it, anyway. Anything not in brackets is a direct quote. My favorite parts are highlighted. Also, sorry for any typos.

--------

Terence Hunt, AP: Were some White House advisors surprised that the President did and did not give a warm endorsement to Karl Rove when he was asked about him at the Cabinet meeting? Can you explain why the President didn't express confidence?

SM: [usual reply]

TH: The President has never been restrained to stay right in the lines of a question. He says whatever he wants. If he had wanted to express confidence in Karl Rove, he would have.

Scott McClellan: But he wasn't asked that specific question.

David Gregory, NBC: But he defended Al Gonzales without ever being asked...
In a previous administration, if the Press Secretary had given the kind of answers that you've just given, referring to the fact that everyone who works here has the confidence of the President, the Republicans would have hammered them as having a kind of legalistic, sleazy defense. The reality is, you're parsing words, and you've been doing it for a few days now. So does the President think that Karl Rove did something wrong or doesn't he?"

SM: No, I'm not at all. We don't want to pre-judge the outcome of an ongoing investigation. We've been going around and around for two days now.

DG: Even if it wasn't a crime. There are those who believe that even if Karl Rove was trying to debunk bogus information, as Ken Mehlman suggested yesterday, perhaps speaking on behalf of the White House, that when you're dealing with a covert operative, that a senior official of the government should be darn well sure that that person is not undercover, is not covert before speaking about them in any way, shape or form. Does the President agree with that or not?

SM: Now again, we’ve been round and round on this for a couple of days now.

DG: Different question. It’s not round and round.

SM: no, you’ve heard from the President earlier today—

DG: This has nothing to do with the investigation, Scott and you know it.

Scott McClellan: --and the President said—

DG: Answer my question. It has nothing to do with the investigation. Is it appropriate for a senior official to speak about a covert agent in any way, shape, or form without first finding out whether that person is working undercover?

SM: First of all, you’re wrong, this is all relating to questions about an ongoing investigation.

DG: if I wanted to ask about an ongoing investigation, I would ask you about the statute. I’m not doing that.

SM: I think we’ve exhausted the discussion.

DG: We haven’t even scratched the surface.

(someone else): We haven’t even started.

SzM: I look forward to talking about it once the investigation is complete. The President does as well, and you heard form the President earlier today

John Roberts, CBS: Can I just get a clarification on something the President said on June 2004 on Sea Island. What were the parameters for those consequences? Would it be a knowing leak with the intent of doing damage?

SM: I have nothing to add on this discussion.

David ?: Scott, when the President was asked that question at Sea Island, and in fact when you made your statement that Karl had nothing to do with this, was there an ongoing investigation at that time?

Scott McClellan: Again, we’ve been through this for two days now, and I’ve already responded to those questions.

David ?: I’m sorry, I wasn’t here yesterday. Could you refresh my memory?
[this is when it really starts to feel like a HS class room]

Scott McClellan: The briefings are available online.

April Ryan, American Urban Radio: I’m going to ask another question, somewhat on the same subject
[Scott McClellan closes his eyes here in pain, or maybe that was just my freeze frame as I paused it.]
but in a different vein. Let’s talk about the Wilson family. Is there any regret from this White House about the effects of this leak on this family?

Scott McClellan: We can continue to go around and around on this.

AR: No, no, nothing about the investigation. This is about the leak and the effects on this family. [she’s pissed] I mean, granted, there are partisan politics being played, but let’s talk about the leak that came from the White House that affected a family.

Scott McClellan: [ongoing investigation spiel]

AR: This is not about the investigation; this is about the personal business of this family, an American family, a taxpaying family, a family that works for the United States Government. And someone in the executive branch let this family down. Is there any regret from the White House that this family was affected by the leak?

Scott McClellan: That doesn’t change what I just said.

(Ghobal from India Times/Asia Today asks question here on China, then homeland security)

[Spreading freedom, fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here, ideological struggle, SSDD.]

TH notes that Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith apparently is leaving the DoD and, of all people, he’s criticizing the way the Iraq war is being conducted, apparently in an interview with WaPo. He’s the highest administration official to criticize. Does the President know this?

Scott McClellan: [Didn’t come up at Cabinet meeting. War is hard.]

??: Secretary Rumsfeld has in the past told Congress when under fire from certain members that he has in fact offered his resignation and the President has in fact rejected that idea and said, “No, I’d like you to stay on. Is the same true of Karl Rove, in the context of offering a resignation or offering to take a leave of absence, and how has the President responded?

Scott McClellan: I think I’ve made the President’s views on Karl very clear and his support for all those who work at the White House, including Karl Rove.

??(same lady): The President has supported Karl publicly, but I guess what I’m asking is, has Karl Rove, as a courtesy, offered to the President that?

Scott McClellan: And again, these are some of the same questions that have been coming up over the last couple of days, and I don’t have anything to add while this investigation is ongoing. But I think the President’s views are very clear when it comes to Karl Rove and others who work here at the White House.

Jessica?: One person at least has said when after being interviewed by the special prosecutor has been asked not to discuss the substance of their interview but was free to talk about this investigation more broadly. So my question is, has the White House been asked by the Special Prosecutor not to talk about specific testimony or to discuss nothing about this at all?

Scott McClellan: these questions came up the last couple of days, and again. I want to [pregnant pause] help the investigation proceed and come to a successful conclusion. And the best way to do that is, as I’ve said, not only the last couple of days, but going back the last two years [huh?] is to not get into discussing the investigation from this podium.

AR: In Africa, Mrs. Bush says, “Karl Rove is a very good friend of mine. I’ve known him for years.” And she’s not going to speculate on any other part of the case. Does the President feel the same way about Karl Rove.

Scott McClellan: Yes, he does.

AR: At this point, is it ebbing or flowing, is that relationship ebbing or flowing?

[laughter]

Scott McClellan: Again, this is a creative way to come at the same question.

[The last question had to do with the space shuttle launch today. As McClellan leaves the room, in another great unscripted moment, someone shouts:

"Will Karl be on the shuttle?"*

Everyone laughs. Someone else quips, "He'll be on the mission to Mars."

I think Scotty will have to send some of these bad boys and girls to the principal's office.

---
UPDATE: They've scrapped Discovery's launch for today, so he still has a chance to get on board.

Dance, Scotty, Dance!!

2005-07-12T14:01:00.000-04:00

No time for another press briefing reenactment today; I'll just do a up-to-the-minute report on today's briefing, which was entertaining, to say the least. By this point the WH press corps knows that McClellan's not going to answer their questions about Karl Rove and the Valerie Plame leak, but they're still firing bullets at his feet to make him jig.

This isn't a transcript, which would be pointless, considering Scotty just repeats the same reply to each question (no comment because of the ongoing investigation; any individual working here at the White House has the confidence of the President), so I'll just relate who asked what (note: the questions are paraphrases only, except where there are quotes), in chronological order:

John Roberts, CBS:
Has anyone considered revoking Karl Rove's security clearance?

David Gregory, NBC:
Does the President retain confidence in Karl Rove?
How do you reconcile the two contradictory statements regarding Rove's involvement in the leak?
What was Karl Rove trying to accomplish with the leak and does Bush think it was fair to do that?

Terry Moran, ABC:
(to McClellan's protests about not being able to comment on legal aspects of an ongoing investigation)
"There's a difference between what's legal and what's right."
Moran then points out the fact that even though the White House refuses to comment directly to the press, the Republican National Committee and other "surrogates" have put out "Talking Points" regarding Rove's conversations. Moran calls Fox News a "friendly news channel" to the White House (Ouch!) and says that on Fox, Bill Kristol characterized the conversation a two-minute telephone call about welfare reform.

John Roberts: Do you stand by your statement of last year when you said Rove had nothing to do with the leak?
Scott: I look forward to talking about that.
John: "Should we take that as a yes or a no?"

Dick ??, from ??: Why did the President break with his tradition this morning of taking two questions from American reporters during his meeting with the leader of Singapore? If he had been asked about Karl Rove, what would he have said? [update: Bush was asked about it this morning, and he ignored the question. He needs dancing lessons from Scotty.]

Bob Franken, CNN: Is Karl Rove an impediment or distraction from the White House's efforts to advance its agenda?

Helen Thomas: Has Rove apologized to you for getting you involved? He put you on the spot.

David Gregory: Do you regret going out on a limb in making that statement? Did you go too far?

(other topic, from Raghubir Goyal of India Globe Asia Today: why isn't the US helping India defeat Pakistani terrorists?)

Okay, here comes my favorite part:

Ed Chen, LA Times: Does the White House have a credibility problem?
Scott: usual bullshit
Ed: This goes beyond this legal matter. It also address the WMD issue.
Scott: more bullshit

At this point, Ed Chen, not surprised at the stonewalling, goes back to doing a crossword puzzle. I am not shitting you. He's got a little smile on his face as he does it, like, I knew this was a complete waste of time; I only came for the show.

McClellan complains about "news reports," as if we can't trust anything that doesn't come from his mouth.

John Roberts: But "news reports" have been about Rove's lawyer's statements that Rove admitted he talked to [Time.com reporter Matthew] Cooper.

(Sarah Scott from NGO Radio else asks about North Korea, but I'm still laughing over Ed Chen's crossword puzzle, so I didn't hear it. Other questions follow.)

?? (not identified by C-Span) asks about the White House's credibility problem again. McClellan replies that the President is a very straightforward person. Hmm, so if someone lies straightforwardly, we should believe them?

Victoria Jones, Talk Radio News Service: How long has the President known that Karl Rove talked to reporters about Valerie Plame? Was it a big surprise to him this week? Will you allow your attorney [meaning McClellan's] to talk to reporters?

April Ryan, American Urban Radio: is Karl Rove still performing the same duties? Has his relationship with the President changed or their interactions? What have their conversations been like? You've changed your statements, so obviously it's been discussed here at the White House.

Bob? from ?: This is an ongoing news story. You and the President and Karl Rove need to say more to close that credibility gap.

There (pant, pant). I'll post this now and fill in more details later.

Again, I stress that these are not direct quotes, except where indicated, but you get the gist: There's blood in the water.

UPDATE: Here's the transcript. It doesn't ascribe specific questions to specific reporters, but if you use this post and the transcript you can figure it out.

Breakfast with Bonzo

2005-07-12T12:12:00.000-04:00

President Bush hosted breakfast at the White House for four Senators--two Democrats (Minority Leader Harry Reid and ranking Judiciary Committee member Patrick Leahy), one Republican (Arlen Specter), and one drooling maniac (Bill Frist). Supposedly they discussed the new Supreme Court nominee to replace the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor. More likely, the Senators talked while he sat there thinking:

Bacon good. I need more syrup. This orange juice is too pulpy. I like milk.

Because he doesn't listen to anyone whose first name isn't Karl or Dick or Scooter. He doesn't even listen to his wife. On a trip to South Africa (huh?), First Lady Laura Bush told the Today show that she hopes her husband will nominate a woman to the Supreme Court. This article says that:

Bush seemed a bit surprised that Mrs. Bush told reporters what she thought. "I can't wait to hear to her advice — in person — when she gets back," he said in the Oval Office after a meeting with the leader of Singapore.

Hmm, sounds like a warning to the Li'l Lady: "Don't you go lettin' the press know you have thoughts, now. When you get back we'll have us a talk about who wears the pants in this White House. Heh heh. It's funny how you're so smart and read all them books, and yet I'm the one who's President. I'm the one meeting with the leader of Sri Lanka today, not you. Heh heh. Please don't divorce me just to save your soul."

Still, it was nice of the President to treat Democrats as humans who need food to survive. Then again, we feed Gitmo prisoners, too.

Dramatic Recap of WH Press Conference

2005-07-12T11:45:00.000-04:00

Yesterday afternoon the White House press corps FINALLY grew a set and raked spokes-goblin Scott McClellan over the coals. There is no substitute for viewing the actual video, except perhaps my dramatic reenactment below.

Middle-School-Girl-on-Phone-with-Best-Friend Theatre proudly presents:

McClellan vs. Media - A Play in Many Acts

Oh. My. God. Caitlin, you should've totally been there. It was awesome. Scotty finished going blah blah blah about whatever he came to talk about, I wasn't really listening, and then he asked if there were any questions.

So then Terence Hunt from the Associate Press goes, "Does the President stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in the leak of the name of a CIA operative?"

And Scotty's all, "Terry, I appreciate your question" and I'm like, yeah, right, that's what you say when you'd like to slap duct tape over the reporter's mouth, and then he goes on to say he can't talk about it because there's an ongoing investigation, only he takes like four hundred thousand words to say it.

Then Terry goes, well, that wasn't what I asked. I asked if the President would fire the leaker like he said he would last June. And Scott's like, but that's in the context of the investigation. (I swear it's like the people who invented the word 'context' are giving him royalties every time he says it.)

Anyway, so then he's like, the podium can't be involved in the investigation. What, Caitlin? I don't know. I don't know what the podium has to do with anything, but it was the first thing he said that wasn't repeating his other answer so that's when I started listening again. Sue me for not soaking in his every goddamned word. Bee-yatch. Do you want to hear this or not? Okay.

So then, and this is so cool, John Roberts from CBS News goes--yeah, I know, he's got awesome hair--anyway, he's all, well, last year you commented on it plenty, in the middle of the investigation, so why not now? What makes now so special, huh? Huh?

And Scotty's like totally peeing himself, you know? He says he appreciates the question, and you can just tell he's jealous of John's hair, and he says, "No one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the President of the United States," and I'm all, why do you have to say "of the United States"? Like, we thought maybe you were talking about the President of Turkey? Yeah, I think Turkey has a President, don't they? Caitlin, just look it up later. I'm talking now. Anyway, my point is, it's like he's trying to remind us how big and important his boss is. He's "The President of the United States" and not just some loser whose words keep coming back to bite him in the ass.

Blah blah blah, same answer, can't comment because they want to be "helpful to the investigation." Oh, then he goes, "someday I'll be glad to talk about it." And then he says we should all hold our breath until that happens so we can pass out and not ask him any more nasty questions. Duh, Caitlin, of course he didn't say that part. You're such a ditz sometimes.

Then John gets all alpha-male on him and says, "When did you change your mind to say that it was okay to comment during the course of an investigation and now it's not?" And then Scott melted into a puddle of his own piss, it was great.

Okay, not really, he tried to be like all, you missed my other answer to Terry's question.

So then NBC's David Gregory--what? Um, I think the blue shirt today. No, he didn't ask about you. Sorry. You should totally talk to him after first period tomorrow. Anyway, he asked Scott "Did Karl Rove commit a crime?" and Scott gave the usual answer. (I think the people who invented the word 'investigation' are also paying him royalties).

David asks Scott if he still stands by what he said last year that like, Karl and Elliott Abrams and Scooter Libby--I know, Scooter, what a dork-squad name--were not involved in the leak.

Scotty says no comment.

Then this part was the best. David's all, "This is ridiculous. The notion that you're gonna stand before us after having commented with that level of detail and tell people watching this that somehow you decided not to talk. You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium or not?"

YEAH! I wanted to high-five him but I would've had to crawl over a bunch of people and probably break a nail.

Here, I'll just do the voices for the really good part:

Scott: Again, David, I'm well aware like you of what was previously said, at the appropriate time.

David: How do you decide when it's appropriate and when it's not appropriate?

Scott: If I may finish--

David: No, you're not finishing. You're not saying anything. You stood at that podium and said Karl Rove was not involved, and now we find out that he spoke about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation? Was he involved or wasn't he? Contrary to what you told the American people, he did indeed talk about his wife.

Scott: David, there will be a time to talk about this, and now is not the time to talk about it.

David: You think people will accept that, what you're saying today. [note: this was not intoned as a question.]

Scott: Again, I've responded to the question.

Scotty's shaking by this point. He knows they're gonna totally beat him up in the locker room. Then Terry Moran from ABC is all, I've gotta ask questions, too, if John and David did, so he goes, "You're in a tough spot here, Scott." And everybody laughs. Except Scott. It was so sweet.

So Terry kinda recaps what David said about Scott making comments last year after the investigation had already started, then goes, "Now that Rove has been caught red-handed, peddling this information, all of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation?"

I know--how cool is that? I'm gonna ask him to go skating Friday.

So Scott acts all hurt and stuff, like, "You and I know each other very well" and then says the same shit as before and reminds us again that Bush is the President of the United States.

I was laughing so hard by this point they asked me to leave. I know--how rude is that?

Yeah, I don't think Scotty's getting invited to any of the press guys' parties anymore. They're totally pissed at him for lying to them.

I'm all, what took you so long?

---
End, Act One

"Why does God hate Florida?"*

2005-07-10T06:59:00.000-04:00

I think there is a legitimate feeling, 'Why me? What did I do wrong?'
--Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, in response to yet another hurricane hitting his state

Oh, Jeb.

Jeb, Jeb, Jeb. The list of things you've done wrong could choke a whale. Most recently, you've persecuted an innocent man who had already been through hell. Before that, there was the 2000 presidential election in Florida. And so many misdeeds in between.

But I don't think your malefactions have brought Hurricane Dennis to your shores. Nature doesn't work that way. Doesn't rain fall on the just and the unjust, or haven't you read your Bible lately (Matthew 5:45)?

A Unitarian preacher in Pensacola gave this sermon last year after Hurricane Ivan wreaked its damage. The sermon, titled "Is God a Sadist?" responded to the question, "Why me?" He says that though science can teach us how the Universe works, it can never tell us why it works that way. In fact, there is no answer. Expecting God to pick and choose who has fortune and misfortune based on their actions is childish.

Jeb's right in one way: it is a 'legitimate feeling' to have that response. We've been raised to believe in fairness and justice. When something bad happens, often the first response is "Who can I sue?" or "Which government program will help me?" What we want to know is, "Who will make things right?"

We crave retribution or remuneration because it represents a return to balance. On a human scale, that's probably a good thing. While fairness and justice aren't the same, they do go hand-in-hand in a morally developed, compassionate society.

But we can't hold the divine to our standards. When we try to put God or the Universe into a box, define Him/it, and guard that definition with our lives, inevitably we encounter evidence that doesn't fit into that box. We can either ignore the evidence, or we can incorporate it into our understanding and accept that that understanding will always be incomplete. In the end, ignoring or attacking what doesn't fit into our carefully constructed system only hurts us, as we lose the opportunity to learn and grow.

So I would say to Jeb, "You've been imperfect, like all of us, but nothing you've done warrants the havoc and destruction of multiple hurricanes. No one deserves that. All you can do is help your citizens prepare and cope, which is what you've been doing all along. Please don't work them into a state of self-pity or misplaced rage at the divine. Next thing you know, they'll be sacrificing virgins to the rain gods."

*A more pertinent question might be "When will Floridians realize their weather sucks?"

Stupidest. Headline. Ever

2005-07-08T15:07:00.000-04:00

U.S. Appears to Win Global Warming Debate

WIN??? WIN??? There are no winners when our [fill in the blank with the worst possible word you can think of--"shitbag" is the phrase that comes to my mind] President scuttles any progress on climate change that could have been made this week. There are no winners in this world when it comes to global warming.

Here's what I was looking at when I saw the ABC News ticker on the side. In case the link expires, I'll sum up. It was a WeatherChannel.com article on Hurricane Dennis, a Category 4 storm headed for the Gulf Coast, with a quick and dirty stop in Cuba. The end of the article notes that

Four Atlantic weather systems -- Arlene, Bret, Cindy and Dennis -- reached Tropical Storm status by July 5, the earliest for so many named storms in recorded history. Only three major hurricanes (Category 3 or higher) have hit the U.S. coast in July in the past 100 years. When the maximum sustained winds in Hurricane Dennis peaked at 150 mph this past morning, Dennis officially became the strongest July Atlantic Basin hurricane on record and the strongest Atlantic hurricane this early in hurricane season.

Two people died in Georgia from Tropical Storm Cindy's floods. A young man drowned here in Baltimore County last week after saving a kid from a flash flood. Think there's no connection between these deaths and climate change?

Someone tell ABC News that nobody wins when global warming comes. Not even the President. Because by the time the Bush Babies inherit their daddy's ranch, it'll be nothing more than a dustbowl. I hope he leaves this world with the knowledge he could have done something to save it AND UTTERLY FAILED.

I have to stop before my head explodes all over the keyboard. I'm incoherent as it is. Sorry.

Rabid Foxes

2005-07-08T10:07:00.000-04:00

Though I said in my post below that I'd like to refrain from joining the Blame Chorus until all the evidence is in, I've seen enough evidence of Fox News hosts' complete lack of conscience that I feel compelled to comment.

Brit Hume, Fox's "star" twitbag, told host Shepard Smith that his first thought after the London attacks was--well, just read it:

I mean, my first thought when I heard -- just on a personal basis, when I heard there had been this attack and I saw the futures this morning, which were really in the tank, I thought, "Hmmm, time to buy."

That's funny, my first thought was an incoherent cry of sorrow for those who had lost lives and limbs during their morning commute, less than 24 hours after lifting their voices in jubilation over the awarding of the 2012 Olympic site. But I guess if I were a soulless robot like Brit Hume, I would have tried to figure out how I could score some quick cash on the deal, like those people who sold pieces of World Trade Center rubble on eBay. Because one man's tragedy is another man's windfall.

Here's the full context of Hume's statement. There's a video, too, if you can stomach it.

It gets better. Fox & Friends news host Brian Kilmeade, in a conversation with substitute host Stuart Varney, gloated over the fact that the terrorist attack took attention away from global warming, which, last time I checked, is a threat to everyone on the planet, terrorist or not. He actually said that the fact that the attacks happened during the G8 summit "works to our advantage." He corrected himself quickly, saying he meant, "to the Western World's advantage." Here's the whole conversation.

It's interesting to note that the attacks make someone besides the terrorists happy.

The Morning After

2005-07-08T09:34:00.000-04:00

I don't have much to say today after the London attacks. It seems that the death toll is much higher than originally thought. The thought of my former home, temporary as it was, facing such horror makes me weep. Of all the cities in the world, only Baltimore is dearer to my heart than London (sorry, Philadelphia: I've only lived around you, not in you).

Like everyone else, my anger makes me want to blame someone, preferably someone I already hate. But the rational side of me (it still exists after all this time) thinks it's best not to jump to conclusions concerning either the culprits' identities or motives. More importantly, I believe now is not the time to politicize what happened, either by Fox News types saying, "Woo-hoo! Now we don't have to talk about global warming" (I'm serious. Check it out.), or those on the left saying, "This is what we get for invading Iraq."

The fact is, we don't really know yet who did this. Yes, that "Al Qaeda of Europe" group claimed responsibility on its website, but their claims have yet to be confirmed. Just because something's on the internet doesn't mean it's true, folks. Anyone could have posted that claim.

Have we forgotten about Oklahoma City? In the first few hours after the bombing it was all, "Muslim" this and "jihad" that, even as a good ol' boy from Kansas named Timothy McVeigh was arrested for driving without a license and carrying a concealed weapon in one of those "happy accidents" of law enforcement (one could say it wasn't pure chance, since McVeigh was speeding in an effort to leave the State of his crime).

No evidence yet released indicates that suicide bombers carried out yesterday's attacks. It's been confirmed that one of the bombs was left on the floor of an Underground carriage. Left behind. As in, could have been discovered and defused in time. As in, no eternal glory for giving one's life to kill the infidels.

All I'm saying is, please let's wait for the evidence before we start playing the blame game. Or at least wait until the dead are buried. Let's have a little respect.

No

2005-07-07T08:33:00.000-04:00

London rocked by terrorist attacks.

Check here for updates from BBC reporters on the scenes. I have to go to work today, so I won't be here to blog.

It looks like it could have been a lot worse, and that the London Emergency Plan is working well.

I feel so sad and angry. And not eloquent, so that's the best I can do for now. Keep London in your thoughts and prayers.

Now that is some funny-ass shit

2005-07-06T10:54:00.000-04:00

Check out Steve, Don't Eat That! But not, I beg you, while you're in a place where your tonsil-ripping laughter would cause people to cast frowns of disapproval upon you. Like at work, or at a funeral, or while you're breaking into a high-security building with criss-crossing sound-and-motion-detection lasers.

Thanks to the heads-up from fellow author P.C. Cast.

RIP, James Stockdale

2005-07-06T10:33:00.000-04:00

I'm sad to see that Vice Admiral James Stockdale has died, and even sadder that most people will remember him as the anything-but-deft vice presidential candidate for Ross Perot's 1992 campaign.

Here's a guy who suffered in a Vietnamese POW camp for 7 1/2 years, four of them in solitary, who smashed in his own face so he couldn't be used in a propaganda film. The highest ranking naval officer captured during the war, he endured unimaginable torture in futile attempts to extract information from him.

Ross Perot once called him "a man of steel" who was "hammered on the forge of brutality."

Rest in peace at last, Admiral.

There's a Scientologist born every minute

2005-07-06T08:43:00.000-04:00

All this talk about Tom Cruise and his increasingly irritating Scientology evangelism has dredged up a forgotten (suppressed?) memory of my one personal encounter with the L. Ron Hubbard-ites.

London, June 1990: As I was walking to the Tube station after my behavioural ecology class at the Kensington campus of Kings College (U. London), they "marked" me, as scammers say. A nice lady approached me and offered a free personality test. Being even more self-obsessed at age 20 than I am now, I agreed. (Kids: this was before the Internet, when you could spend all day taking free insightful personality tests like What Rejected Crayon are You? and What's Your Alcohoroscope?)

I don't remember what questions were on the test, which was administered in a lovely air-conditioned office, but I think they gave me snacks--always a sure lure for a college student. After a short wait, the nice lady led me into a small conference room and proceeded to inform me, with a look of grave concern, that I had low self-esteem.

My reply was--and I'm paraphrasing here--"Duh!"

I was living 5,000 miles from anyone I'd known for more than four months
The guy I was dating had just left me for his vapid American ex-girlfriend
The guy I dated before that left me for his vapid French ex-girlfriend
I had four papers to write in a week-and-a-half
My money was long gone
The London sky that June looked like clam chowder without the clams for sixteen straight hours every day
I lived on the Northern Line

(The last one alone should have been sufficient grounds for depression. They used to call it the Underground's "Misery Line.")

Actually, the fact that I knew my blues came from temporary circumstances probably indicated that my self-esteem was just fine.

The lady tried to push her Scientology solutions on me, all of which cost money (she kept missing the fact that one reason I was "down" was lack of funds). The cheapest ransom available was a paperback copy of Dianetics. Yeah, I should have been stronger, but I felt three pounds was a small price for instant freedom. At that moment, it felt like bail money.

Once on the Tube, I skimmed the book for about thirty seconds. It was all I could to hold onto it long enough to place it safely in the trash. Leaving it on the train seemed like a randomly hostile act: what if some vulnerable Tube rider picked it up and got sucked into the cult, just because I was too lazy to clean up after myself?

I downed an extra pint of cider 'n' black in the common room that night. Nothing does wonders for your self-esteem like being taken for a sucker. Thanks, L. Ron.

(Look, Ma--I'm cross-posting!)

DSM is Wiki'd good

2005-07-05T12:29:00.000-04:00

The Downing Street Memo now has a Wikipedia entry. The entry is long enough to be comprehensive, but not so long as to overwhelm the casual reader.

I'd bookmark it as a good place to refer friends and family who say, "What's this Downing Street thingie all about?"

Double the fun!

2005-07-05T10:34:00.000-04:00

Find Jeri the self-righteous windbag here. Find Jeri the self-absorbed writer here.

Collect all two!

Mega-Shuffle! Vol. 1

2005-07-01T15:07:00.000-04:00

Okay, now that I've finally got all my music ripped to my computer (7.8 days' worth), I can shuffle among every single song I possess. I'm as happy as a little girl. Following the example of Agitprop, I'll recount the next 10 songs, with whatever commentary/explanation I can provide:

1. "Ferny Hill" - The Chieftains, off their live album, Long Black Veil. I owned this for years before listening to it for the second time just a few months ago. I love the Chieftains but wasn't really motivated to hear them share the stage with Sting, Mick Jagger, Sinead O'Connor, Tom Jones, etc. What a mistake I'd made; the album is fantastic. The title song, sung by Jagger, is one of the saddest and most romantic tunes I've ever heard. "Ferny Hill" is a lovely traditional pipe song.

2. "Mazurka Op. 63, No. 3 in C sharp minor" - Frederic Chopin, one of my top five favorite composers. My sister says his preludes are deceptively difficult to play. Haven't been in a classical frame of mind lately.

3. "(New Wave) Polly" - Nirvana, off their eclectic and sometimes annoying collection of remixes and extras, Incesticide. I prefer the regular version of "Polly," off of Nevermind, and the acoustic version from Unplugged, but the song is sublimely creepy in any form. It gives me this savory, predatory feeling. In an ironic way, of course.

4. "The Fly" - U2, from Achtung Baby. Most people will disagree with me, but I still say this was U2's last good album. I never got into Zooropa or All That You Can't Leave Behind, and How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb sounds like they're trying too hard to prove they're not old yet.

5. "Children of the Korn" - Korn, from Follow the Leader. This song features Ice Cube over the distinctive vocals of Jonathan Davis. My favorite "South Park" episode was the Scooby-Doo-esque Halloween one with Korn as a mystery-solving band. I literally fell off the couch laughing when they turned themselves into different forms of corn to perplex the villain.

6. "Forkboy" - Lard, off the Natural Born Killers soundtrack--next to Tank Girl, my favorite soundtrack to a movie I've never seen. Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails produced this soundtrack, which includes enough dialogue bits sprinkled within the songs themselves (as opposed to separate tracks, a la Pulp Fiction) to give the general idea of the movie's plot. Lard featured the vocals of ex-Dead Kennedys' frontman Jello Biafra.

7. "Uptown" - Roy Orbison. Yeah, he seems to stick out among the harsher stuff here, but I truly love this guy and his music. This was only his second release, hitting #72 on the US charts in 1960. I started listening to him because I heard he was the favorite singer of both Elvis Presley and Chris Isaak. They're sort of the Holy Trinity of rockabilly heartthrobs. Sigh...

8. "Hitchin' a Ride" - Green Day, off Nimrod. Hmm, even though Green Day is one of my favorite bands, I rarely listen to this album, so I have nothing to say about this song. It sounds pretty cool, though.

9. "1000 Miles" - Robert Mirabal, off his live album Painted Caves, where he performs with Rare Tribal Mob. Mirabal is one of the most prominent contemporary Native American recording artists. He's from the Taos Pueblo tribe in Northern New Mexico and offers a unique blend of rock and traditional music. He plays a flute and he's hot. Married with kid, though.

10. "Sweetest Sound" - CMS Productions. This was a CD of ambient music I got for Christmas called Music for Healing. There are birds chirping, apparently enamored with the synthesizer sitting next to a waterfall.

Well, that's today's edition of Mega-Shuffle. Opinions/observations on any of the above artists welcome.

Where do you see yourself in five years?

2005-06-30T15:35:00.000-04:00

Give me your best smart-ass answer to the above job interview question. A really good one might make it into my next book.

I'm opening up the blog to anonymous comments in honor of the occasion.

Haven't got time for the pain

2005-06-30T08:32:00.000-04:00

I feel like one of those people who ignore their friends whenever they're infatuated with a new man or woman in their lives. I'm working on a New Idea, and I'm in that heady, goofy stage in which I can barely think about anything else--even eating, much less world events. So blogging is difficult right now.

No one's saying anything new today, anyway. Tony Blair trotted out the "Dick Cheney defense" by saying that the Downing Street Memo was wrong because...wait for it...

"We went to the United Nations."

Sigh...let's review, AGAIN: The original Downing Street minutes state,

The NSC had no patience with the UN route…

The Prime Minister said that it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors…

Despite US resistance, we should explore discreetly the ultimatum. Saddam would continue to play hard-ball with the UN...

The Foreign Secretary would send the Prime Minister the background on the UN inspectors, and discreetly work up the ultimatum to Saddam.

So, Tony--may I call you Tony?--if I can take a moment:

The DSM notes that you'll go to the UN in order to help sell the war that you'd already decided on, intimating that a UN resolution/ultimatum will provoke Saddam into Belligerent Mode, at which point we'll be justified in attacking him.
You go to the UN, setting the pre-planned events into action.
The DSM is...wrong?

Not to brag, but I got a perfect score on the Analytical portion of my GRE test. So I knows poor logic when I sees it.

Enough of this. I'm in love with all my characters, and those darlings love me right back. Things will change: in a few weeks I'll set them aside to start revising my book for Luna, and they'll grow sullen. By the time I've hit the hundred-page mark they'll stop sharing their deepest thoughts and feelings with me. The plot will look trite and hackneyed, and all dialogue will drop to the level of a one-episode-then-cancelled sitcom. It always happens, and usually I break through the growing pains to a more mature, workmanlike level of devotion to the work.

But for now I'm crushing big time, so see ya!

Public Vow

2005-06-29T07:58:00.000-04:00

I'm a woman of my word. Except when I'm lying, of course, or when I change my mind. But anyway...

All you dozens (sad, huh? just dozens, so far, but someday you'll be THOUSANDS!!) of Seethers out there, be witnesses to my vow that today, June 29, 2005, AD, I will begin doing yoga again.

Later, of course.

UPDATE: 12:22 PM -- I did it!

Blah blah blah September 11 blah blah blah

2005-06-29T07:15:00.000-04:00

In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda. - Our President, May 24, 2005

And now, this century's Oxy Award (for Biggest Waste of Oxygen) goes to....

this guy's speech.

There's not a single new idea in the entire ramble. He refuses to plan an exit strategy and refuses to send more troops. In other words, let's keep doing what's obviously not working. In the face of overwhelming skepticism from the American people, he fails to acknowledge that his Administration has made any mistakes or miscalculations.

Everything's going great, but it's "hard work." After all, it's forced him to think about it "every single day." Gosh, even on Saturday? I think he deserves a vacation after all this thinking. Maybe he needs time to clear some brush on his ranch, like he did in August 2001 after being warned that Osama bin Laden was determined to attack the U.S.

And of course, when speaking about Iraq, which had nothing to do with the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Bush invokes 9/11 FIVE TIMES. He must think people are paying as much attention to his words as he did to his teachers' lectures when he was sitting in the back row making spitballs and goofy faces at his friends, knowing that his daddy would buy him C's. He thinks that if people hear "September 11" and "Iraq" in the same paragraph, they'll draw the conclusion that Saddam brought down the World Trade towers.

He even had the nerve to invoke the Civil War and World War II. Mr. President, you're no Abraham Lincoln or Franklin Roosevelt. When all this is over, you'll be lucky to stand equal with Warren G. Harding.

That's all the keyboard-pounding I'll waste on him.

UPDATE: The Baltimore Sun turns its Lie Detector on the speech. Hurray for journalists who can look stuff up!

From Those Who Serve

2005-06-28T10:28:00.000-04:00

...comes a reply to Karl Rove's assertion that liberals will not protect our country.

Take it to Karl is a blog created to give liberal servicemembers and veterans an opportunity to tell Rove where to stick his assertions.

A small sample, first from a Vietnam vet:

They, including chickenshit Cheney, keep saying "we" about this war. They don't have a clue about combat, service, discomfort or honor. Rove should be covered in tar and feathers and placed in stocks in the city square. It's difficult to respect a "war president" or his staff, who's never been anywhere close to combat, or reality. But I'm glad he thinks about it "every day."

And from a veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom:

Whenever I get into an argument with a conservative, the story is always the same. First, they tell me I'm unamerican and unpatriotic. After I show them my military ID and mention I was in OEF, their next response is to say that I'm hurting my fellow soldiers. Then I confront them and ask them what they've done for the troops. Have they petitioned congress to make sure that the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan have all the armor they need? Do they make sure that the Reservists still have jobs when they come home? Do they lift a finger to look out for soldiers families while they're away? Did they even send a care package? So far, everyone I've debated has given me a no to all of these questions.

And from a Vietnam-era vet and son of a disabled vet:

You think war is just about dressing your boy up in a fly-boy uniform and landing on an aircraft carrier patrolling the dangerous waters off the coast of San Diego for a cheap photo op. Wrong! You think war means sneaking into Iraq with a team of Fox news "reporters" to carve a fake turkey at a Baghdad photo op? Playing to the stay-at-home "Support-Our-Troops" "Boycott the French" crowd? Wrong again!

Forget your flags and your shallow bumperstickers! The most important thing you could do to support the military was never send them into an area unless absolutely necessary and you failed at that and you know it.

As angry as I am about Iraq, I can't even imagine the rage felt by those in the military who are seeing their fellow servicemembers die in an unnecessary, poorly planned, and boneheadedly executed war, while here at home veterans health benefits are short a billion dollars (yeah, billion with a "B").

And then the Mouth of Bush has the gall to call them weak and unpatriotic.

No! No! Bad! Baaaaaad!

2005-06-28T09:32:00.000-04:00

This and this made it past my meticulously constructed anti-clown fortress because of Majikthise and Kung Fu Monkey.

Going to hide under the stairs now and croon "Jesus Wants Me for a Sunbeam" until the shaking stops.

New Downing Street cartoons

2005-06-27T08:34:00.000-04:00

Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Don Wright of the Palm Beach Post has brought us more than one Downing Street political cartoon. This one mocks the media "watchdog." (Note: the link will expire on 7/1. )

He ran another one on June 12 which I can't find anywhere except in this paper version of the Baltimore Sun I had lying around my house for some reason. It's a one-panel cartoon in which Deep Throat meets a member of the press in a garage and says, "The British Downing Street Memo proves that, long before telling Congress, Bush had secretly decided to go to war against Iraq, and he lied to the American people."

To which the reporter replies, "BOOOOOORING! Whaddya got on Brad Pitt and Michael Jackson?"

Matt Wuerker also has fun with the media "watchdog."

Tom Toles skewers his own colleagues at the Washington Post in "Correction."

Nick Diamond draws the only cartoon actually targeting Bush instead of the media.

And last but far from least, the singularly brilliant Tom Tomorrow brings us "The Liberal's Guide to Ignoring the Downing Street Memo."

Forehead-slapping

2005-06-25T10:24:00.000-04:00

A short editorial in yesterday's Baltimore Sun brings up a couple new items I hadn't heard about.

1. A subsidiary of Halliburton has just been awarded a $30 million contract to build a new prison facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

2. Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, who was in charge in Iraq during the Abu Ghraib scandals, is being considered for a promotion.

Because in Bush's Bizarro Universe, those who show their corruption and/or incompetence get rewarded. (Exhibit A: Condi Rice.)

Here's an excerpt from the editorial:

The United States has no business stashing felons or anyone else in Cuba. This is not because it's cruel to them (though it is) but because it's so bad for the United States. Guantanamo is a blot, a stain, a focal point for all those people around the world who are convinced Americans can do no good.
It should be shut down. The detainees should be charged with crimes or given prisoner-of-war status or just let go; their continued incarceration there simply isn't worth it.

But the people running the Bush administration just barge ahead, seemingly unaware or untroubled by the way they're perceived. Halliburton a war profiteer? How could that be? Kicking a prisoner to death an act of torture? How do you figure that?

They don't care how they're perceived because they think they create reality. To a scary degree, they're right. But the little segments of this nation that aren't afraid to speak the truth are getting louder every day.

Batman Begins: The Antidote

2005-06-25T08:35:00.000-04:00

We saw Batman Begins last Saturday, thus completing our mini-Christopher Nolan festival (we watched Memento Friday night--amazing movie that will twist your brain in ways you thought it couldn't go).

Batman Begins was, in a word, terrific. It wasn't perfect--the film editor in me wanted to cut the parts where characters shout exposition at each other, however necessary it was to get the information across. But it felt real to me in a way that no other movie of its genre ever has.

Aw, heck, I suck at writing reviews, at transforming my gut reactions into words more eloquent than, "Whoa, cool." So read Film Freak Central's review to see what I thought of it.

On a more personal level, Batman Begins was the Batman movie I always wanted to see. Scratch that--it was the Batman movie I needed to see ever since Joel Schumacher's soul-annihilatingly awful Batman & Robin, which was the single most painful moviegoing experience of my life.

Chris O'Donnell surfing down through the atmosphere, Arnold Schwarzenegger saying, "You're not sending ME to the COOLER!", the pointless, celluloid-munching romance between George Clooney and whatever vapid model was trying to make the leap to acting that year--these memories used to throw me into bouts of hyperventilating apoplexy, the kind that you normally only see in survivors of wars or natural disasters.

But now I can look back and smile, knowing that the franchise is now safe in the hands of a man who understands Batman enough to know that he would never put nipples on his armor.

P.S.: Cillian Murphy as Dr. Crane/Scarecrow: was there ever a more adorable, huggable, stuff-in-a-bag-and-take-home-able villain? I think not. Those eyes, those cheekbones, that verging-on-heroin-chic fair skin...I'm done fer.

P.S.S.: On a related note, I refuse to see Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. After the extensive makeup work Johnny Depp underwent for Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and Pirates of the Caribbean, covering every bit of his natural sex appeal, I thought my attraction to him was as impervious as Kevlar.

NOT. SO. The trailer to Charlie alone was a serious threat. Depp freaked me out every time he opened his mouth. Shudder. I may need to watch Chocolat again to rekindle the swoon.

Because Batman Begins proves that there's an antidote for everything.

This One Goes to Eleven

2005-06-24T12:09:00.000-04:00

...and beyond, of course.

Tonight marks eleven years since Christian Ready and I became husband and wife (not man and wife, because he was already a man when I married him, if you know what I mean--bow chicka bow!).

I can best characterize our marriage by telling a little anecdote we recounted over the breakfast table this morning. A few years ago we went to a friend's wedding where the officiant went on for several minutes about how much work is involved in marriage. This guy made it sound as if marital fulfillment was a Sisyphean chore, never complete, like weeding the garden or cleaning the kitchen sink.

We looked at each other during the sermon and realized we were missing some essential piece of life that seemed so obvious to everyone else. We were so busy having fun and making each other happy, we forgot to work at it, forgot to put "love each other" on our to-do list.

Now you may shake your head and go, "Jeri Jeri Jeri, just wait until you hit hard times, then you'll realize how much work marriage really is." Well, we've had hard times. What Hamlet called "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" have hit us as sharply as anyone else. Deaths, layoffs, medical problems, wet sock feet from puddles outside the shower--you name it, we've been through it.

Life hasn't always been easy. But being together sure is.

Oh, and I don't mean to sound smug. Just impossibly, ecstatically grateful.

Honey, I hope this counts as a card, because I forgot to pick one up last night. Pretend there's a teddy bear or something at the top of the post. Love ya!

Where there's smoke...

2005-06-24T09:01:00.000-04:00

There's mirrors.

Rather than address the concerns of millions of Americans who are wondering why secret British documents indicate that the Bush Administration lied to the nation and the world to garner support for an illegal and immoral war, Karl Rove has decided to go on the attack. I won't even taint this blog with his ugly, pathetic words. Suffice to say that his reply to the scathing evidence of the Downing Street Memos is to tell the world that Democrats are wimps.

That's the best he can do. He's like a football coach who assumes that his team will never lose control of the ball and therefore only has offensive plays in his playbook. In football, that would be stupid, because your own success (scoring points) results in turning over the ball to the other team in the form of a kickoff. The rare exception is the case of the onside kick, in which you line up for the kickoff and then try to kick to your own team. If it succeeds, you get another chance to score.

Because the onside kick rarely works, it's only used in moments of desperation, when your team is behind and time is running out. Hmm....

So that's the smoke. Dick Cheney provides the mirrors.

Since no one, even his boss, will wholeheartedly agree with him that the Iraqi insurgency "is in its last throes," he's now parsing the meaning of "throes:"

If you look at what the dictionary says about throes, it can still be a violent period, the throes of a revolution.

Gee...you think?

On another topic, he indicated that Guantanamo inmates are lucky because "they're living in the tropics."

I'm not kidding. He really said that. Because we know that life in the tropics is always peachy. Just look at Haiti, or the Congo. Woo, what I wouldn't give to live there, rather than in our desolate temperate region with snow and ice and decent sanitation.

He also said that "[t]here isn't any other nation in the world that would treat people who were determined to kill Americans the way we're treating these people."

The problem is, we've seen no evidence that Gitmo prisoners are terrorists. Where are the convictions? Where are the trials? When's the big press conference where you trot out the baddies in handcuffs and tell the world all about the terror you thwarted? You'd think they'd be bragging left and right about all the evidence that justifies these torture camps.

As for the Downing Street Memo, he claims he hasn't read it. Yeah, right. The document that could bring down your administration and force you back to the salt mines of Halliburton boardrooms--you haven't bothered to read it. Liar.

Even though he hasn't read it, he says it's "wrong" and he has a response to it nonetheless, which parrots Bush and Blair's vaudeville routine of last week. Cheney says,

Remember what happened after the supposed memo was written. We went to the United Nations. We got a unanimous vote out of the Security Council for a resolution calling on Saddam Hussein to come clean.

Which is exactly what the Downing Street Memo said you were going to do, as a sham act to help "sell" the war. How does this prove the Memo "wrong"? Liar.

He went on to assure us that the guy who always wanted a war to boost his political capital tried really, really, really hard to make peace.

The president of the United States took advantage of every possibility to try to resolve this without having to use military force. It wasn't possible in this case.

As Jon Stewart of The Daily Show once said, "Mr. Vice President, I must inform you that your pants are on fire."

Says Me Street

2005-06-23T08:01:00.000-04:00

As you've probably heard, the House Appropriations panel voted last week to cut federal funding for PBS and NPR by 25 percent, placing an even larger fundraising burden on local stations.

There have been complaints among the radical right that PBS and NPR demonstrate "liberal bias," because these stations only parrot the Administration's baloney 50% of the time instead of the required 100% (remember, anything less than total agreement with the White House means you're a traitor who hates America).

I imagine they also believe that 'Sesame Street' has poor moral values. Here's what they'd replace it with.

Hope for Hubble

2005-06-23T07:15:00.000-04:00

The Baltimore Sun reported yesterday that a Senate subcommittee has approved the down payment for a possible Hubble Space Telescope servicing mission, without which it will die by the middle of 2008.

Longtime Hubble champion Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski made it happen, of course.

"I have long said that Hubble is the greatest scientific instrument since Galileo's telescope," she said in a written statement. "That's why I wasn't going to let it die without a fight."

It's good to know that some Democrats still know how to stand up for what they believe in. Go, Babs!

Keith is Da (Olber)Man(n)!

2005-06-22T21:56:00.000-04:00

Check out Crooks and Liars for video of Keith Olbermann's FANTASTIC interview with Newsweek's senior White House correspondent. Here are two mainstream media personnel speaking about the actual content of the Downing Street Memos and their implications, not just talking about the story about the story. And it only took a few seconds to download.

I think this story has legs now. There are too many media mentions each day to keep track of, so I'm just going to steal from Shakespeare's Sister's daily e-mail dispatch to all of us Big Brass Alliance bloggers. Enjoy!

Crooks and Liars: Video of The Daily Show—Bush, Iraq, and the DSM

TomPaine: David Corn on why he’s obsessed with the DSMs

Rolling Stone Blog: Downing Street Memos--the Cliffs Notes. Read this if you have no time to read anything else.

From News & Notes with Ed Gordon (NPR Radio programming Tuesday, June 21):

"Democrats Stage Mock Hearing on Iraq Memo"

"Examining Pre-War Intelligence and the Iraq Invasion"

CounterPunch: Kevin Zeese interviews Col. Sam Gardiner

Counterbias: Sibel Edmonds—An Appeal to the Internet Community

The Nation: David Corn’s got Rove’s response to the DSMs

TomPaine: Fixed is Fixed

by former CIA analyst and witness at last week's DSM hearing Ray McGovern

Detroit Free Press editorial

St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Iraq—Storm Warning

Bangor Daily News: What to Make of a Memo

The Daily Astorian (OR): US Opinion Shifts on Iraq War

More Downing Street cartoons

2005-06-22T12:23:00.000-04:00

Check out Thaddeus & Wheez by Charles Pugsley Fincher and find out who's the new devil on Bush's shoulder (he obviously flicked the angel off the other shoulder long ago).

Mike Lane strikes again with In a Jam Call Dad.

While it's not a cartoon, Billmon at This Modern World (the brilliant comic with the penguin--no, the brilliant comic with the penguin) has a post on the Downing Street Memo(s).

He makes a great point--not only should we contact media outlets, but let's also put some pressure on the Senate and House Intelligence Committee chairs and ranking minority members to investigate why the intelligence was "being fixed around the policy." Names and numbers are at the end of Billmon's post.

Durbin genuflects

2005-06-22T12:04:00.000-04:00

He must have heard the clicker!

Greg Saunders at This Modern World puts it best.

Fight Mannequinism

2005-06-22T11:38:00.000-04:00

No, it's not an early Christian heresy espousing the inherent duality of God, it's the tendency to become frozen by apathy into a state of nonaction.

Thanks to Seether Carole for sending this amusing site my way.

And God bless the Ad Council. Both of Him.

What? No "CPO Sharkey"?

2005-06-21T13:57:00.000-04:00

Note: Not much blogging today because I'm trying to finish a project. I picked up a summer research job with a criminology/public policy professor at University of Maryland. Maybe I'll make enough to buy a new washing machine (ooh, the wild ambitions of the thirty-somethings). Anyway, here's a post I wrote last week and forgot to publish.

Lest I become too preciously relevant with all this political stuff:

MSN lists the ten coolest TV shows not yet on DVD. I agree with most of them: who wouldn't want to spend an evening with our old friends from "WKRP in Cincinnati"? I was too young at the time to stay up 'til ten for the groundbreaking "Hill Street Blues" or "St. Elsewhere," so those would fill in a vital blank space in my TV-watching canvas. And of course, no David Lynch fan's repertoire would be complete without the second season of "Twin Peaks."

I was going to suggest "Northern Exposure," but hurrah!! just in time for my birthday, the first three seasons have finally been released.

So instead I'll add "Bosom Buddies." Sure, it was a ripoff of Some Like it Hot, but it featured good slapstick and a young Tom Hanks in a wig--what could be better? I confess, I had a crush on Peter Scolari, replaced by Michael Keaton the following year (I cried when "Report to Murphy" was canceled).

What show would you add to the list?

US firebombed Iraq

2005-06-20T08:33:00.000-04:00

The UK Independent reported Friday that US Marines used a napalm-like firebomb weapon in Iraq during March and April 2003 and possibly again during last year's assault on Fallujah. Here's the beginning of the article, titled "US lied to Britain over napalm used in Iraq war:"

American officials lied to British ministers over the use of "internationally reviled" napalm-type firebombs in Iraq.

Yesterday's disclosure led to calls by MPs for a full statement to the Commons and opened ministers to allegations that they held back the facts until after the general election.

Despite persistent rumours of injuries among Iraqis consistent with the use of incendiary weapons such as napalm, Adam Ingram, the Defence minister, assured Labour MPs in January that US forces had not used a new generation of incendiary weapons, codenamed MK77, in Iraq.

But Mr Ingram admitted to the Labour MP Harry Cohen in a private letter obtained by The Independent that he had inadvertently misled Parliament because he had been misinformed by the US. "The US confirmed to my officials that they had not used MK77s in Iraq at any time and this was the basis of my response to you," he told Mr Cohen. "I regret to say that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."

Read the rest.

MK-77s are napalm canister munitions that evolved from the napalm bombs used in Vietnam. For more information on these weapons, click here. Heretik also has a good graphic on the weapons and where they may have been dropped in Iraq; and CN Todd at Freiheit und Wissen has a fantastic background report that you really should read.

There are two reasons why a napalm-type munition is more lethal than a regular explosive.

1) The canisters have no stabilizing fins, causing them to tumble rather than plummet when dropped, which spreads the flammable gel farther. It also means that they are hard to target properly--really "dumb bombs"--resulting in a higher chance of "collateral damage" (the wrong dead people).

2) The gel sticks to the skin as it quickly burns through, causing rapid loss of blood pressure and death (though probably not rapid enough from the victim's perspective). It also releases carbon monoxide, which can kill those in the vicinity through asphixiation. This weapon--did I mention it was dumb?--can't distinguish between an al Qaeda member and a schoolkid.

The use of napalm against civilians was outlawed internationally by the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). The US didn't ratify this treaty, but the Brits did. This is why the Bush Administration had to mislead the British Defence Ministry into thinking we wouldn't use MK-77s--it would have been illegal for the UK to participate in a military operation involving such weapons.

So besides the obvious horror wrought upon the firebombed Iraqi population, we've dealt yet another damaging blow to our closest ally. The "special relationship" we share with the UK is starting to look a little like the one we had 250 years ago, with the fist of power pointing east across the Atlantic this time.

Downing Street Alarm

2005-06-19T08:05:00.000-04:00

DING-DING-DING-DING-DING!!

The Associated Press wakes up and writes

U.S. War Plans Much-Discussed in Memos

Memo: Post-War Iraq a Concern in Britain

2002 Memos Undercut British WMD Claims

Redford Says He Linked Deep Throat to FBI (in which Robert Redford discusses the Downing Street memo, among other things)

MSNBC wakes up and reports U.K. memos show concern over Iraq invasion. The Ron Reagan/Monica Crowley show Connected also covered it, as noted by One Woman Wrecking Crew.

The Washington Post and New York Times yawn, stretch, hit the snooze button, then finally wake up, if you count running a new and excellent Associated Press article waking up. To me, it's more like they stumbled out of bed, fed the cats and went back to sleep.

Which is what I think I'm about to do.

They've looked at clouds from both sides now

2005-06-19T07:24:00.000-04:00

Have you ever looked to the west about half an hour after a summer sunset and seen wispy, luminescent clouds stretch pale blue tendrils across the sky?

No? Then you need to get out more, and move north if possible.

These spectacular clouds--called noctilucent clouds--are actually on the very edges of Earth's atmosphere, almost in outer space itself. Astronauts on the International Space Station have seen them from above (clink the link to see photos), and those at 40 degrees latitude or more on Earth can see them routinely from below.

We live at about 39.5 degrees latitude, and I know I've seen them many times. I just thought they were clouds. I didn't realize they were "space clouds," or as I've decided to call them, "space-cicles."

Noctilucent clouds are formed of ice crystals, which are more common in the upper atmosphere now, due to two factors: 1) global warming: while greenhouse gases cook the lower atmosphere (the part we live in, unfortunately), they cool the upper atmosphere; 2) higher levels of space dust, as a result of no-one-knows-what.

Whatever the reason, they sure are purty.

Downing Street political cartoons

2005-06-18T08:42:00.000-04:00

"KAL," the Baltimore Sun's political cartoonist, featured the Downing Street Memo on Thursday in this piece he calls "That Was Then". It's bitter-chuckle funny.

On PoliticalCartoons.com there are two great ones so far: "Downing Street Memo" by M.e. Cohen and "Downing Street Memo Cut" by Mike Lane. You can order these cartoons as mugs, T-shirts, towels, hats, mouse pads, teddy bears, and more!

Think I'll get an apron of the "paper cut" one.

ANNOUNCEMENT

2005-06-17T23:46:00.000-04:00

So very, very long ago, it seems, I mentioned that the acquisitions committee of a major publisher was considering my proposal for a fantasy trilogy. Then later I teased you about it again, before realizing that negotiations were still in the works.

Now it's finally final, finally finally final. On Halloween 2006, Luna Books will release the first volume of my trilogy, tentatively titled Aspect of Crow. This will be my first publication by a traditional print publisher--the kind that gives advances and sends its books to real, non-virtual bookstores, bookstores that have shelves and coffee shops and bored employees who pick at their eyebrow rings while concentrating very hard on ignoring you.

Anyway, Luna is the new fantasy imprint of Harlequin Enterprises. Before you go imagining some kind of bodice ripper (which technically no one writes anymore, anyway), be advised that Luna is fantasy first. The amount of romance varies from book to book, from "none" all the way up to "bunches" (to use sophisticated statistical terms). The only thing they all have in common is a strong, complex female protagonist who uses her own abilities to save the world--or at least her part of it. She doesn't stand on the sidelines watching the blokes take care of everything. Anyone who grew up reading fantasy and wishing the women would actually do something besides waft around in frilly gowns, check out these books.

I've read most of the Luna offerings so far and have enjoyed them all. The fact that I can remember each of them vividly is a testament both to their variety and quality. I only hope I can measure up to the caliber of authors--people like Mercedes Lackey, Catherine Asaro, Christie Golden, Robin Owens, and many more.

A few years ago, several people in the publishing business told me to pretend I was a new writer, that having been e-published carries a worse stigma than never being published, even though my e-publisher was Time Warner. The funny thing is, the whole Luna deal began because an editor there loved Requiem and wanted to bring me on board. So rather than hurting my career, the e-publishing venture led to what, by any measure, can now be called "my big break."

I'll tell you more about my new book in a few weeks, when I've started the second draft. Right now I'm trying to forget it so I can revise with a fresh eye. I still dream about it, and I still wake with shreds of the Lord of the Rings soundtrack playing in my head (I wrote to it nonstop the last few weeks).

Mark your calendars: next year I'm having the biggest Halloween/book debut/Election Week bash you've ever seen. Or possibly the only one you've ever seen.

Hold the escargots

2005-06-17T16:57:00.000-04:00

"Clown taste is like French cooking."
--this ad

Umh...

Science Friday

2005-06-17T09:10:00.000-04:00

Sweet, dude!

Scientists at the USDA have added a chemical to table sugar to create an environmentally friendly pesticide, according to this article on LiveScience.com. The pesticide leaves no chemical residues and can't penetrate human skin. It's currently used against a mite that has decimated honey bee populations but the EPA is looking to approve it for household use against wasps and cockroaches.

Deep Impact: the Not-Movie

This July 4th, a portion of NASA's Deep Impact spacecraft will collide with Comet Tempel 1. The collision--or at least the resulting BAM!--will be visible to the average backyard telescope on Earth. Principal Investigator Michael A'Hearn of the University of Maryland (Woo! Fear the Turtle!) says that the mission is designed to learn more about the interior makeup of comets, which will teach us a lot about how the solar system was formed. Also, it's nice to know what happens when a comet explodes, in case one ever heads our way...

Their Honors Have Honor

On Monday, the U.S. Conference of Mayors unanimously passed a resolution requiring cities to try to meet or exceed standards set by the Kyoto Protocol. The Protocol is the global warming treaty ratified by the international community earlier this year, with the glaring exception of the United States. These cities can do it; Toronto did.

Democrat won't apologize for telling the truth

2005-06-17T08:11:00.000-04:00

The gall! When admonished by the Bush Administration for comparing Gitmo to Nazi- or Soviet-style prison camps, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin had his office issue a statement that it's the Administration who should apologize "for abandoning the Geneva Conventions and authorizing torture techniques that put our troops at risk and make Americans less secure."

Don't you know the script, Senator Durbin? When you criticize the government for chaining prisoners to the floor without food and water for days in extreme temperatures, and then the aforementioned government calls your criticism "reprehensible," you're supposed to grovel on the floor while fellow Democrats hold you there, step on your back, and tape your mouth shut.

Here was Durbin's quote on the Senate floor:

If I read this [report] to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings.

Press Secretary Scott McClellan responded,

Our men and women in uniform go out of their way to treat detainees humanely, and they go out of their way to uphold the values and the laws that we hold so dear in this country.

FBI evidence suggests otherwise.

DSM Hearings: The morning after

2005-06-17T07:40:00.000-04:00

The New York Times has a decent article on yesterday's hearings, although it should have reported more on the actual testimony and less on a rehash of the White House's lame defense.

An Associated Press article does a much better job of summing up the actual meeting, even pointing out that it was relegated to a tiny basement room in Capitol Hill and the fact that the Republicans scheduled 11 major votes to coincide with it.

That's all the reporting I can find so far, despite the fact that the meeting room was packed with media. Much to the Bush Administration's relief, Tom Cruise proposed to Katie Holmes at the top of the Eiffel Tower, so that's all people are talking about today.

Thank goodness for bloggers, who took the time yesterday to report on the meeting as it was happening. In addition to Shakespeare's Sister, which I mentioned last night, The Tattered Coat, Last Day of My Life, Yowling from the Fencepost, and BradBlog, among others, also live-blogged the event.

Thanks to everyone who did this. I was driving home from work at the time listening to it on C-SPAN radio, and our Troopers hate when people blog & drive. Maryland's such a paternalistic state.

Anyway, if you want to catch the hearing on TV, C-SPAN-2 will be running it at 8PM EDT tonight.

Freaky Flag Day

2005-06-16T21:01:00.000-04:00

Now before anyone jumps down my throat at my religious intolerance, suggesting that I would slap the label "freak" on someone who thinks we need an "American Christian flag" and who thinks Satan talks to her through telephone poles, let me clarify: the aforementioned "freak" refers to me. As in, this lady freaks me out. Which is my own problem, really, resulting from a vivid imagination and having read Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale a little too closely.

Anyway, the Baltimore Sun reports that Marcia Thompson Eldreth from Cecil County, MD, was inspired to create an American Christian flag, featuring, among other elements, a bald eagle carrying a bloody cross and a chopped-up Scripture quote that looks forward to Armageddon with joy.

Noah Diamond of Nero Fiddled (an awesome blog I just discovered by Googling Ms. Eldreth) views it much more maturely than I did. He even called her up and asked her what her reaction would be if someone wanted to fly her flag over a government building (read his post to find out what she said).

When I read the Sun article, I stood in my kitchen quivering, going, "Oh my God, Oh my God, Oh my God," and imagining this flag flying high as the 2007 Purge of Free Thinkers begins.

However, as her website clearly states (click on "Pledge," as the entire site is done in frames)

This pledge, flag, and its mission is not to replace our government pledge OR Old Glory. We are NOT trying to overthrow our government or force anyone to be a Christian.

Okay, but please understand, Ms. Eldreth, that you've written that disclaimer under a revised Pledge of Allegiance that reads:

I pledge allegiance,
to the Christian Flag,
of the United States of America,
and to the Lord, who made us great and free.
I purpose, to band together, with all believers,
to protect the truth and liberty of God.

Furthermore, your "Press Release" is headlined "Northeastern Maryland Woman Declares War Against Liberalism!"

While this flag declares and visually speaks of many aspects, they all basically come under a Threefold Heading. First, let it be a Wave Offering unto our Lord, then a Declaration of war on Satan and his lies of liberalism and secularism, and finally a prophetic proclamation of Christ’s second coming.

It's my duty as an American citizen to be tolerant of all religions. But I don't have to stand by and applaud someone who says that my beliefs, at the center of which rest Christ's edicts to care for the poor and downtrodden, are lies of Satan. I don't have to celebrate the fact that she and her Operation Band Together are looking forward to watching me and my kind be thrust into the gaping maw of Hell. Really, I think this situation calls for a response more like, "Fuck off, you crazy bitch! I love Jesus, too!"

Note: I've refrained from using profanity on this website, in an effort to maintain the readership of my mom and those using library computers, but when someone declares war on me, when someone questions my faith simply because I'm a liberal, I'm not going to be mature or circumspect about it. I can recognize it as an exercise of free speech and expression of creativity. I'd fight like hell to protect her right to say what she wants, but I won't be trampled in the name of tolerance.

Like most of the Radical Religious Right, this woman has a persecution complex the size of the Roman Coliseum. When a thunderstorm struck out her phones while she was taking Flag Day orders last year, she took it as a sign from Satan that he was trying to thwart her efforts. So she thanked him for confirming her beliefs.

Because everything confirms these people's beliefs. Everything that happens, every new event or piece of information has to fit into their narrow conception of reality, or it's ignored. Overwhelming evidence for evolution and the Big Bang? Nope, not getting through. Terry Schiavo's autopsy report? La la la, can't hear it.

The most ironic part of the flag to me is the Bible quote the eagle carries in its mouth: "Take heed that no man deceive you." (Matthew 24:4)

Considering that someone has been feeding this woman the popular lie that "Our nation was based on Judeo-Christian principles," I think she's the one who'd better take heed.

DSM Hearing Report

2005-06-16T18:02:00.000-04:00

Shakepeare's Sister has a play-by-play of the Downing Street Minutes meeting that occurred today on Capitol Hill. I heard it in the car on C-SPAN radio. If you get a chance, check it out on C-SPAN 2 tomorrow night at 8PM EDT--or for you impatient folk or those who actually have something better to do on Friday nights, go to C-SPAN's web site for the video. There were some startling new revelations by a former CIA analyst and some heartrending testimony by a woman whose son was killed in action in Iraq. The head of AfterDowningStreet.org and the former Ambassador to Iraq also testified.

I was surprised how many times the word "impeachment" came up in such polite society. I, for one, have heard enough to want more investigation into whether the Bush Administration, and the President and VP in particular, knowingly misled the Congress and the American people into a devastating war, the end of which is nowhere in sight.

After the meeting, Rep. John Conyers met his supporters in Lafayette Park and marched over to deliver his letter to President Bush, onto which over 565,000 Americans and 120 U.S. Representatives signed. Yep, over half a million people want the President to answer a few basic questions:

1)Do you or anyone in your administration dispute the accuracy of the leaked document?
2) Were arrangements being made, including the recruitment of allies, before you sought Congressional authorization to go to war? Did you or anyone in your Administration obtain Britain's commitment to invade prior to this time?
3) Was there an effort to create an ultimatum about weapons inspectors in order to help with the justification for the war as the minutes indicate?
4) At what point in time did you and Prime Minister Blair first agree it was necessary to invade Iraq?
5) Was there a coordinated effort with the U.S. intelligence community and/or British officials to "fix" the intelligence and facts around the policy as the leaked document states?
6) What is your major malfunction, numbnuts? Didn't your Mommy and Daddy show you enough attention when you were a child?

Okay, I added the last one, on account'a having watched Full Metal Jacket on Memorial Day.

Read 'Em and Don't Weep

2005-06-16T07:15:00.000-04:00

Last month, I blogged about the Campaign for Reader Privacy, which was one of many efforts to push for repealing Patriot Act section 215, the part that lets the government look over your shoulder when you buy books or check them out from the library.

Yesterday the House voted 238-187 to restrict investigators from using the anti-terrorism law for such purposes. The White House, of course, has threatened to veto, because Bush is suspicious of anyone who actually reads a book. Hmm, maybe Laura the Librarian needs to have a little talk with him...

This Associated Press article notes:

Supporters of rolling back the library and bookstore provision said that the law gives the FBI too much leeway to go on fishing expeditions based on what people read. Innocent people could get tagged as potential terrorists based on what they check out from a library, critics said.

Wow, letting people read what they want, letting them follow their own curiosity or research needs without worrying about being carted off to Gitmo. It's starting to look like America out there again, folks.

Update on Philip Cooney

2005-06-15T15:37:00.000-04:00

Perhaps he won't even notice he has changed jobs.
--David G. Hawkins, with the Natural Resources Defense Council

Last week I blogged about Philip Cooney, the ex-oil lobbyist who doctors White House climate change reports for a living. Now the New York Times reports he's leaving Bush, Inc., to take a position with Exxon"Let's Not Cry Over Spilled Oil"Mobil.

Oil industry insiders are writing this Administration's energy policy. Duh, let's see: whose best interests might they have in mind? Yours? Mine? The nation's? The world's?

Bawlmer is Hot, Hon!

2005-06-15T11:08:00.000-04:00

Hon is a feeling that you have in your heart.
-- Denise Whiting, founder of HonFest and owner of Cafe Hon and the Hon Bar

International travel experts Frommer's has listed Baltimore as one of this year's top ten up and coming summer destinations.

I'm not kidding. Here's what they say:

If you've never considered Baltimore, now is the time. It's undergoing a cultural renaissance that goes beyond baseball and steamed crabs. Check out the fascinating medieval art, suits of armor, and Egyptian mummies at the Walters Art Museum. Then, fast forward to the American Visionary Art Museum where the offbeat and funky works will engage your imagination. Go "down under" at the always popular National Aquarium in its new wing devoted to "Animal Planet Australia" opening this fall. Top off your day by visiting one of the new ethnic restaurants that have been popping up in neighborhoods like Fells Point, Mount Vernon, and Little Italy that make dining an event unto itself.

A Must: Shop 'til you drop on Antique Row, where you'll discover silver, porcelains and chairs of all sizes and shapes.

No, I'm really not kidding.

But why spend the day in a stuffy art gallery when you could be attending the HonFest in Hampden? Sorry, it's over for this year (I meant to post this blog last Friday), but mark your calendars for HonFest 2006, where you can celebrate big hair, cat's-eye sunglasses, and good old-fashioned charm. The event features the "Best Hon" contest, including prizes for "Li'l Hons," as well as a life-sized "Hon-Opoly" game, and--new this year--the "Hon Run."

Baltimore, Maryland, a city with a proud history, where our national anthem was written and our young democracy was defended from the ravaging Brits. Where Babe Ruth was born, and Edgar Allen Poe decided to die.

Come for the museums, stay for the Hons.

(Yankee fans, stay home.)

Stunning Revelation: Moral Values for Sale

2005-06-15T10:35:00.000-04:00

I'm going to show Washington that a porn star is more than someone who just flashes her boobs.
--Mary Carey

In fact, they usually flash a lot more than that. Or so I've been told.

The New York Daily News, never one to shy from incisive political commentary, especially when it allows them to use the word "boobs," reports that porn star Mary Carey, who ran for Governor of California in 2003, will be attending a Republican Party fundraiser in Washington, an event headlined by President Bush.

The evangelical community is freaking out as they realize that the only "value" the Republican Party cares about is that of the Almighty Dollar:

An RNCC spokesman has said the committee would take Carey's $2,500 price of admission and spend it to elect more Republicans.

That pretty much speaks for itself.

Drowning in Downing (Street) (Updates)

2005-06-15T09:28:00.000-04:00

Aaaaaugh! I take a few days off to finish my book and decompress from finishing my book, and having a beer for finishing my book, and loads o' stuff happens with regard to the Downing Street Memo.

For today, just go to AfterDowningStreet.org for the latest.

But I can't resist pointing out NBC's belated but welcomed wakeup, where they verify SEVEN more British memos relating to the Bush Administration's resolve to go to war nearly a year before he told us we were being forced to invade as a last resort.

The house of cards is falling, folks.

Kids these days, Part III

2005-06-15T08:55:00.000-04:00

The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE), based at my graduate alma mater, the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy (yes, I have some objective qualifications for spouting off on this blog, thank you very much), just released a report showing that turnout among the nation's youngest voters increased in 2004 more than that of any other age group.

Voters age 18-24 upped their turnout by 11%, "making it a significant and disproportionate factor in the overall jump in the number of Americans going to the polls last fall." The overall turnout increase was 4%.

So there!

Of course, voter turnout among the young'uns is still lower than that for other age groups. But the gap is closing, and when you consider the obstacles involved in absentee ballots for college students, lack of transportation, and the simple fact that young people haven't yet established the habit of voting, this increase is a sign of growing awareness and urgency relating to political issues that affect them directly.

Like, you know, the fact that soon there could be no jobs for them other than killing and dying in Iraq.

Let's hope they all come back in '06, and bring their friends.

Luv Our Guv--it's the Law!

2005-06-15T08:09:00.000-04:00

"The Princess Anne police told us, if we did anything except politely clap for the governor, we'd be arrested, and that we couldn't raise our voice in protest, and we had to stand away from everybody else."
--Zachary Gidwitz, Baltimore high school senior

Michael Olesker of the Baltimore Sun reports in his latest column of a disturbing incident--or suppression of an incident--at Gov. Robert "Whining is Not a Leadership Style Unless it's Mine" Ehrlich's recent veto party at a Somerset County Wal-Mart. He was vetoing the "Wal-Mart bill," which I wrote about here (see #3). The student quoted above went to protest as part of an independent study project called Maryland Health Care for All, which was joined by labor and health care groups in the protest.

Hmm, remind you of anything? Ehrlich is so eager to be Bush's Mini-Me, he's adopting all of his heavy-handed, freedom-suppressing tactics. (In some cases, he's been worse. As far as I know, Bush hasn't sent a memo to every federal employee forbidding them to speak to certain reporters.)

Shawn Dobson of Progressive Maryland reported that:

[A]nother officer said, 'You're not allowed to boo, chant, or hold up any signs, and if you do, we'll arrest you. One of our people said, 'What happens if we want to cheer the governor?' The police said, 'That's OK.'
....
The funny thing is, as the police were issuing their threats, the governor took the microphone and said, 'Isn't it great to be in the Free State?'

Yes, Bob, it certainly was. And will be again one day.

First draft finished

2005-06-15T07:58:00.000-04:00

The prose is clunky, many minor characters lack names (they tend to be referred to as "[horse lady]", "[dead guy]", "[other dead guy]", ["?????"]), and a few scenes have no endings. But this ugly duckling's got swan genes, I just know it.

A novel's first draft can be compared to the sketches of a sculptor*: the basic form is there, you can sort of tell what the final version will look like, but it's just the beginning. The real work comes when I pick up the hammer and chisel in a few weeks to begin Draft 2.

I finished it Monday, then took yesterday off--no chores, no work (including blogging), no writing. I finished reading three books and started a fourth. When noon rolled around--my usual writing time--I started to get antsy, then bored, then depressed. Who knew I was such a workaholic?

I guess I'm addicted to the feeling of words rolling off my pen or keyboard. A day without writing is worse than a day without sunshine--with a heat index in the high 90s, I'll take a few clouds right now.

Though I was originally planning to take off two days in a row--you know, create one of those "weekends" I've heard so much about--I'm back in the saddle today, bloggin' 'til 9, then tackling the horror-movie-sized weeds in the front garden. Noon will find me back in front of my beloved laptop, revising a proposal for my agent.

By the weekend I'll be adding to a first draft of a Requiem sequel that I started back in 1998. I don't know if it'll ever sell, but it may be my last chance to write something simply because I love it. Especially if I'm the only one who ever does.

-----
*Bonus: When I Googled "first-draft sketches of sculptures," I came across this site, a Photoshop contest showing famous artists' early works, stolen from the "archives" of their childhood art classes. My favorites are "Whistler's Mommy" and Mondrian's "Math Doodle." Be sure to check out both pages.

Chapter Last

2005-06-13T07:21:00.000-04:00

Today I'll be finishing the first draft of my latest novel. It's been--gulp!--three years and a month since my last first draft (not counting those two screenplays).

I already feel a little post-manuscript depression, which reminds me of the emotional letdown after the closing of a play. The difference is, I have no one to share it with, no one with whom to have a beer and reminisce about the time the prop guy accidentally turned on a bandsaw backstage during the leading lady's death scene. I suppose I could have a nice glass of whiskey and remind myself, "Hey, remember that time you misspelled 'reticence'? Hah." But it's not the same.

I've been watching the seemingly endless Appendices to the Lord of the Rings movies lately. What an amazing team effort. Clearly it was stressful, but it seemed fun at times, and the four-year slog just added to the enormity of the collective accomplishment.

In comparison, novel writing feels lonely. I love what I do because I crave creative independence. But sometimes I long for collaboration again, the way it was in theatre. An obsession is much more fun when it's shared.

Springtime for Santorum

2005-06-11T10:15:00.000-04:00

My good friend Greg! at Define "a Life"... just noticed an amazing development in the Philadelphia Theater scene. Any actor/singers nearby might want to consider auditioning for this one.

--Christian

The real reason we invaded Iraq?

2005-06-11T10:01:00.000-04:00

'Morning, all. Jeri said I could keep blogging once in a while, and so I thought I'd pass this one along.

I always knew the real reason we invaded Iraq had to do with oil. I mean, let's face it, Saddam wasn't threatening us or his neighbors, and the Downing Street Memo proves that as much. What was still left to explain the deaths of 1600+ Americans and countless innocent Iraqis is why we really invaded in the first place.

Al Feldstein, retired editor of MAD magazine, has a great post on the subject at AfterDowningStreet.org. What caught my attention was his supposition that we didn't invade to access cheap oil, we invaded to keep cheap oil off the market.

Wouldn't be surprised if it were true.

--Christian

Latest DSM News

2005-06-10T09:44:00.000-04:00

Events are happening more quickly than one overworked novelist can handle, but I'll try:

Rep. John Conyers will hold a hearing on the Downing Street Memo next Thursday, after which he will join thousands of supporters in Lafayette Park to walk down the street and deliver his petition to the White House. Here's a selection from his diary on dKos.

On Thursday, a week from today, I will be holding a hearing with my Democratic colleagues to begin to hear evidence about the DSM. We will have a number of witnesses, including Joe Wilson, who frequent readers here already know is a WMD expert and former Ambassador; Ray McGovern, a 27-year CIA analyst; Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq; and John Bonifaz, a renowned Constitutional attorney. At the conclusion of the hearing, we will go to Lafayette Park and I will personally deliver your signatures to the White House.

The number of signatures has skyrocketed since MoveOn.org got involved this week. As of yesterday Conyers confirmed that 241,000 had been obtained, but I've heard as many as 421,000. Click here for the latest results from MoveOn.org. Personally, I think that's an overestimation, but I'm sure Conyers's final figure next week will eliminate duplicate names to withstand any inevitable (and justified) scrutiny.

Media coverage is picking up:

- Seattle Weekly editorial: "Memo to Mainstream Press"
- Editor and Publisher: "USA Today Defends Lack of Coverage of Downing Street Memo"
- UK Times: "Washington confronts 'Memogate'" and "Downing Street minutes that lasted for months"
- Videos (courtesy once again of Crooks and Liars) of Colin Powell on The Daily Show and a DSM discussion on Hardball
- an interview with Conyers on Buzzflash
- and FINALLY, the New York Times: "Bush and Blair Deny 'Fixed' Iraq Reports"

Or you could skip the media's scramblfor relevancy and instead read this fun piece at Adventures of the Smart Patrol, where Paul the Spud translates the Bush/Blair press conference: "Bert and Ernie on Downing Street" (Warning: Explicit Lyrics)

Whew! Now excuse me while I run that final furlong of the Novel Derby.

Bush & Truth: Like Oil and Water

2005-06-10T08:54:00.000-04:00

The environmental policies of the most powerful and gluttonous nation on the planet are being written by the world's most powerful oil company. Which is, of course, a bit like our national dietary guidelines being written by Burger King, or our national health care guidelines being written by Merck, or our national school curricula being written by lost born-again Neanderthal creationists. Oh wait.
--Mark Morford, "Global Warmin' is Fer Idjuts"

A White House official who used to be head lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute has been editing government reports on climate change. Suprise, surprise--those changes played down the well-established connections between human emissions and global warming.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle,

The official, Philip Cooney, removed or adjusted descriptions of climate research that government scientists and their supervisors, including some senior Bush administration officials, had already approved. In most cases, the changes appeared in the final reports.
The dozens of changes, while sometimes as subtle as the insertion of the phrase "significant and fundamental" before the word "uncertainties," tend to produce an air of doubt about findings that most climate experts say are robust.

This guy Cooney has ZERO scientific training or experience, yet he has the authority to alter the findings in order to soften the blow for the people who used to sign his checks.

The White House said Mr. Cooney will not be made available for comment. In other words, "there's nothing he can say that won't make us look worse, and we don't care enough to address the issue in any substantive manner, so let's pretend it didn't happen."

And the media will respond, "Okay, global warming is boring and depressing, anyway. What did Michael Jackson wear to court this morning?"

Bush personifies the national fear of science. Science has numbers and formulas and weird furrin' characters like epsilon and sigma. Some of those numbers are little and ride up high or down low next to the other numbers--seems awfully suspicious. Scientists have bad haircuts and no tans and act like they know more about their field than we do (the gall!).

We can't trust science, because it's inherently less than one hundred percent certain--unlike faith, which shows us the straight and narrow moral path from which we never stray from unless doing so would make us and our friends lots of money.

So Bush cuts funding for the Hubble Telescope, which has advanced human understanding of the universe a thousandfold since its launch, in favor of the mega-billion-dollar ego-boost of putting men (yes, MEN, and they better be straight men) on Mars, not to learn more about the Red Planet, but to jam our flag into its dust and mine its resources and beat the Soviets.

They handpick scientists to review government research, eliminating the time-honored process of peer review. They overruled FDA staff scientists and two independent advisory panels to prevent over-the-counter access to emergency contraception. They changed lead paint regulations to protect the manufacturers instead of children. And we all remember what the EPA told the people who lived near Ground Zero.

For some more fun examples of how this administration has politicized science, check out this report.

PLAIN AND SIMPLE TIME

This Administration has two agendas:

1) profits for their corporate comrades, especially in the oil business
2) imposing the values of a narrow segment of one religion on all citizens

Any facts that contradict either agenda are denied, ignored, or demonized.

Bottom line: Don't trust anything they say. They only tell the truth when it's convenient.

I know of several intelligent conservatives who read this blog and don't comment. Please, please explain how you can defend this behavior. You believe in truth. Your President doesn't.

Don't even consider responding with, "Clinton lied about sex."

The Story that Won't Die...

2005-06-08T07:43:00.000-04:00

...also won't really be reported.

Yesterday's Washington Post featured another in an increasingly long line of articles about the fuss over the Downing Street Memo.

Yes, folks, the story is the story. How 'meta.'

Instead of focusing on the minutes themselves and why the Post's readers should care that our President lied us into war, they turn their laser-sharp investigative skills onto...

Tim Russert's interview with Ken Mehlman, the Republican National Committee chair.

There are so many levels of absurdity, it's hard to concentrate on one at a time, but let me try:

1) No one gets straight talk, much less facts, from a party chair. Shouldn't Russert be interviewing a person of substance instead of a creature of spin? Mehlman's just doing his job, diabolical as it is, and after reading the transcript I thought that for once Russert was pretty tough on a Republican. But you can't get to the bottom of anything by interviewing a shill.

2) I forget what #2 was.

3) The Post article doesn't question Mehlman's claims that "the findings of the [Downing Street Memo], the fact that the intelligence was somehow fixed have been totally discredited by everyone who's looked at it."

4) The author of the article, Jefferson Morley, credits two people with providing "research" for the article. So you're telling me that 3 warm bodies couldn't come up with anything better than summaries of existing media coverage? I have a feeling Morley's two "researchers" are unpaid interns who earned their lack of pay by doing a Google search.

I decided not to become a journalist partly because of the incisive investigation required. I hate bothering people, and when I was in school, journalists actually had to call sources on the phone to get quotes, to dig deeper for information that people just didn't want to reveal. I wish I'd known I could cobble together an article by cannibalizing other reporters' lack of reporting.

5) The Post article ends with this quote:

Far from being a dud, the Downing Street Memo may generate more stories to come.

Just not this one.

Dare I care?

2005-06-07T11:23:00.000-04:00

Not to gloat, but the Yankees are under .500 again. And my hero-turned-traitor Randy Johnson has taken much of the blame for the Evil Empire's terrible season. My curse is working.

Okay, I'm gloating. But when Johnson left the Diamondbacks for the Yankees, it pretty much ended my love of baseball. No exaggeration there. It butchered my happiest baseball memory, that of the 2001 World Series, when Johnson and Curt Schilling won a joint MVP Award for their decimation of the Yankees' lineup. To me, Randy Johnson had always epitomized a quiet integrity, so different from the pompous prima donnas from the Bronx.

(Hmm, maybe that's why he doesn't pitch well in pinstripes: deep down he knows he doesn't belong there.)

I disowned the sport to the point where I didn't care that my childhood dream of a Washington baseball franchise had come true. In my mind, baseball was a fictional story that had a happy ending in the Red Sox 2004 World Series victory; anything else was a non-canonical sequel. Only the Orioles' unlikely success and the Yankees' continued mediocrity has coaxed me back, tentatively, to the sports page.

Maybe it's temporary. Maybe I'm a fool to love again. Maybe the Yankees' $200 million payroll will give Steinbrenner a return on his investment, and the myriad injuries the O's have taken to their lineup will finally hobble their march to the playoffs. Life will return to normal, and baseball will bring me pain once again, all the sharper for having once broken the addiction.

Or maybe the forces of good in this world are starting to wake up.

Operation Truth

2005-06-07T08:54:00.000-04:00

O’ beautiful, for spacious skies
But now those skies are threatening
They’re beating plowshares into swords
For this tired old man that we elected king
Armchair warriors often fail
And we’ve been poisoned by these fairy tales
The lawyers clean up all details
Since daddy had to lie
--Don Henley, "The End of the Innocence"

Most of us--you, me, the President--don't know what we're talking about when it comes to war. We haven't been there.

But these people have. Operation Truth is a fantastic site put together by military personnel who want their stories to be heard. It has no overt political agenda other than telling the truth, which, surprise surprise, isn't all good or all bad. It just is.

Check out their blog, and especially the link on the right-hand side of the home page to the report Two Years Later: Troops tell the raw truth about the Iraq war. The report reprints stories in the servicemembers' own words about what's going wrong and what's going right in Iraq.

We owe it to our troops to do something more important than slap yellow ribbon magnets on our SUV's or sit in our comfy little chairs bitching about Bush's incompetence.

We owe it to them to listen.

Book bloggin' Part I: Oprah ruins Americans' summers

2005-06-07T08:28:00.000-04:00

With a good reading-group leader, they'll make it through As I Lay Dying. And they'll make it through Light in August. But they're going to start The Sound and the Fury and say, 'What is this?' (feigns throwing a book over shoulder)
--Richard Howarth, mayor of Oxford, MS, William Faulkner's hometown

Last week, Oprah Winfrey picked the above three William Faulkner novels as her summer reading choices. I appreciate her attempt to produce a more literate America, but five minutes with The Sound and the Fury may cause readers to gouge out their own eyes, thereby limiting themselves forever to audiobooks and books written in Braille.

Sure, everyone has their masochistic literary tastes. I'm a huge Thomas Hardy fan, and Fyodor Dostoevsky is my ever-lovin' sweetheart (literarily speaking, of course). But I wouldn't suggest to my audience of millions--er, dozens--that they should lug The Brothers Karamazov or Jude the Obscure to the beach (although Jude would fit in the sveltest of beach bags, if you're interested).

One has to wonder if Oprah is compensating for what Jonathan Franzen insinuated were her questionable literary tastes, after he rudely rebuffed her choice of his own novel The Corrections for her book club. Last year Oprah recommended Tolstoy's Anna Karenina, and millions of copies flew off the shelves, resulting in bruises, concussions, and countless cases of shoulder tendonitis. How many people actually read all 838 pages has yet to be determined.

A group of contemporary authors has recently written Oprah to ask her to please start recommending books by writers who still draw oxygen. We need the sales, and for many writers her book club was the difference between languishing forever in anonymity and languishing forever next to an Olympic-sized swimming pool.

Anyway, reviewer Jesse Kornbluth has some alternate suggestions for easing your way into Faulkner's inscrutable little world. But if you'd like to enjoy your summer, the Washington Post Book World just released its editors' picks for best books of the season.

I'm excited about The Good Wife by Stewart O'Nan. Last year I listened to O'Nan's Night Country on tape, and it ranks as one of my favorite Halloween-related experiences ever. I've also heard good things about Pearl by Mary Gordon. Two of my favorites, Bebe Moore Campbell and John Irving, have new novels appearing in July.

Will I be reading any of these? Nope. As a Jeri-come-lately to the world of fantasy, I've got several decades of that genre's classics to catch up on, as well as keeping on with new trends. But I couldn't resist Loving Soren by Caroline Coleman O'Neill, about the woman who tried to save my favorite philosopher, Soren Kierkegaard, from himself. I'll let you know how that goes.

Rescue Help Needed

2005-06-06T10:39:00.000-04:00

Most of us have heard stories of couples who give the boot to their previously beloved pets as soon as they have a baby. For all those dogs and cats shoved aside to make way for the furless two-leggeds, this one's for you.

Under the cover of weekend oblivion

2005-06-06T10:17:00.000-04:00

The military admitted to five instances of "mishandling" the Koran at Guantanamo Bay. According to this Reuters report, in separate incidents, guards defiled the Muslim holy book by:

1) kicking it
2) splashing water on it when throwing water balloons into a cell block
3) stepping on it
4) splashing urine on it while peeing into a nearby air vent
5) writing a two-word English obscenity inside it

The last line of the article is the most telling:

Southern Command released its findings on a Friday night.

Hint: no one reads the Saturday paper, no one watches news on Saturday night. They might as well have released the findings directly into a sewer drain. If you want to find out what the government doesn't want you to notice, read the newspaper or news sites on Saturday mornings.

This is why blogs are important. We pay attention on weekends, so you don't have to.

Almost There

2005-06-06T08:45:00.000-04:00

I'm returning this week to "full-time" blogging, as promised a month ago. The novel is almost finished, and I'm on the verge of being able to make an exciting announcement, as promised much more than a month ago.

Summer has finally reached Central Maryland, as evidenced by the pervasive haze settled over the landscape. I have seen the last of the distant Catoctin Mountains for several months. I still like knowing they're there, though.

In addition to keeping you up-to-date on the latest Downing Street Memo news, I'm also sifting through the FBI Torture documents released to the ACLU under the Freedom of Information Act. Nothing like a little light summer reading.

John Bolton, International Man of Bastardry

2005-06-06T08:32:00.000-04:00

According to an article in Newsday, U.N. Ambassador-nominee John Bolton orchestrated the firing of the head of an arms inspection agency in a move that a U.N. tribunal has since declared "unlawful."

A former Bolton deputy says the U.S. undersecretary of state felt Jose Bustani "had to go," particularly because the Brazilian was trying to send chemical weapons inspectors to Baghdad. That might have helped defuse the crisis over alleged Iraqi weapons and undermined a U.S. rationale for war.

Hmmm...so Bolton made sure this Bustani guy got fired so that he wouldn't discover that Saddam Hussein had no chemical weapons. This was just two weeks after the meeting in the U.K. now famously documented in the Downing Street Minutes.

Curious-er and curious-er, as my friend Alice once said.

Shakespeare's Sister has a full analysis.

C-SPAN covers Downing Street Memo

2005-06-06T07:59:00.000-04:00

Crooks and Liars has a link to C-Span's Washington Journal spot featuring Steve Cobble of AfterDowningStreet.org and Kevin Aylward from the conservative Wizbangblog.

Aylward reflected the Right's anemic response to the DSM. Allow me to summarize:

1) It's nothing new.
TRANSLATION: C'mon, we all knew he was lying about WMD's just to scare the American people into supporting the war. What's the big deal.
2) No one is paying attention.
TRANSLATION: The public is so exhausted from all the bad news coming out of Iraq that they only care about the war's end, not the beginning.
3) It's irrelevant because Bush has already been reelected.
TRANSLATION: We got away with it. Nyah-nyah-nyah.

My response:
1) It's nothing I didn't already know deep in my heart from the first moment they started taking us to war. But not everyone is as cynical as I am. Statements such as "military action was seen as inevitable" (as of July 2002, when Bush was still telling us that war was a last resort), "the facts and intelligence were being fixed around the policy" and "there was little discussion of the aftermath after military action" might disturb the more trusting citizens among us.

2) Anyone with loved ones in Iraq cares why they're there and what they're fighting for. They are NOT there to protect our freedoms or to defend their country.

3) particularly offends me. It insinuates that losing office is the only way this Administration can be held accountable. It is not.

Downing Street for Dummies

2005-06-03T09:38:00.000-04:00

Discovering a great new blog is like hearing a fantastic new band on the radio. Unfortunately, the latter hasn't happened to me since 2003 (and just because they're popular doesn't mean they suck).

Anyway, Damn Liberals has a great primer on the Downing Street Memo, laying out point for point why it's the "smoking gun." If you're the Cliffs Notes type and don't have time to read the whole one-friggin'-page memo, here's your chance to study up for the big exam.

Also read his post on Supporting Our Troops. He pokes holes in the vapid, do-nothing Right's claim to patriotism.

Must get back to my novel now. Up to nearly 110,000 words, on the verge of writing my first battle scene ever. I should finish the first draft by the middle of the month, at which point I'll start blogging more regularly. Thanks for your patience, and thanks especially to Christian, your hot substitute teacher who's kept the whole Big Brass Alliance/Downing Street Memo focus alive. MMMWWAHH!

Ask your President!

2005-06-03T08:58:00.000-04:00

How much hair have you pulled out of your scalp after watching our President give a press conference? Are you frustrated with his incoherent responses, impatient with his whiny toddlerisms, aghast at his incomprehension of basic facts?

Hey, show some respect. Maybe it's not even his fault (remember, nothing is his fault)--maybe it's the difficult, complicated questions that those mean reporters keep asking. Being President is hard work.

Now you can ask the President your own questions, courtesy of the Bush Press Conference Response Generator. I posed a straightforward query, "Why are so many people dying in Iraq?" and he told me this:

Ah. (looks around room) We had a counterterrorism group meeting on a regular basis to analyze the threats that came in. The lessons of 9/11 that I -- one lesson was, we must deal with gathering threats. And that's part of the reason I dealt with Iraq the way I did. Well, the oil revenues are -- they're bigger than we thought they would be at this point in time. I mean, one year after the liberation of Iraq, the revenues of the oil stream is pretty darn significant. This is a guy who was a torturer, a killer, a maimer; there's mass graves.

Um. And my job as the President is to lead this nation into making the world a better place.

Gosh, I don't know. It's a dangerous -- it was a dangerous network that we unraveled. (long pause)

Let's see -- next question.

Okay. My bad. I should have been more specific. I'm still getting this whole journalism thing down pat. How about "Mr. President, how do you address the assessment by many senior military officers that our forces are stretched too thin in Iraq and Afghanistan to do an efficient job?"

I think --

The spirit is incredible.

In order to secure the country, we must do everything in our power to find these killers and bring them to justice, before they hurt us again. I wish you would have given me this written question ahead of time, so I could plan for it. And we appreciate that sacrifice in America.

Yes. Next.

Hmm. Well, Iraq is a dodgy subject, and I hear that questioning foreign policy can harm our national security. Let's turn to domestic issues. Mr. President, why do the American people reject your plans for Social Security?

Er. Ah. Er. And we appreciate that sacrifice in America. A free society is a society in which somebody is more likely to be able to make a living.

I'm afraid they want to hurt us again. They're still there.

Next question.

Who will want to hurt us? Senior citizens?

We're at war. Look.

Let's see here, hold on. You're next.

Wait, sir, you haven't answered my question about social security. Why do Americans reject your plan for private retirement accounts?

Those who yell will not be asked.

But--hey, my mike's been cut! That's it, I'm calling FAIR.

Quote of the Week

2005-06-03T08:16:00.000-04:00

I've always believed that, obviously, the best way to solve any difficult issue is through diplomacy.
--President Bush, at his May 31, 2005, press conference

Unless that difficult issue is, um, war.

86,000 signatures and counting

2005-06-03T08:13:00.000-04:00

John Conyers is over 86% (as of Wednesday) of the way to the desired 100,000 signatures on his letter to President Bush asking for answers about the Downing Street Memo. AfterDowningStreet.org has the latest message from Congressman Conyers. If you haven't done so already, read the letter and sign up!

--Christian

We're going to war...all we have to do now is justify it

2005-06-02T19:42:00.000-04:00

If taking the country to war is the most important decision a president could make, shouldn't it be made only after compelling evidence was presented that war was the only solution, and not the other way around?

Unfortunately, the idea of deciding to go to war first then finding the means of justifying it second is precisely what the Bush administration did in the aftermath of September 11 and even well before September 11.

Mark Danner has a piece titled The Secret Way to War in the New York Review of Books. In it, he chronicles the events leading up to war, exploring the ways in which the British and US governments sought ways to justify a war against Iraq. He makes several references to the Downing Street Memo and uses that along with other sources to tell a compelling story.

Remember all that talk about wanting to get the UN to vote for a resolution to allow UN weapons inspectors back into Iraq?

...the idea of UN inspectors was introduced not as a means to avoid war, as President Bush repeatedly assured Americans, but as a means to make war possible. War had been decided on; the problem under discussion here was how to make, in the prime minister's words, "the political context ...right."

Yep, just a little bit of setting the stage for war, is all it was. But even this was a bit of a gamble, in Cheney's' eyes:

Cheney, like other administration "hard-liners," feared "the UN route" not because it might fail but because it might succeed and thereby prevent a war that they were convinced had to be fought.

Turns out Cheney had reason to be concerned:

...Saddam frustrated British and American hopes...hundreds of inspectors entered Iraq, began to search, and found...nothing.

The piece goes on to talk about how the US then went and pretty much successfully hoodwinked the American people into going along with war. The argument went something like, "of course they can't find Saddam's weapons because Saddam hid them...let's kick his a**!!!!"

The inspectors' failure to find weapons in Iraq was taken to discredit the worth of the inspections, rather than to cast doubt on the administration's contention that Saddam possessed large stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

So you'd think that now the Downing Street Memo has come out, we'd see this all over the news, right? Wrong:

As I write, no American newspaper has published it and few writers have bothered to comment on it. The war continues, and Americans have grown weary of it; few seem much interested now in discussing how it began, and why their country came to fight a war in the cause of destroying weapons that turned out not to exist.

But it does point out that public support for the war is eroding, in large part due to the fact that most Americans no longer believe that Saddam ever posed a threat to the US:

That barely four Americans in ten are still willing to believe this suggests that as time goes on and the gap grows between what Americans see and what they are told, membership in the "reality-based community" may grow along with it. We will see.

We sure will.

--Christian