Thought Puh-leeze

The Worst (and Last) Congress in the History of the United States

2011-04-07T20:17:00.000-04:00

The United States is about 28 hours from a planned shutdown of "non-essential" federal government services and operations. More than anyone can expect from the newly-annointed Tea Party members of the House of Representatives will prove, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the current government of the United States is completely invalid, illegitimate and undeserving of any support by any member of the general population.

Over the past 10 years, since the inauguration of George W. Bush as president - actually, appointed by the Supreme Court, and his second term a stolen election - the United States federal government has done nothing to benefit the general population of the nation, and the Obama administration, with the willful assistance of the Republican party, has carried the rhetoric and action to the extreme.

In the rawest sense, the United States of America no longer exists as a sovereign nation, but rather as a cleptocracy centered on Wall Street, with no interest for the common good of the nation and incapable of carrying out even the most rudimentary duties of governance.

It is ironic that the supposed "freedom fighting" Tea Party members of congress would be the very ones to tip the nation over the edge, for we are truly at a crossroads. By ceding control of the functions of government, the current congress and the president are in no small way ceding control of the government, abrogating their powers and should have their feet held to the hottest fires on earth. They have abandoned all logic, all sense of decorum and any small shred of decency they have left in their bones.

Once the senators, representatives and the president pass this rubicon of budgetary necessity, they should be barred from re-entry into their abdicated seats of power. even if they re-instate themselves, their dictates, laws, regulations and authority should be hitherto ignored and rejected. The American people are as good a people as there is in the world, and they are more than capable of carrying on the orderly conduct of a civil society without the intrusions of a mad, maniacal band of rogue agents in contradiction to the constitution.

Let the fools walk away. Let the government cease to exist. Let the chips fall where they may, but know you this, all those who entertain thoughts of ruling, leading or governing: you have lost the people and the people will rise up against you and smite you, for you have shown yourselves to be powerless squabblers with no plans, no future and no right to rule.

The hours grow short. There is probably already no time left. Those who claim to know what is best, those who have oathed to serve their country, have left it in a state of great disrepair from which they cannot rescue it.

When the clock strikes midnight on the 8th day of April, and the government - by its own decree - discontinues operations, mark that moment as mere hours before the dawning of a new day in America, one which will progress without the burden of illegitimate caretakers.

The Brighter Side of Radioactivity

2011-03-24T18:26:00.002-04:00

Watching Wolf Blitzer talk to former Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark earlier today, I had, thanks to a short smoke break, something of an epiphany.

I laughed at the notion of square-headed Clark being called "supreme" anything. I looked him in the television eye and chortled, as, in the back of my mind was the apparition of a nuclear grim reaper, glowing bright orange and blue, as it were, turning all around him into an uninhabitable, unthinkable, gruesome cataclysm, complete with disformed, tortured humans, screaming for relief, death, anything to halt the searing, invisible heat that was melting their skin.

And there was fire all around, everywhere fire burning and destruction.

Clark, in all his "supreme-ness" and all of his allies in the military, government, business and politics are puny adversaries when compared to the totality of nuclear winter, death to all and no escape.

It was at that point that I became truly free. I looked upon Clark and the powers that be as nothing, mere pawns in the larger scheme, and any fear of them had vanished.

The larger enemy of radiation, invisible, deadly and persistent, dwarfed their machinations of power and supposed superiority in every imaginable way.

Oh, The Humanity! Cartoon Peggy Noonan Meets the Press

2010-05-16T10:05:00.003-04:00

I am fairly certain that Peggy Noonan is not a human being. She is a cartoon character, a Hanna-Barbera inspiration miscast as a political analyst, which, in cartoon-land, must be something like living in hell.

To deserve such a severe fate, Noonan the cartoon character must have committed some kind of cartoonish crime, like not breaking into tiny pieces when hit with an anvil, or not churning her legs at whipsaw speed before actually running, or, and I believe this was cartoon Noonan's crime, acting too much like a human being.

In cartoon-land, of which I know little, acting too human is probably cause for erasure, but Noonan somehow survived the wrong end of the pencil and lives on in our human environment, somehow. And the Sunday news shows love her. Usually reserved for ABC (that network owned and operated by a cartoon mouse), she suddenly popped up this week on Meet the Press. Could it be that Peggy has been banished from cartoon-land or did she somehow leap off the page and land in the lap of some enterprising publicist?

Whatever the case, the penciler did a masterful job of superimposing Peggy's cartoon image onto the MTP set. I must say, you could barely detect the normal flickering cartoon movements, though one cameraman or show producer is going to be fired for showing the blank stares of the other columnists while she was (supposedly) talking. Bob Shrum, Mike Murphy and Jonathan Alter were variously shown staring vacuously into space during some of Peggy's voice-overs, like she wasn't really there at all! I think they got Julia Louis Dreyfus to do Peggy's vocal work. Nice job, but keep the camera on the cartoon next time, guys.

Peggy the cartoon-character limped through the discussion without making any salient points, which, you've got to believe, is the point of her being on the air in the first place. The networks have long-believed that the American public can't handle the truth. That's why they have roundtable discussions with people (and cartoon characters) who don't matter. They spout gibberish, which is just peachy-perfect for Peggy.

For instance, when moderator David Gregory asked her about Obama and leadership, prodding her to compare him to Reagan - something she simply could and would never do - she said, "the President seems different from his party," about as profound a pronouncement as a cartoon character could utter.

When asked about the upcoming Senate Judiciary confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Elena Kegan, Peggy conjured up images of Robert Bork being hanged (more about that below), but must have done some Googling before the show as she made a reference that "Oliver Wendell Holmes would not be confirmed today." That's a dubious call, though Peggy gets credit for bringing up the obscure and opaque.

On anti-incumbency, another topic about which Peggy knows nothing, adding to the case that she's not really human, Gregory called on her to dissect the Arkansas democratic race, where Blanche Lincoln faces a tough primary. Peggy, always aiming for a cheap shot on the president, said, "he stiffed her," and added that Lincoln "does not have the part of the party which needs to be on fire, on fire."

Note to Peggy: Your hair is burning!

After chuckling though MTP, I needed a little more convincing, so I checked for Peggy's latest writings and, sure enough, she didn't disappoint.

What has me convinced that Peggy is actually a cartoon character gone rogue is that she writes opinion columns for the Wall Street Journal, the paper owned by that bastion of fairness and equanimity, Rupert Murdoch, who, over the years, has morphed into a caricature of himself.

I was happy to find Peggy's most recent column in the Journal, which was promoted on line with the tag: "Noonan: The Lamest Show on Earth" complete with comic strip picture.

I thought when they mentioned "lame" the Journal editors were talking about Peggy. Alas, the column was about the coming Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, to whom Peggy swiftly, and without explanation, applied the "liberal" tag. But, that's just Peggy's way of keeping close ties to her dead hero, Ronald Reagan, and continue her 23-year lament for Robert Bork.

A few of Peggy's choice lines from her current monograph (with my comments):

"Ms. Kagan needs and deserves a tough and spirited grilling..." - of course. She's a liberal, after all. (This is just Peggy's first instruction to the Senate.)

"...even dead trees have a place in the forest." - obvious reference to Reagan.

"The Senate Judiciary Committee in 1987 took everything Judge Bork had ever said or written, ripped it from context, wove it into a rope, and flung it across his shoulders like a hangman's noose." - keep the flame alive, Peggy!

"There should be and needs to be a vigorous, rigorous grilling of Ms. Kagan." - Second call. All aboard!

"his [chief justice John Roberts] testimony was among the more lucid of recent years." - shamelessly self-serving.

"It would be nice if Ms. Kagan were given the opportunity and responsibility to answer tough, clear, direct questions." - strike three, Peggy. You're out.

I used to think that Peggy Noonan was a vampire, released from the crypt following a 20-year, post-Reagan snooze, but she's too old and silly and girly to be a vamp. She's a cartoon character, I'm totally sure.

The demise of eBay, Spankings and Naughty Pictures

2010-05-13T08:09:00.003-04:00

Editor's note: I posted this on the Seller Central message board at eBay, in response to the hundreds of thousands of sellers who are experiencing massive reductions and pageviews and thus, sales, essentially firing them from jobs at which they have worked hard for many years.

eBay, in the infinite wisdom of its CEO and leader, John Donahoe, has blundered to the point of extinction by moving all previous store listings onto the main auction site, thus flooding the system with a remarkable load in excess of 120 million items. Additionally, on or about April 1, they decided to allow items with a starting bid of less than $1 to be listed for free, resulting in even more junk and garbage being shown in their horribly flawed "best match" search results.

The exodus away from eBay has begun, and it's only a matter of time before the former auction colossus will be brought to its knees and eventually destroyed by from the inside, by the team of Harvard and Stanford geniuses who don't quite grasp the internet, the middle class or how to run a business.

Much of this is written in a kind of code. see if you can figure out what the other auction sites are.

Being a formerly good Catholic, I have to confess.

Bless me Father Donahoe, for I may have sinned.

I listed 20 items a week ago. One was a naughty magazine with a picture of Cindy Margoilis in it. She apparently lost her bikini top. OOOPSIE! Boy, is she hot, Father Donahoe.

What's that? Yes, I still have the magazine. It only got one page view over 6 days and I think that one was mine.

Huh? For my penance I must bring you the magazine? Well, OK, but I have other sins to confess.

I went and tried to sell some of the same items at a RANCH. A big ranch, not a Bonzai ranch, much bigger. The people there were very nice. I haven't sold anything, but the atmosphere is much better than here at the Church of the Diminishing eBay Lights. People are friendly and it's free to list stuff. So, that's a sin, right?

No? But it's a policy violation? And you're going to spank me?

Well, I have committed other sins. I sold some things from my own website and I know that you and your really, really smart friends have been using the term "web site" - two words - for many years, even as I kept telling you it was one word and now the AP has finally agreed that it's ONE WORD, you dumba$$.

So, Father Donahoe, you see, I've been using "website" since 1998 and I have proof. This shows that you and your friends aren't really that smart after all and the Church of the Diminishing eBay Lights is really just a big money grab for you and your Wall Street scumbag friends.

You should all go to prison for cheating hard-working Americans (and even those lazy ones) out of their money and their goods by lying to them about "improvements" which are really just big blunders and "fee reductions" which are actually fee increases, and for not allowing people to link to their websites and for splitting Playboy into Adult and regular auctions, and for not allowing downloads and electronic books and other non-tangible items to be listed on your WEBSITE, and for allowing sellers only to leave positive feedback and making feedback percentage indicative of just the past year, and for all the other stupid, moronic, insipid, petty things, like Best Match, DSRs, investigations, pink slaps, bans and favoring buyers over sellers.

Sellers pay the fees, Father Donahoe. We are your customers, NOT the buyers. Well, let me say, we were your customers, because we're all leaving and going to the MOON, or to the BIG RANCH that rhymes with Costanza, or maybe we'll just take a trip down the BIG SOUTH AMERICAN RIVER.

So, Father, I am confessing, but you and your people need to 'fess up, too. And, no you can't spank me and I'm not going to bring you any naughty magazines to look at. I'm going home and listing them on other WEBSITES, you LOSER.

Amen, amen. I'm feeling much better now.

Valerie Jarrett Is Really Bothering Me

2009-12-03T18:32:00.005-05:00

OK, I watched the President (Mr. Obama) on the tele today, promoting his "Jobs Summit" complete with call outs and who-dats and other useless nonsense. The idea of getting a whole bunch of diverse people together to work on how to get more jobs for more Americans is just such a total canard.

If the feds were really serious about creating jobs, they'd do what they do best: hand out money to employers and let them hire people. Of course, that would be too simple and probably unproductive, but the benefits in graft and corruption to the cronies on the inside would be enormous. Considering that, it's a wonder that they haven't done it already. Billions for jobs; millions for US!

Anyhow, while the "best and brightest" are schmoozing on and about Capitol Hill, there's a nagging image which keeps reappearing on CNBC (I know, I know, but I really do need the steady dose of humorous interludes only mindless economic reporting can provide). It's one of Valerie Jarrett, the wunderkind of the White House, the jazzy superstar of the formerly underprivileged, the she-bop superstar who fell neatly into the job of Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Relations and Public Liaison, which is a really fancy way of saying, "I do nothing constructive."

This image of Ms. Jarrett (BTW: she was married, now divorced and apparently available, though you'd have to be pretty rich and pretty self-important to land a date with her, I believe) comes around just about every hour or so, and it's making me crazy. In the short clip, Jarrett is on some podium, where, presumably, she had just spouted some drivel, and says, "If you have an idea about how to create jobs, I want to hear it."

Well, if that don't beat all. Here she is with her degrees and her too-long title, asking for ideas about how to create jobs. It's annoying on a couple of levels. First, what she has to do with creating jobs in the USA would probably fill a corner of one tiny room in the basement of the Executive Office Building, but I guess she's there representing for the Prez, as intergovernmental explorer extraordinaire or some such nonsense.

Second, if one were to offer her some truly constructive idea that would lead to the creation of a job in America, I doubt that Ms. Jarrett could possibly conceive of how it might work. After all, she's spent almost all of her life behind the shield of public employment, that safe place in America where 40% of the population actually makes a living doing things that aren't necessary to anyone.

I just can't look up to her as an authority on anything, much less job creation. Maybe "saving jobs" which the government has subtly substituted for actual job creation, because they can't do the real thing, would be more in line with Ms. Jarrett's qualifications, as in move this line item to another part of the budget and save this or that job. That's how they do it at city hall, the county office, the state level and yes, all the way up to the White House (I still like Paris Hilton's idea to paint it pink).

Ms. Jarrett really bugs me, not because she's cute and successful (though those would be two good reasons), but because she's such an obvious fraud in a town full of them. Not just Democrats or Republicans, but all of the people in DC are frauds, taking public money and wasting it, mostly to pad their own already well-fattened wallets.

If Valerie Jarrett would like some ideas on how to create new jobs, let's start with the obvious. Cut payroll taxes. Reduce the cost of unemployment insurance. Pay half of newly hired employees' pay right out of the government's own coffers for the first six months. Make it easier for employers to hire people, like reducing the interminable amount of paperwork, costs, fees, taxes and all the other mind-blowing additions that turn a $9/hour job into $15.

How about this one, and the liberals will love it: Roll back the minimum wage laws to $5.25 per hour for new hires. Believe me, you'd have employers falling over themselves to hire people. Or, better yet, keep the minimum wage laws in place, but stop taking social security and medicare from both the employer and the employee.

Small business in America needs a break from taxes and costs. We are non-competitive because of all the taxes and regulations that have turned our free markets into a socialist Turkish bath. Are you listening, Valerie Jarrett? Or will you continue to bother me?

Evidence of Shrinking Intellectual Capacity

2009-04-24T08:17:00.003-04:00

First, I'd like to think that these two women stole my idea - the power of small numbers - but their book, The Power of Small is likely to prove otherwise, as I'm 95% sure that they could not come up with any fresh ideas. As a matter of fact, the kernel of an idea is, in itself, a very small thing, but the people who actually will look down upon this attempt at "new age" junk philosophy are the practitioners of Taoism, for it was the founder, Lao-tzu (c 604-c 531 bc), who said, "A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."

If any more proof is needed that there's a sucker on every street corner waiting to be taken by snake oil salesmen - or, in this case, sales women - watch this segment from the Martha Stewart show below, all the time reminded that Martha, the mistress of pop culture, will give air time to any woman who has even the spark of a marketable idea.

OK, not to be snarky, but I'm not even going to read their book or mention the authors names, as I'm fairly certain they won't be making any "world literature" lists (I may not either, but that's another matter), but I will link to their blog, where they offers gems of wisdom, like, you can save money by using coupons. Oh, yeah, they also have some links to online coupons, as though nobody ever heard of those before.

Of course, they are twittering, jumping on all the fads, making the talk show rounds and raking in the cash. These women are quickly becoming my inspiration, because if they can take a concept as simple as small and turn it into a book and make money off it, hey, why not me?

Maybe Associated Press Needs Mercy Killing

2009-04-08T23:32:00.006-04:00

Watching this moron - CEO Tom Curley - from the Associated Press (AP) (shown at right) on the Charlie Rose show flail about over "who's going to pay?" for AP content, and then he brings up Iraq, and somebody needs to take this nutjob out back and beat him senseless, telling him that maybe, if your so fu**ing superior news gatherers were doing such a bang up job, we would never have gone into Iraq, and maybe we wouldn't have the financial mess we have today, you greedy, self-indulgent priggish little whiner.

The problem with the AP moaning about people stealing their content is that it's hardly worth it, since most of their "breaking" news is morphed over the internet in minutes by hundreds, if not thousands of news sites and blogs. What Tom Curley is complaining about - if I'm getting the message right - is unauthorized use, not FAIR USE, which allows for derivative works based on the original story, but I think he's angling for some of the AdSense pie, via Google, because he keeps channeling traffic, which is a whole different story.

Here's a snippet from CEO Tom Curley's April 6 statement (here's a link to the content and, I suppose, UNAUTHORIZED USE OF YOUR WORDS, SO SUE ME!):

In the past year, we shifted resources to business, real estate and economic coverage at the right moment to deliver comprehensive and continuing coverage of the biggest story in a generation.

Like I was saying, the AP wants to cover the news of the financial meltdown, but maybe if its reporters were doing real investigative journalism, they might have been reporting on the massive amount of mortgage-related fraud as far back as 2002 and 2003. So, now, they take credit for "following" the story, but it's the usual, dull, packaged boring read for which the AP is famous.

Oh, and I can't resist this:

At the same time, we delivered on another presidential campaign and vote count and found a way to increase coverage of celebrities to feed the growing demand for entertainment news.

OK, Tom, only every single media outlet in the world was covering the election, so what made your coverage so special? And what happened to that vote count in 2000 and 2004? Do Florida and Ohio ring any bells? Dimwit! (Sorry, I simply cannot comment on the sublime irony of taking credit for making celebrities more famous.)

Here's an idea, Mr. Curley: If you want to be paid well, try doing some good work!

The real problem lies in the fact that the lifeblood of the AP, their 1500 newspaper licensees are falling over like dominos and that directly affects AP's bottom line and their ability to function as a going concern. Beyond that, the AP is so overtly politically connected and establishment they cannot be trusted as an objective source. They have grown too elitist and this latest whining episode is just another reminder that they feel deserving of being treated differently. They are asking the readers of the world to respect and pamper them. Sorry, boys, ain't gonna happen!

Sure, they have bureaus in 240 countries, and that's all well and good, but there are newspapers, web sites, bloggers and ordinary people with cell phones, i-phones and laptops who are out in the real world suitably equipped to report on anything that even smells like news.

AP's biggest problem is that technology has outgrown their revenue model and now they're whining about it. Claiming to be the oldest news-gathering organization on the planet is probably as good a reason as any to euthanize the old dog now, before it starts making messes on the carpet and drooling on respected guests.

Meet the Press Scripted: Political Discourse is Dead

2009-03-29T09:14:00.005-04:00

A few weeks ago, on my blog which focuses mainly on economic issues, Money Daily, I coined the term, Post-Government Era, to describe the public backlash at increasingly overwhelming government control, dictates and policy. Already, a number of instances of the backlash have surfaced on the public landscape - various "tea party" protests, the indictment of six upstate New York lawyers who failed to file state income taxes, and a slow trickle of civil disobedience actions from Bangor to Phoenix running across the political and demographic plains of America have confirmed that regular Americans are fed up with the burdens of massive federal, state and local government, their regulations, taxes and attitudes.

On Sunday's "Meet the Press" the government's response was clear in a well-scripted and rehearsed "interview" between host David Gregory and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. The discourse began with a basic economics lesson, complete with charts and graphics, explaining how "securitization" works and how it is essential to the smooth functioning of the American banking system. Following that little treatise, Geithner and Gregory continued - at a pace which allowed for no follow-up or intellectual inquiry - on to another instructional session on why Geithner's Public-Private Investment Partnership (PPIP) to get the toxic (securitized) assets off the books of the nation's largest banks (BofA, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, et.al.) is the "best" solution for investors, bankers and the general public.

This trite, insipid attempt at justifying spending trillions in taxpayer money to keep the structurally-flawed mega-banking system afloat also included a terse reply by Geithner to NY Times economics opinion writer Paul Krugman (also a Nobel Prize winner) criticism that the Geithner plan was just a rehash of former Secretary Paulson's bad bank ideas with new frills, gee-gaws, bells and whistles.

Geithner's response was so forgettable and lame - and quick - that I actually forgot what he said. Nonetheless, it was pure gibberish and Krugman, who carries water for nobody, is still correct and in good company. As with the previous administration, this one, the one which promised to work from the "bottom up", is surely continuing the policies that got us to this point, with a "top down" approach that favors banks over individuals, institutions over individuals and protecting the status quo over real, fundamental change.

By this dumbed-down, completely-scripted interchange, it's become more than obvious that the press is on board with the administration and the overall dictates of the massive federal system. To take the nation's most widely-watched Sunday talk show and turn it into an infomercial for federal financial reconstruction is more than pure fascism at its unholy worst, it is nearly a return to feudalism, replete with all the trappings of monarchy, class structure and mostly, dictates from the pulpit of officialism, with the formerly-free press serving as a megaphone for the federal government.

To make matters worse, Meet the Press continued the charade with, instead of the usual roundtable discussion, the discussion continued with the inarticulate and largely-emasculated John McCain (drill, baby, drill), to prepare the nation for the "blood and treasure" losses about to be sustained in Afghanistan and at the Mexican border.

Americans have had their minds warped by years of inappropriate Bush doctrines and their savings eroded by globalization and the banking and stock market meltdown. Whether the public is ready for the reinstitution of "perpetual war," further erosion in their individual rights and economic freedom and total control by the distasteful characters in congress and on Wall Street is not in doubt. We have been primed and readied for the final assault on the middle class: extreme taxation, political unaccountability and a widening of the police state structure.

We are ready. Most - those who haven't already - will submit to the feudal federal will. Those with a smattering of grey matter still between the ears will either flee or fight. The runners will be stopped at the border or banished to outliers not of their choosing. Those who stand and fight will likely be slaughtered by the hand and the gun paid for by their very own labor and taxes. And, with the rapid destruction of the nation's newspapers, the press is being downsized along with the expectations of Americans.

We are a lost nation now. Democracy is merely a facade by which the government can continue to con the public into a false belief that America is good, and free, and just - somethings it hasn't been in many years. There are only two ways America can proceed: we will either submit and suffer, or reject and repel the forces of government. With the mainstream media firmly on the government's side, the odds are set against us.

This is not a partisan issue pitting Democrats against Republicans. Rather, it is the purest of class struggles, with the tiny-by-number but great-in-power ruling elite of Washington, Wall Street and the media against 300 million regular folks, armed to the teeth not with pitchforks and torches, guns and ammo, but with cunning, wit, deception and non-compliance.

In the words of the worst American president in history: Bring it on.

Time Out for File Extensions

2009-02-20T12:26:00.002-05:00

Have you ever wondered what those letters after the dot on internet and computer documents meant and didn't know where to look?

Well, geeks, robots and people with waaaaaay too much time on their hands can now find out at File Extension Library, where more than 1000 of the odd-looking and oddly-spelled acronyms are located, easily identified and defined. Also, the site offers useful information on the proper use of such files and how to open them.

For instance, we all know that .jpg or .jpeg stands for Joint Photographic Expert Group, don't we? It's the most common extension for photos posted on the internet.

Some are easier than others, such as dat which signifies a data file.

Then there are ones like flv, which is the common expression for a Flash Video File.

So, whatever you like, there's surely a vob, plsc or swf for it. Figure those out and you can either amaze your friends or become an instant hit at the next Star Wars exposition.

Corrupt Pols #1: GOP Chair Michael Steele

2009-02-09T10:16:00.004-05:00

This is the beginning of a new series which I feel necessary to write as we slide quickly into an economic depression brought about by the continuance of the most corrupt government ever to exist.

Clearly, there will be opportunity to unmask most of the corrupt pols who populate positions of power from the local to the federal level in America.

Let's get the ball rolling with newly-minted GOP Chairman Michael Steele, a black politician from the city of Baltimore, Maryland, who is accused of misappropriation of campaign funds, stemming from his failed Senate run in 2006.

Steele was the first African-American to hold statewide office in Maryland, winning the Lieutenant Governor position in 2002.

For a completely cynical take on this story, in which Steele is accused of paying money to a catering company run by his sister (nepotism is nearly always a tell-tale sign of dishonesty) which had earlier been dissolved, consider that Steele was recently named Chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Having campaign contribution issues hanging over him, Steele can now be easily manipulated, as surely there are other skeletons in his closet. For the most intense side of cynicism, consider the fallout when the media begins to attack "party leaders" Obama and Steele - both black men - for the ills of the nation.

One has to wonder just who is running the government, the KKK or the John Birch Society. Maybe both.

Talking (Clown) Heads Agree on Stimulus Stupidity

2009-02-08T11:59:00.002-05:00

Of the various positions and postures taken by the talking heads (mostly congress-people) on the regular Sunday morning shows, two very intriguing arguments emerged:

1. Nobody knows whether the current plans (separately by the House and Senate) will work.
2. Almost everybody agrees that "something must be done."

At some point, one has to recognize that these two positions - in a real world, say, business - cannot peacefully coexist.

In business, if a manager or group of managers were to approach the executives of a firm with a plan that they said they were unsure about, but that they felt should be implemented immediately, they'd likely be fired, or at least, ignored and castigated.

Sadly, the American public isn't afforded the opportunity to veto the government's massive "stimulus" plan, now hovering somewhere between $780 and $825 billion, depending on which version - House or Senate - one studies.

What's even more disconcerting is the sheer size of the proposal: a stunning 760 pages in the House version, with more added and amended by the Senate. One can safely assume that nary a Senator or Representative has read the entire bill. That would take and average reader a couple of days. Our "busy" legislators don't have that kind of time, but they'll likely go ahead and pass this monstrosity next week.

The most cogent discussion on what would actually stimulate the economy was on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopolous," largely spirited by three fellows who are notably NOT elected or administration officials: George Will, Robert Reich and Newt Gingrich.

Between them, they correctly postulated that the most immediate stimulus to the entire economy - done with alacrity and efficiency - would be to make deep cuts in broad tax grabs, specifically payroll taxes, social security and medicare contributions and capital gains taxes.

Cutting the payroll tax, which affects a huge number of workers, would be easy to do and could be immediately implemented. Somebody - I don't know who, but I believe it was a government regulator - said it would take three months to rework the payroll tables. There's the typical government cop-out on why our leaders won't do what the American public wants and prefers. It's a straw man argument when one considers that the stimulus plan currently under debate will take anywhere from 6-24 months for the effects to be implemented.

It's also a huge lie. If the government wanted to reduce payroll taxes - even on selected income levels or at varying amounts by income level - it could issue such a measure within a week's time, simply by informing tax preparers (businesses) of the percentages, i.e., 50% off this level, 30% off this level, etc.

Besides, most of the nation's tax deductions are handled by computer, or by the major companies which have made a business of dealing with the complexity of the federal and state tax codes, Paychex and ADP. The adjustment to lower deductions would be painless, simple and hugely beneficial, putting more money into the hands of citizens, instead, as Mr. Will pointed out, as part of the government taxing and regulatory system that "wants to do the spending for you."

There has been a great deal of discussion about how effective the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) will be in stemming the loss of jobs and creating new ones. Frustrated at not being able to find an appropriate breakdown of the major spending in the bill, I found some hint of where the money is going in a Wall Street Journal article, entitled A 40-Year Wish List.

On the sidebar, the Journal breaks out $265 billion in what is mostly "welfare" spending on medicade ($81 billion), food stamps (20 billion), extensions of unemployment insurance ($36 billion) and COBRA insurance extensions ($30.3 billion). Color me blind, but I cannot fathom how shoving additional billions into these programs is going to translate into jobs.

A number of private economists have called this stimulus package a big mistake. You can clearly count me in that camp. It's a bloated, unwise, excessive spending program that will likely make matters even worse by failing to address the actual problems in the economy and bandaging over them with more handouts.

I am Cold

2008-12-04T00:14:00.004-05:00

I just did something I've never done before. I deleted something I wrote because it was offensive to somebody. I feel somewhat dirty. Well, considering the circumstances, I guess that's OK. But, I hope I never do it again because I say what I mean and I mean what I say.

And to all of you reading this, and you know who you are, yeah, I'm not happy. But, you know what. I will be. And you'll be what you are.

Ohio for Obama, It's Over

2008-11-04T21:25:00.000-05:00

If one assumes that Obama will win California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii, and their 77 electoral votes, and add them to the 175 Obama already has, we are within 18 EVs of electing Barack Obama the 44th President of the United States.

Polls don't close on the West coast until 11:00 pm.

Ohio has just been called for Barack Obama. IT IS OVER!!!!

Party Time!

Obama within 100 EVs. Udall 4th Dem Senate Pick-up

2008-11-04T21:13:00.000-05:00

Tom Udall defeats Steve Pierce in New Mexico, another pick-up for the Democrats.

A slew of states were just called for Obama, including New York, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Rhode Island. Georgia went for McCain, as did Oklahoma and Kansas. Obama is showing well in Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Indiana. Most of these states are going to eventually go to Obama. There's likely a good deal of vote flipping going on just to try to not make it look like as large a slaughter as it really is.

Arizona, McCain's home state, too close to call. Always a bad sign when you can't defend your home state.

Clean sweep for Obama in the Northeast and upper Midwest.

Obama 174, McCain 76.

ABC just called Kentucky for Mitch McConnell, but the margin was razor thin.

Hagan Ousts Liz Dole in NC

2008-11-04T20:45:00.000-05:00

Another Republican Senate seat goes down. Hagan whips Dole in NC. Sununu (R) is also out in New Hampshire, beaten by Jeanne Shaheen on her second try.

This is looking more and more like an Obama avalanche. There's almost no doubt about it. They're calling for more than 1/2 million people in Grant's Park in Chicago where Barack Obama is expected to accept the Presidency later tonight.

New York closes within 10 minutes. Another 31 electoral votes for Obama, who only needs one more swing state to call it a night because he has the West coast (California, Oregon and Washington) in the bag.

McCain is facing a real uphill climb. It really looks like it's over. I'm on my fifth beer. The celebrations will begin shortly as it gets closer and closer to reality.

I can hardly believe that the eight year nightmare is almost over.

Pennsylvania Goes for Obama

2008-11-04T20:04:00.000-05:00

All networks confirming the Keystone State and its 21 electoral votes belong to Barack Obama. This is great news for Obama, but it brings Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada later. The networks want to keep us glued in until at least 10:00.

No raw numbers, still, anywhere. Very strange.

All the Northeastern states are falling in line for Obama. He'll probably maintain the lead from here on out.

The Anxiety Level is Rising Fast

2008-11-04T19:27:00.000-05:00

Strange. At 7:20, PBS has Obama ahead 50-49, while ABC has McCain winning by the same percentage.

Polls in Georgia, Vermont, Indiana, Kentucky, Virginia, South Carolina and most Florida are already closed.

No raw numbers available just yet from most of the states.

Warner wins in Virginia. Daniels (R) takes Governorship in Indiana.

This is too close. These numbers aren't yet making any sense. McCain is leading nationally, but who knows from where they're getting their figures. Ohio, West Virginia and North Carolina closing at 7:30. We need to start getting some numbers.

Exit Poll Trends via ABC

2008-11-04T18:47:00.000-05:00

ABC just released preliminary battleground state exit polling data. Stunningly, the economy was the #1 issue for 60% of voters. The War in Iraq was a distant second at 11%. Charlie Gibson said he had never seen such a dominant issue.

74% espressed dissatisfaction with president Bush.

If these trends holds up, it's going to be a rout for Democrats.

Which network has the best coverage? So far, I'm looking at ABC.

Four Key Senate Races

2008-11-04T18:33:00.000-05:00

There are 35 Senate races this election year and a good number of them are close. There may also be some sizable unexpected outcomes, especially if Obama wins a number of the early swing states, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio and Virginia key among them.

The races that are worth watching are, with incumbents listed first:

Minnesota: Norm Coleman (R) vs. Al Franken (D)
North Carolina: Elizabeth Dole (R) vs. Kay Hagan (D)
Kentucky: Mitch McConnell (R) vs. Bruce Lunsford (D)
Alaska: Ted Stevens (R) vs. Mark Begich (D)

Hagan has been well ahead in the polls in NC right through to the election. Franken is in a virtual dead heat. There's a third candidate taking votes from both in Minnesota. Stevens was convicted of taking gifts from constituents in return for legislative favors and should go down, or will Alaskans show their maverick tendency and return a convicted felon to Congress? McConnell is nothing less than the Republican leader in the Senate. His defeat would be huge. Even a close call would send an enormous message.

Network news is beginning. Let's see what the suits have to say.

Randomly Towards a Decision

2008-11-04T18:11:00.000-05:00

Just posting some ideas...

Will we get this one right? Or will be be subjected to the whims and wishes of a hidden power elite? Did enough people go out and cast votes in such an overwhelming majority that any egregious vote-fixing would be easily spotted? Will the majority be large enough to discourage the manipulators completely?

Probably not. There is sure to be a large degree of vote switching within the maze of computer networks and IT specialists across the nation. The sizable hope is that turnout exceeded even the greatest expectations.

Considering that there's still litigation in motion over the 2004 election, maybe expecting that there won't be tampering turns out to be a defective concept. There's always hope for a free and fair election. A certain large percentage of Americans will never stop trying to get elections to be fairly run, honestly administrated and completely non-partisan. It seems such a long shot.

Exit polling used to "call" states and races is once again being handled by the usual gang: Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for the National Election Pool, a consortium of the networks and The Associated Press. Well, in a nation that also sports the BCS for picking a college football champion, what can we expect?

No Early Exit Polls

2008-11-04T17:37:00.000-05:00

Exit polls and other early indicators are under tight security, especially since the 2004 election showed the early exit polls favoring Kerry before a sudden shift later in the evening by George W. Bush erased all of that. In the end, exit polls were eventually "adjusted" to match the figures on election web sites. No big deal there. We're just talking about some run-of-the-mill organizations like CNN, MSNBC, FOX and ABC.

Obviously, our glorious captains of industry and mind-controlling media moguls don't want little details like actual vote counts muddying the waters about which candidate is actually chosen. The small matter of who did the choosing need not be shared with the actual electorate.

For those reasons, in addition to the avalanche of litigation and reporting on questionable and, to a large degree, criminal, activity that took place in 2004, and after the debacle of 2000, the shapers of the universe are at odds with the general public. It's an unhealthy relationship in which the public at first mistrusts the government, and then mistrusts the people supposed to expose the misdeeds of government, project and protect the populace, the media.

Worse than promoting a stalemate, bad public-media relations foments more than just plain anger, it proceeds to survival instinctiveness and gets nasty on both sides, but especially in the public sphere, if only because there are so many individuals whose actions cannot be predicted or aganst which much of a defense can be erected.

So, here we are with no fireworks. Well, maybe it for the best that there are no early exit polls today. There has been enough incidental and anecdotal reporting already, via early voting polling, and it all points to the same thing - a Democratic landslide with Obama winning as many as 340 electoral votes at the top of the ticket.

The networks aren't going to call a race, or a state, until they're darned sure of what's out there. Quite a few stories are circulating on the consition of no early exit poll releases, The Chicago Tribune has a good story.

Live Blogging: Stocks UP, Gold UP, Oil UP

2008-11-04T16:59:00.000-05:00

Here's a quick and dirty look at what happened on Wall Street today. Some odd trading brought stocks and commodities higher as Americans went to the polls. Check out our commentary at Money Daily.

Today is the Day!!

2008-11-04T15:50:00.000-05:00

Live Blogging to Begin at 5:00 pm ET.

Well, I voted at 10:00 this morning, and was planning to start blogging while simultaneously hitting the bong and boilermakers around 1:00, but a nefarious click attack on my home site set back my plans by a couple of hours.

Naturally, I'm blaming Republicans for this, since they cannot win elections legally nor garner enough traffic to make a living from advertising, they resort to harming those who can and do. Reports of vote theft, flipping and disenfranchisement have been abundant the past few days, and most of us are gripping right about now, especially since Lion John (McCain) has been on the campaign trail insisting that he's going to win.

I have a some web housekeeping to attend to before the festivities can really get underway here, but in the meantime, readers can regale themselves with some of the work I did yesterday on my woefully incomplete but highly entertaining Election Guide. Click on the graphic below and you'll magically jump into a new window of wonder.

I'll be back shortly. Promise.

ABC This Sunday: Not Worth Watching

2008-06-08T11:04:00.000-04:00

Somebody needs to crack a two-by-four over the heads of ABC's Round Table discussion participants. Claire Shipman, George Stephanopolous, George Will (the easiest conservative voice to debate) and the other participants discussed the potential running mates for Barack Obama this Sunday morning.

They are either serially misinformed or purposely stupid.

After pretty much dismissing the possibility of an Obama-Clinton ticket, they went around talking about three Democrats in Virginia, including Senator Webb and former Governor Mark Warner. They even mentioned Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell. Not once was the name of the most obvious choice - New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson - who would both solidify the Hispanic base and add valuable experience to the ticket.

Maybe these geniuses are simply out-of-touch with Democratic politics. More likely, they are in denial that whomever Obama picks as his running mate, the race for the White House is going to resemble a Harlem Globetrotters basketball game with John McCain in the role of the inept, overmatched Washington Generals.

The networks - FOX, NBC, CBS and even the Mickey Mouse ABC network - needs to understand that fewer and fewer Americans are paying attention to their idle shibboleths and instead acting in their own self-interest. The glory days of the networks as mouthpieces for the corrupt Republican political machine are about to end... miserably and not a moment too soon.

Obama will choose either Hillary Clinton or Bill Richardson as his VP, and the election in November - unless Republican operatives conspire once again to steal it - will not be close. Obama will win by more than 100 electoral votes and the margin of victory will be something approaching 55-45%.

Get used to hearing the words, "President Obama." It has a nice ring to it.

ABC: Attack Barack Continuously

2008-04-17T13:22:00.000-04:00

Last night's nationally-televised debate between Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama could not have been more of a disgrace and misuse of public airwaves had it been aired on FOX.

In fact, the vacuous, gossipy questioning by the usually likable and intelligent George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson were more akin to the sound bite-baiting tactics of a Sean Hannity or Bill O'Reilly. In fact, Stephanopoulos had appeared on one of Hannity's shows just the day earlier, and must have been taking notes. Most of the two hours of "debate" concerned itself with Obama's minister, his recent statements about frustrated Americans and whether he was or was not patriotic for not wearing a US flag pin.

It seemed as though ABC wished to paint a portrait of the Democratic primary campaigns as a smarmy mess of accusations, cross talk and affiliations with unsavory people. In that regard, they did a bang-up job. As for presenting the candidates' views on the issues of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the economy, high gas prices, lost jobs, the mortgage and foreclosure disaster, foreign policy, the use of torture by the Bush administration and other important matters, ABC should pay a fine to the FCC.

Americans deserve better than what was offered by the network. They deserve a debate and primaries that present issues with which a prospective president will have to deal, not rehashed television-and-talk-show trash.

It was aggravating to have to watch and listen to question after dumbed-down question from the ABC interrogators. Both candidates tried to steer the debate away from the mundane to the real issues and should be praised for not losing their cool under such extremely stupid circumstances.

However, it would have been nice - as Obama nearly did to Stephanopoulos, saying one of his questions didn't "make sense" - to hear Obama answer with what was honestly on his mind. Something to the effect of, "If I thought wearing a US flag lapel pin everywhere I go would get me to the White House, I'd wear three of them."

Neither the candidates nor the voting public should have to be subjected to forums such the one ABC put forward last night. It was dull, moronic and trivial and has no place in American politics. We can only hope that ABC will learn a lesson from the commentaries which are certainly critical of their "debate" and get back to serious coverage of real issues affecting Americans.

Republicans Walk Out, Americans Pray They Won't Return

2008-02-14T20:15:00.000-05:00

Republican lawmakers in Washington, DC, did today what voters and citizens across the country have been trying to do for the better part of the last 8 years: they removed themselves from the House chamber of the Capitol.

Following an impassioned speech decrying "political grandstanding" by minority leader John Boehner, Republican members of the House of Representatives walked out of congress and onto the steps of the Capitol in a move oddly similar to "political grandstanding."

Many Americans cheered the move, but asked, "how can we keep them from coming back? Could they all just go home and stop bothering us?"

The Republicans supposedly walked out in protest that the Democratic members would not approve a Senate bill that granted blanket retroactive immunity to telecom companies involved in the Bush administration's "warrantless wiretapping" practices.

Strangely enough, since that measure was not going to come to a vote, the next item on the agenda, forwarded by Chairman of the Judiciary Committee John Conyers, was to hold administration officials Harriet Miers and Josh Bolton in contempt of Congress and authorized a civil contempt suit against the two by the House. When that issue came to a vote, there were no Republicans in the chamber and the measure passed, 223-32.

Sadly, the Republicans returned to their offices and various hearings moments later, dashing the hopes of millions that once gone, they would stay away.

Hack N. Spend, an interested bystander, hoped the Republican lawmakers would make use of FEMA trailers that New Orleans hurricane victims have been living in for the past two years and now were being told by FEMA executives that they are unsafe for human habitation.

"The Republicans could camp right out here in those FEMA trailers since they're said to be not fit for regular people," said Spend. "Believe me, these Republicans are anything but regular," he added.

State of the Union Drinking Game

2008-01-28T17:53:00.000-05:00

Tonight, the world will cheer President Bush's State of the Union address... because it will be his last. Personally, I intend to be already fairly hammered by the time the faux-presidente takes the podium, shortly after 9:00 pm Eastern time tonight.

Having painfully watched and listened to all seven of his previous SOTU addresses (sad, but true), I plan on celebrating this final assault on my sensibilities with unprecedented gusto.

George Bush... this ass-hole has brought the American people nothing but pure grief for seven long years and if he ends up hanging by the gallows in the Hague for his crimes, it won't be justification enough.

In my own way, I plan on reveling in this jerk's departure, beginning tonight, so I've devised a devilish drinking game designed to maximize my pleasure (always a good idea).

Here are the rules:

You take a drink of the beverage of your choice if Bush says any of the following (or any close variations):

"hard work" - his trademark line of BS

"Al Queda" or "terrorist" or "War on Terror"

"stimulus"

If he calls anyone "brave", drink

any mention of "Iran", drink

if he mentions "Crawford" or his "ranch", drink

If he says "the surge is working" or "we're winning" related to Iraq, Afghanistan or the overall War on Terror, drink

if he says anything about giving the economy a "shot in the arm" two drinks, plus a bong hit

any time he "urges Congress" drink, bong hit and masturbate enthusiastically

if he says the word "legacy" at all, immediately become addicted to heroin

Any reference to Dick Cheney, DRINK hard!

if he says the economy is "strong", "resilient" or "growing", drink, bong hit, shot of heroin, fornicate with anything in the room even if it's not human (cats count), snort cocaine, then go out for a drive.

If he says he's sorry or has any regrets, drink as much as possible because you're either unconscious, dreaming or the nukes have already fallen, we're all dead and that is the rapture you're hearing

That should just about cover it. Make sure to get good and primed. If you can't keep up with all the drinking words, just drink throughout what figures to be about a 40-minute speech. Enjoy the beginning of the end of one of the worst eras in US history.

Media in the USA: Who's Watching?

2007-11-29T12:40:00.000-05:00

It's getting pretty stupid out there in Mainstream Medialand. Last night was the Republican version of the YouTube/CNN debate featuring the mental pygmies and of course, the scourge of the party, Ron Paul.

While most of the press focused on Rudy Giuliani (the adulterer) and Mitt Romney's (the moron Mormon) "heated" slugfest over immigration, the "debate" was poorly staged and arguably scripted. The two Republican leading candidates are both such empty suits when it really comes down to it. Both have hired illegals or had them work on their properties in the past, and neither will do a damn thing about immigration if it costs US businesses one single penny more in wages. Neither would make a suitable president of this country. Maybe some backwater nation like Slovakia or Burundi, but not America.

The most entertaining parts of the debate were taking place off camera, actually, in the crowd that somehow got invited. This particular goon squad cheered every time the "troops" were mentioned and booed at even a hint of the hated Hillary.

It was also interesting to witness the Grover Norquist sighting. The public was told that ordinary citizens would be asking the questions, not paid pro-Republican, loyalist lobbyists like Grover, but there he was, live and in almost-living color.

According to more than a handful of analysts, CNN hijacked the debte, cherry-picking the questions. There was no mention of health care, energy policy or the environment, though considerable time was spent talking about guns and abortion and immigration.

It was not worth watching, even with the paucity of original programming available due to the writer's strike. The Republican candidates are hollow and script-fed phonies. But, on the other side, the leading Democrats don't look much better.

Self-rule is the answer. Without followers, we wouldn't need empty leaders.

Ken Burns "The War"offers perspective for today

2007-10-02T18:26:00.000-04:00

If you are at least half aware of your world, you probably have tuned into PBS to view at least a couple episodes of Ken Burns' opus on World War II, simply titled, "The War." It's a lengthy examination of the "Great War" which took place in the 1940s between the Allies (the United States, Russia and Europe, generally) and the Axis (Germany, Italy and Japan).

What I've come away with so far is a better understanding of what actually took place in the decade preceding my birth, an understanding of what sculpted my parents' opinions and lifestyles, and, especially after viewing last night's episode with my father, an appreciation for his experience at the Battle of the Bulge.

I strongly suggest that everyone watch at least some of this series. It's extremely strong and the images are powerful. Most of us have no idea of the incredible suffering that people of the generation before the Baby Boom endured. It will also give you some perspective on our current bogus war in Iraq and how it doesn't really compare to the most serious conflict the world has ever seen.

If you watch "The War" for a couple of nights, you'll be convinced that President Bush's over-promoted "War on Terror" is a complete contrivance and that our current leaders have tried to fool us into thinking we're at war when we're really not.

Please, take a look around. We're at peace. Our leaders are lunatics.

Bush talks Burma to UN audience

2007-09-25T19:27:00.000-04:00

Today, President Bush spoke to the General Assembly of the United Nations, and sadly, with three major issues - Global Warming, Iraq, and Iran - dominating all discussion, the president spoke about none of them. He chose instead to focus his remarks on freedom and the plight of the people of Burma.

In some small way, his expression for new sanctions against the repressive regime of Burma may have been an appropriate action, albeit about 20 years late. Recently, Buddhist monks have led marches of over 100,000 people in opposition to the military regime which has oppressed the nation for more than two decades.

The last time there were such large public movements, the military ruthlessly crushed them. Bush's new sanctions may only serve to fuel the outrageous autocratic rule to more oppressive measures.

Most Americans are unaware of the vicious human rights abuses in Burma because they are out of sight. While Bush may have overlooked the more pressing issues of the day, he may have opened some people's eyes to an ongoing tragedy.

You, your kids and the Federal Reserve

2007-09-18T11:13:00.000-04:00

Later today, Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, will announce some kind of cut in the Federal Funds rate, the base rate upon which the markets take their cue. Currently, it's at 5.25% and it's widely expected that the Fed will cut to 5% or even 4.75%.

What this means for the average American is actually not much on the surface, though what it means down the road and long into the future is important. If the Fed manages credit and risk properly, America generally has a well-functioning, robust economy. Bad management, such as what was committed by the previous Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan, can cost dearly, as we're seeing today.

Greenspan, though he was revered in financial circles as a genius, was actually a credit pumper, ever ready to lower rates at the first sign of a bump in the economy. He's the major reason we have a credit crunch at major lending institutions today and why the housing market may not recover for years to come. Greenspan was far too loose with monetary policy and it's going to cost all of us and our kids, dearly.

Here's hoping that Ben Bernanke is a bit more circumspect and rational in his decision-making regarding not only interest rates, but te future of our country. Today will be a real test for him.

Bush Wins in 17 Minutes

2007-09-13T21:19:00.000-04:00

Well, the drinking only got me through one beer and the start of another. I am disappointed. Mr. Bush didn't say "we are winning", the terrorists would "follow us home", though he did say that they could "reach our cities and kill our people" so I took a drink on that.

Sadly, he didn't mention Osama or Uuuusama, the Sheik who died recently or mention the term, "bottomup." However, General Petraeus received five mentions and Iran came in a close second with four.

Due to the paucity of drinking potentialities, I had to fill in with some of my own. The president said "Al Queda" five times, used the phrase "one year ago" four times and the word "reconciliation" three times. Smashing, though not enough to get me smashed.

Thumbs down to Rachel Maddow on this one. She really misread the thrust of the message. Either that or she didn't want anyone to get too schnockered.

Kudos to the media, however. They managed to squeeze the whole speech, the Democrats' rebuttal and some of their own commentary into a half hour. NBC even thrrew in a preview for next season's "The Office." Fabulous. Gloss over the war in a half hour and throw in a promo. Move on. Nothing to see here. American politics at its absolute nadir. Lovely. Drink up. I have extras.

Drinking with George W. Bush

2007-09-13T21:01:00.001-04:00

OK, I'm ready. George is speaking and I am drinking according to Rachel Maddow rules, as follows:

If Bush says “we are winning”, drink once.

If Bush says “they’ll follow us home”, drink once.

If he says OSAMA BIN LADEN, drink once.

If he pronounces it UUUUSAMA bin laden? Drink twice.

If he says the name of that Sunni sheik he was photographed with two weeks ago, who got blown up today? Chug half of what’s in your glass.

Any mention of IRAN? Drink once.

Every mention of PETRAEUS, drink once.

If he says the phrase “bottom up”? (Which is the thing they leaked in advance about his new fake-new Iraq strategy)? Then BOTTOMS UP. Chug it.

And lastly... if he says, that actually he’s not just ending the surge, he’s ending the war? He's bringing our troops out of there, totally? Then don’t drink a thing. Because clearly you’re already plastered and are having optimistic auditory hallucinations. See you on MSNBC this evening, and out of the bottom of a bar glass soon thereafter.

Where is Harriet Miers?

2007-07-19T11:32:00.000-04:00

Since failing to appear before the House Judiciary Committee by the imposed deadline on Tuesday, July 17, there's been little news on the issue, either from the White House or from Committee Chairman John Conyers, who only said that he and the committee members were "planning their next move."

It's a little past the time we'd like to see the committee "planning", as seeing Ms. Miers hauled before the committee in irons would be far more preferable. The woman has no right to executive privilege according to most scholars, and she should have been compelled to appear.

There's been no Miers sightings nor any statements other than the one prepared by the legal team of Fred Fielding in Ms. Miers' stead.

Harriet Miers should be forced to comply with the subpoena from the committee just like any ordinary citizen. It's time for the House (and Senate) to take off the gloves.

Big Ed Schultz Jumps on the I-Hate-NBC Bandwagon

2007-04-19T13:00:00.000-04:00

OK, I can't stand the fat lump, radio talk show poser, faux-leftie, Ed Schultz, but I have my reasons. Today, he opened his show with a monologue about NBC's airing last night of the video made by the Virginia Tech gunman, Cho Seung-Hu, and criticizing NBC for doing so.

He keeps asking what was added to the the story other than "added grief," etc. Maybe, since Ed isn't a journalist, somebody should clue him in. The video is news, you idiot, big news. The video manifesto was produced by the killer after he had killed one person and was on his way to kill more. It brings up plenty of questions, most remarkably, where were the police for an hour and a half while this nutjob was making this video?

NBC had the video, photos and text as they were FedEx'ed to their headquarters in New York. They had them exclusive of all other media outlets. NBC apparently ran them by the FBI, who said they had no problem with NBC airing the video and reporting it. What was NBC to do, admit they had it, explain that they aren't airing it out of "sensitivity" to the parents, and just recap, with no photos and no video?

In case fat boy Ed and any of the other morons criticizing NBC haven't noticed, NBC is in the television news business. Video is their lifeline and exclusive video is like a bag of fresh plasma. Any other network would have done the same thing and rightfully so. The media exists to cover news and report events without bias. This video was enormous and NBC would have been chastised roundly if they hadn't aired it.

Sure, the video was distasteful, nasty and played to the most morbid interests, but it may provide some insight into the perpetrator and may provide researchers with some insight into the mind of a deranged killer. Maybe that information may lead to preventing of this kind of rampage happening again.

Ed is criticizing Matt Lauer and Brian Williams, two of NBC's top newsmen, and Steve Capus, president of the news division, for running their business in a prudent manner and defending that decision. Big Ed would have done exactly the same thing, because he, just like Williams and Lauer, is a poser, just not such a big one as those network biggies.

He wishes he was, and since people are critical of NBC out of sympathy towards the parents of the victims, Ed's jumped on that particular bandwagon today, because that's the money side of the issue, the side with which most of his listeners will agree. What a windbag, perfectly willing to be blown about by popular opinion. Maybe he should go on American Idol.

I'm not necessarily a big fan of NBC news or any of the mainstream outlets, but I'd much rather have those people making decisions on what to air than an unsophisticated midwestern hick who pretends to know what's right and wrong in the news business. Ed's a talk show host, not a journalist, and as such, he should stay out of the fire lest he get burned.

He's gotten a whole three callers agreeing with him after 45 minutes and he's still saying, "I think I'm right on this one..." Maybe not, chubby. NBC was right and you're, as usual, wrong.

UPDATE: At 2:27 pm Eastern, Ed Schultz zays live on the air, "I think Americans are split on this issue, how about hand guns?" suggesting that listener feedback on the NBC airing of the killer video didn't fit his profile (i.e., people disagreed with him) and that he has to switch topics to keep his listeners. What a simpleton,

Media Bias: Dead Students Trump Dead Soldiers

2007-04-18T13:00:00.000-04:00

I had wanted to get this post up a day ago, but the rigors of competing in the great American fiction writing contest, otherwise known as the federal income tax filing deadline (yeah, I know, I'm a procrastinator), and some interesting research into dream theory kept me more than busy enough yesterday.

The 32 deaths at Virginia Tech are surely a tragedy worthy of our attention, remorse and sharing in the grief of the families of the victims. The murder rampage was an horrific act perpetrated by a deranged individual who apparently needed psychiatric medical attention more than the right to buy handguns.

But the media coverage of the tragedy bordered on pandering and sensationalism in its most overt form. On Tuesday, a day after the awful event, all three major networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) expanded their usual half-hour nightly news programs to an hour to provide wall-to-wall coverage of the aftermath, the grief, the President's visit and speech. PBS devoted their entire news hour to coverage of the Virginia Tech tragedy.

The networks also each aired special reports on the story, grasping desperately for every last heart-string and crushed emotion.

I, for one, found no good reason to immerse myself in the media spasm and could not bring myself to watch. There was nothing newsworthy in rehashing these morbid events.

But the networks' coverage got me to thinking about death, Americans and the media. Why is it that a senseless tragedy such as this merits additional coverage when our military routinely loses that many American soldiers - many of them roughly the same age - every two weeks in Iraq?

Are the students more deserving of our attention and grief than the soldiers? The students were victims, unsuspecting and innocent. The soldiers who die in Iraq (to say nothing of the countless Iraqi civilian deaths) are ostensibly putting their lives on the line for the rest of us. They deserve at least the same coverage by the media, if not more - more focused, more poignant, more probing - than the sobbing narration that substituted for journalism these past two days.

I offer no apologies for the media's choices, nor do they, but perhaps events such as those in Blacksburg, Virginia are easier to cover than those in Baghdad, Iraq. The networks can get more reporters, film crews and staff in place much more quickly and efficiently than to the arrival points of the flag-draped caskets from Iraq. (The sad fact is that the media is barred from covering the homecomings of dead soldiers by the government.)

As I grieve for the students, I grieve for the soldiers and their families who are not given rightful respect and honor even in their deaths. These too are sons and daughters, some mothers and fathers, yet when they die, the American public is hardly made aware.

Maybe a picture and a name may be flashed across the screen some days later. PBS does this most often on Fridays and ABC regularly displays the names of the fallen on their Sunday news show, This Week. But that is all the coverage they get, when they deserve so much more.

The truth is that Americans are mostly ashamed of the war in Iraq. A majority of us want our military to stop the carnage and come home, but the best the media can do is ignore the dead and report the routine killing of Iraqis and Americans in the loathsome maw of war.

Shame on them.

Imus in the Twilight

2007-04-15T21:16:00.000-04:00

If you were awake at all this past week, you couldn't have missed the unfolding drama surrounding radio talk show superstar Don Imus in the aftermath of his unfortunate remarks about the Rutgers University women's basketball team.

Imus actually uttered the infamous three words, nappy-headed hos, characterizing the Rutgers' players as such, on Wednesday, April 4. By the 6th, Imus had already apologized on the air. He did so again on Monday, the 9th, but by the morning of Thursday, April 12, Don Imus, one of the original "shock jocks" (the other being the notoriously raunchy Howard Stern), was out of a job.

Both CBS, parent of the companies which aired and syndicated his morning show, Imus in the Morning and NBC, parent company of MSNBC, which simulcast his show on their cable network, had dismissed the jock permanently. Just a day earlier, the networks had decided on a two week hiatus for Imus, but the continuing cries for his dismissal - and probably more importantly - the defection of large advertisers like Staples, General Motors, GlaxoSmithKline,

Read the complete Imus Timeline at Media Matters for America.

Bigelow Tea, American Express and Sprint Nextel - were taking a toll on network executives behind the Imus image.

By the weekend, both networks had gone into "mea culpa" mode, along with fellow giants of the public airwaves, PBS, FOX, and ABC. Soon everybody was talking about a "national dialogue" on race, women's rights and decency, pointing the finger at various rappers like Snoop Dogg, 50 Cent, Ludacris, who routinely use the N-word, and other racially, and sexually-charged language in their rap lyrics.

Finally, by Sunday night, CBS' 60 Minutes and ABC's Dateline featured the Imus, race, women's rights story on their shows and maybe the furor will subside and maybe some good will come of it.

The matter is pretty simple, especially concerning First Amendment rights, public decency notwithstanding. As Imus has overwhelmingly proven, anyone can say anything on public airwaves, though not necessarily without consequences. Our constitutional rights are well-established and are not threatened by this incident.

And while it may be OK to call President Bush misguided, suggest he's mentally-challenged or even opine that the Vice President is deliberately evil, it's quite a different thing to call a group of female college students - athletes or otherwise - prostitutes. Make no mistake, that was why Imus was fired. Had he stopped at "nappy-headed" he probably would have escaped with an apology and his job. But calling them "hos" stepped over the line.

He completely denigrated ten women he had never met and whose backgrounds he did not know. The fact that most of them were black makes little to no difference. Nobody, not Imus or anybody else, can publicly characterize a private person in a degrading, derogatory manner.

There are laws that preclude such speech, mostly under defamation of character statutes, and the Rutgers' women could, if they so choose, pursue the matter in the courts, and they'd likely have a winnable case against not only Don Imus, but CBS and NBC. Those are some deep pockets there, but the Rutgers women have shown themselves to be a singularly classy group of young women, and they probably won't pursue the matter in the courts.

Maybe that ought to tell us something.

As for the rappers, their use of the N-word, the "gansta" lifestyle and the self-degradation of their own race is a cultural issue - a black cultural issue - and one that I, being a 50-something white guy, have no dog in that fight. I'll leave that up to Ludacris, Snoop Dogg, Jesse Jackson, Oprah and the Reverend Al Sharpton to sort out. I have a feeling they'll - apologies to Spike Lee - do the right thing.

Tommy Thompson for President?

2007-04-03T10:52:00.001-04:00

I've just heard that former Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tommy Thompson, has announced that he's running for president in 2008. Thompson, who was also governor of Wisconsin, served in the HHS post during Geroge W. Bush's first term, otherwise known as "four years from hell."

This comes a little bit as a surprise because I thought Thompson had a really fat job as a lobbyist at something like $2 million a year. I guess that's just not enough for this particular fat bastard.

Thompson, interviewed on ABC's "This Week" called himself the "reliable conservative." I suppose that means if he's elected president, all gays will be banned from seeking employment and women who try to get abortions will be jailed.

I'm pretty sure Thompson wants to repeal most of the Voting Rights Act of 1964 and add a new twist that only people who own more than 10 acres of real estate can vote.

Just what we need, a reliable conservative. Thompson is human garbage.

McCain is Out, Ron Paul is In

2007-03-29T18:29:00.000-04:00

After Senator John McCain's publicly-exposed lies about the safety of Baghdad's streets on Bill Bennett's radio show and Wolf Blitzer's the Situation Room, we can now safely call the Senator out of the '08 presidential race and unofficially out of his mind.

McCain's comment, There are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods today. was proven laughable when Blitzer, no anti-war freak himself, contacted CNN and NY Times correspondent Michael Ware, who blew big John out of the water with this pithy comment:

To suggest that there's any neighborhood in this city where an American can walk freely is beyond ludicrous. I'd love Senator McCain to tell me where that neighborhood is and he and I can go for a stroll.

Ware had more to refute, including McCain's unfounded claim that General Petraeus travels around the city in an unarmored Humvee.

McCain is officially toast. Adios, Senator.

Meanwhile, unbeknownst to almost anybody, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination two days ago. The mainstream media doesn't want to mention Paul because they know he's a straight-talking critic of almost anything that goes down in Washington.

With Paul in the race - he'll never get the Republican nomination even though he's the most conservative voice of the party - we have the makings of the dream split-party ticket: Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.

Libertarians and Conservatives should take note because both are from the House - the people's house - and not the Senate. It's time to start drafting Articles of Impeachment and talking up the potential for a real non-partisan ticket. Our democracy may not be dead just yet.

Fat Ed's Heels Go Down

2007-03-26T14:37:00.000-04:00

Once again, it's time to report on my favorite radio goon, Ed Schultz. Now, anyone who's been reading my posts for a while understand that I am a serious media critic and generally call a spade a spade. After calling out Tim Russert and the producers of "Meet the Press" last week for having Tom DeLay on their air, Schultz (and every other talker out there) chimed in on the issue, proving that one does not have to be especially sharp to be a radio talk show host.

What brings me back to Fat Ed again was the superb job the Georgetown Hoyas did on the North Carolina Tar Heels on Sunday, winning in overtime to advance to the Final Four.

While that was, in my estimation, the best game of the tournament thus far, I was overcome with joy that not only are the Hoyas my pick to win the NCAA Tournament, but they advanced past the pick of Fat Ed, the Tar Heels.

So today, Eddie actually opened his show with a denunciation of North Carolina, which means that the shameless self-promoter won't get any more mileage out of his pick to win the tourney. Ed had picked the Tar Heels only because he is headed to North Carolina in mid-April, and being the unrepentant shill that he is, picked them to win it all.

What an a$$-hole. The Tar Heels don't need fair-weather fans like Ed Schultz. I hope they boo him off the stage when he does his little meet and greet in April.

Ron Paul on Entitlements

2007-03-26T14:04:00.000-04:00

Representative Ron Paul of Texas simply does not get enough credit for his plain-speaking approach to issues facing America. Instead of hearing the wisdom of this honest man, we're stuck with sound bites from blithering idiots like John McCain and Rudy Guiliani.

On the Democrats side, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barak Obama don't make much sense either when they bluster over the entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare, entitlements which Paul (and any other person with half a brain who understands economics) says will bankrupt the nation in 20 years.

Paul cites David Walker, Comptroller General at the Government Accountability Office in this recent article, pointing out that federal spending is completely out of control and entitlement programs will probably never be able to meet their promises unless radical changes are made now.

It's interesting that people like Al Gore and Ron Paul are sounding the alarm about Global Warming and Entitlement Meltdown today, while the current politicians are more concerned with the phony "War on Terror."

We are already a bankrupt nation, morally and economically. The coming 2008 elections are already a complete fiasco.

I Swear to Tell Some of the Truth...

2007-03-22T10:48:00.000-04:00

In the matter of the fired prosecutors from the DoJ, it is absolutely amazing to me that the the criminal-in-chief, George W. Bush, would make an offer to Congress to have Harriett Meirs and Karl Rove testify to John Conyers and the Judiciary Committee behind closed doors, with no record and not under oath.

Apparently, Mr. Bush doesn't want anybody in his administration to admit to anything or be on the record about anything. How the president can make a case that his deputies shouldn't be held to the same standards as the rest of us is really stretching the imagination - not only mine, but that of every thinking person in America.

Not being sworn in to testify before Congress is the ultimate abuse of power. It means that one can say whatever one pleases without the threat of perjury or comtempt of Congress ever being raised. It must be nice to be a neocon, fascist, immoral, unpatriotic pig like the people we have running this administration.

It's time for Conyers and Congress to issue subpoenas and put the president's fee to the impeachment fire. The American public has endured six-plus years of this lying, deceitful, decrepit, (did I mention immoral?) charade and this summer should be one full of non-stop incestigations, hearings and hopefully, resignations and jailings.

Cool Idea: Giga-Storage at the Right Price

2007-03-20T13:32:00.000-04:00

These days, computers are used for just about anything but computing. Ripping video, piping music through your system or downloading huge graphics files are just a few of the operations which require massive storage requirements.

Just a few years ago, people thought a 20 gigabyte drive was huge. (Actually, I am still running 6 blogs, 2 websites and various other operations on my Mac Powerbook G3 with a measly 2 Gig drive.) But those days are over. If you want to store music, videos or graphics, you're eventually going to hit the hard drive wall.

There are lots of choices out there for external drives (yes, you must back up your files!), but none better than these portable drives by from Pexagon Tech.

The all new Store-It Colors line of portable USB hard drives from Pexagon Tech, featuring a small 2.5" form factor hard drive, are red hot. With storage ranges from 40GB up to 160GB, these pocket-sized dynamos are priced right, too - from just $59.99 for the 40-gig to 169.99 for the 160-gig, and they're personalizable.

When you order online at the Pexagon Tech web site, you can laser engrave both sides with whatever you like. And there's NO setup charge and NO order minimum. Way, way cool. 5 shades!!

The Latest from the Robb Report

2007-03-20T13:13:00.000-04:00

Just got my email from the luxury portal, Robb Report, featuring a story about a cool business in Albany, New York which specializes in restoring antique pool tables.

According to the story, Donald Bartholomay and Dave Grunenwald, the two craftsmen who operate Bankshot Antique Pool Tables spend anywhere from 4 to 10 weeks to restore pool tables made from 1870 to 1920.

The finished products are masterpieces of luxury gaming equipment, replete with leather pockets, oak and mahogany carved woods, and heavy slate slabs beneath the cloth playing surface.

Playing pool may never again attain the heights of these magnificent tables, which reportedly sell for anywhere from $15,000 to $60,000. By the way, if you're going to set your drink down to make your next shot, please use a coaster.

Search Directory Hoping for Big Things

2007-03-20T11:37:00.000-04:00

Recently launched Big Web Links Directory offers a new approach for directory listings. While most search engines sort by PageRank or some other kind of relevance, Big Web Links are sorted by contribution amount, allowing webmasters to control the position of their listings rather than being lost in the shuffle of hundreds or thousands of similar pages.

The paid listing concept is not particularly new, but the Big Web Links Directory, human edited web directory provides a new wrinkle to the standard equation.

There's a one-time fee of $29.90 for all new listings, but after that, anyone can contribute to a listing and increase the site's ranking. It should be interesting to watch which sites compete for top listings in the coming months.

Sponsored Post

Ed Schultz, the Pet Food Shill

2007-03-20T11:18:00.000-04:00

Radio talk show host Big Ed Schultz was noticeably not on top of the news yesterday regarding the gigantic pet food recall involving Canadian company Menu Foods Inc., a supplier to more than 50 brand names of dog food and 40 brand names of cat food.

Could it be that Ed exercises selective editorial control as one of the show's major advertisers is one of the biggest brand names in the pet food business - the Purina company?

I'd say that's a good guess, since Ed Schultz has already been identified as a self-promoting, business-first kind of "progressive" who leans towards the money side of issues. In other words, if it's good for Ed's business, it makes the show. Alternately, Ed would not want to alienate an advertiser even though Purina's pet foods aren't even involved in the recall.

Considering Big Ed's propensity for the outdoors and his love for the family dog, Buck (frequently mentioned on the show), it's difficult to imagine the big guy simply missing the story.

This is just more proof that Ed Schultz isn't really a progressive, but nothing more than a paid shill for whatever advertiser offers him enough money - or in this case, a paid censor.

Why Pay for Dates?

2007-03-19T14:14:00.000-04:00

If cruising bars no longer appeals to you or you've gotten tired of friends "fixing you up" with various losers or people you don't find interesting or attractive, you've probably checked out a variety of the online dating services on the web.

The problem with most of these is that they're either charging a ton of money to meet the right kind of people or they're charging a ton of money to allow you to cruise people you'll never meet. Either way, you pay. Sometimes it's worth it, but more often than not, it's a waste of time and money.

But, your frustration may be nearing an end. There's now a free
online dating service that allows you to search by gender, age and locale, to within 10 miles of any location. And all it takes is the time to fill out a 60-second online form. Once you've completed that, you're able to search and post your own profile at JustSayHi.com.

Think about it. The money you save on trying to find a date can now be spent on having a really nice night out with someone special. You never know.

New Depths of Deceit: NBC and the Hammer

2007-03-19T11:55:00.000-04:00

Just when we thought the mainstream media could stoop no lower, Tim Russert and the producers of NBC's Meet the Press have hit rock bottom by allowing former Speaker of the House Tom Delay and Iraq war architect Richard Pearle to appear on their show.

Pearle, who is nothing more than a policy wonk for the administration, has consistently toed the company line on Iraq. His point of view is nothing more than propaganda, not even disguised. Pearle, former chairman of the Defense Policy Board, and DeLay offered nothing more than simple, tired talking points.

DeLay, former Republican House member who resigned in disgrace, has no place in Washington politics or in any American policy debate. He's been appearing on right-wing shows such as those hosted by Sean Hannity and elsewhere on Fox news and now has made it to prime time. The man is a known liar, cheat and was forced to step down from the House because he was under criminal investigation.

It was interesting to note that Pearle and DeLay, who argued ardently for the war, have no official position in government. Former Rep. Tom Andrews (D-MD), director of Win Without War. Rep, Joe Sestack (D-PA) retired Vice Admiral of the US Navy argued successfully against the war and proposals to redeploy the troops out of Iraq.

Pearle engaged in excessive finger-wagging and pointing. Russert even called DeLay "Congressman DeLay." Sorry, Tim, your credibility is now kaput. ZERO. As an honest participant in American politics, you have nothing left. Allowing DeLay on the air is one thing, but calling him "congressman" and holding up his recently penned book No Retreat, No Surrender, is another. You've become nothing less than a shill for the Republican/conservative party that is systematically destroying democracy in America.

Russert, his producers and the management of NBC are elitist plutocrats. Their interests in no way intersect with the majority of Americans. Russert can sit on his fat , pampered ass at the head of his big table and conduct phony, useless debates such as this one. Meanwhile, troops are dying in Iraq. Russert could care less, and it shows.

Thankfully, the truth is that very few Americans even bother to watch the Sunday morning news shows, including Meet the Press. The influence of these shows has diminished drastically thanks in part to the internet and other alternative news and information sources. The shows themselves have helped speed their decline, though, as they continue to feature guests espousing mostly right-wing, pro-war points of view.

I encourage them to keep it up, as it will only hasten their ultimate demise.

Ed Schultz Is Turn-Off Radio

2007-03-14T14:03:00.000-04:00

As I've pointed out in previous posts, radio talk show loudmouth Ed Schultz is on my air from noon to 3:00 pm every weekday. What used to be a sometimes enjoyable part of my day, thanks to Al Franken, has now become quiet time. I have taken to turning the radio off during his show.

When Franken was on the air, prior to this switch, I and other listeners were magnetized by Franken's dry wit, intelligent, measured commentary, and a bevy of regular guests which included such erudite personalities as Lawrence O'Donnell, Tom Oliphant, Christy Harvey and David Sirota.

Today and all other weekdays we are now forced to endure the tortuous yapping of the ill-mannered doofus, Schultz, who today was blathering on about paying college athletes, puckering up to Paula Zahn (he was a guest on her show last night) and making cooing noises about being in New York City, redneck yokel that he is. Yesterday, he actually interviewed his son, a fledgling pro golfer, for much of the first half hour.

I turn Schultz on from time to time because he may have an interesting politician every so often, but mostly he turns my stomach, so I tune him out. I wish my station (950-AM WROC), and others would wise up to this ignorant poseur. The good news is that there's only an hour before I get to hear the goddess of the airwaves, Randi Rhodes, at 3:00.

Flip-flops or Sandals?

2007-03-12T19:49:00.000-04:00

I've often wondered if there was a certain kind of personality that preferred flip-flops over sandals. I've always been a sandals kind of guy and I wonder if people who wear flip-flops, like the California surf crowd, are more laid back, easy-going or free-spirited.

Whatever the case, and whatever your demeanor, you aren't going anywhere in style this Spring and Summer without rainbow flip flops in a variety of colors to mix and match with any wardrobe.

These flip-flops are more substantial than the ones kids wear. These are high-quality footwear, made of premier leather, with laminated, closed cell sponge rubber, and feature a non-skid surface which molds to the foot, ensuring a perfect fit. Plus, they're guaranteed for the life of the sole.

Now that you've got your shades, hat and footwear set for Spring and Summer, you're ready for anything, from beach to boat to boardwalk. Kick it up!

Topping off Your Look

2007-03-12T19:36:00.000-04:00

OK, you got your sunglasses and you're ready to roll out into the Spring sunshine.

Not so fast. How about a cool hat to top off your look? I found a few sites that have a great selection of hats for guys and gals.

At hats.com you can outfit yourself with anything from berets to genuine straw hats to tropical clippers or genuine cowboy hats.

If the sports lover in you needs to express team loyalty, check out the selection of franchise caps at lids.com.

And, if you're feeling really adventurous, the largest selection anywhere is available at the Village Hat Shop.

Ed Schultz: Serial Chest-Thumper

2007-03-08T13:02:00.000-05:00

Being one myself, I give a certain amount of latitude to self-promoters. But overdoing anything can grate on one's good side and the non-stop self-praise that comes from the mouth of progressive radio talk show host Ed Schultz is so far over the top as to be onerous.

Ed never misses a chance to pimp himself to his listeners, even though they've heard it from him ad nauseum. He flaunted his ranking as the #5 choice in Talkers magazine Heavy Hundred. I had to remind Ed that he's keeping company with a crop of loudmouth lying losers from the right, aka Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and their ilk. How good a survey can it be, touting "the most influential talk show hosts" when Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage are preaching to a conservative choir that's diminished to 20-30% of the population?

Real liberals didn't show up in the survey until Randi Rhodes at #13. When it comes to influence, I'd put Randi far beyond "Big Eddie" because while he does get some name guests (mostly elected politicians), Randi offers far and away a production that's smarter and better-researched than his. And ranking nitwit Glen Beck above her proves the survey is seriously flawed. The Talkers' editors even admit "Aside from the hosts whose sheer numbers and fame demand their inclusion on this list, the selection process is subjective..."

But any reasoned analysis failed to dissuade Schultz from talking himself up for a week or so. It was disgusting.

Ed also never fails to mention - at least twice per hour and complete with clips - from any appearance on anyone else's show. He shows up alot on Larry King Live, which should explain much. Schultz is palatable to the right because he's only leaning to the left. He really doesn't have any identifiable convictions beyond making sure he never misses a meal or an opportunity to pimp himself or, even more whoresome, one of his program sponsors.

I recently had the good fortune of exchanging some email with Big Ed himself (or, hisself, as he would say in his faux redneck accent). Here's the transcript:

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Gagliano [mailto:fr@dtmagazine.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 1:31 PM
To: ed@edschultzshow.com
Subject: You're a huckster, shameless self-promoter

Ed,
Whatever Howard Stern said about your show sucking eggs, he was probably right. Since your meltdown about Air-America a few weeks ago and the departure of Al Franken, we here in Rochester have been subjected to your daily middle of the road, wishy-washy opinions from noon until 3:00 pm on WROC 950. Thankfully, you're bookended by the soul sisters of the left, Stephanie Miller and Randi Rhodes, so I only have to tune out 1/3 of the time.

I've contacted the station and have requested that your time slot be changed to Thom Hartman, a real progressive with a functioning mind, rather than the daily blather you produce. I mean really, who gives a crap about college kids downloading music, or less-fattening food in schools or, for that matter, who's winning the stupid race for president in '08. It's a year to the first primary for god's sake.

You are nothing more than a loudmouth panderer who serves at the behest of your advertisers. Just today you revealed yourself when you mentioned that you wrote a book to "promote yourself" or something to that effect, and to make money. It's not the primary reason most people produce works of art, something you obviously know little about.

YOU write books to make money. You run your mouth on the radio to make money. I'm certain that you would champion any cause that would improve your ratings. Basically, you've sold out to commercial interests and aren't worth listening to. While I wish you well, I wish you were off my air. And please, don't get into the March Madness stuff, something you know nothing about. I mentioned you on my web site last year and you couldn't return the favor with so much as a mention. It's a two-way street, Ed. I'll see you on my way up. You'll be going in the opposite direction.

OHHHHHH! I'm #5 in Talker's Hot 100. Big freaking deal. Do you see who's ahead of you? Nice company you keep.

Regards,

Rick Gagliano
Downtown Magazine
http://www.dtmagazine.com

Ed Schultz wrote:

Rick…Can you send me that magazine so I can it use while sitting
On the toilet.

ed

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Gagliano [mailto:fr@dtmagazine.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 1:52 PM
To: Ed Schultz
Subject: Re: You're a huckster, shameless self-promoter

Your response proves what a self-possessed, self-important ass-hole you are.

---------------------------------

Ed Schultz wrote:

Rick….Now be nice…at least it would be read….then flushed like your attitude.

ed

---------------------------------

Yes, I called him an ass-hole, but only after he expressed a desire to read my magazine on the toilet - a slur for sure.

Ed's got a big head, but it pales in comparison to the size of his gut. He, he, it's my blog, I get the last laugh.

Is Martha Raddatz a War Profiteer?

2007-03-08T07:36:00.000-05:00

While watching Charlie Rose last night on PBS, it occurred to me that his guest, ABC News correspondent Martha Raddatz, might, in another political climate, qualify as a war profiteer.

Ms. Raddatz, who glowingly proclaimed that she has covered the war in Iraq from "the Pentagon, the White House and on the ground" has penned a new book, The Long Road Home: A Story of War and Family, detailing the travails of a group of soldiers who were essentially ambushed in Baghdad's Sadr City in 2004. The book purports to offer perspective from both the soldiers and the family of the soldiers.

In an ironic twist (and maybe Raddatz's motivation for writing the book) the death of Casey Sheehan, son of activist Cindy Sheehan, is detailed. Could the tie-in with Sheehan been a convenient excuse for Raddatz to capitalize on death and destruction in a foreign land?

That could be the case. Raddatz has been pretty busy on the book-promotion front. Her appearance on Rose's broadcast wasn't the first - and apparently not the last - time she'll be appearing on national or syndicated TV this week.

The media likes to make heroes out of journalists who write war stories, regardless of the background. In an amazing revelation of her boundless ego, Raddatz even went so far as to say she faced the same dangers as the soldiers. Sorry, Martha, I don't think so. It's that kind of talk and thinking that makes me want to tell people like Raddatz to strap on some kevlar, grab a weapon and go cap some terrorists. The attitude of journalists is insanity couched in some perverted sense of honor and duty. In reality, it's rubbish.

War is glorified in books such as these without examining the deeper issues. While Raddatz was surely paid a princely sum for this work, I won't read something which essentially was bought and paid for with blood money. The war is on all our hands, but Ms. Raddatz's have a particularly crimson hue.

March on Pentagon March 17

2007-03-07T21:45:00.000-05:00

Next Saturday, a coalition of anti-war groups will march on the Pentagon in protest of American involvement in Iraq. The March 17th protest will occur on the 40th anniversary of a 1967 march on the Pentagon that was a major milestone in the anti-war movement of the Vietnam era. The countries are different but the message of protesters is eerily similar: we shouldn't be there and we need to get our troops out.

Organizers of civic and anti-war groups say they expect tens of thousands of people to join the protest march on the Pentagon. Among the many groups which will be represented at the march are the ANSWER coalition, World Can't Wait and many other dedicated anti-war groups who see the United States' involvement in Iraq as criminal and completely unjustified.

Considering how the war seems to have no end in sight, it's difficult not to agree with the views of the protesters. That their march will have any impact is doubtful, especially considering the cynicism in both the White House and Congress. At least there are still some Americans willing to voice their opposition to the war. I am one of them and while I can't make it to Washington, I will stand in solidarity and report on the event here in this blog. It's the least I can do.

Special: Scooter Libby GUILTY

2007-03-06T13:05:00.000-05:00

After ten days of deliberation, jurors returned guilty verdicts on four of five counts of obstruction and perjury in the CIA leak case which centered on the exposing of then-undercover agent Valerie Plame Wilson.

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has not brought indictments in the case against anyone, though Libby was tried separately for various lies to prosecutors, the FBI and the grand jury enpaneled for the original investigation in the fall of 2003.

Libby is free on appeal but could face fines up to $250,000 on each guilty count and 10 years in prison for obstruction and up to 5 years for each of the other three counts. It is doubtful that Libby's attorneys will find sufficient grounds for appeal. Though the trial was highly publicized, there was little for the defense to argue as Libby's accounts were roundly disavowed by government witnesses which included various members of the Washington media and the administration.

With the verdict now in his pocket, Fitzgerald is free to reactivate his investigation with fresh subpoenas and a new grand jury. Fitzgerald said outside the courthouse on Tuesday that he does not expect to reopen the investigation "unless new information" comes to light. Information that emerged from the trial had pointed the finger directly at the office of the Vice President, Dick Cheney, to the point that Fitzgerald said there was a "cloud" over the VP's office in his closing statement.

Trial transcripts will now be widely disseminated and Congress could take matters into its hands, demanding further hearings on the matter. There's plenty of circumstantial evidence to suggest that not only Cheney, but presidential advisor Karl Rove and president Bush himself were aware of Plame's identity, ostensibly tried to smear her husband Joseph Wilson and either originated the leak and/or may have conducted a cover-up to keep facts from Fitzgerald.

Congressional investigations should follow, but whether the current Democratic Congress has the will to pursue the matter is a matter of considerable conjecture. When Nancy Pelosi said before the elections of November 2006 that "impeachment is off the table" should Democrats win a majority - which they did - it signaled to many that the party would not pursue an attack strategy against the current administration.

Since then, the president has defied Congress and the will of the people in sending more troops to Iraq and only former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage has admitted to revealing Plame's identity to reporters. There remains nobody formally charged with "outing" Valerie Plame, an act some on the liberal side of the debate equate with treason.

A congressional response will be quick, possibly today. Some loudmouth grandstander like Joe Biden could grab the baton and run with it. We'll see.

Will Toyota's Yaris Make it in America?

2007-02-26T09:15:00.000-05:00

I've been interested in this car - Yaris - since the first ad I saw a few months ago. Toyota is the proverbial "little engine that could" threatening to become the #1 automaker in the world, now just a few footsteps behind General Motors.

The Yaris is one of the most economical vehicles I've seen in years. With a starting price under $12,000, it also boasts average MPG of 34 city and 39 highway.

The Yaris is new to Americans, but in Europe the car has been the top seller since 1999. It's interesting to note just how far behind the ecology curve we are in the USA.

Yaris is classified as an Ultra-Low Emission vehicle, making it a top choice for the environmentally-conscious class. How many people will opt for a sub-compact and superb mileage over a gas-guzzling SUV remains to be seen, but I believe Yaris will be a top seller in its category, which includes Chevrolet's Aveo, Hyundai's Accent, Kia's Rio and Saturn's Ion.

Visit www.toyota.com for more on Yaris.

Sean Hannity: Solid Gold Hater

2007-02-24T15:07:00.000-05:00

You may agree with some of what Sean Hannity has to say, though it's difficult to imagine agreeing with everything he says. More people would probably agree with almost nothing he says, since much of it can be characterized as nothing more than hate speech.

I am fortunate enough to hear Hannity nightly on my radio, late at night. Generally, I fall asleep listening to his absurd mix of hating Hillary, smearing Obama and other Democrats and praising anything that walks, talks or even has the appearance of being a Republican.

Hannity is unhealthy, a poison to the nation. He spends the majority of the first hour of his 3-hour radio show abusing, vilifying and distorting the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. It's unclear just who appointed Hannity as the Hillary attack dog, but make no mistake, he's determined to deny her so much as the Democratic nomination for president in '08. He even goes so far as to have nicknamed his show The Stop Hillary Express. Very subtle.

Hannity is not particularly bright, but he doesn't have to be because his loyal listeners - who can tune into any phrase that will fit on a bumper sticker - have made him the #2 talk show host in the country (behind Rush Limbaugh), according to Talkers magazine. With an audience of hard core right wing simpletons, Hannity simply plays to the choir.

One thing is clear about Sean Hannity: he's a hater, not a player, because his show and his comments don't bring anything positive to the discussion. He, like haters everywhere, can only try to discredit others, since he has nothing affirmative to offer on his own.

Is Iran Next?

2007-02-24T11:55:00.000-05:00

The latest political buzz is whether or not our bizarre administration is actually planning an attack on Iran.

Well, maybe not whether it's planned - they've already done that, according to this excellent article by Tom Rinne, but when is the operational question.

With our armed forces already stretched to the breaking point, an aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities is looking like the obvious direction. Apparently, the administration is not content to steal just Iraq's oil; they'd like Iran's too and bombing only nuclear sites in that "rogue nation" would conveniently be far afield from any oil facilities.

If the Bush gang is intent on doing damage to Iran there really doesn't seem to be much to prevent it. Congress has shown an unwillingness to stand in the way, though other countries - notably Russia - have not kept their positions secret.

If it's bombs away over Iran, we could be looking at $4 a gallon gas soon thereafter.

Happy motoring!

Wal-Mart... Lower Prices and Mercury Poisoning

2007-02-22T15:20:00.000-05:00

In January, Wal-Mart announced it had set a goal of selling 100 million compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs) in 2007. Now, nearly two months later, Wal-Mart has not yet adopted a national recycling program to deal with the environmental threat posed by the mercury in CFLs.

Today, Wal-Mart made an another announcement regarding its plan to sell CFLs. In response, WakeUpWalMart.com and the Center for Environmental Health called on the company to adopt a national recycling program.

If CFLs are not properly discarded, mercury exposure can cause permanent brain and kidney damage, with potential damage to vision, hearing and memory. Also, children are especially sensitive and women exposed during pregnancy have greater risks of bearing children with developmental problems.

Without a national recycling program, Wal-Mart's 100 million CFLs could result in an estimated 227,273 pounds of mercury being released into American homes.

Wal-Mart has also not publicly committed to selling only low mercury fluorescent bulbs. In fact, the fluorescent light bulbs which will be available at Wal-Mart will have a higher mercury content than similar bulbs available elsewhere. Naturally, Wal-Mart's more poisonous bulbs will be cheaper.

By contrast, IKEA committed to sell only low mercury light bulbs in their stores and to create a free recycling program to lessen the environmental risk.

A fact sheet on the serious environmental risks posed by Wal-Mart's fluorescent light bulb initiative is available at WakeUpWalMart.com.

Ready for Martial Law?

2007-02-21T19:13:00.000-05:00

According to the New York Times and other reliable sources, the Bush administration managed to slip some language into a massive Defense Department appropriations bill last October which authorized the president to declare martial law just about as he pleases.

The language gives the president sweeping powers to use the military as a domestic police force in response to a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, terrorist attack or to any “other condition.” It's that "other condition" that has Constitutional scholars and congressmen worried.

Accordingly, there is a bill now pending in the Senate, sponsored by Senators Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, and Christopher (Kit) Bond, R-Missouri, that would repeal the provisions.

The Hill provides more insight on the issue and the proposed Senate bill.

What will these people think of next?

Parade of Liars: the Ruling Class Run Amuck

2007-02-11T12:02:00.000-05:00

With each day that passes with war and sectarian violence raging in Iraq and Democrats and Republicans in the Congress debating (or shutting down debate on) non-binding resolutions, it becomes more and more evident that the Congress is - though now ostensibly in the hands of a Democratic majority - powerless to oppose the functional dictatorship of George W. Bush.

The talking heads on the Sunday shows are nothing more than waifs and apparitions, lacking resolve to oppose the efforts of the administration, opting instead for symbolistic posturing and hyperbole over outright opposition in congruence with the will of the people.

Maudlin would be the most apropos term to describe the ongoing dialogue between elected officials on both sides of the aisle. It makes a travesty of the truth, becomes an abrogation of trust and appears to be the end of democracy as we have known it.

After the mandatory Iraq talk, all of the shows devolve into debating the relative merits of the 2008 presidential candidates as though that is an issue of any import with the first primaries 11 months ahead and the actual presidential election nearly two years in the future.

It's as though all that matters is the political news cycle, not actual legislation or policy, but the silly popularity contest of presidential politics and the monotonous drone of debate without consequence.

It is because of this sorrowful and sickening malaise, this disservice to the citizenry of the United States, that I have decided to make this Sunday Talk Show Scorecard the last, and instead devote the efforts of this blog to exposing the abject failure of government, the hypocrisy of both the left and the right (though currently mostly the left), and promoting the ideals of democracy and self-determination by denouncing the monstrous lies of the federal government.

Having been a regular viewer of the Sunday shows for many years, it's evident that these shows, as currently produced and configured, are designed to tantalize and placate the populace, not inform nor educate.

It's obvious from our scoreboard these past 4 months that the best one could hope for in this environment of public fear and official impotence would be a balance of voices from the left and the right, but the left, in the persona of elected officials, is not representative of progressive views. Instead of Thom Hartmann, David Korn, Al Gore, Dennis Kucinich, and Paul Craig Roberts, we are fed steady doses of the likes of Steny Hoyer, Joe Biden, John Kerry, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton.

Those who pontificate from the right are so far removed from the travails of ordinary people as to be wholly worthless. Their views are so poignantly opposed to the public good that in another time - a better time - they would all have been in shackles by now.

These elected types - the ruing class - have not the interest of their constituents in mind. They share one interest, that being job security through election and re-election. The ruling class, as has been proven by legislation passed over the past six years, are ineffectual, intellectually dishonest, greedy, petty, lazy, elitist, obstructionist, arrogant in their disregard and disinterest in the welfare of the citizenry, close-minded, craven and ultimately self-interested to the point of being hazardous to the very people they were elected to serve.

The American people have few good choices remaining to them as our democracy is shorn to little indiscernible pieces and the Constitution is trampled under the jack boot of the corporatists at the head of government. We have seen what is produced by overthrowing the majority: a new majority which preens and postures and poses, and does nothing. Surely, the tactic of voting for change has provided only false hope and great disillusionment.

We can criticize and cajole the ruling class, express our wishes in poll after poll, but those wishes, wants and desires go unheard, our hopes and dreams shattered on the hard granite steps of the Capitol before ever reaching the ears of those who promise change.

We can, however, excel the ruling class in one regard. We can become oblivious to their laws and pronouncements and carry on our lives without heed to their autocratic, undemocratic and essentially unrepresentative decrees, regulations, fees and taxes.

Surely, we cannot completely disregard the established laws of the land, but we can act in concert and individually to thwart the imperial obsessions of a rigid tyranny. No law is so absolute that it cannot be debated and repealed, no tax so universal that cannot be avoided nor diminished, no regulation so binding that cannot be overruled.

Citizens of the United States of America deserve better representation than is now being afforded to them. We have already demanded this and have received little more than polite lip service. It is past the time for debate, past demands unanswered, past acceptance of the status quo. It is time for a second American revolution.

We are oppressed by a seemingly-benign government which stabs us in the back with incessant, excessive taxation to fill the coffers from which they steal and plunder. Always we are asked for more and given less. It's high time to turn the tables on the ruthless ruling class: give them less and demand more. We must demand - and receive - more accountability, more honesty, and ultimately more common sense legislation for the common good.

There are laws which need to be repealed or, at the least, amended. There are inequities which need to be corrected and issues of great import that need to be addressed wholly, openly and without invective or insult. There are lies which need to be exposed and leaders who need to lead from the font of public opinion, not from any particular political perspective.

The situation we face as a people is dire. It may not seem so on the surface, but the machinery of oppression has been at work, unchecked, for many years. And if it is allowed to continue in this manner, in a very short time we will have a country which very few of us will recognize.

I can find no better words to close than those which are not my own, but which should resonate with every American who stands for freedom:

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. -- John Philpot Curran

February 11 Sunday Talk Shows Scorecard

Week 14

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	Reps. Steny Hoyer (D) and John Boehner (R)	1	1-2	12-35	34.29
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	Senators Mitch McConnell (R) and Jack Reed (D), former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith (R)	1	1-3	15-37	40.54
This Week (ABC)	SenatorJohn Kerry (D), presidential contender Mike Huckabee (R)	1	1-2	19-38	50.00
Face the Nation (CBS)	Senators Chris Dodd (D) and Trent Lott (R)	1	1-2	11-27	40.74
Total for week, all shows (14 weeks)	all guests	4	4-9	57-137	41.61

*Total of progressive/Democrat guests to total # of guests.
**Total percentage of shows beginning with Sunday, November 12, 2006.
Chart updated weekly each Sunday.

How well are the Sunday News Talk shows presenting the progressive/Democratic point-of-view?

We look at the guests each show offers and award them a point for every one that is either an elected Democrat or shares the values of the progressive left and a zero for every one that does not. Generally, Democratic party guests get a 1; Republicans and all others, a zero.

Sunday Talk Show Scoreboard for February 4, 2007

2007-02-04T12:39:00.000-05:00

Notes on the Shows (Feb. 4): NBC's Meet the Press hit a home run with it's hour-long interview with Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards. Meanwhile, CBS struck out by punting with an all-super Bowl tie-in show.

The Super Bowl network may be excused this week, but barely. There's already more worldwide coverage of the Super Bowl than there is on, say, Iraq. It was an easy call for CBS execs, but fans in the stands usually boo when a team punts, and this was a punt.

Edwards represented himself well on Sunday. Possibly the most important statement by the former Senator was, "They [Iran and Syria] will never participate in stabilizing Iraq as long as the United States is an occupying force."

Edwards clearly understands the intricacies of the Middle East and has a plan for US withdrawal. However, he isn't a sitting member of Congress, so he does not have to vote on or introduce any proposals. He presently enjoys the luxury of sitting back and criticizing all sides. Nevertheless, Edwards has consistently shown a willingness to extricate the US from Iraq and employ diplomacy, rather than force, to achieve positive resolution there.

It's anybody's guess why the networks continue to put Senator John McCain on the air. He adds nothing to the discussion except his repetitive "stay the course" and "we must win" messages. His grasp of the situation in the Middle East can be described as monolithic at best.

ABC managed to somewhat even the score with Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, who fielded questions on the upcoming Senate non-binding resolution in opposition to the president's surge strategy. Hagel may have invoked some inside baseball when he said that 12 Republican Senators were on board with him and John Warner on the subject.

If there are indeed 12 Republicans who will vote with Warner and Hagel, the resolution will pass cloture (by 61-38) and be debated this week. Democrat Joe Lieberman is likely to align himself with the hard-liners and hospitalized Senator Tim Johnson will not be able to vote.

Hagel also left open the question of whether or not he'll run for president in '08, though he did respond by saying he was not an anti-war candidate, even though he sure looks like one.

February 4, 2007, Week 13

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	John Edwards (D)	1	1-1	11-33	33.33
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	Senators Jim Webb (D), Lindsey Graham (R)	1	1-2	14-34	41.18
This Week (ABC)	Senators John McCain (R) and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R)	1	1-2	18-36	50.00
Face the Nation (CBS)	NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell; sportscasters' panel Phil Simms, Jim Nantz and Dan Marino	0	0-1	10-25	40.00
Total for week, all shows (13 weeks)	all guests	3	3-6	53-128	41.41

Sunday Talk Shows Scoreboard, January 28, 2007

2007-01-28T13:59:00.000-05:00

Notes on the shows: Who's in charge here?

That is my question after watching the absurd display presented by the network talk shows this Sunday. Meet the Press and Fox News Sunday, both led off with Republican presidential candidates, Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Kansas Senator Sam Brownback, respectively. Both initial interviews quickly glossed over Iraq in the first two to three minutes before devolving into discussions of family values, abortion and religion. This display of irresponsibility was nothing short of abhorrent behavior against the public interest by NBC's Tim Russert and Fox's Chris Wallace and the producers of both shows.

Fox fell even further into the abyss, trotting out Senator Joe Lieberman on as their next guest. Lieberman tried once again to paint the November 2006 as a rejection of "partisanship" rather than the true repudiation of the President's policies.

NBC at least made an attempt at balance with NY Senator Charles Schumer as their second guest. Senator David Vitter (R-LA), a supporter of the President's "troop surge" and opponent of regional diplomacy, followed up with more talk of escalation and even mentioned that he may be amenable to sending even more troops.

ABC's This Week with George Stephanopolous was no less disheartening. The dueling Senators, Democrat Joe Biden and Republican Richard Lugar, at least - from Biden's perspective - discussed the merits of the surge and touched on Iran. Unfortunately, the discussion was too short (about 10 minutes) to be meaningful. The pundit round table didn't mention Iraq except in the context of the 2008 presidential election, preferring to focus on the proposed health care tax breaks offered by Bush in the State of the Union message and the far-off primaries.

Senator Jim Webb of Virginia waffled badly on Face the Nation, saying he's not opposed to the War in Iraq and not opposed to the president's surge policy, couching his criticism in abstractions like "opposed to the strategic mistake" and the president's "lack of a strategy."

Bob Schieffer's commentary on "the truth" was poignant and, in the current environment, rather risky. His criticism of how the government and the military has shaded (and often outright lied) about the war in Iraq and other issues, should strike a nerve in the collective consciousness. We can only hope.

Nowhere was there any mention of Saturday's 7 American deaths in Iraq nor the massive anti-war rally on the National Mall on Saturday, except for CBS, who opened their show with video from the rally on Face the Nation. The trial of "Scooter" Libby was given a short discussion by Fox's panel. Not a word was spoken about the Senate's rejection of a minimum wage increase (due to the efforts of the Republican minority) or the soon-to-be-reconvened Senate Intelligence Committee investigating pre-war intelligence - reports from which Vice President Dick Cheney office has consistently sought to delay.

In the end, watching the Sunday morning shows is a depressing experience for anyone who believes in a free, open American society with a responsible, free, fair press. The misuse of the public airwaves by the media giants which control them is appalling. It's obvious that the American public is being disserved by television media and that the only truth in journalism can be found on carefully selected internet sites and progressive radio stations.

For example, take these two articles from the highly-regarded political newsletter, CounterPunch: What's Really Going on in Baghdad by Patrick Cockburn, and Why Can't Americans See What's Coming? by Paul Craig Roberts.

The titles of the Counterpunch articles alone offer an insight to the divergence of opinion and disagreement of what important journalism really is. While the mainstream TV media glosses over Iraq and debates family values and the 2008 election, real journalism is reporting directly from Baghdad and probing the president's pending attack on Iraq.

TV media failed in the run up to the war in Iraq, they have continued to fail, are failing us now and will continue to fail with a flawed, audacious sense of self-importance and faulty journalistic reasoning.

Make no mistake, the Congress won't prevent the president from sending more troops to Iraq and elsewhere and the widening of the war - including Iran - is now a distinct possibility. Even after the resounding victories by Democrats in the mid-term elections, the president's power is still absolute, the Congress - especially the Senate - continues to abrogate its responsibility and the media whitewashes all debate and discussion.

January 28 Sunday Talk Shows Scorecard

Week 12

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, Senators Vitter (R), Charles Schumer (D)	1	1-3	10-32	31.25
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	Senators Sam Brownback (D), Joe Lieberman (I),	0	0-2	13-32	40.63
This Week (ABC)	Senators Richard Lugar (R), Joe Biden (D), Representative Dncan Hunter (R)	1	1-3	17-34	50.00
Face the Nation (CBS)	Senators Jim Webb (D), Arlen Spector (R), Mitch McConnell (R)	1	1-3	10-24	41.66
Total for week, all shows (12 weeks)	all guests	3	3-11	50-122	40.98

*Total of progressive/Democrat guests to total # of guests.
**Total percentage of shows beginning with Sunday, November 12.
Chart updated weekly each Sunday.

How well are the Sunday News Talk shows presenting the progressive/Democratic point-of-view?

We look at the guests each show offers and award them a point for every one that is either an elected Democrat or shares the values of the progressive left and a zero for every one that does not. Generally, Democratic party guests get a 1; Republicans and all others, a zero.

Sunday Talk Shows Scoreboard for January 21, 2007

2007-01-21T11:56:00.000-05:00

Notes on the Shows: Kristol calls Dems "irresponsible."

It was a fairly good week for progressive politics as 5 of 8 main guests represented the majority view. Once again, Republican Senator Chuck Hagel was given a positive nod, being that he is opposed to increasing troops in Iraq. He acts as a counter-balance to Joe Lieberman, a Democrat who sides with the administration almost all the time.

Among the more insipid and/or inspired quotes of the day, John McCain had a number of solid right-wing one-liners, such as "I would have liked to have seen more [troops sent to Iraq]"; "I guarantee the catastrophic results of failure"; "This [the proposed Senate non-binding] resolution is a vote of no confidence in the troops we're sending"; and, "It's [Iraq conflict] going to be long and hard and difficult..." Sweet. We can only hope that McCain emerges as the Republican candidate for president in '08.

Newt Gingrich actually made some sense on FOX, saying, "The inter-agency process is broken. It's pathetic how bad our non military bureaucracy is." He added, "We're in a long-term war. Iraq is a campaign." Another potential presidential candidate speaks out. Recall that Newt was pushing the World War III rhetoric this past summer. OH BOY!

Newt could not contain his abject hatred for Democrats when he commented on Nancy Pelosi's agenda, "typically democratic in that they had to have a tax increase as part of the first 100 hours." I don't know what Newt saw, but I certainly didn't see the Dems pass any tax increases. It's good to get people like Gingrich on the record because at best he's misrepresenting, at worst, he's lying.

Biden and Levin were given 12 minutes between them. Gingrich was on for 9 minutes alone. FOX was fair and balanced, as always.

Ted Kennedy on Meet the Press, offered, "The burden is on the president to prove that the surge will work." Plus, "If we have a president who is going to defy the American people, the military and the Congress, we have a responsibility to end the funding for the war."

Kennedy continued with this beauty: He [Bush] ought to come to Congress. The burden is on him. We are offering an alternative policy. They don't have an alternative policy. We have an alternative that will supply some training and diplomacy which they haven't tried.

Bill Kristol once again was on top of his game: "It's so irresponsible that they [Democrats] can't just be quiet for six or nine months." Geez, Bill, why not just come out and say what you mean?

January 21 Sunday Talk Shows Scorecard

Week 11

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	Senators John McCain (R), Edward Kennedy (D)	1	1-2	9-29	31.03
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	Senators Joe Biden (D), Carl Levin (D); Presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich (R)	2	2-3	13-30	43.33
This Week (ABC)	New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (D), Kansas Senator Sam Brownback (R)	1	1-2	16-31	51.61
Face the Nation (CBS)	Senator Chuck Hagel (R)	1	1-1	9-21	42.86
Total for week, all shows (11 weeks)	all guests	5	5-8	47-111	42.34

Sunday Talk Shows Scoreboard for January 14

2007-01-14T11:23:00.000-05:00

Notes on the Shows (Jan. 14): Considering the significant events of the week, the shows had relatively little new to offer, continuing a trend towards total insignificance. Naturally, Stephen Hadley had little new to offer - as did VP Cheney - beyond a selling of the President's plan for escalation.

A couple of Cheney's quotes should be challenged, however, especially, that the plan "...was embraced by [Generals] Abizaid and Casey," and "We consulted with over 120 members of Congress."

The VP should be reminded that consultation is a far different matter than dictation, which is more along the lines of what the administration did on the troop surge plan.

The most absurd line of the week goes to William Kristol, who said on FOX News, "I think the American people would like to see reinforcements sent to win the war." Obviously, Mr. Kristol is reading poll data upside down.

Overall, the non-progressives won the week on the talk shows handily. The big debate will come within weeks and months in the Congress, with votes on, first, a non-binding resolution, then on $6 billion in funding for the troop surge, and later on appropriations for the overall war effort for fiscal 2008 (beginning in September 2007), estimated at between $100 and $160 billion. There should be ample time for debate and resolution. In the meantime, it's plain and evident that the American people are being ignored and short-changed and the military is slowly being ground down by a losing strategy and no clear plan for either victory or withdrawal.

January 14 Sunday Talk Shows Scorecard

Week 10 - January 14

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, Senators Christopher Dodd (D), Joe Lieberman (D-I), Chuck Hagel (R), John Kyl (R)	2	2-5	8-27	29.63
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	VP Dick Cheney	0	0-1	11-27	40.74
This Week (ABC)	Stephen Hadley, Rep., John Murtha (D), Arnold Schwarzenegger (R)	1	1-3	15-29	51.72
Face the Nation (CBS)	Senators Barak Obama (D), John McCain (R)	1	1-2	8-20	40.00
Total for week, all shows (10 weeks)	all guests	4	4-11	42-103	40.78

Bush to America: SCREW YOU!

2007-01-11T09:48:00.000-05:00

The president ignores voters, world opinion and expands the war. Impeachment is clearly now a viable option.

We all saw the president on the tube last night. Well, those of us who give a damn saw him and heard his speech. For those misinformed and disinterested few, here's a rough rundown of Mr. Bush's new strategy for Iraq:

Send 20,000 more troops into and around Baghdad

Send another carrier strike group into the Persian Gulf

Threaten the Maliki government

Ostracize and isolate Iran and Syria

Ignore the wishes of the American people

Start a major fight with Congress

Bush simply does not get it. 80% of the American public now favors a reduction of the number of troops in Iraq and either a phased or immediate pull-out. The president has purposely misread or ignored the historic vote of November 7, 2006 which put Democrats in power in the legislative branch.

In calling for an immediate escalation of the war, the president wants us to believe that he can see the future. The following excepts from his speech offer an opportunity to see what the president believes and just about how far detached from reality he is.

We thought that these elections would bring the Iraqis together, and that as we trained Iraqi security forces we could accomplish our mission with fewer American troops.But in 2006, the opposite happened. The violence in Iraq — particularly in Baghdad — overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made.

Well, here we see that the president's future vision is a little blurry. In fact, it was dead wrong, begging the question, why should we believe his prognostications now? Like...

Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States.

The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits. They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions. Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people.

If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people — and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people.

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering. Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad's residents. When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas. Most of Iraq's Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace — and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.

...the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival.

The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue — and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties. The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success. I believe that it will.

But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world — a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people. A democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them — and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and our grandchildren.

...we concluded that to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear the country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale. Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal. If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.

Why should we believe him now? This is the same president who said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when there weren't. He told us that Saddam Hussein was developing a nuclear arsenal to use against us when he wasn't. He assured us that Republicans would retain power in the Congress prior to the last election. He was wrong.

Mr. Bush does not have a crystal ball; at least not one which works. Mr. Bush's vision of the future is clouded by a failed ideology, an intractable, unyielding personality and a desire to shape history in a deeply bewildered invention of his own imagination.

Bush's faulty thought processes have brought us nothing but anguish and defeat. His presidency is a mockery and a slap in the face of a once-distinguished office. He is derided by foreign leaders, uncompromising in the face of overwhelming public and private opinion, and has routinely compromised the office, the Constitution and the will of the American people.

Mr. Bush will not back down from any fight, no matter the odds, and he has proved to be more than willing to spill any amount of American blood and treasure to ensure that his misguided vision of the future is fulfilled. No cost is too high for this charlatan. No war too expensive nor too tragic; no single life to sacred to not be spared in his quest for satisfaction.

Bush has gone too far, not only this time, but in the past as well. The American public is well beyond giving him a second, third or fourth chance and it is up to the newly-convened Congress to repudiate and correct the president's mistakes.

That begins with denial of funding for any further escalation of this war and it ends with a comprehensive plan to end our engagement in Iraq. If the president does not understand that we must end our involvement in Iraq - and he clearly does not - then he must be impeached, not for being stubborn, unruly or oppositional, but for failing to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States as he swore to do in taking his oath of office.

Sunday Talk Shows Scorecard - January 7

2007-01-07T11:31:00.000-05:00

Notes on the Shows: As the shows mostly continue to give the Republican administration equal time concerning Iraq, it's become clear to almost everyone (with the notable possibility of NBC's Tim Russert) that important policy decisions are going to be made by the Congress.

Once again, we see that the only network that really "gets it" is the one built on the back of a cartoon mouse, ABC. George Stephanopoulos, the show producers and his panelists seem to have a much better handle on the public mood and have lately been choosing more guests with progressive agendas than the other networks. The show comes across as more thoughtful, better organized and more in the public interest.

What's become evident in the undercurrent of debate is that the president's administration is spoiling for a Constitutional showdown with the Congress and the Iraq "surge" policy will be its centerpiece. By promoting a policy (supposedly to be announced this week) that is at odds with the wishes of the majority of American people and the Congress, the president isn't fomenting a strategy for a realistic end to the conflict, but more of a continuation of it.

Bush's actions, as we have seen repeatedly, have an ulterior motive and that has been and is always an assault on the Constitution and a push for unitary executive power. Such an assault will drive the Congress towards more investigations and hearings concerning the use - and abuse - of presidential power. The response from Congress will be (and it should have been in the previous Congresses) to protect the Constitution and the co-equal power of the legislative branch.

January 7 Sunday Talk Shows Scorecard

Week 9 - January 7

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	SenatorsJoe Biden (D) & Lindsey Graham (R)	1	1-2	6-22	27.27
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D) and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R)	1	1-2	11-26	42.31
This Week (ABC)	Reps. David Obey (D), Henry Waxman (D), Charles Rangel (D), former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft (R)	3	3-4	14-26	53.85
Face the Nation (CBS)	Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D)	1	1-1	7-18	38.89
Total for week, all shows	all guests	6	6-9	38-92	41.30

Sunday Talk Shows Scoreboard - Dec. 31, 2006

2006-12-31T11:48:00.000-05:00

Notes on the Shows

The year 2006 could not end soon enough for viewers seeking substance. For the second week in a row, the network talk shows were less relevant than policy addicts would appreciate.

NBC's Meet the Press in particular has mailed in their last two shows, this week focusing on a rehash of the Ford-Nixon relationship with Tom Brokaw and Bob Woodward and devoting the latter half of the show to a year in review panel of journalists. The show did not even offer a guest worthy of a rating.

Over on FOX, at least the fair and balanced network offered balance, with guests Senator Richard Lugar (R) and Iowa Governor (and presidential hopeful) Tom Vilsack (D).

ABC, which has turned in the best effort of navigating the holiday season, delivered an exclusive interview with John Edwards and his wife Elizabeth, marking the high point of the morning.

CBS managed to out-do NBC on the bore-o-meter with reflections on Gerald Ford by former General Alexander Haig, Ben Bradlee, James Cannon and Tom DeFrank, scoring a big fat zero on all counts, since we don't count panelists as guests.

I would be remiss if I did not at least mention the triumvirate of larger-than-life figures who shuffled off their mortal coils this week. James Brown, the Godfather of Soul was certainly the least political figure of them, though his music - and that of musical artists who followed his lead - will likely outlive the legacy of the other two.

Gerald Ford lived to the ripe age of 93, and was best remembered for replacing first VP Spiro Agnew and then Richard Nixon as president... and later pardoning Nixon. But Ford represents the last Republican of a generation of politicians, WWII veterans who actually embodied the values of which they preached.

Gerald Ford was not remarkable for his honesty, forthrightness, and down-to-earth approach. There were many who shared his views of doing right for our nation. His passing reminds us of from where we came and to where we are going.

And what can one say about the planned and executed demise of Saddam Hussein except that maybe he deserved it? His hastened hanging seemed fashioned to fit the cliched maxim that deaths of major figures always happen in threes.

So long for 2006.

Dec. 31 Sunday Talk Shows Scorecard

Week 8 - December 31

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	Tom Brokaw and Bob Woodward	0	0-2	5-20	25.00
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	Senator Richard Lugar (R), Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack (D)	1	1-2	10-24	41.67
This Week (ABC)	John and Elizabeth Edwards	2	2-2	11-22	50.00
Face the Nation (CBS)	None rankable	0	0-0	6-17	35.29
Total for week, all shows (4 weeks)	all guests	3	3-6	32-83	38.55

The President's Poor Choices

2006-12-28T09:00:00.000-05:00

Sometimes you just have to sit back and smell the roses. And from where I'm sitting, the roses couldn't smell any sweeter for Democrats - and any more putrid for Republicans - in 2007.

Despite protestations from the war party, a new era of governing from a progressive agenda begins in just one week as the candidates elected in November are officially sworn in on January 4. In the House of Representatives, Democrats will hold a hefty advantage of 233-202 over their Republican counterparts, while the Senate will also swing marginally to the Dems, 51-49, though the accurate count is 49-49-2. Senators Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernard Sanders of Vermont are technically Independents, though both have said publicly that they will caucus and vote with the Democrats.

When the 110th Congress convenes, on one side of the aisle you will have embattled Republicans, ostensibly tied to their most visible leader, President George W. Bush, and Democrats committed to restoring respectability and responsibility after 12 years of Republican rule.

What Bush decides about the War in Iraq and how he will handle bills that reach his desk - notably a minimum wage increase and a rollback of the tax breaks doled out to major oil companies in 2005 - will weigh heavily on the Republicans.

If, as he has hinted recently, the president decides to send more troops to Iraq, the fallout could be severe and lead to impeachment. Equally certain in that scenario is that some Republican lawmakers will take pains to distance themselves from Mr. Bush as the mood of the people is for a reduction in troop levels leading to eventual disengagement.

If the president does an about-face and actually begins to draw down troop levels (unlikely), this will be seen as a preemptive win for the Democrats and set the Republicans back on their heels.

Bush has shown that he is neither a man of high principles nor deep convictions, but more of a political animal than any president since... well, since Bill Clinton. With his options constrained, the troop level choices for Bush range from bad to worse.

Either way, the Democrats win. Many on the left hope that Bush will suddenly see the light and begin backing out of Iraq while others hope he digs in his heels and fights on, ordering more troops into the fray, because that will accelerate the Democrats' agenda and sink Bush into a precarious position, teetering on forced removal from office by impeachment.

If Bush announces that his new plan calls for a "surge" in troops to secure Baghdad, the opposition will be swift and loud. A recent AP-Ipsos poll found that only 27% approve of Bush's handling of Iraq - a new low. With those kinds of numbers staring him in the face, Bush might as well throw political expediency out the window and do either what he likes or what will actually improve the situation in Iraq.

Sadly, the president doesn't listen to critics, nor does he accept cogent advice, as evidenced by his light handling of the ISG report released earlier this month which called for eventual troop redeployment, engagement with Syria and Iran in seeking a solution and offered the Bush administration somewhat of an easy way out.

As much as I hate to see it, I'm hoping that the president announces his "new way forward" as the "surge" strategy, because committing more troops to Iraq will anger the American people, amplify the debate and hasten his - and VP Dick Cheney's - removal from office.

Critics of the impeachment push will argue that it's wrong for America, that we've been through enough already and that we need to move on, but they fail to see the value of restoring the values and principles of our Constitution and that begins with investigating and trying those who failed to uphold it - the Bush administration.

That Bush, Cheney, et. al. broke the law is not a matter for debate. On which charges they will be tried, is. Bush, Cheney and their lackeys have committed a myriad of unlawful acts, told a boatload of lies and have squandered and/or stolen the nation's treasure. Impeachment is not a means of reprisal; it is the only just resolution to this administration's high crimes and misdemeanors.

Dec. 24 Sunday News Shows Scorecard

2006-12-24T10:59:00.000-05:00

Three of the four networks pretty much mailed it in this week, as they went with the religion in America theme. ABC was the notable exception.

Meet the Press wasn't even worth watching, but Fox News Sunday managed to lure Lynne Cheney, wife of the VP, for a pre-holiday neocon boost. Mrs. Cheney was on message, mentioning 9/11, and citing the Patriot Act, the "terrorist surveillance program" and "detainee policy" as important elements in keeping the nation safe. Mrs. Cheney had little notable to say, except for her view of Scooter Libby being on trial as "bizarre" and that his upcoming trial, "does not reflect well on our judicial system." Maybe Mrs. Cheney would like to see perjury crossed off the list of criminal offenses. Yes, "bizarre" is the operative term.

Face the Nation one-upped Fox by having Laura Bush in an "exclusive" interview. This is the equivalent of punting on second down for CBS.

ABC's This Week was the only network actually providing any substance with Senators Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) discussing their recent trip to the Middle East and the situation in Iraq. ABC also managed to get an interview with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Kudos to them for getting it partially right despite the lure of going easy during the holidays. The Dodd-Graham didn't really break much new ground as the Senators exchanged ideas for and against the President's policy favoring a "surge" or increase of troops. Dodd was against it; Graham favored it. The two also differed on diplomatic approaches to Syria and Iran, with Dodd having been to Syria and in favor of more dialogue. Not surprisingly, Graham was opposed to any further diplomatic overtures to either nation.

Collectively, the shows registered only 1 progressive out of 7 guests, a new low.

Week 7 - December 24

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	Authors Dr. Rick Warren and Jon Meacham	0	0-2	5-18	27.78
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	Lynne Cheney, Archbishop of Washington Donald Wuerl, Anne Graham Lotz (Billy Graham's daughter).	0	0-3	9-22	40.91
This Week (ABC)	Senators Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.	1	1-3	9-20	45.00
Face the Nation (CBS)	First Lady Laua Bush	0	0-1	6-17	35.29
Total for week, all shows (4 weeks)	all guests	1	1-7	29-74	39.19

Dec. 17 Sunday News Shows Scorecard

2006-12-17T12:00:00.000-05:00

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	Newt Gingrich	0	0-1	5-16	31.25
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Frederick W. Smith, chairman and president of FedEx Corp., retired General. P.X. Kelley	1	1-3	9-19	47.37
This Week (ABC)	Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), General. Jack Keane, former Army Vice Chief of Staff, Congressman-elect Joe Sestak (D-PA)	2	2-3	8-17	47.06
Face the Nation (CBS)	Colin Powell	1	1-1	6-15	40.00
Total for week, all shows (4 weeks)	all guests	4	4-8	28-67	41.79

*Total of progressive/Democrat guests to total # of guests.
**Total percentage of shows beginning with Sunday, November 12.
Chart updated weekly each Sunday.

Notes on the Shows:

Meet the Press: NBC went 0-1 this week, headlined by Newt Gingrich, who was followed by two NY Times pundits. Gingrich, while he thinks he's bright, is really in a sort of no man's land. His conservatism was noticeably absent and his rhetoric suffered. He made himself even more irrelevant to any important political discussion - if that's even possible. His appearance was nothing more than a feeling out for him. After all, he's a political animal and he's wading into the water espousing non-partisanship. Overall, he was particularly insincere. As for Friedman and Brooks, nothing new there: they act more as mouthpieces for staying the course rather than real change. As guests, we don't count journalists, or even people impersonating them.

FOX News Sunday: OK, we're all familiar with Ted Kennedy and he's not changing his stripes. His opposition to the war in Iraq was refreshing, but the interview was really softball.

ABC: Stephanopolous' interview with Harry Reid was unremarkable. Nothing new was revealed. However, the talk with retired General. Jack Keane and Congressman Joe Sestak was noteworthy.

First off, Keane is calling for a two-phase military buildup with correlating economic packages. In simple terms, Keane wants 35-40,000 more troops in Baghdad and Anbar province and more money spent on reconstruction.

Keane is significantly off his rocker and right out of Dr. Strangelove. He's proposing around-the-clock, 24/7 US patrols and sentries in Baghdad and a renewed military assault in Anbar. It's pure lunacy.

Sestak's response was refreshingly on the other side, his points being that the US needs to redeploy, thus enhancing our security posture outside of Iraq. He cited the failure in Afghanistan, threats from Korea and elsewhere and a view of the the Middle East as a regional situation, best handled by those in the region. In total, Sestak is simply opposed to sending more troops to Iraq, a position strongly supported not only by the American public, but the Iraqi population as well.

CBS: Face the Nation featured Colin Powell, and it was a fitting finale to the Sunday smorgasbord. Powell put some real teeth and definition into the debate over putting more troops into Iraq, pointing out that the US military isn't capable of policing Baghdad and clarifying the troop "surge" as nothing more than extending deployments. In the end, though he never said it in so many words, Powell sees Iraq as nearly lost, still workable, but mostly a problem best handled by Iraqis.

Bob Schieffer's interview with Powell was the most enlightening and heartening piece offered this week. Powell's unbiased comments were refreshing and dare I say, progressive. CBS scored a +1 with Colin Powell.

What is the most outstanding feature of all the Sunday shows - and this continues week in and week out - that the discussions following the guests focus more on the 2008 presidential election rather than the war in Iraq. Every one of these shows is guilty of avoiding the obvious big issue of the day - Iraq - and maybe that's the most damning indictment against the fuliginous nature of these shows.

ABC did debate the rather dubious choice for Time magazine's Person of the Year, a cheesy mirror and the word "You", denoting that people made the biggest difference in 2006. George Will suggested that the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would have made a good choice. I humbly submit to Wills' rationale and add that either Hugo Chavez or (my choice) Nancy Pelosi would have been equally reasonable choices. Apparently, the editors or Time want neither to offend nor commend anyone. Ultimately, their choice of everybody - actually nobody - is one of the most completely derelict actions in journalistic history.

NBC's very own Grinch on Meet The Press

2006-12-17T08:46:00.000-05:00

After hearing that Meet the Press was having Newt Gingrich on as their "exclusive" guest this week, I couldn't wait to see the show before firing off another note to the redoubtable Mr. Russert and the show's producers. Following is the unedited (and unvarnished) email to the show:

Dear Mr. Russert, executive producer Betsy Fischer and producers Michelle Jaconi and Rebecca Samuels:

Are you really as out-of-touch as you seem or are you just jealous that you don't have your own Grinch and needed Gingrich to take up your air and scare the little kids that may be watching?

Is Mr. Gingrich, who resembles the famous Dr. Seuss character, the "Grinch" in ways that cannot be measured by appearance alone, really the best guest you could find this week?

While it may be the case that Mr. Gingrich suffers - like the Grinch - from having too small a heart (the size comparison usually reserved for other Republican bodily parts such as the brain or certain "unmentionables"), those of us on the progressive front have noted a certain lack of relevance in the former Speaker's message and some distance and departure from the reality-based community.

It is noticeable (and ironic) that Mr. Gingrich has not held public office since 1998, but still thinks he's a viable voice for conservative politics. The notion that he's entertaining a run for the presidency would be humorous if it were not the case that he's taking it so seriously. There's a reason he's been out of public office for 8 years - he can't get enough people vote for him to win even a local election.

The problem with Newt may be that his heart is not too small, but that his head is too big - inflated, as the case may be, with the tantalizing notion of possibly becoming the most powerful man in the world. Yes, he's scary all right, but we're not living in Whoville, or Kansas, for that matter.

Maybe all other suitable politicians were out of town, too busy preparing for the upcoming 110th Congress, or had made holiday plans with their families, like most normal people. If that's the case, Newt Gingrich could be considered a solid choice, since he's not much of a "real" family man, having already been married three times (I can't wait to hear him fulminate over values and morals).

Speaking of available guests, Condi Rice (single) was probably looking for something to do this weekend. Why not her? She's proven to be completely ineffective in every office to which she's been appointed. As National Security Advisor she watched and did nothing on 9/11/2001 and as Secretary of State she's overseen the unending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the horror of Darfur and the Israeli bombing of Lebanon just this year. In keeping with your mantra of irrelevance, she seems the perfect pre-holiday guest.

Maybe you and your bosses at NBC just want to continue down the path of becoming less and less relevant to your dwindling viewership. If that's the case, you're doing a bang up job. Mr. Gingrich provides just the kind of peripheral doddering that makes your show so singularly nauseating.

Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah and Happy New Year!

Rick Gagliano
Publisher, Downtown Magazine
Thought Puh-leeze
http://thoughtpuh-leeze.blogspot.com

On the Table with Congressman John Conyers Jr.

2006-12-14T14:09:00.000-05:00

Just minutes ago I received an email from Congressman John Conyers Jr. informing me (and doubtless thousands of other rapt and impatient subscribers) that he has officially been named Chairman-designate of the House Judiciary Committee in the 110th Congress.

The news was expected, but what Conyers said in the missive points to more... maybe much more. Quoting Conyers:

"...we helped bring public attention to the Downing Street Minutes, warrantless wiretapping, and the disenfranchisement of Ohio voters and on many, many other fronts. While the public has expressed its concern about these issues, the Republican Congress was largely derelict in looking at any of the Bush administration's excesses. Thankfully, these -- and other -- areas will now be subject to greater scrutiny and examination, and the lack of oversight of the last six years will finally yield to checks and balances.

For my part, I believe this election was very much about restoring transparency and accountability to Washington and I will seek to do that as Chairman. I think the Judiciary Committee should become a place where we tackle important legislative issues, like lobbying reform and election reform, and where we ascertain the truth for the American people. I hope I will be the kind of Chairman you can be proud of.

It won't happen overnight. There is the inevitable lag between the election, the lame duck session of Congress, and the transition to the Majority. And there is so much left undone over the last six years."

The key phrase is ...these -- and other -- areas will now be subject to greater scrutiny and examination... which may signal that Conyers will indeed reopen these investigations.

The first two, the Downing Street Minutes and warrantless wiretapping, if properly investigated, will lead to subpoenas, claims of Presidential privilege and eventually a showdown between President Bush and the 110th Congress.

Should the president decide to resist, as he is currently in delaying any movement on the Iraq issue, talk of special prosecutors, select committees and impeachment will surely follow. My personal view on the president is that his days in office are numbered and that he and Cheney will both resign before the year 2007 is out. This follows the Watergate pattern, in which President Nixon eventually stepped down rather than face impeachment in the House.

While Bush has proven to be at least as stubborn as Nixon - probably moreso - he's not immune from loud, raucous, public protests nor the underside of Republican politics. Just as Nixon was advised by party loyalists to resign, so too will the heavy hands of Republican leadership fall hard upon the head and shoulders of George W. Bush. The likely leaders of the insurrection from the right would be Senators Trent Lott, Elizabeth Dole, Orrin Hatch, Mitch McConnell and John McCain, who rightly could see his chances at being elected president in 2008 significantly compromised by a recalcitrant, unpopular president.

As in 1974, when Nixon resigned, the best friends of the Democrats who seek the removal of the president and vice president are likely to be found on the other side of the aisle.

Conyers' investigations will get the ball rolling early in 2007 and the natural process of political survival will carry Bush and Cheney beyond the Beltway before the primaries begin in 2008.

Sunday News Shows Scorecard

2006-12-10T10:23:00.000-05:00

How well are the Sunday News Talk shows presenting the progressive/Democratic point-of-view?

We look at the guests each show offers and award them a point for every one that is either an elected Democrat or shares the values of the progressive left and a zero for every one that does not. Generally, Democratic party guests get a 1; Republicans and all others, a zero.

This week, the co-chairmen of the Iraq Study Group (ISG) made the rounds to three of the four shows. Though the ISG was a non-partisan commission, the group's propositions were amounted to nothing more than talking points for an extended stay for our military in Iraq. The closest the study came to calling for withdrawal was a carefully-crafted statement saying that "most" of the American combat forces "could" be out of Iraq as early as early 2008.

Since the ISG is non-binding and reactive, there's little reason to believe that it has produced a progressive document. While some of the suggestions are laudatory, such as engaging Iran and Syria in diplomacy, the report offers little more than a laundry list of possible corrective measures for a situation that has grown increasingly violent and uncontrollable. Baker and Hamilton are no more progressive than Laurel and Hardy, and they are not even close to being as funny.

Week 5 - December 10

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	James Baker, Lee Hamilton	0	0-2	5-15	33.33
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	James Baker, Lee Hamilton, Senator Chris Dodd (D) and Senator Sam Brownback (R)	1	1-4	8-16	50.00
This Week (ABC)	Tony Blair, Senators Joe Biden (D) and Gordon Smith (R)	1	1-3	6-14	42.86
Face the Nation (CBS)	James Baker, Lee Hamilton, Senators Carl Levin (D), Trent Lott (R)	1	1-4	5-14	35.71
Total for week, all shows (5 weeks)	all guests	3	3-13	24-59	40.68

*Total of progressive/Democrat guests to total # of guests.
**Total percentage of shows beginning with Sunday, November 12.
Chart updated weekly each Sunday.

Sunday News Shows Scorecard: Hadley goes 3 for 4

2006-12-07T23:32:00.000-05:00

It took less than a month, but the major news media has managed to shift the focus back to the right, falling under 50% in progressive guests on Sunday talk shows for the first four-week period. This week was particularly dull and biased as National Security Advisor to President Bush, Stephen Hadley, appeared on three of the four shows. How Fox News Sunday failed to give Hadley a perfect 4-4 is somewhat beyond comprehension.

Sorry this edition of the scorecard is a little late, but it was a particularly boring weekend of news shows and I nearly gave up on the concept of watching them at all. At least Russert gave Jimmy Carter some air time. Carter is the only person in the American media who speaks openly of the apartheid in the Palestinian settlements, but oddly, nobody calls him a Jew hater. Maybe he should give Mel Gibson lessons.

Sunday News Shows Scorecard

How in or out of touch are the Sunday morning shows following the message of the midterm elections?

We look at the guests each show has and award them a point for every guest that is either an elected Democrat or shares the values of the progressive left and a zero for every one that does not. Generally, Democratic Party guests get a 1, Republicans and others a zero.

Week 4 - December 3

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	Stephen Hadley, Carl Levin, John Warner, Jimmy Carter	2	2-4	5-13	38.46
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	Senators Joe Biden (D-DE) and Lindsay Graham (R-GA), Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer; Incoming District of Columbia police chief, Cathy Lanier	2	2-4	7-12	58.33
This Week (ABC)	Stephen Hadley (National Security Advisor), Senator Evan Byah (D-IN), Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack (R-IA)	1	1-3	5-11	45.45
Face the Nation (CBS)	Stephen Hadley, Senators Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE)	0	0-3	4-10	40.00
Total for week, all shows (4 weeks)	all guests	5	5-14	21-46	45.65

Deja Vu 43 Years and Counting...

2006-12-07T22:48:00.000-05:00

When this blog was started as a project to air some views and maybe make a little money on the side, the name, Thought Puh-leeze was not my invention, but that of my then-partner who has recently become a non-partner, due mostly to being a non-participant and soon, in my mind, a non-entity.

It's difficult when one realizes that bonds formed years ago still have the same petty strings attached and that those fragile things we call egos can still be damaged and hurt by blunt talk. What's particularly discouraging, though, is that one's feelings would rank above and beyond the purpose of informed dissent and minor matters such as free speech, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and habeas corpus.

But that is as it is, and so shall it remain.

Getting back to the name of this blog, and the photo I chose as its signature image, the infamous picture of Lee Harvey Oswald being shot by Jack Ruby in a Texas courthouse basement. For years - actually all 43 of them - I've wondered about who that surprised lawman in the hat might be. His identity seemed as much a mystery as the intrigue surrounding the death of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, but today, there he was, as large as life on the NBC Nightly News, one Jim Levealle, a Pearl Harbor survivor and in 1963, a homicide detective in Dallas. Levealle is the man on Oswald's right in the photo, the man in the Stetson hat.

So, now I know all of the people in the photo, but why do I not believe that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, that he alone, a madman with a rifle six stories above and half a block away - and no apparent reason, would kill a president?

The question haunts our generation and peers into our collective psyche. Who killed Kennedy? And why? In days that seem all too familiar, our current president resists good advice, our Congress fails to act and the same players from 43 years ago reappear as chimeras and nymphs with lutes, singing songs and carrying signs. We cannot forget, nor should we fail to ask until we are answered.

Meet the Press meeting mostly non-progressives

2006-11-26T09:54:00.000-05:00

After last Sunday's grandstanding by having two Democrats on the air - John Tester and Jim Webb -
Tim Russert and the Meet the Press crew returned to their pro-Republican form by having just a token Democrat (Ike Skelton) as part of a 4-person panel on the Iraq war; the other three panelists were two retired generals and the presumptive presidential candidate, far-right Duncan Hunter. The main guest was California Guvernator, Arnold.

Nice try, Tim, but we have you pegged at 1-5 for the week.

Over at Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace got drilled by Rep. Barney Frank, who told the host that while he was appreciative that three Democrats were invited to appear (Charles Rangel, John Dingell were the other two), Wallace's questons had nothing to do with the Democrats' agenda and more to do with stirring controversy over issues such as Nancy Pelosi's promoting of John Murtha for the majority leadership position and her choice of Alcie Hastings to chair the House Intelligence Committee.

Frank's comment was right on the mark, as Wallace once again exhibited his telling smirk (the same one Clinton pointed out), which comes out every time he's caught with the truth.

Still, we applaud Fox News for at least having 3 Democrats out of their 4 guests.

Sunday News Shows Scorecard

How well are the Sunday News Talk shows presenting the progressive/Democratic point-of-view?

We look at the guests each show has and award them a point for every guest that is either an elected Democrat or shares the values of the progressive left and a zero for every one that does not. Generally, Democratic party guests get a 1; Republicans and all others, a zero.

Week 3 - November 26

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	Arnold Schwarzenegger, Ike Skelton, Duncan Hunter, Gen. Barry McCaffrey, Gen. Wayne Downing	1	1-5	3-9	33
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	John Dingell, Charles Rangel, Barney Frank, Trent Lott	3	3-4	5-8	62.5
This Week (ABC)	King Abdullah, Dick Durbin, Sam Brownback	1	1-3	4-8	50
Face the Nation (CBS)	Bob Corker (R-TN), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Sherrod Brown (D-OH)	2	2-3	4-7	57
Total for week, all shows	all guests	7	7-15	16-32	50.00

*Total of progressive/Democrat guests to total # of guests.
**Total percentage of shows beginning with Sunday, November 12.
Chart updated weekly each Sunday.

Red Shift: Were Democrats denied a landslide in the 2006 vote?

2006-11-22T11:43:00.000-05:00

With the 2006 elections quickly sliding into distant memory, evidence of monumental election fraud is just beginning to surface.

Naturally, with the Democrats taking control of both houses of Congress on November 7, claims of vote fraud are largely being ignored (as in 2000, 2002 and 2004) by the mainstream press.

But the issue of electronic voting and the high probability of hacking and misappropriation of possibly millions of votes is still very much alive and the math behind the theory seems to have expanded exponentially and is becoming increasingly viable.

Shortly after the 2004 election, Dr. Steve Freeman of Pennsylvania University authored a study, [pdf] The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy [pdf] that suggested the results of that election were skewed towards George W. Bush beyond reasonable expectations.

While the report received little fanfare from the mainstream media besides the erudite Keith Olbermann at MSNBC's Countdown, Dr. Freeman continued his research, eventually publishing a book with Joel Bleifuss, editor of In These Times Was the 2004 election stolen?

Most recently Freeman, as the Directory of Election Integrity conducted an extensive exit poll survey in three Pennsylvania counties - Delaware, Montgomery and Chester - which comprised most of the congressional districts in two key races: Pennsylvania's 6th Congressional District, which pitted incumbent Jim Gerlach (R) against challenger Lois Murphy (D), and the 7th District, where incumbent Curt Weldon (R) faced a tough race against retired Navy vice admiral, Joe Sestak (D).

The Phase 1 and 2 results are now available online and while Sestak won in the 7th District, Murphy failed to unseat Gerlach in the 6th. The Election Integrity report shows that fraud was not only possible, but probable.

Our initial calculations indicate a disparity of eight percentage points as compared to these unofficial numbers, meaning that our raw polling data indicated that Murphy won the race by nearly 7%.

The report also states that as of last Friday (Nov. 17) Delaware County (wherein most of District 6 is located) was still unwilling to release precinct figures. Delaware County Board of Elections Director Laureen Hagan refused to release the precinct figures stating she was, "working with the numbers."

Freeman and his staff intends to get the actual precinct numbers. Stay tuned.

Elsewhere, a couple of reports that may be of interest are those of the Election Defense Alliance, which claims that there was a major miscount of votes in the 2006 elections, on the scale of 4% or roughly 3 million votes nationwide and this post, THE MATH: Democratic Tsunami and GOP House Election Fraud at Progressive Independent by poster truthisall with links to the Truth Is All web site. The post is a rambling discussion and a large amount of raw number crunching on potential election fraud in the 2006 vote. As a guide, the poster states:

The following analysis estimates the effects of vote switching in the 61 House GOP seats that were in play. It also determines which seats were the most likely candidates for fraud.

For math/stats geeks, it's got to produce euphoria. For the rest of us, the numbers are somewhere between indeciperable and mind-blowing.

More on these developing stories as time and events warrant. Stay tuned... the Democrats don't actully take over the reins of power until January 3rd. There's a lot of time for positioning on the issues until then.

Sunday News Shows Scorecard 11/19/06

2006-11-19T11:09:00.000-05:00

How well are the Sunday News Talk shows presenting the progressive/Democratic point-of-view?

We look at the guests each show has and award them a point for every guest that is either an elected Democrat or shares the values of the progressive left and a zero for every one that does not. Generally, Democratic party guests get a 1; Republicans, a zero.

Week 2 - November 19

Show	Guests	Score	WeeKTotal	Cum. Total*	Cum. %**
Meet the Press (NBC)	Jim Webb, John Tester	2	2-2	2-4	50
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	John Kerry, Newt Gingrich	1	1-2	2-4	50
This Week (ABC)	John McCain, Steny Hoyer	1	1-2	3-5	60
Face the Nation (CBS)	Charles Rangel, Lindsey Graham	1	1-2	2-4	50
Total for week, all shows	all guests	5	5-8	9-17	52.94

*Total of progressive/Democrat guests to total # of guests.
**Total percentage of shows beginning with Sunday, November 12.
Chart updated weekly every Sunday.

Did Meet the Press get the message?

2006-11-18T10:29:00.000-05:00

Last Sunday, I emailed NBC's Sunday morning political talk show, Meet the Press - posted here - and submitted the same to the emotionally-charged political free-for-all at BellaCiao.org.

The message clearly expressed my disappointment - bordering on astonishment - that even after the severe thumpin' given to the Republicans by the Dems in the midterm elections, Meet the Press had on as guests, Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman, two of the more vocal (and a decidedly minority view) proponents for the Iraq War, and my outrage that NBC continued its policy of shading toward the right, even after such a resounding victory by the progressive left.

In approximately the same time space, Media Matters for America was on the same page, complaining that NBC had once again shown bias toward the right with their choice of guests. Media Matters pointed out that the show's host, Tim Russert, mentioned that invitations were extended to both Democratic leaders, Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid, but the show - inadvertently or otherwise - failed to connect with such Democratic luminaries as Rahm Emanuel, Chuck Schumer, Steny Hoyer, John Murtha or others. I noted the same in a follow-up post, here.

Well, along comes the kicker in the form of a response email from Meet the Press delivered to my inbox Friday evening. I believe the message is self-explanatory, and present it in its (unedited) entirety:

Dear Mr. Gagliano,

Thank you for your email to "Meet the Press."

We have a proud history of including many different political voices and viewpoints on our program. The Sunday before the election we included Democratic Campaign Committee Chairs Rep. Rahm Emanuel and Sen. Chuck Schumer and a few weeks prior we devoted the entire newmaker portion of our program to Democratic Senator Barack Obama.

This past Sunday, as Tim Russert explained on the program yesterday, we extended invitations to both of the new Democratic leaders, Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Harry Reid. Unfortunately, they both declined.

You can read Tim's comments on the transcript page of our website (), and for your convenience we included the relevant paragraph below:

MR. RUSSERT: And our viewers should know we extended invitations to the new Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Harry Reid. Both declined our invitation, but we hope they'll be here on a future Sunday.

This Sunday, we will be interviewing two new Democratic Senators-elect, Jon Tester of Montana and Jim Webb of Virginia. We hope you enjoy watching.

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts about "Meet the Press."

Sincerely,
Meet the Press

Whether or not ThoughtPuh-leeze or Media Matters for America had any input into the decision to have two newly-elected Democratic Senators appear this week is likely never to be known, though it is debatable. The mere fact that the Meet the Press staff had the hindsight to at least email me with this information is a good step in the right direction.

Whether the progressive left will be given a fair shake from here on out on the Sunday talk show circuit is questionable.

According to a February, 2006 Media Matters' study, "If It's Sunday, It's Conservative" which examined the Sunday morning shows on ABC, NBC and CBS from 1997 - 2005, the agenda of the right is more often presented that that of the left - and the bias was even more pronounced during the Bush administration years.

We can only hope that the mainstream begins to get the message that the Progressive Left is now the more-favored political flavor for the majority of Americans. In the meantime, we press ahead and will be keeping score:

Sunday News Shows Scorecard
How in or out of touch are the Sunday morning shows following the message of the midterm elections?

We look at the guests each show has and award them a point for every guest that is either an elected Democrat or shares the values of the progressive left and a zero for every one that does not. Generally, Democratic Party guests get a 1, Republicans a zero.

Week 1 - November 12

Show	Guests	Score	Total	%*
Meet the Press (NBC)	Joe Lieberman, John McCain	0	0-2	0
Fox News Sunday (FOX)	Howard Dean, Dan Bartlett	1	1-2	50
This Week (ABC)	Joe Biden, Carl Levin, Josh Bolton	2	2-3	67
Face the Nation (CBS)	Harry Reid, Josh Bolton	1	1-2	50
Total for week, all shows	all guests	4	4-9	44.44

*Cumulative percentage of shows beginning with Sunday, November 12.

I'll continue to update this little chart weekly.

If the president is impeached, how will we know?

2006-11-16T23:56:00.000-05:00

Just 9 days have passed since the Democrats swept into power in our nation's capitol and the president, George W. Bush, and his henchmen have already shown contempt for the will of the people. News from the British newspaper, the Guardian, reported yesterday that the president plans on sending as many as 20,000 more troops to Iraq at the same time the American public is clamoring for troop withdrawals, and soon.

The news has not reached the shores of our republic, apparently, as our crooked, deceitful, inept and wholly provincial network television media does not feel compelled to report the story, just as they will not report the charges of war crimes filed in Germany against soon-to-be-replaced Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, current Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez and former FBI Director George Tenet, among others. Credit to Time magazine for running the story at least, but they themselves give the suit little hope. (I'm sure we'll hear more about this at a later date... if we're living in Europe, supposedly.)

Somebody needs to inform the administration that Al Gore invented the internet and it's still working.

In response to the non-story, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowed to oppose sending more troops into the untenable Middle East quagmire. Once again, the report comes from the UK's Guardian.

Now that we have our president making policy from out of the county and we're getting most of the important news (and spending money) from foreigners, maybe we should just put our hands over our heads and give up. "OK, we won the election and we surrender!"

One of the troubling aspects of the president's wish to commit more of our fighting-age youth to a losing effort is that many experts (Joe Lieberman, John McCain and General Abizaid excepted) don't believe we even have 20,000 spare troops. Not a problem, since it's not a story, so far.

The continuing nefarious efforts of the television networks is ostensibly the foremost injustice of the past six years of Bush regime rule. In order, the main culprits in the faux news game are FOX, NBC, ABC, CBS, the latter recently showing a propensity for breaking from the crowd, and that a credit to anchor Katie Couric, or in the most cynical, her producers.

In the television world, ratings matter. In affairs of the nation and the press, however, the truth matters. It would be refreshing to see some of it on American airwaves.

We deserve to give the president his space

2006-11-15T21:08:00.000-05:00

Today was a particularly enjoyable news day.

Not only was there little violence in Iraq reported, some senators were able to grill the commander in charge of the Iraq war, General Abizaid (with enlightening results), but the day was highlighted by the welcome disappearance of both the voice and visage of one George W. Bush.

Mr. Bush is purportedly en route to Vietnam and thus ensconced within the veritable comforts of Air Force 1, is relatively incommunicado. It's such a welcome relief!

If you are anyhow erudite, sensitive or intelligent (or maybe even all three), you will understand my euphoria over the absence of the lunatic-in-chief. Not to be forgotten, the VP is also out of sight and out of mind as well.

But the sublime majesty of a day without a president - particularly this one - cannot be appreciated without another one, and soon. I suggest that the press decline to cover him during his visit to Southeast Asia, and that the Chilean government extend an invitation to Mr. Bush, ostensibly to cut some brush or chew some fat, maybe slap some leather, tan a hide, run a gamut, pimp a ride or engage in some other harmless, busy activity. The president, after all, needs his entertainment.

It would only increase our joy and the standard of living in the USA. Children would dance in the streets and birds would coo and cuckoo in the suddenly etherealized US air. Life for many would seem worth living if we could impose a muzzle on the president's mouth and a paparazzi ban on his photo-ops.

Am I saying that the president should shut up and leave? Hardly. I am only suggesting that while he is already away, he should remain thus, perhaps hop-scotching the globe in search of his soul, like the Beatles in the late 60's. The president would do well to inhale and listen to some extract of Vishnu. Peace.

More on Meet the Press

2006-11-14T09:12:00.000-05:00

According to this article from Media Matters for America Tim Russert, host of Meet the Press explained that he did extend invitations to appear on the show to both Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

"And our viewers should know we extended invitations to the new Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi [D-CA], Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV]. Both declined our invitation, but we hope they'll be here on a future Sunday."

Apparently, while Russert was covering his ass, I was shouting too loudly at John McCain, who asserted his belief that the US should send more troops into Iraq, or Lieberman, who was his usual noncommittal self throughout his 15 minutes of fame on the show.

Media Matters for America takes the case further, noting that other prominent Democrats such as Rahm Emmanuel, Chuck Schumer, John Murtha, Steny Hoyer, Dick Durbin, or any of the newly-elected Democratic Senators, like Jim Webb (VA), Claire McCaskill (MO), Sheldon Whitehouse (RI), John Tester (MT), Bob Casey, Jr. (PA) or Sherrod Brown (OH).

Russert and the producers of Meet the Press made the choice to air their show with out-of-touch McCain and the self-inflated Lieberman, two tried-and-untrue faces well known to American viewers. Leave it to the networks to take the easy way out and stick with the company line, "we must win in Iraq, no matter what the cost."

Ugh! I'm sick of Republicans and their policies, but I'm almost thoroughly disgusted with laziness, ineptitude and the lack of understanding that everything changed on November 7.

Your comments are welcome...

My message to Tim Russert of NBC's Meet the Press

2006-11-12T12:31:00.000-05:00

Dear Mr. Russert and Producers of Meet the Press:

With John McCain and Joe Lieberman as your guests on this Sunday's Meet the Press, you have proven just how completely out of touch you are with the American public. And, this is on the heels of a monumental repudiation of the Republican party and a nationwide victory by Democrats.

Why wasn't Nancy Pelosi on your show? Harry Reid? Russ Feingold? John Conyers? The voters of America have spoken loud and clear. The leadership of President Bush and the Republicans in both the House and Senate has been rejected. The Democrats now hold power in the Capitol, but you refuse to accept the fact.

As an independent journalist and free American citizen, I find your choice of guests wholly reprehensible and completely irresponsible. John McCain, his policies and his positions, are, for the most part, irrelevant. He has "stayed the course" with the War in Iraq, has allowed the congress to shirk their oversight duties for the past six years, yet you find him worthy of your air time. Are you completely insane or just plain stupid?

McCain's views have been shown to be on the wrong side of public opinion over and over and over again. While most people want troops removed from Iraq, McCain wants to send more. While the American public wants John Bolton removed from the UN, McCain thinks he should be confirmed.

As for Joe Lieberman, all I can say is this is a feeble attempt by you and your producers to portray him as a power broker and a leader in the Senate because of his "unique" independent (helped by the Republicans) win in Connecticut. This is unbelievable hubris and totally misguided. Nobody in the vast spaces of America cares about Joe Lieberman except supporters of the Israeli lobby. It's time the news media awaken to the fact that most Americans do not support the policies of Israel and do not want to be bound to their every action. Wake up!

As for Lieberman's power, your theory is rubbish. He'll be forced into line with the Democrats or will be roundly repudiated, just like the Republicans.

I would hope that you would change your policies regarding guests on your show and present opinions more in line with the views of the American public in the future, though, if you choose not to, I cannot complain, as this only creates more opportunity for me and other independent journalists.

When Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, Alberto Gonzalez and other top administration officials are about to be charged with war crimes in Germany, you fail to even acknowledge the story. And you dare call yourself a journalist. You are nothing more than a paid toady for the party that has just lost power. Stay that way if you wish, but the American public has moved on. Apparently, you have not.

I trust you and your producers pay attention to viewership because while I will not tune you out, I will continue to loudly criticize every guest you have on your show that does not represent the will and wishes of the American public. You're starting out after this election at 0 for 2. Good luck in the future. I am posting this letter on my website and other public opinion sites, and sending a copy to Media Matters for America.

Apparently, even though the Democrats won the vote on November 7, you've shown that they must continue to be vigilant because you and other members of the mainstream media have not yet gotten the message. If you wish to be fully discredited in the eyes of the American public, continue on your present course. However, if you would like to restore some of the credibility you've already lost, I suggest you review your policies and politics concerning your on-air guests.

Good day,

Rick Gagliano, publisher
Downtown Magazine
http://www.dtmagazine.com

Limbaugh's Self-Liberating Lies

2006-11-09T04:47:00.000-05:00

The Democratic victory scored on November 7 just keeps getting better and better.

What could have been better than having as the president's first order of business on 'the day after' the immediate jettisoning of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld?

How about Rush Limbaugh throwing in the towel?

Believe it. On his November 8 show, Limbaugh threw over the entire Republican party in one fell swoop. (see transcript)

Rush is "feeling liberated" after the demise of the permanent majority (uh, make that 6 years) on the day after the American people took their country back from the gnashing teeth of fascism.

Here's the key phrase from 'El Rushbo':

I'm liberated from having to constantly come in here every day and try to buck up a bunch of people who don't deserve it, to try to carry the water and make excuses for people who don't deserve it.

What an absolute weasel. Rush goes on trying to explain his remarkable epiphany with a shaky kind of justification that he was doing what he thought was best. Rush rationalizes that he supported the Republican agenda, backed Tom DeLay, defended Scooter Libby, promoted the war in Iraq, sold out to corporatism and pimped all the rest of the neo-conservative blather by gratuitously serving it up daily to his eager, drooling horde of Pavlovian listeners because he thought it was the right thing to do.

Rush obviously harbors a great deal of contempt for his listeners as he apparently thinks they're stupid enough to believe that he was doing the right thing at the same time the Republican ship of state was sinking. (Well, he's right, they're stupid enough, like lemmings.) Beyond that, he's betraying a nasty spate of disdain for Mr. Bush and the neocon gaggle of sick human-animal hybrids while trying to clear his name before being hauled off to the Hague.

Mr. Limbaugh is an out-and-out liar and once again shows a penchant for bad judgment. Nobody put a gun to his head (maybe somebody did) to "carry water" for anybody or any principle or any legislation. Saying that he promoted concepts which he himself did not trust or believe in and spewing them over the public airwaves labels him as nothing more and nothing less than a well-funded propagandist. He was given his talking points and marching orders and like the good soldier in the war on truth, he let fly with a daily diatribe filled with hate for the left and praise for the pseudo-right.

Now he commits the ultimate betrayal as the party falls from power.

Rush may be just the first of the disloyalists. These people who have abused the people, the laws and the constitution of our nation are jumping ship like the scared rats they are. They fear the light of justice, of truth. The fascist right has been defeated and the casualties are mounting.

Re Greetings from the Blue States

2006-11-08T20:28:00.000-05:00

Rick ,

Thanks for that hilarious set of salutations...not sure I could even determine which was my favorite appellation...speedy might be one of the finalists though. Anyway, not to quibble but...Kindasleezy deserves to be forever linked to her most egregious public moment...might it be suggested "Ms. Mushroom Cloud"...or better yet, "Ms. Mushroom Fog", for as they well knew at the time there were no weapons, and therefore no threat of a cloud. Just fog...deceptive, cloaking the truth. Go " move heavan and earth to prevent..." that sweetie!

Greetings from the Blue States !

2006-11-08T11:04:00.000-05:00

Just thought I'd post this for the die-hard Republicans out there, including, but decidedly not limited to, drug addled gas-bag Rush Limbaugh, Slanthead Sean Hannity, Drunk with Power Tom DeLay (enjoy your stay in the pen, buddy), Shooter (Dick Cheney), closet queen Ken Melhman, the Big Guy- Bill O'Reilly, Neil Cavuto and everyone at Fox News, Rick Santorum (buh-bye), she-male Ann Coulter, Tony (Crony McSnowjob) Snow, Don (back off) Rumsfeld, Condi (get a life) Rice, Torture Czar Roberto (Speedy) Gonzalez, Libby Dole (shut the hell up), Turd Blossom Karl Rove (nice job there, genius), and a warm and fuzzy special "howdy" to the Liar-in-Chief, George W. Bush.

Thanks for six years of nothing but CRAP, you losers. See you in the Hague, hopefully.

DEMS DO IT BETTER !!

2006-11-08T10:20:00.000-05:00

With Claire McCaskill winning the Senate seat in Missouri and Democrats leading in the Senate races in Montana and Virginia, the Democratic party has pulled off one of the most stunning and important election victories in America's history.

If the slim margins hold in Montana and Virginia, the Democrats will have picked up at least 26 seats in the House and also wrested control away from the Republicans in the Senate, 51-49. The pickups in the House guarantee a Democratic majority for the first time in 12 years and (in January, 2007) will proffer upon party leader Nancy Pelosi the title of Speaker of the House.

A number of Democrats are not conceding losses at this time, notably Eric Massa and Dan Maffei in two close House races in upstate New York, and Victoria Wulsin in Ohio, who is within less than 1% of unseating Republican name-caller Jean Schmidt. The Wulsin camp is considering legal options, a recount and waiting for all the votes to be counted.

Wulsin spokesman Ady Barkan said provisional and absentee ballots could tip the balance and that the campaign would consider asking for a recount.

With the gains in both houses, Democrats now have the authority to order investigations - with subpoena powers - on everything from the war in Iraq to president Bush's illegal wiretapping operations.

The changes may not be evident at first blush, but the national nightmare that began in 2000 with the illegal appointment by the Supreme Court of George Bush as president, is nearly over.

The president will be the lamest of lame ducks, with only his veto power to help him avoid complete and total repudiation of all of his misguided policies. Democrats have pledged not to forge ahead with impeachment hearings, though John Conyers (D-Mich), who will become chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, will surely reopen investigations into voting irregularities and reform and the White House's wiretapping efforts.

The shoe is firmly on the other foot today, and the Democrats should waste little time fixing the wrongs of the past six years. The list is lengthy.

No fat lady singing; Webb takes slim lead in Virginia

2006-11-08T00:12:00.000-05:00

Virginia Senate
99% of precincts reporting
D Webb 1,141,052 50%
R Allen (Incumbent) 1,138,676 49%

It doesn't get much closer than this. Most of the country won't know until AM, if then.

Also, Tester is leading in Montana and Ford won't concede in Tennessee. With RI, OH, and PA already in the bag, the Dems are looking good here for at least a pickup of 5 seats, which would be a 50-50 tie.

This isn't over. Not by a long shot.

Upstate NY update: Incumbents hold three key seats

2006-11-07T23:56:00.000-05:00

Tom Reynolds, Jim Walsh and Randy Kuhl all won re-election to their respective house seats, though by slim majorities. The Democrats have to be disappointed that they did not take at least one of these seats, especially in the 29th District, the Kuhl/Massa race.

At least Tom Reynolds will be in the minority, and that's a plus as we plummet headling into two years of gridlock... that is, so long as the new Congressional Democrats have some spine.

Winners/Losers - Minimum Wage / Gays

2006-11-07T23:24:00.000-05:00

From the polling I've seen so far on statewide initiatives, the big winners of the night were those which sought to raise the minimum wage, which passed handily in every state. In the meantime, same sex marriage or initiatives calling for measures to identify marriage as between a man and a woman have been favoring the conservative position.

What this means for Democrats is that they may have to rethink their platform for '08. Gay marriage is looking more and more like a losing issue and it may end up being discarded or shoved to the side. In the larger scheme, losing the White House over gay marriage would probably be akin to a Republican wet dream.

There are more pressing issues in America and the Democratic party needs to focus on issues more relevant to the average family. Otherwise, the Republicans will re-establish their majority in the House and keep the Senate and presidency. Our nation cannot afford more years in the morass of Republican spin and hypocrisy.

By gaining the majority in the House, the Democrats have only slowed the progress of the Republican political machine and it's obvious that there's much more work to be done. A good start would be to work for better voting legislation. There are still too many questions surrounding suppression practices and electronic voting procedures to ensure a safe democracy.

CNN says Dems will control House

2006-11-07T23:19:00.000-05:00

CNN projects Democrats will pick up 15 House seats, giving them control of the House. ABC just announced same.We'll see how long the other networks take to get on board with this and how much larger the advantage becomes.

NY 29 Massa/Kuhl race may take days to resolve due to absentee ballots. Downstate Dems doing well, however, with Hall, Gillibrand and Arcuri looking like winners for a net gain of 2 seats.

Raising Arizona?

2006-11-07T22:49:00.000-05:00

Arizona Senate
12% of precincts reporting
D Pederson 97,460 50%
R Kyl (Incumbent) 91,464 47%

This has been a hunch bet for two weeks. Good news coming from the Southwest.

New York update... Clean sweep for Dems at the top

2006-11-07T22:33:00.000-05:00

Hillary Clinton returned to the Senate and Eliot Spitzer is the Empire State's new governor. Andrew Coumo wins Attorney General. Results in key House races are close, but trending towards Republicans in the countryside counties, Democrats winning handily in urban districts. No surprises except that people in the sticks are still dumb enough to swallow any kind of manure the Republicans can shovel.

Quite disappointing if the Dems don't pick up at least one of the three in NY 25, 26 and 29. Currently, Repubs are leading all.

Senate looks grim...

2006-11-07T22:14:00.000-05:00

Junior Allen looks like he may hold his seat, and that probably keeps the GOP in command of the Senate. A big win for the puppet. Pass the rot-gut!

Sorry Mr. Chafee but...

2006-11-07T21:52:00.000-05:00

Whitehouse unseats Rhode Island incumbent...unfortunately the losing incumbent represents the flickering quadrant of the GOP that the country desparately needs. Apologies to the Senator, but we just can't afford the bill for such nurturing right now. Spank the puppet!

Machines working OT in VA

2006-11-07T21:42:00.000-05:00

Virginia Senate
79% of precincts reporting
R Allen (Incumbent) 884,747 50%
D Webb 859,061 49%

Thus far, this is the only good news for the Republicans. Hard to figure, but maybe Northern Va. reports late? Maybe people in VA are just that stupid?

Party of one...

2006-11-07T21:37:00.000-05:00

Lieberman takes Connecticut Senate race...real and frivolous questions ensue....might he change affiliations? Joe of joe-mentum has spoken of the excess of partisanship. Perhaps he can begin the healing by helping the administration to discover it's long hidden bi-partisan and non-partisan sides. More wine!

Dems hold Minnesota

2006-11-07T21:30:00.001-05:00

CNN calls for Klobuchar...

Yarmuth !!

2006-11-07T21:21:00.000-05:00

Kentucky 03
96% of precincts reporting
D Yarmuth 117,212 51% votes by countynot available
R Northup (Incumbent) 110,738 48%

Yarmouth has it, as there are less than 5000 votes remaining to be counted. Score 2nd House seat for the PEOPLE, er, Democrats.