samedi 30 avril 2005
EoMEoTE #6: Warm and sunny
In the fried egg world you're either a runny-yolk person, or you're a... Neanderthal.Why anyone would deny themselves the bliss of piercing the golden sun of a barely cooked egg yolk is beyond me. Rich, thick and eggy it oozes languidly into your toast providing nourishment and comfort.So for this month's End of Month Eggs on Toast Extravanga #6 it was back to basics. Fried egg on toast. Extra
EoMEoTE #6: Warm and sunny
In the fried egg world you're either a runny-yolk person, or you're a... Neanderthal.Why anyone would deny themselves the bliss of piercing the golden sun of a barely cooked egg yolk is beyond me. Rich, thick and eggy it oozes languidly into your toast providing nourishment and comfort.So for this month's End of Month Eggs on Toast Extravanga #6 it was back to basics. Fried egg on toast. Extra
vendredi 29 avril 2005
"...and even if you do fix them, I can hire Indians for 1/3 the price"
The inimitable Tom Friedman, prefect of the Flat Earth Society, has yet another of his "Hooray for Outsourcing" pieces in today's New York Times, this one inspired by Bill "The Hell with the Gays" Gates' comment at a recent governors' conference, which Friedman translates as "If we don't fix American education, I will not be able to hire your kids."
Now, Bill Gates certainly has a point about American education, though not for the reasons he or Friedman claim. The biggest problem is not that schools can't teach kids what they need to know; it's the pressures from the fundamentalist right AGAINST teaching kids what they need to know. For the so-called tech jobs of the future (which Friedman doesn't seem to realize are already the tech jobs of the past), kids are going to need to be able to think and reason, and they'll need a good solid foundation in math and science (read: FACTS). The problem is that the Christofascists want to implement Bible-based education nationwide, and let's face it: The Bible has little to do with established fact.
Of course Gates couldn't come out and SAY this, not after caving to a bantam rooster of a Christofascist preacher and withdrawing support for a gay rights bill, but that's the truth.
The other problem, of course, is money, and with C-Plus Caligula and his Congressional acolytes funneling ever more money into the pockets of the wealthy and corporations, there's less federal money available for eduction, which means the states have to pay more, and since they don't want to, it means higher property taxes, at which communities nationwide balk.
But even if the educational system COULD be brought up to the kinds of standards that would create the sort of workers that Gates and his compatriots crave, said workers will still have one strong strike against them: They are Americans, which means that in return for keeping their skills up to date by continually learning new skills, often on their own time and with their own money, and for working the 80-hour weeks that are characteristic of engineers at companies like Microsoft, they want to be well-compensated. And that's where it all falls apart. Friedman seems to think that engineers in China and India are racing to the top, rather than American engineers racing to the bottom, but with the degree of wage gap that currently exists, any kind of levelling is a long way off -- and when wages reach a point of equilibrium among, say, the U.S., India, and China, they will be far lower than those to which most college-educated Americans are accustomed.
Now, it may very well be that Americans' high standard of living is unsustainable, in which case guys like Friedman ought to come out and admit that the future of the American workplace looks like a high-tech version of a 19th century sweatshop, rather than trying to convince us that Bill Gates' lobbying to lift the H-1B cap is about anything other than corporate profit.
Now, Bill Gates certainly has a point about American education, though not for the reasons he or Friedman claim. The biggest problem is not that schools can't teach kids what they need to know; it's the pressures from the fundamentalist right AGAINST teaching kids what they need to know. For the so-called tech jobs of the future (which Friedman doesn't seem to realize are already the tech jobs of the past), kids are going to need to be able to think and reason, and they'll need a good solid foundation in math and science (read: FACTS). The problem is that the Christofascists want to implement Bible-based education nationwide, and let's face it: The Bible has little to do with established fact.
Of course Gates couldn't come out and SAY this, not after caving to a bantam rooster of a Christofascist preacher and withdrawing support for a gay rights bill, but that's the truth.
The other problem, of course, is money, and with C-Plus Caligula and his Congressional acolytes funneling ever more money into the pockets of the wealthy and corporations, there's less federal money available for eduction, which means the states have to pay more, and since they don't want to, it means higher property taxes, at which communities nationwide balk.
But even if the educational system COULD be brought up to the kinds of standards that would create the sort of workers that Gates and his compatriots crave, said workers will still have one strong strike against them: They are Americans, which means that in return for keeping their skills up to date by continually learning new skills, often on their own time and with their own money, and for working the 80-hour weeks that are characteristic of engineers at companies like Microsoft, they want to be well-compensated. And that's where it all falls apart. Friedman seems to think that engineers in China and India are racing to the top, rather than American engineers racing to the bottom, but with the degree of wage gap that currently exists, any kind of levelling is a long way off -- and when wages reach a point of equilibrium among, say, the U.S., India, and China, they will be far lower than those to which most college-educated Americans are accustomed.
Now, it may very well be that Americans' high standard of living is unsustainable, in which case guys like Friedman ought to come out and admit that the future of the American workplace looks like a high-tech version of a 19th century sweatshop, rather than trying to convince us that Bill Gates' lobbying to lift the H-1B cap is about anything other than corporate profit.
Shorter George Bush
If you can't fuck it or eat it, kill it, then fuck it, then eat it.
Or as Uggabugga points out, "Turn Social Security into welfare first, THEN we kill it."
Today's headlines: Bush Babbles, Steph Stiffed
It takes some serious chutzpah to decide to move up the time of a rare prime-time presidential "news conference" so that it pre-empts the most popular show on the network your administration is trying so hard to destroy. But that's what C-Plus Caligula's handlers decided last night when they moved the planned 8:30 presidential babblefest up to 8:00.
Sam Seder is right; you do NOT want to watch this stuff without the Majority Report team playing the roles of Mike, Crow, and Tom Servo. What's even more fun is to turn on the TV with the sound down and let Sam and Janeane do their thing. Every time I see George W. Bush on television, I feel the kind of embarrassment ordinarily reserved for the kind of unabashed promoters of their own mediocrity that used to appear on The Gong Show (a.k.a. American Idol's granddaddy), and for William Hung -- which is pretty much saying the same thing.
But watching a blotchy-faced Bush, hunched over like -- well, if the shoe fits -- a chimpanzee, clutching the podium as if it were life preserver, babbling the same talking points about Social Security is failing, freedom is on the march in Iraq, and his good friend Vladimurr, it was actually hard to feel contempt for him; it was more like embarrassment that enough Americans, most of whom will never set foot NEAR the hole in the ground where the World Trade Center used to stand, were still so scared shitless of terrorism coming to their small towns that they gave this guy another four years to wreak havoc on not just this country, but the entire world.
What this means is that the next year and a half, and November 2006 in particular, are going to be very interesting. With Bush's approval ratings currently in the mid-40's and sinking like a stone, and Congress faring even worse, with approval ratings in the mid-30's, one wonders if even rigged Diebold and ES&S voting machines are going to be enough to keep the Republicans in power. And even if they are, will Americans buy the results of the midterm elections? And if they don't; if Americans finally wake up and realize the bill of goods they've been sold since December 12, 2000, what will they decide to do?
But if you managed to stay sane until Bush was finished floundering for his own political life, you got to see Stephanie LaGrossa, the new best damn Survivor player ever to not win the game (de-throning the reigning holder of that title, Rob Cesternino), intimidate her new tribemates enough to be the latest casualty -- and leaving with class. Steph in 2016, I say.
jeudi 28 avril 2005
Another Octopus?
In August, 1991, journalist Danny Casolaro was found dead in the bathtub in a hotel room. Casolaro had been working on a book, working title, "The Octopus", in which he had planned to draw connections among various high-level scandals -- including the so-called "October Surprise", which claimed that the Reagan campaign agreed to sell arms to Iran in exchange for holding on to the American embassy hostages until after the 1980 election, thus ensuring a Reagan victory; the Iran-Contra scandal, and the BCCI banking scandal. Casolaro's mysterious death has provded fodder for conspiracy buffs for over a decade.
Today, an explosive diary at Daily Kos seems to indicate another Octopus -- this one involving the CBS memos regarding C-Plus Caligula's Texas Air National Guard service, the thuggish intimidation of vote counters after the 2000 election, Republican dirty trickster Roger Stone, and JimmyJeff GannonGuckert.
Isn't it interesting, how whenever there's one of these intricate webs of sleaze floating around, there's always someone named "Bush" associated with it?
OK, here's why Microsoft has decided to sacrifice gay rights
It's in return for a complete abolition of H-1B quotas:
The U.S. should remove visa limits to allow more skilled foreign citizens to work at U.S. companies if it wants to remain a leader in technology, Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates said today.
Microsoft is having a hard time finding skilled workers within the U.S., and the lack of H-1B visas for skilled workers is only making the situation worse, Gates said in a panel discussion at the Library of Congress.
"The whole idea of the H-1B visa thing is, 'Don't let too many smart people come into the country.' The whole thing doesn't make sense," Gates said.
Gates echoed the concerns of other business and education leaders who warn that the U.S. must improve science education and boost spending on research and development to avoid falling behind India, China and other countries that are rapidly gaining ground.
But Gates reserved his sharpest criticism for the visa caps, which he called "almost a case of a centrally controlled economy." Gates added, "If the demand is there, why have the regulation at all?"
Congress capped the number of nonimmigrant visas for skilled professionals at 65,000 in 2004 and 2005 in an effort to increase border security and ensure more jobs for homegrown tech workers.
That's a third of the 195,000 work visas issued annually during the high-tech boom years from 2001 to 2003.
The entire quota of H-1B visas was snapped up the first day of the fiscal year last October by U.S. employers anxious to recruit foreigners for jobs in medicine, engineering, education, research and programing, among other fields.
While increasing the number of H-1B visas is important, "we can't be so naive to believe that there is not a very serious border-security problem that we need to deal with," said Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.), who heads the House Rules Committee.
Undersecretary of Commerce Phil Bond, a top Bush administration technology official, pointed out that the unemployment rate for engineers is above the national average.
When even the Bush Administration, whose favor Gates is trying to gain, is admitting that the unemployment rate for tech workers is above the national average, you know that Gates' claim that there aren't enough qualified American tech workers is utter horseshit. There may not be enough qualified American tech workers who are under 35 and willing to work 100 hour weeks for $13,000/year, but there are plenty of skilled tech workers out there. This isn't about addressing a shortage of workers, it's about turning the American workplace into a global sweatshop.
Thomas Friedman? Go fuck yourself.
Hey, Laura, you're still a bitch on wheels, but get well soon! Love and kisses, Me
Laura Ingraham may be as foul a breed of pond scum as exists this side of Ann Coulter, but as a fellow middle-aged woman who by dint of age, ethnicity, and lack of reproduction is also at risk of breast cancer, I'd like to wish Ms. Ingraham a speedy and full recovery.
Happy days are here for oil companies
Yes, that's our Bush -- by the oil companies, of the oil companies, for the oil companies. At the same time as he's cutting Medicaid, veterans benefits, and education, and stuffing the pockets of Halliburton executives with YOUR tax dollars, his other friends in the oil industry are making out like bandits:
Exxon Mobil:
Exxon Mobil Corp., the world's largest publicly traded oil company, said Thursday that first-quarter earnings soared 44 percent from last year, due mainly to strong crude and natural gas prices. The company said it will boost its share repurchase rate by $1 billion in the second quarter.
Net income surged to $7.86 billion, or $1.22 per share, from $5.44 billion, or 83 cents per share, a year ago. Excluding a $460 million gain on the sale of Exxon's stake in China Petroleum and Chemical, the company earned $1.15 per share in the latest quarter.
Total revenue climbed to $82.05 billion from $67.60 billion last year.
Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial were looking for the company to post higher operating earnings of $1.20 per share in the latest quarter.
Exxon Mobil said earnings from drilling operations were a record $5.05 billion, an increase of $1.04 billion from the first quarter of 2004, reflecting continued strength in crude and natural gas prices. Earnings from refining and retail sales grew $139 million to $1.14 billion, with improved worldwide refining conditions partly offset by weaker marketing margins.
Shell:
Shell (RD: news, chart, profile) (SC: news, chart, profile) said first-quarter net income rose 42% to $6.67 billion, with revenue up 26% to $72.2 billion.
On a cost of supplies basis, earnings rose 28% to $5.55 billion on higher fuel prices, strong LNG earnings and higher downstream earnings in Oil Products and Chemicals. That topped the $4.68 billion analyst forecast, according to Dow Jones Newswires.
BP:
P, the world's second-biggest publicly traded oil company, posted a 29 percent jump in first-quarter profit, helped by higher energy prices.
Net income rose to $5.49 billion, or 25.6 cents a share, excluding gains in the value of its oil inventories, BP said yesterday. Revenues rose 16 percent, to $79.8 billion, from a year earlier.
BP, which is second to the Exxon Mobil Corporation, is the first of the world's large oil companies to report earnings from the first quarter, when New York crude oil averaged $57.60 a barrel, natural gas prices rallied in the United States and Europe and gasoline prices surged.
Meanwhile, the rest of the economy -- the one you and I live in -- is growing at its slowest rate in two years, largely because of the cash with which the oil companies are stuffing their pockets:
Buffeted by rising energy prices and weakened consumer and business spending, the economy grew at an annual rate of just 3.1 percent in the first quarter. The slowest pace of expansion since in two years was evidence of a new "soft patch."
The latest reading on gross domestic product, released by the Commerce Department on Thursday, showed that consumers and businesses turned cautious in their spending in the January-to-March quarter, a key factor in the slower economic growth. High energy prices and rising borrowing costs are causing Americans to tighten their belts a bit.
The first-quarter's GDP figure, down from a 3.8 percent pace logged in the final quarter of 2004, represents the economy's most sluggish showing since the first quarter of 2003, when economic activity expanded at an even more mediocre 1.9 percent rate.
GDP, the broadest barometer of the economy's health, measures the value of all goods and services produced within the United States.
On Wall Street, stocks slumped. The Dow Jones industrials were down 54 points and the Nasdaq was off 10 points in morning trading.
[snip]
In second report Thursday, the number of new people signing up for unemployment benefits rose last week as businesses coped with rising costs. New claims rose by 21,000 to 320,000, the Labor Department said.
And in the midst of these reports, the President of the United States of Petroleum Refiners is going to appear on television tonight to tell you that drilling the 10 days worth of oil that's in ANWR is going to solve our energy needs in perpetuity. Of course, what does he care? He thinks Jesus is coming, and he and his oil company buddies will have luxury boxes, complete with open bar, hot and cold buffet, and lap dancers, to watch the unrepentant burn in the unholy flame of God's wrath.
Busted!
Of course, the hypocrisy of Tom DeLay is hardly news anymore, but this is worth a snarky giggle just the same:
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And sometimes, according to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a cigar is an economic prop to a brutal totalitarian regime. Arguing against loosening sanctions against Cuba last year, DeLay warned that Fidel Castro "will take the money. Every dime that finds its way into Cuba first finds its way into Fidel Castro's blood-thirsty hands.... American consumers will get their fine cigars and their cheap sugar, but at the cost of our national honor."
DeLay has long been one of Congress' most vocal critics of what he calls Castro's "thugocracy," which is why some sharp-eyed TIME readers were surprised last week to see a photo of the Majority Leader smoking one of Cuba's best—a Hoyo de Monterrey double corona, which generally costs about $25 when purchased overseas and is not available in this country. The cigar's label clearly states that it was made in "Habana." The photo was taken in Jerusalem on July 28, 2003, during a meeting between DeLay and the Republican Jewish Coalition at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem.
(Via Atrios)
The Handmaid's Tale
Florida Republicans have decided that rather than face uppity adult women outright, they'll take out their fear and loathing of female sexuality on 13-year-olds:
As a 13-year-old Palm Beach County girl prepared this week to end a pregnancy she says she does not want, the Florida Department of Children and Families went to court to stop her from having the abortion.
The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the state's position Wednesday, saying DCF is overstepping its authority and violating the girl's constitutional rights.
The girl, identified only as L.G., lives in a shelter for abused and neglected teens and found out two weeks ago during a doctor's appointment that she is pregnant. Soon after, she told her DCF caseworker in Palm Beach County that she wanted an abortion.
The caseworker scheduled an appointment for the girl to have an abortion Tuesday and planned to drive her to the office, according to an appeal filed by the ACLU. On the same day, lawyers for DCF filed an emergency motion to stop L.G. from terminating her pregnancy.
In a hearing that day before Juvenile Court Judge Ronald Alvarez, the state argued that Florida law gives DCF authority to prevent L.G. from having an abortion. The state said the girl was not able to make an informed decision because of her age and immaturity, according to the appeal filed Wednesday by the ACLU.
Alvarez agreed to delay the abortion until the court could give L.G. a psychological evaluation to find out whether an abortion could cause her emotional harm. The judge also wanted the court to determine whether the girl would face medical risks in terminating the pregnancy or carrying the baby to term.
The ACLU and the Legal Aid Society appealed that decision Wednesday to the 4th District Court of Appeal, saying neither DCF nor the court had any right to interfere.
The U.S. Supreme Court's position that women have the right to choose an abortion overrides any state argument or law, ACLU of Florida Executive Director Howard Simon said.
"Whatever politically motivated, convoluted legal rationale they (DCF leaders) can come up with, they cannot ignore the constitutional rights of women as recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court," Simon said.
DCF spokeswoman Marilyn Munoz said Wednesday that DCF is "acting in the best interest of the child." She cited a Florida state law that says DCF cannot permit an abortion without a judge's consent, but declined further comment.
A spokesman for Gov. Jeb Bush also declined comment.
Under Florida law, a 13-year-old can have an abortion without her parents knowing or agreeing. The legislature is considering a bill this session that would require parental notification, but not consent, for girls under the age of 16.
Now think about it: If this girl was living with her parents, she would be able to just go ahead and terminate the pregnancy. But because she's a ward of the state, the state has decided to turn her into a breeder for their own political purposes, EVEN THOUGH THE LAW STATES VERY CLEARLY THAT A PREGNANT TEENAGER IS AN EMANCIPATED MINOR WITH THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE A PREGNANCY (Florida Statute 743.065):
"Unwed pregnant minor or minor mother; consent to medical services for
minor or minor's child valid.--
"(1) An unwed pregnant minor may consent to the performance of
medical or surgical care or services relating to her pregnancy by a
hospital or clinic or by a physician licensed under chapter 458 or
chapter 459, and such consent is valid and binding as if she had
achieved her majority.
"(2) An unwed minor mother may consent to the performance of medical
or surgical care or services for her child by a hospital or clinic or
by a physician licensed under chapter 458 or chapter 459, and such
consent is valid and binding as if she had achieved her majority.
"(3) Nothing in this act shall affect the provisions of s. 390.0111."
What I want to know is how this girl became pregnant while in state's care. If the state is supposed to serve as guardian, how is it that she was able to become pregnant? And by whom was she impregnated? An adult caseworker or other state staff?
And yet, there seems to be NO investigation of how the pregnancy took place; the important thing is to punish this "evil, unchaste daughter-of-Eve temptress" for not being chaste.
Jebbie, of course isn't saying anything, but you know damn well which side he's on.
In 2003, a parental notification law was struck down by Florida's Supreme Court. Yet Christofascist politicians are trying to put one together again. If they succeed, this is just the beginning of the reduction of women of all ages becoming breeders for the state when the state deems it appropriate, and having such pregnancies regarded as just punishment for sexual intemperateness when the state wants it to be.
Margaret Atwood didn't know the half of it.
I hope some of our Florida readers will weigh in ("Skywind", I'm talking to you).
OK, that does it
How DARE they? How DARE the Roman Catholic Church decide, after its shameful looking-the-other-way during the Nazi Holocaust, decide NOW to gain political advantage from the corpses of my relatives and those of millions of other Jews worldwide by allowing one of its high-level representatives to make the ludicrous and offensive connection between gay marriage and death camps:
Gay rights groups in Spain reacted with anger on Wednesday after a Roman Catholic cardinal compared obedience to the legalization of same-sex marriage to the process that led to the creation of Nazi death camps, Agence France-Presse reports. "If you give obedience to the law priority over obedience to your conscience, that leads to Auschwitz," Cardinal Ricard Maria Carles, former archbishop of Barcelona, told a Spanish television station.
Spanish deputies last week approved a bill allowing gays and lesbians to marry and adopt children. The bill is expected to become law and would make Spain the third European country after the Netherlands and Belgium to do so. "The people who made Auschwitz were not criminals, but people who had been forced to, or thought they had a duty to, obey the laws of the Nazi government rather than their own conscience."
The Triangulo foundation, a Spanish gay rights group, said that comparison with the Holocaust was "repugnant" and called on the church to "stop sowing hatred against victims of discrimination and against victims of the Holocaust, among whom there were many homosexuals."
Another gay rights group, Cogam, said it was "incredible that the Catholic hierarchy should reach the point where it makes a link between the parliamentarians who voted for the [gay marriage bill] and Nazism" and attacked an "unacceptable interference by a foreign state in Spanish politics."
Particularly galling is the use of the perfectly legitimate notion of conscience overriding adherence to law to justify this kind of hate-filled screed, particularly when the Catholic Church is now being led by a man who chose adherence to law during the Nazi regime over his own conscience....assuming that his conscience told him that what Hitler was doing was wrong. I'm not convinced that's the case.
Lurking behind what seems to be a legitimate and admirable sentiment of personal moral courage lies a warning: gays and those who support them had better watch out or they'll end up in camps.
I'm sure Pope Ratso I is smiling, right along with Dr. Frist and Mr. DeLay, who are probably making the plans even as we speak.
mercredi 27 avril 2005
Those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat it
And in that spirit, I bring you, in this week of the final weapons inspection report which found NO weapons of any significance, this little reminder from just shy of a year ago of just how funny C-Plus Caligula thinks it is that we didn't find any WMD in Iraq -- 1600 dead and over 10,000 wounded American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed Iraqi civilians later.
Deconstructing Thomas Friedman
It seems that the New York Times' op-ed page idiocy factor grows ever stronger. As if it weren't bad enough that we have the Babbling Brooks, now we're treated to the moronic John Tierney, replacing the senile William Safire. Tierney's rhapsodic waxing about the glories of the Chilean pension system, based on the testimony of one guy he knows (Nathan Newman debunks the whole mess) is a triumph of reductionism.
But nothing quite reaches the Zippy the Pinhead-like heights of Thomas Friedman. Yes, Thomas Friedman, cheerleader for the Iraq War and passionate advocate of the glories of outsourcing (especially since it's not HIS job going to Bangalore). It's rare that I link to anything in the New York Press, but Matt Taibbi's review of Friedman's new book will be the biggest laugh to be had this week for those not holding Spamalot tickets.
Bill Gates walking a tightrope
Bill Gates is many things, but stupid isn't one of them. He seems more aware than Steve Ballmer does that Microsoft's backtracking this year on the Washington state gay rights bill doesn't look good:
Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, has indicated he may reconsider his company's decision not to support a Washington State gay rights bill amid the growing firestorm inside and outside the company that exploded after the recent disclosure that Microsoft had changed its position on the bill.
In an interview with The Seattle Times on Monday, Mr. Gates, who rarely grants interviews and declined through a spokesman Tuesday to grant one to The New York Times, indicated that he was surprised by the backlash to the company's turnaround on the legislation. He also suggested that Microsoft, which had been known for decades as a corporate leader on gay rights and had supported the bill in previous years, might change course next year because of the controversy.
The bill was defeated by one vote in the State Senate last week. Microsoft had withdrawn its support, and critics said the company was under pressure from a prominent local evangelical minister who threatened a boycott of Microsoft products.
"We certainly have a lot of employees who sent us mail," Mr. Gates told The Seattle Times. "Next time it comes around that'll be a major factor for us to take into consideration."
Gates probably knows full well that the red-state Rapturist Christofascists to whom his company caved this year are hardly likely to switch to Linux if his company supports this bill. It's pretty obvious that he's trying to buy time to try to defuse the controversy, but the cat's out of the bag already.
Is Georgie trying to come out?
Just wonderin' is all.....
Frankly, I hope not. I would think that finding out that George W. Bush is gay would be in the gay community like finding out that the Son of Sam killer was Jewish was for me.
President Bush drew laughs from his audience Tuesday when he asked whether the Galveston area still hosts "Splash Day."
The annual beach party that dates to the 1950s does live on _ but now as an unofficial gay and lesbian event.
In town to speak about Social Security, Bush told the crowd: "I want to thank the mayor for being here _ Lyda Ann Thomas greeted me coming in. I said, 'Do you still have Splash Day?'"
The crowd laughed. "You have to be a baby boomer to know what I'm talking about," Bush said. The crowd laughed again.
Splash Day once marked the end of school and the beginning of summertime fun. The city backed off from it many years ago when it turned a little too wild, says Christy Benson of the Galveston Chamber of Commerce. It later became a party day for gays and lesbians.
Drawing another round of laughter, Bush said: "I'm not saying whether I came or not on Splash Day. I'm just saying, 'Do you have Splash Day?'"
Frankly, I hope not. I would think that finding out that George W. Bush is gay would be in the gay community like finding out that the Son of Sam killer was Jewish was for me.
mardi 26 avril 2005
No WMD in Iraq. None. Period. Got it?
This is for all those people (not that any of them are reading this blog) who were still clinging to the belief; some might say the hope, that their Fearless Leader, Jesus H. Bush, would be vindicated by the finding of even one stockpile of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (emphases mine):
Wrapping up his investigation into Saddam Hussein's purported arsenal, the CIA's top weapons hunter in Iraq said his search for weapons of mass destruction "has been exhausted" without finding any.
Nor did he find any evidence that such weapons were shipped officially from Iraq to Syria to be hidden before the U.S. invasion, but he couldn't rule out some unofficial transfer of limited WMD-related materials.
He closed his effort with words of caution about potential future threats and careful assessment of this and other unanswered questions.
The Bush administration justified its 2003 invasion of Iraq as necessary to eliminate Hussein's purported stockpile of WMD.
"As matters now stand, the WMD investigation has gone as far as feasible," wrote Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group, in an addendum to the report he issued last fall. "After more than 18 months, the WMD investigation and debriefing of the WMD-related detainees has been exhausted."
In 92 pages posted online Monday evening, Duelfer provided a final look at an investigation that, at its peak, occupied more than 1,000 military and civilian translators, weapons specialists and other experts. His latest addenda conclude a roughly 1,500-page report released last fall.
Among warnings sprinkled throughout the new documents, one concludes that Saddam's programs created a pool of weapons experts, many of whom will be seeking work. While most will probably turn to the "benign civil sector," the danger remains that "hostile foreign governments, terrorists or insurgents may seek Iraqi expertise."
"Because a single individual can advance certain WMD activities, it remains an important concern," one addendum said.
Another addendum noted that military forces in Iraq may continue to find small numbers of degraded chemical weapons — most likely misplaced or improperly destroyed before 1991. In an insurgent's hands, "the use of a single even ineffectual chemical weapon would likely cause more terror than deadlier conventional explosives," the addendum said.
Now, the Bush apologists will seize on expressions like "small numbers of degraded chemical weapons" or "pool of weapons experts", or "limited WMD-related materials" as proof that Saddam Hussein did, in fact, have WMD and that the war was justified on this front -- at the same time that they parrot the "liberation of the Iraqi people" line, just to make sure the bases are covered.
However, "limited" and "small numbers" is not what the American people were told when Bush announced his boner for war. We were told about huge quantities of active weapons and thriving weapons programs that posed an imminent threat to our own shores. And it was all bullshit.
And no one seems to want to hold this Administration responsible for anything.
UPDATE: Remember when the MSM had succeeded in convincing 71% of Americans that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction? Not any more:
Half of all Americans, exactly 50%, now say the Bush administration deliberately misled Americans about whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, the Gallup Organization reported this morning.
"This is the highest percentage that Gallup has found on this measure since the question was first asked in late May 2003," the pollsters observed. "At that time, 31% said the administration deliberately misled Americans. This sentiment has gradually increased over time, to 39% in July 2003, 43% in January/February 2004, and 47% in October 2004."
Also, according to the latest poll, more than half of Americans, 54%, disapprove of the way President Bush is handling the situation in Iraq, while 43% approve. In early February, Americans were more evenly divided on the way Bush was handling the situation in Iraq, with 50% approving and 48% disapproving.
Last week Gallup reported that 53% now believe that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was "not worth it." But Frank Newport, editor in chief at Gallup, recalled today that although a majority of the public began to think the Vietnam war was a mistake in the summer of 1968, the United States did not pull out of Vietnam for more than five years, after thousands of more American lives were lost.
These are bad, bad, bad numbers for Captain Codpiece, for the GOP in general, and for the Genius King, King Karl. This means only one thing: Time to let another terrorist attack happen. Maybe that's what Georgie and King Abdullah were discussing yesterday.
If you cross the Bush Administration, you will be destroyed
This letter from Melody Townsel, who testified about John Bolton's inappropriate, abusive, and downright wacko behavior, is now the target of a Bush Administration smearjob. The moral to this story is that if you cross the Bush Administration, your own past had better be clean as a whistle, because if you so much as filched a pack of gum from the corner store when you were six, your integrity will be questioned until they drive you mad.
Emphasis mine:
Hello, Daily Kos-ers:
Tonight, my deepest fears regarding my pending testimony in the John Bolton nomination process have come true: Republicans have dredged up un unfortunate chapter of my life and, clearly, are about to announce it to the world. When you read this, you may decide either that I was stupid to step forward, or that I no longer deserve your trust. I want, however, to be the one to announce this to you all since you've been so unbelievably supportive.
When I was in college, 22 years ago, I plagiarized some columns while working for my college newspaper, and I was removed from staff. Months later, while working for another college newspaper, I wrote a review for a local play that tracked closely in format to another writer's review -- and, although it was not plagiarized, it made my editors, who had become aware of my recent past, very uncomfortable, and we mutually agreed that I would no longer submit stories to them.
As you can imagine, I'm deeply ashamed to be forced to revisit these events so publicly -- and, while I was under tremendous academic, financial and family pressure at the time, there is absolutely NO excuse for what I did so long ago. I knew it was wrong then, and I remain deeply ashamed and embarrassed.
I wish to stress that Amy, my friend who has been such a staunch supporter and has been keeping you posted on things happening with my pending testimony, was completely unaware of these events. There are some things you don't tell even your best friend.
As you judge me, please keep in mind that I was 21 years old when this happened. Today, at 42, I can state emphatically that I've worked hard my entire professional and personal life to put my incredibly poor decisions and actions behind me -- and I believe my professional and personal life since that time speaks for itself.
More than 10 years had passed from those college events when I had my brutal, ugly and unfortunate contact with Mr. Bolton. In that decade, I worked professionally as a copyeditor, a business writer, and a business analyst for major publications. I also worked as a senior planning analyst for a major airport project -- and, thereafter, I accepted a one-year posting with Black Manafort Stone & Kelly to Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. There, as you know, I met Mr. Bolton.
I want to tell you all this story, first and personally, before the Bush camp works its special brand of magic -- and I would deeply appreciate your help in posting this letter as many places as you can in advance of my testimony. Even as I write this, the Bush team is working overtime to destroy my life and business, telling and retelling the things I'm writing here. I just received a phone call from a Christian newspaper reporter.
I know they'll tell you that my pending statement to the Senate cannot be trusted because I did some stupid things as a 20-year-old kid two decades ago -- even as they try to tell you that Mr. Bolton's bahavior toward me in Moscow and Kyrgyzstan 11 years ago just doesn't matter. They'll try to make my actions of two decades ago the story -- setting aside the forgiveness Mr. Bush grants himself about his own history of questionable behavior by stating, "When I was young and irresponsible, I was young and irresponsible."
As of tonight, it's clear that I've truly risked everything to tell you -- and the U.S. Senate -- about Mr. Bolton. I've already told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee counsel about this episode in my life, and I remain committed to to going through with my testimony tomorrow. They still want to depose me.
Since Amy first posted my letter, you may have read that former colleagues have stepped forward to verify its contents to the Senate regarding Mr. Bolton -- and other, similar tales of his abuse appear to be surfacing daily. The fact that they're working so hard to discredit me tells me they know that I'm right.
That's my story. If you can still offer it, I would appreciate your continued support. I would appreciate your empathy. I would appreciate your thoughts and prayers as I try to rebuild my life and my business.
Perhaps most important, I would also appreciate your sharing my story, as quickly as possible, with anybody you can. Please help me get this out there first.
Sincerely,
Melody Townsel
This letter originally appeared at Daily Kos, but since she wants it disseminated in order to get HER story out, here it is. Please reprint at will.
Another Bush Mandate
Yesterday it was Georgie and King Abdullah strolling hand-in-hand in a brush garden in Crawford, Texas. Today, Georgie has a mandate with his other best bud, Tom DeLay:
In a show of support, President Bush will give embattled House of Representatives Republican leader Tom DeLay an Air Force One ride to Washington from Texas on Tuesday, a White House spokesman said.
DeLay is under fire over allegations that he violated ethics rules by allowing lobbyists to pay for some of his overseas travel, including a May 2000 trip to Britain that included golf at the St. Andrews golf course in Scotland.
The Texas Republican has accused Democrats and the media of conducting a witch hunt, and the White House has called him a friend of Bush and said Bush appreciates the work he is doing as the No. 2 Republican in the House.
DeLay is to attend with Bush an event in Galveston, Texas, on Tuesday about the president's proposals to overhaul Social Security and then will ride back to Washington with him aboard Air Force One, the spokesman said on Monday.
Man, judged, company, keeps, lie, dogs, fleas, etc.
Who died and made Karl Rove king?
Last night there were some disturbing rumblings that Harry Reid was going to capitulate on a few of C-Plus Caligula's most lunatic wingnut judges in exchange for Bill "Dr. Diagnosis-by-Video" Frist's agreement to not exercise the "nuclear option". Today, it seems that King Karl has put the kibosh on any such agreement:
Karl Rove rejected a compromise with Senate Democrats Monday on long-stalled nominations for the federal judiciary and strongly defended President Bush's choice of John Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations.
In an hour-long interview with USA TODAY and Gannett News Service reporters and editors, Rove, deputy White House chief of staff, dismissed suggestions from Democrats that they might drop threats to use filibusters to prevent votes on Bush's judicial nominees if the president would withdraw a few of the most controversial names.
Now, I'm not all broken up about this sort of compromise falling apart. Democrats have voted to confirm 95% of Bush's judicial nominations. Only the worst of the worst have been rejected, some of them, like Priscilla Owen, were blasted by Republicans in earlier days. But that's not enough for Republicans; they want to own everything, the better to install their evangelical Christian wingnut theocracy on all Americans. And frankly, ONE of these guys is too many.
If the Democrats keep moving the goalposts, sooner or later the Republicans won't have to even MOVE to score a touchdown.
But regardless of whether this is a good or bad thing, since when does Karl Rove have veto power over negotiations in Congress? Who died and named HIM king?
I say we let the Republicans shoot themselves by pursuing this -- the "Dirty Harry" option. Americans oppose this by a 2-1 ratio. The Republican agenda is about as popular with the majority of Americans as a bucket of warm spit. They think they have a mandate to turn this into a one-party theocratic dictatorship? Let 'em try. When their approval ratings are down in the 20's, even rigging an election won't help them.
Bar Fly: Pier 26, Darling Harbour
So I've posted on the Pier 26 bar before, but for Sarah's first dining-out online flogger event: Bar Fly: eat at the bar (great idea!), I couldn't resist heading back here again.In the dying throes of a gorgeous Sydney summer (technically it's the end of autumn but don't tell the sun that), Pier 26 is one of our favourite places to sit back with a glass of wine and watch the world go
Bar Fly: Pier 26, Darling Harbour
So I've posted on the Pier 26 bar before, but for Sarah's first dining-out online flogger event: Bar Fly: eat at the bar (great idea!), I couldn't resist heading back here again.In the dying throes of a gorgeous Sydney summer (technically it's the end of autumn but don't tell the sun that), Pier 26 is one of our favourite places to sit back with a glass of wine and watch the world go
Just a reminder
Saudi Arabia sits on 25% of global oil reserves. (Iraq has 11%)
Gasoline is over two dollars a gallon in the U.S.
The Administration is making no efforts to foster reduction of consumption.
The President's family is in the oil industry.
15 of the 19 hijackers in the 9/11 attacks were Saudi.
How do YOU feel about the president's leisurely hand-in-hand stroll in the garden with Saudi King Abdullah?
lundi 25 avril 2005
Oh, MAN...they never come up into the hills....
Yikes. And this is our future WITHOUT John Poindexter?
So who was Gannonguckert servicing at the White House?
Let's for a minute pretend that it's the mid-1990's. Bill Clinton is president. We find out that a fake reporter for a fake news service, who had a history as a prostitute and gained access to the press gaggle for two years on a day pass, has made more than two dozen excursions to the White House when there were no scheduled briefings. On some of those days, the press gaggle was held on Air Force One. And it also turns out that for many of these visits, either the entry or exit times were not filled out. And on several of these visits, the aforementioned fake reporter/hooker entered or exited by a different entry/exit point than the customary one.
I know what you're thinking. This so-called "reporter" is servicing the president.
Well, guess what. It's 2005. The president's name is George W. Bush. The fake reporter's name is James Guckert/Jeff Gannon. And everything else in the above is true.
So what do you think now?
Think you pay high taxes now? Wait till the Bush Administration gets through with you
Americans have long been bamboozled into thinking that Republicans are the party of less taxes. Perhaps if you are a major corporation, or if you obtain most of your income from investments, they are.
But if you're an ordinary working schmo like most of us, getting wages or salary, the Republicans are about to stick it to you so hard you won't be able to get out of bed in the morning...assuming you have a bed to get out of when they're done with you. Oh, what they come up with may be simpler, and doing your taxes won't be as confusing, but you'll be lucky to end up with a quarter in your pants pocket.
How much of your pay are you willing to sacrifice for "simplification"?
The President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform has decided that you have just too many tax deductions that you're allowed to take. This is based on information obtained by "witnesses" the panel called -- nonpartisan (sic) geniuses like Bush family consigliere James Baker and Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, who decided after being silent for three rounds of Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, that the deficit must be dealt with -- by cutting programs.
The president whose current short-duration economic personal savior is Grover "Starve the Beast" Norquist has been delivered a message by this panel that "We have lost sight of the fact that the fundamental purpose of our tax system is to raise revenues to fund government." Yes, we have, folks...I recommend that we start asking corporations to pay THEIR fair share.
But that's not what the panel is talking about. What they're talking about are things like the tax deduction for businesses that provide health insurance to employees -- worth $126 billion next year; the mortgage interest deduction, the capital gains tax break for home sales, the deduction for charitable contributions and the child tax credit.
Do you honestly believe that your employer will provide health insurance if there's no tax incentive? I don't know about YOUR health plan (if you have one), but for me to pay the entire premium for my self+spouse health insurance would be over $10,000/year. Do you have a mortgage? Maybe you bought a home in the last year, perhaps with one of those new 40-year-mortgages that let you buy a house that ten years ago would have cost you under $200,000 but is now over $500,000? Maybe you pay, oh, say, $15,000/year in mortgage interest? That's a $3000-$4000 tax hike for you right there. And if you're a new retiree who wants to sell your house, you're going to get socked with capital gains taxes -- when those whose investments are primarily in stocks won't.
As for charities, remember when they were supposed to replace government for helping the poor? Are you going to continue to give when you can't deduct the donations?
That college savings plan for your kids that you're so proud of? That deduction would go too. Are you a teacher? Do you buy extra school supplies for your students? No more deduction for that either.
Meanwhile, a group of morons calling itself Americans for Fair Taxation advocates replacing the entire federal tax code with a 30% sales tax on everything. 30%. Think about that. "But I'm in the 25% tax bracket, and if I don't have to pay Social Security tax, that's a tax cut for me, right?"
WRONG.
If you're in the "25% tax bracket", you're probably paying closer to 15-20% in Federal income taxes. Here's why: If you're married filing jointly for 2004, you paid 10% tax on the amount of income AFTER DEDUCTIONS -- the deductions the Bush Administration wants to take away from you -- up to $14,300. You paid 15% on the amount up to $58,100. You ONLY paid 25% on the amount above $58,100.
Most people think they're paying 25% on everything, without taking into account the graduated tax tables and their deductions.
So even if you stop paying the 6.2% FICA (Social Security) tax and the 1.45% Medicare tax, you'll still be well under 30% for your total Federal tax rate. Let's not even take into account the employer's share of the FICA tax, because no, they're NOT going to give you that in your paycheck; it'll go right into the CEO's pocket.
Here's some implications of a 30% sales tax. The wealthy consume a lesser percentage of their total income, so their taxes would be reduced, whereas the poor or working-class family that lives paycheck to paycheck would be taxed at the full 30% rate.
There won't be any Social Security, so if you don't have anything left to save after paying 30% tax on your rent, food, and clothing yourself and your kids, you are going to be S.O.L. when you retire. And don't you DARE look to the government for help.
The value of your home will probably plummet too, because without a mortgage interest deduction, and with a 30% tax on the purchase of a home, most people will be priced out of the market at its current rates.
So just how much IS spending less time doing your taxes worth to you? Enough to be OK with carrying the entire tax burden for the Bushistas and their cronies?
What if the commander-in-chief's name was "Bill Clinton"?
You can bet your life that if Bill Clinton was president when this article appeared, the screaming heads would be calling not just for his impeachment, but his immediate execution for "putting our boys in harm's way without adequate protection."
But since the president's name is George W. Bush, he can stiff the troops with impunity, and as long as he dresses in enough spiffy military drag, people will believe he "supports the troops":
On May 29, 2004, a station wagon that Iraqi insurgents had packed with C-4 explosives blew up on a highway in Ramadi, killing four American marines who died for lack of a few inches of steel.
The four were returning to camp in an unarmored Humvee that their unit had rigged with scrap metal, but the makeshift shields rose only as high as their shoulders, photographs of the Humvee show, and the shrapnel from the bomb shot over the top.
"The steel was not high enough," said Staff Sgt. Jose S. Valerio, their motor transport chief, who along with the unit's commanding officers said the men would have lived had their vehicle been properly armored. "Most of the shrapnel wounds were to their heads."
Among those killed were Rafael Reynosa, a 28-year-old lance corporal from Santa Ana, Calif., whose wife was expecting twins, and Cody S. Calavan, a 19-year-old private first class from Lake Stevens, Wash., who had the Marine Corps motto, Semper Fidelis, tattooed across his back.
They were not the only losses for Company E during its six-month stint last year in Ramadi. In all, more than one-third of the unit's 185 troops were killed or wounded, the highest casualty rate of any company in the war, Marine Corps officials say.
In returning home, the leaders and Marine infantrymen have chosen to break an institutional code of silence and tell their story, one they say was punctuated not only by a lack of armor, but also by a shortage of men and planning that further hampered their efforts in battle, destroyed morale and ruined the careers of some of their fiercest warriors.
Of course, Bush-asswiping chickenhawks like John Hinderaker at Powerline think it's a soldier's job to provide his own protection. Like he would know...
It's disgusting how the military has been betrayed by its own commander-in-chief over the last three years, and even more disgusting how the folks back home continue to slap cheap made-in-China ribbon magnets on their cars and think they're more patriotic than the rest of us.
dimanche 24 avril 2005
...unless said infants are poor and/or black
The Bush Administration's cynicism knows no bounds. After its utter silence about the removal from life support of Sun Hudson, a five-month old Texas infant born with a fatal form of dwarfism, in accordance with a Texas law that Bush himself signed as governor, we now have this:
The Bush administration issued guidelines yesterday advising physicians and hospitals that under a 2002 law they are obligated to care for fetuses "born alive" naturally or in the process of an abortion, and medical providers could face penalties for withholding treatment.
The law, signed by President Bush nearly three years ago, conferred legal rights on fetuses "at any stage of development." It specifies that a fetus that is breathing, has a beating heart, a pulsating umbilical cord or muscle movement should be considered alive and entitled to protection under federal emergency medical laws and child abuse statutes.
[snip]
"The 2002 law and today's actions by the agency were both badly needed, because there are those in our society who have convinced themselves that some newborn infants -- particularly those born alive during abortions, or with handicaps -- are not really legal persons," said Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee.
And yet, where were the National Right to Life Committee, Mike Leavitt, and George W. Bush, when they were pulling the plug on Sun Hudson?
Just askin'.
If we let them come for the gays, tomorrow they come for...
women. Jews. All non-Christians. Liberals. Philosopher kings and queens. Progressive utopians with no sense of humor.
No, wait a minute...that's Maron's line.
Anyway, because one of our commenters seems to think that the fight for gay rights and the fight for women's issue are mutually exclusive, I present to you Shakespeare's Sister, who explains why it's all related.
And keep an eye on this site. The "coming soon" stuff is great; let's see how the site develops.
samedi 23 avril 2005
IMBB#14: Orange You Hungry
Foodgooat's theme for the 14th version of Is My Blog Burning was Orange You Hungry (say it in an American twang-- "Aaaaaah", sigh the Antipodeans).Orange as in orange-coloured foods or spices, or products even.What to cook? I thought of Aussie favourites like pumpkin soup and pumpkin scones. Then I thought about orange poppyseed cake and sweet potato chips.But then I thought, why make things
IMBB#14: Orange You Hungry
Foodgooat's theme for the 14th version of Is My Blog Burning was Orange You Hungry (say it in an American twang-- "Aaaaaah", sigh the Antipodeans).Orange as in orange-coloured foods or spices, or products even.What to cook? I thought of Aussie favourites like pumpkin soup and pumpkin scones. Then I thought about orange poppyseed cake and sweet potato chips.But then I thought, why make things
IMBB#14: Tarka dhal
I've been craving dhal for some time now. There's something deliciously comforting about a spoonful of steaming hot, spicy dhal with rice.I've never made it before though, and IMBB#14: Orange You Hungry seemed like the perfect opportunity to do so.A couple of clicks later on the Internet and I found what looked like an authentic recipe from someone who had visited a friend's mother in New Dehli.
IMBB#14: Tarka dhal
I've been craving dhal for some time now. There's something deliciously comforting about a spoonful of steaming hot, spicy dhal with rice.I've never made it before though, and IMBB#14: Orange You Hungry seemed like the perfect opportunity to do so.A couple of clicks later on the Internet and I found what looked like an authentic recipe from someone who had visited a friend's mother in New Dehli.
IMBB#14: Moroccan carrot dip
With left-over carrot mash from my tarka dhal on-hand, I decided to turn this into a Moroccan carrot dip for my second submission for IMBB#14: Orange You Hungry.Moroccan Carrot Dip1 cup cooked carrot2 tsp cumin1 tsp paprika1/4 tsp ground ginger1/2 tsp ground cinammon1 garlic clove, mincedsalt and pepper to tastePuree or mash the cooked carrot and combine with remaining ingredients.The end.This
IMBB#14: Moroccan carrot dip
With left-over carrot mash from my tarka dhal on-hand, I decided to turn this into a Moroccan carrot dip for my second submission for IMBB#14: Orange You Hungry.Moroccan Carrot Dip1 cup cooked carrot2 tsp cumin1 tsp paprika1/4 tsp ground ginger1/2 tsp ground cinammon1 garlic clove, mincedsalt and pepper to tastePuree or mash the cooked carrot and combine with remaining ingredients.The end.This
Think about it
From Utopian Turtletop, via Digby:
WW2 v. WOT -- ONE MONTH TO GO
1,347: Number of days from the bombing of Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, to VJ Day (Victory in Japan) on August 15, 1945.
1,317: Number of days from the airplane-bombing of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, to today.
If Osama makes it to May 21, he will have survived the self-declared world's only superpower in a presidentially-declared war longer than Tojo, Hitler, and Mussolini combined.
IMBB#14: German carrots cooked in beer
When I stumbled upon this recipe, there was noooooo way I could resist this one. Carrots and ale? Oh boy, do I know a few people who would love this one! You know who you are...German Carrots In Beer(4 servings)4 large carrots1/4 ts salt1 tbp butter1 tsp sugar1 pint dark beerMethod:Peel and slice carrots into long, thin slices.Melt butter in medium-size frying panAdd beer and carrots.Cook slowly
IMBB#14: German carrots cooked in beer
When I stumbled upon this recipe, there was noooooo way I could resist this one. Carrots and ale? Oh boy, do I know a few people who would love this one! You know who you are...German Carrots In Beer(4 servings)4 large carrots1/4 ts salt1 tbp butter1 tsp sugar1 pint dark beerMethod:Peel and slice carrots into long, thin slices.Melt butter in medium-size frying panAdd beer and carrots.Cook slowly
Unbelievable
If this were about civil rights for black Americans, or female Americans, or Jewish Americans, or Buddhist Americans, or disabled Americans, or older Americans, do you think Microsoft would be able to get away with phrasing its position on an antidiscrimination bill like this? (from a letter from Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to Microsoft employees, via Americablog; emphases mine)
On February 1, two Microsoft employees testified before a House Committee in support of the bill. These employees were speaking as private citizens, not as representatives of the corporate position, but there was considerable confusion about whether they were speaking on behalf of Microsoft.
He's saying that any time a private citizen is an activist, it's "confusing" as to whether he/she is representing him/herself or his/her employer. Bullshit.
Following this hearing, a local religious leader named Rev. Ken Hutcherson, who has a number of Microsoft employees in his congregation, approached the company, seeking clarification of whether the two employees were representing Microsoft's official position. He also sought a variety of other things, such as firing of the two employees and a public statement by Microsoft that the bill was not
necessary.
After careful review, Brad Smith informed Rev. Hutcherson that there was no basis for firing the two employees over the misunderstanding over their testimony, but did agree that we should clarify the ambiguity over the employee testimony. Brad also made it clear that while the company was not taking a position on HB 1515, the company remains strongly committed to its internal policies supporting anti-discrimination and industry-leading benefits for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees.
Why should this have been subject to "careful review"? Unless said employees stated that they were representing the opinion of Microsoft, why should this have had to have been reviewed? Let me emphasize that: The livelihood of two Microsoft employees was "carefully reviewed" because of ONE complaint by ONE wingnut preacher. Imagine what religious nutcases could do to your job or to my job if they decide they don't like our politics. Is this really where we want to go as a society?
I understand that many employees may disagree with the company's decision to tighten the focus of our agenda for this year's legislative session in Olympia. But I want every employee to understand that the decision to take a neutral stance on this bill was taken before the Session began based on a desire to focus our legislative efforts, not in reaction to any outside pressure.
Then why was the testimony of the two employees so "carefully reviewed"?
I have done a lot of thinking and soul-searching over the past 24 hours on this subject, and I want to share with you my thoughts on how a company like Microsoft should deal with these kinds of issues.
This is a very difficult issue for many people, with strong emotions on all sides. And that makes it a very difficult issue for me, as the CEO of this company.
In this particular matter, both Bill and I actually both personally support this legislation that would outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. But that is my personal view, and I also know that many employees and shareholders would not agree with me.
We are thinking hard about what is the right balance to strike – when should a public company take a position on a broader social issue, and when should it not? What message does the company taking a position send to its employees who have strongly-held beliefs on the opposite side of the issue?
Now here's where you substitute the words "black" or "Jew" or "disabled" or "sick" or "pregnant" or "over 40" or whatever other "protected class" you like. Isn't it appalling that a company the size of Microsoft, which unabashedly crushes every other company that gets in its way, is quaking in its boots because one fucking closet case Christofascist has a problem with that group? Wouldn't there be an outcry if Ballmer had said this about any other group?
The bottom line is that I am adamant that Microsoft will always be a
place that values diversity, that has the strongest possible internal policies for non-discrimination and fairness, and provides the best policies and benefits to all of our employees.
I am also adamant that I want Microsoft to be a place where every employee feels respected, and where every employee feels like they belong. I don't want the company to be in the position of appearing to dismiss the deeply-held beliefs of any employee, by picking sides in social policy issues.
And if a few employees are KKK members who don't want to work with black people, are you going to appease them too? Are you going to institute policies that black employees can't date white employees, because some people might be offended? What about pregnant women? If some people are "offended" by the sight of a pregnancy, are you going to placate them too?
And as for picking sides, well, haven't you already done so, by giving the complaints of this wingnut any credence at all after supporting this legislation for years? I'm sorry, but Microsoft has openly supported this legislation at least since 2001, when the company was given an award by a gay and lesbian center in 2001. As soon as some Christofascist ordered you to fire two of your employees because of something they said on their own time, you should have shown him the door, Mr. Ballmer. You didn't.
I know that some employees will still feel frustrated by the position
the company has taken, but I wanted you to hear directly from me on this. We will continue to wrestle with how and when the company should engage on these kinds of political issues. And above all, I want you to know that as long as I am CEO, Microsoft will always be committed to diversity and non-discrimination in all of our internal policies.
At least until the Christofascists threaten a boycott. Then you'd better watch your ass.
If you think that because you're not gay, this isn't an issue for you, guess again. Because it's not about gay rights, it's about the pressure that the Fundies are going to bring to bear not just on politicians and the media, but on every employer in this country, to toe their particular line or face their wrath. Today it's gays. Tomorrow it could be anyone. This isn't about how you feel about gay marriage, it's about whether this country is going to be a place where people can be free, or if it's going to be run by an American Taliban of religious fanatics.
You don't like gays? Fine. Don't be gay; don't have gay friends. You don't like to think about gays having sex? Fine. Don't think about how they have sex (and what are you doing thinking about how people you don't know have sex, anyway?). You don't believe in gay marriage? Don't marry someone of the same sex.
It's all so simple. Too bad a smart guy like the CEO of Microsoft can't see it.
More good old fashioned Christian love
You know what I'd like to see? I'd like to see Jesus ride in on Shadowfax, brandishing Excalibur, and when he sees people like Jerry Falwell, and Bill Frist, and the Rev. Fred Phelps, and all of their many followers, he smites them in one blow and screams, "How DARE you claim to speak in My Name?" Then he turns to the rest of us and says, "Now will you believe in Me?"
And you know what my answer will be? "Where do I sign?"
Then we all go for a big feast, where music from all over the world is played, and a new era begins, in which the man's message isn't corrupted by a misogynistic guy who was the first Jew to try to pass as a gentile by changing his name from Saul to Paul.
But until then, we have to deal with crap like this:
Authorities at a Christian university near Chicago moved dozens of black and Hispanic students to a hotel for their own safety and police stepped up patrols on campus Friday after three people received threatening, racist letters.
Authorities at a Christian university near Chicago moved dozens of black and Hispanic students to a hotel for their own safety and police stepped up patrols on campus Friday after three people received threatening, racist letters.
This is what people like Frist and Phelps and Bush and Cheney and the rest of the Christofascists don't understsand -- that whether they themselves advocate this kind of retribution against those who transgress from some particular social order, their rhetoric, invoking God, gives tacit approval to those who do.
vendredi 22 avril 2005
Remember when Barry Goldwater was what a conservative Republican looked like?
Now, Limbaugh, Hannity, Frist, and the rest of the Christofascists would be all over him:
...on religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.'
Of course, by 1981, when this quote is attributed, the party had already moved far to Goldwater's right. I grew up in a home in which Barry Goldwater was regarded as Satan Incarnate (or at the very least, Satan's henchman, right next to Nixon).
But DAMN, I wish he was around now. He'd bitchslap guys like Frist all the way back to debate club.
When wingnuts retire...
...all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out.
The wingnut in question here is Rep. Henry "Youthful Indiscretion" Hyde, who admitted in an interview for ABC News' Chicago affiliate that the impeachment of President Bill Clinton was simply "payback" for the threatened impeachment of Richard Nixon.
I can tell you what will happen. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Nothing will happen because it won't hit the national media. They won't touch it. And if they do touch it, it'll be to tell the American public that the Watergate cover-up was simply "politics as usual", while the Clinton impeachment was trying to get a moral degenerate out of office.
Now think about it: $70 million in taxpayer money was spent on investigating Clinton. While this investigation was taking place, Al Qaeda was working on planning the 9/11 attacks. And all of this was NOT based on any kind of sense of right and wrong, but was simple political "payback" for Nixon?
I wonder if the families of the 2700 people who died that day will think this made things "even", and that Nixon was worth it.
The wingnut in question here is Rep. Henry "Youthful Indiscretion" Hyde, who admitted in an interview for ABC News' Chicago affiliate that the impeachment of President Bill Clinton was simply "payback" for the threatened impeachment of Richard Nixon.
Republican Congressman Henry Hyde made some surprising comments Thursday on the impeachment hearings of President Bill Clinton. He now says Republicans may have gone after Clinton to retaliate for the impeachment of Richard Nixon.
[snip]
In an exclusive interview, Hyde delivered a big dose of candor and some reflective second guessing. He said, among other things, he might not try to impeach President Clinton if he had it to do all over again.
[snip]
When asked if he would go through with the Clinton impeachment process again, Hyde said he wasn't sure. It turned into a personal and political embarrassment for Hyde when an extra-marital affair he had in the 1960's became public amid accusations of hypocrisy. He called the affair a youthful indiscretion.
"Accusations hurled at me to intimidate me were misplaced, and I regret having to deal with them, but they didn't intimidate me," Hyde said.
The veteran DuPage County congressman acknowledged that Republicans went after Clinton in part to enact revenge against the Democrats for impeaching President Richard Nixon 25 years earlier.
Andy Shaw asked Hyde if the Clinton proceedings were payback for Nixon's impeachment.
"I can't say it wasn't, but I also thought that the Republican party should stand for something, and if we walked away from this, no matter how difficult, we could be accused of shirking our duty, our responsibility," said Hyde.
Hyde's comments reflect what Democrats have been saying for years about the Clinton impeachment. It will be interesting to see what happens when Hyde's comments hit the national media.
I can tell you what will happen. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Nothing will happen because it won't hit the national media. They won't touch it. And if they do touch it, it'll be to tell the American public that the Watergate cover-up was simply "politics as usual", while the Clinton impeachment was trying to get a moral degenerate out of office.
Now think about it: $70 million in taxpayer money was spent on investigating Clinton. While this investigation was taking place, Al Qaeda was working on planning the 9/11 attacks. And all of this was NOT based on any kind of sense of right and wrong, but was simple political "payback" for Nixon?
I wonder if the families of the 2700 people who died that day will think this made things "even", and that Nixon was worth it.
Microsoft tries to duck responsibility for the Washington gay rights vote
When we last visited Washington State yesterday, the gay rights bill on which Microsoft had reversed itself lost by ONE VOTE -- and the representative from Redmond could have changed that.
The more Microsoft tries to spin this, the worse they look, as the New York Times reports today:
Microsoft officials denied any connection between their decision not to endorse the bill and the church's opposition, although they acknowledged meeting twice with the church minister, Ken Hutcherson.
Dr. Hutcherson, pastor of the Antioch Bible Church, who has organized several rallies opposing same-sex marriage here and in Washington, D.C., said he threatened in those meetings to organize a national boycott of Microsoft products.
After that, "they backed off," the pastor said Thursday in a telephone interview. "I told them I was going to give them something to be afraid of Christians about," he said.
[snip]
The bill, which had passed in the State House, would have extended protections against discrimination in employment, housing and other fields to gay men and lesbians. It was supported by other high-tech companies and multinational corporations including Nike, Boeing, Coors and Hewlett-Packard.
Think about that. Sweatshop-labor Nike and wingnut-run Coors supported it, and Microsoft weaseled out.
Microsoft officials said that the recent meetings with the minister did not persuade them to back away from supporting the bill, because they had already decided to take a "neutral" position on it. They said they had examined their legislative priorities and decided that because they already offer extensive benefits to gay employees and that King County, where Microsoft is based, already has an anti-discrimination law broader than what the state bill proposed, they should focus on other legislative matters.
Well, as John Aravosis points out, they have no grounds to blow their own horn on benefits to gay employees, becuase such benefits are REQUIRED BY LAW IN KING COUNTY!
But State Representative Ed Murray, an openly gay Democrat and a sponsor of the bill, said that in a conversation last month with Bradford L. Smith, Microsoft's senior vice president and general counsel, Mr. Smith made it clear to him that the company was under pressure from the church and the pastor and that he was also concerned about the reaction to company support of the bill among its Christian employees, the lawmaker said.
Now hold it right there. Why were they concerned about company support of the bill among Christian employees, but not about withdrawal of company support of the bill from gay employees? Aren't they aware that this is a tacit admission that Christian employees take priority? And why are they assuming that ALL Christian employees are opposed to this bill, instead of a small segment of extreme right-wing theocratic Christofascist Christians? Are corporations now going to have to be run according to the religious dictates of a small minority?
And don't tell me that supporting this bill caters to a small gay minority. Supporting civil rights is not about catering to a gay minority, it's about simple human rights that the rest of us take for granted as Americans, and that these people think they shouldn't have. Civil rights for gay Americans take NOTHING away from Christians -- except their ability to throw away the U.S. Constitution and create a Taliban-style theocracy in America.
This so-called "minister of God" behaves like a common thug, and the Mighty Microsoft caves. Here's who they were dealing with: A guy who makes threats of mass boycotts (i.e. extortion) if Microsoft doesn't do his bidding. A guy who demanded that Microsoft fire employees who testified this year on behalf of the bill. Does that sound like Jesus representative on earth to you? It sure as hell doesn't to me.
This episode is terrifying even if you're not gay, for it demonstrates the utter terror that even major corporations have of this SMALL MINORITY of vocal religious fanatics, to the point that they're willing to deny people basic human rights in order to not make this small minority angry.
Right now it's gays, and we already know how they feel about Muslims. Who's next? Buddhists? Wiccans? Jews? African-Americans? Women? Who will the round up and put into camps and execute in the name of Jesus, if we give them the chance?
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
by Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945
SHF#7: Dense gingerbread
My first-ever Sugar High Friday entry! Woohoo!When I found out Derrick's chosen key ingredient was molasses, my first thoughts--like Niki--were of literary memories of childhood. I can remember poring over English and American stories, trying to imagine the treacle tarts, pulled taffy and treacle toffee so lovingly described. I had no idea what these things were, but boy, they sounded good!I've
SHF#7: Dense gingerbread
My first-ever Sugar High Friday entry! Woohoo!When I found out Derrick's chosen key ingredient was molasses, my first thoughts--like Niki--were of literary memories of childhood. I can remember poring over English and American stories, trying to imagine the treacle tarts, pulled taffy and treacle toffee so lovingly described. I had no idea what these things were, but boy, they sounded good!I've
jeudi 21 avril 2005
Another reason to hate Microsoft
As if buggy operating systems and Big Brother tactics, along with having more money than God wasn't enough, now we have Big Bad Microsoft capitulating to one -- yes, ONE -- Christofascist preacher:
In a move that angered many of the company's gay employees, the Microsoft Corporation, publicly perceived as the vanguard institution of the new economy, has taken a major political stand in favor of age-old discrimination.
The Stranger has learned that last month the $37-billion Redmond-based software behemoth quietly withdrew its support for House bill 1515, the anti-gay-discrimination bill currently under consideration by the Washington State legislature, after being pressured by the Evangelical Christian pastor of a suburban megachurch. The pastor, Ken Hutcherson of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond, met with a senior Microsoft executive in February and threatened to organize a national boycott of the company's products if it did not change its stance on the legislation, according to gay rights activists and a Microsoft employee who attended a subsequent April 4 meeting where Bradford L. Smith, Microsoft's senior vice president, general counsel, and corporate secretary, told a group of gay staffers about Hutcherson's threat. Hutcherson also unsuccessfully demanded that the company fire two employees who had testified in favor of the bill.
I guess that gay Microsoft employees are supposed to take comfort in the fact that those two gay employees still have their jobs. This, of course, is like saying that Jews in Poland in the 1930's should have been grateful when their neighbors next door were taken instead of them.
As John Aravosis, who along with some good friends of mine (sorry, SS, but if you'll put your web site back up, I'd love to link to you too), has a personal, not just an ideological stake in this, so succinctly puts it:
Dear Microsoft,
You messed with the wrong faggots.
You thought you were avoiding a religious right boycott by suddenly going anti-gay. And you may have thought "hell, the evangelicals boycott us, the gays boycott us - we've got to choose one, and the evangelicals are in power, so let's screw the gays."
But here's something you didn't count on. You messed with the wrong faggots.
We have no intent of launching a boycott. Boycotts are hard to enforce, especially when dealing with a monopoly. And in any case, we're smarter than that. We're the country's top lobbyists, and grassroots activists, and lawyers, and politicos, and bloggers working in both Washingtons (state and DC).
When we fuck back, we don't launch boycotts. When we fuck back, we go for the jugular.
Changing the subject, we understand congratulations is in order. You're planning a 2.2 million square foot expansion of the Microsoft campus in Redmond over the next ten to twenty years. The expansion, we hear, would allow you to hire 10,000 to 20,000 new employees.
Well bully for you. You must be quite excited about that.
We also hear that you're going to need a lot of help - a LOT of help - from the state legislature and the Redmond city council to actually make that expansion work, for highway and road improvements and the like, and that not everybody is real happy about it.
Well, wouldn't it be funny if some really smart faggots decided to use their political expertise to kill any possibility of you getting the legislation and city council approval you need to make that expansion happen? And wouldn't it be even funnier if those same faggots went to your competitors and asked them to finance the entire campaign to kill your expansion?
It'd be pretty hard to hire those extra employees without your expansion, wouldn't it? I'm not saying anyone is going to do that to you. I'm just saying it would be really funny.
Best of luck to you with the legislative session over the next 24 hours.
Yours truly,
One of the faggots you just screwed
Now, I don't know John Aravosis any better than I know most of the bloggers I read. But I don't have to know a person to recognize rage and pain when I read it. I'm fortunate in that I've never had to personally deal with entire political blocs who not only hate me for what I am, but want to see me have no rights in this society. Yes, I've had family members I never knew experience that. They were Jews in Russia and Poland during the 1930's, they were my grandparents' parents and siblings, and they ended up pretty much where most Jews in Russia and Poland ended up.
This is no different. It's not being done through government, the way the Nazis did it -- but only because so far they haven't been able to (though believe me, that's what DeLay and Frist are working on even as we speak). But it doesn't matter. American citizens are being persecuted, and no, it's not the Christofascists.
As I wrote to my local paper not too terribly long ago, I've been married to the same, my first and only, spouse, for almost 20 years (which is more than most House Republicans can say). And I will be no less married on the days I dance at the weddings of my gay friends.
And neither will you, and neigher will Tom DeLay or Bill Frist or the Rev. Fred Phelps, or any of the other hatemongers who seem to think that allowing gay Americans their place in society is somehow a horseman of the very Apocalypse they want so badly.
Here's who to call to speak out:
Jack Krumholtz
Microsoft Director of Government Relations
202-263-5900
- Jim Desler,
Microsoft US
425-703-6061
jdesler@microsoft.com
- Dirk Delmartino,
Microsoft Europe
+32 (0)2 550 06 21
dirkdelm@microsoft.com
- The firm handling public policy for Microsoft in DC:
The Glover Park Group
Washington, DC
202-337-0808
- The firm handling Microsoft's "rapid response" to questions:
Waggener Edstrom Rapid Response Team
rrt@wagged.com
503-443-7070
- Media Relations for Microsoft
Global Communications & Television
(212) 339-9920
mediarelations@gctv.com
- Microsoft Investor Relations
Curt Anderson
(425) 706-3703
- Walt McGraw, Edelman, (206) 223-1606, walt.mcgraw@edelman.com
- Shon Damron, Edelman, (323) 857-9100, shon.damron@edelman.com
- Carlos de Leon,tel. 425-703-3824, or carlosde@microsoft.com
- Katie Goldberg, tel. 206-268-2244, or katie.goldberg@edelman.com
- Shoreen Maghame, Edelman, (323) 202-1061
- Sean Durkin, Edelman, (206) 268-2229
UPDATE (from Americablog):
The gay rights bill just lost in the Washington state Senate by a 24-25 vote, i.e., by one vote.
All the Republicans voted against the bill, and at least one Democrat. Apparently the forces of good did win a procedural vote to force the bill out of committee and onto the Senate floor, but then it was killed by the 24-25 vote. As an interesting aside, if you can call it that, one of the moderate Republicans voting against the bill was the guy representing Redmond, Microsoft's district.
Hey, Jesus, when you come back with your sword, start with the credit card companies
Joe Queenan once wrote a review of the athlete/cannibal film Alive! in which he describes shouting at the screen, "Eat Vincent Spano first!" In a like vein, let's assume for a moment that the Christofascists are right, and Jesus is about to return on his giant white horse (I think the plan is for him to borrow Shadowfax from Gandalf), brandishing Excalibur (nothing like mixing your mythical archetypes, is there?) to smite the unholy. As for me, I'll be shouting at him "Smite the Credit Card Companies first!"
To hear the Christofascists tell it, he'll be coming after people like me first -- a Jewish woman who's not religious, a feminist, no kids, contraceptive user (alas, no abortions), a liberal and a vociferous one -- and that calling attention to myself might not be the wisest course. But I'd be more likely to accept Jesus if he went after the credit card companies first.
I have one card that I use for monthly bills. This way my long distance, my New York Times weekend subscription, my Dish Network fees, and Netflix, all get paid at once. And of course I pay off the balance every month.
This is, as expected, giving the issuer fits, particularly because I earn points for purchases on this particular card.
I have another card that I used a "no fee, no interest till..." cash check for one installment on some work on the house. I've budgeted so that this balance will be paid off -- just as the 0% rate expires. This issuer too is having canniptions. It's already April, and they've finally stopped sending me more advance checks, having realized that they're not going to get any interest from me.
I love messing with these guys; they hate it when you beat them at their own game.
Jazz Shaw today deconstructs one of the many "too good to be true" offers he gets. When Jesus chased the moneylenders from the temple, this is what he was trying to get rid of. Too bad the Christofascists in Congress have aligned themselves with those their Savior purged.
Eric Alterman smacks down Time Magazine
Eric Alterman's smackdown of Time reporter John Cloud, for the shall we say, act of journalingus the latter performed on Ann Coulter in this week's issue, is truly a beautiful thing to behold:
In response to my comments on his admiring profile of Ann Coulter in which he pronounced her work to be “mostly accurate” based on a casual Google search, available here, Cloud says I am:
the left-wing equivalent of [] Ann Coulter
trying to out-Coulter Coulter
simply insult[ing] him
hid[ing] the fact that it also quotes James Wolcott, Andrew Sullivan, Salon, Ronald Radosh, and even Jerry Falwell criticizing Ann Coulter. She is called everything from an "ideological huckster of hate" in my story to a "skank." I myself say she can be "callous and mouthy," that I want to "shut her up occasionally," that her writing can be "highly amateurish." She is called a "fascist," a "polemicist," and--by Radosh--a virtual McCarthyite.
wants [...] people to ignore Coulter, to pretend as though she doesn't exist and isn't one of the most loved--and hated--figures on the public scene
Made a mistake about a quote of hers in What Liberal Media?
seems most annoyed that we did not use more of his personal "sources" on Ann Coulter
doesn't seem to have done any reporting for his item on me whatsoever
In his interview with CJR Daily interview available here, he adds:
"I think Eric Alterman and Ann Coulter engage in the same kind of debate. They don't often make actual arguments. Instead, they throw names around. This is the point of my article.”
And...
"I think maybe Eric and Ann are in the same bunch. They also, by the way, use the same language."
To take these one by one may appear a bit tiresome and self-serving, but there are larger issues involved, including, admittedly, defending my reputation, but more importantly, having to do with defending the tenets of honest journalism and fair-minded media criticism. So I will, as briefly as I can, engage Cloud on the facts:
Cloud insists that Coulter and I are peas in a pod, guilty of the same sins, up to the same shenanigans. OK, let’s compare me with Ann Coulter. True, we both have B.A.s from Cornell, where we both attended many Dead concerts, (though I don’t pretend I refused to partake in the local customs). More to the point, I went on to earn an M.A. in international relations from Yale and a Ph.D. in U.S. history from Stanford. I’ve written six books, two published by university presses, containing many thousands of footnotes. None of these books have been substantially challenged on the basis of the evidence they employ, even by those who strongly disagree with my arguments. This is not true of Coulter.
I am also a professor of journalism at the City University of New York, a senior fellow of two think tanks, a professional blogger for the most trafficked Internet news site in the world and the media columnist for oldest continuously published weekly magazine in the United States. I am pretty sure none of the above is true of Coulter, either.
What’s more, Coulter has twice either wished for, or joked about the mass murder of American journalists. She has called for, or joked about, the assassination of a sitting American president. She has called for, or joked about, the mass murder of entire populations of Moslem nations. She has referred to the president of the United States and his wife as “pond scum,” among many other things. She has called Christie Todd Whitman a "birdbrain" and a "dimwit"; Jim Jeffords a "half-wit"; and Gloria Steinem a "deeply ridiculous figure" who "had to sleep" with a rich liberal to fund Ms. magazine--all of which makes her "a termagant." I have never called publicly for the death of any one, nor joked about anyone’s murder, nor called any president or any senator any names like those listed above, though I admit, not all of them—including the current president--are among my favorite people.
Cloud is clearly resorting to the standard response to criticism of Ann Coulter, which is that anyone who doesn't worship before the altar of the almighty Jeebus H. Bush is just like Ann Coulter. This particular line is usually reserved for Michael Moore, who, like Alterman, has not advocated the assassination of a sitting American president, mass extermination of entire populations, and has not made fun of a legless American war hero. It's one thing to hoist people on their own petard, as Moore did in Fahrenheit 9/11, which at least uses real video footage of the person being made fun of, as opposed to, as Bill Maher said to Coulter's face, "making shit up," or as I prefer to call it, "pulling stuff out of her ass."
There's a kind of besottedness that comes over American male journalists when writing about Ann Coulter; a recent profile in Esquire had a similar tone. It's not because she's so bee-yoo-tiful, unless you like women with suspiciously large hands and Adam's apples. I suspect it's the same kind of self-loathing proclivity that makes men look for dominatrixes in the personal ads and on the Web, like the hapless husband of Marcia Cross' character on Desperate Housewives. But it's one thing to want to fuck Ann Coulter (and again, I ask, WHY??); it's quite another to do it in public print in a piece you're calling "journalism."
No wonder print journalists are so threatened by bloggers and print film critics are so threatened by onliners. At least if I write a review of a Terence Stamp movie, I'll tell you that I'd pay to watch him shine his shoes for two hours. Perhaps if John Cloud had just said "I wanted to fuck her", we might take him more seriously.
Or maybe not. She IS still pretty skeevey.
The net gets wider
Hoo-boy, can you imagine if DeLay, Reed, AND Norquist go down all at once? That's some serious bowling, my friends:
Organizations headed by two of the best-known figures in conservative political circles, Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist, have been subpoenaed by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee in its long-running probe of GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the paid-restricted Roll Call reveals Thursday. Excerpts from John Bresnahan and Paul Kane's article appear below.
#
The committee is planning to hold its next hearing in the investigation in late June. The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, one of Abramoff’s former clients, is expected to be the focus of that hearing, according to sources close to the investigation.
Americans for Tax Reform, for which Norquist serves as president, is refusing to disclose its donor list to the Senate committee, said two officials with the group. Reed’s firm, Century Strategies, is complying with the subpoena. Senate investigators are seeking four years’ worth of records detailing Century Strategies’ business dealings with Abramoff and GOP political consultant Michael Scanlon and entities under their control, said several sources familiar with the issue.
Ah, yes, but any matter of sleaze is OK if you're a Republican, right? And what's more, Jesus has already forgiven them, so who cares about the government?
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)