John Moltz

Summing Up

The AP sums up the summer nicely:

In a summer of political surprises, Howard Dean catapulted to the head of the Democratic presidential field while President Bush lost his aura of invincibility in Iraq.

The one thing the AP fails to mention, of course, is the reason Bush has lost his aura of invincibility. The media, in its ham-fisted way, started paying attention to the lies the administration was shovelling.

Still, we're not out of the woods. They're still haven't come to grips with the reality of Bush's popularity.

An ailing economy and unrest in the Middle East threaten the president's re-election prospects although he remains a relatively popular leader, according to officeholders and activists in both parties who took stock of the 2004 race at the traditional Labor Day break.

At least they've added "relatively" to "popular leader", but relative to what? Certainly not relative to the previous president, who enjoyed approval ratings ten points higher while he was being impeached. Is 53-55% enough these days to be a paragon of leadership? And who the hell in the Democratic party is so dimwitted as to be playing along with Karl Rove's message?

The source of this next quote not withstanding, it's a great line.

"They better be worried," said Donna Brazile, manager of Al Gore's 2000 campaign. "Dean's cooking with grease."

And in the "no fricking duh" category:

A senior Democrat who has backed Kerry, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Dean surge has hurt Kerry's efforts to court organized labor and has the senator's own backers wondering whether his campaign has been too conventional and cautious.

Kerry's running a traditional campaign and Dean's running one the likes of which no one has seen before. Dean's got buzz and he's pulling people out of the woodwork - he's exciting people, many of whom have been sitting on the political sidelines up to now.

Kerry cannot keep doing what he's doing and not doing what he's not doing and expect to get anywhere.

Perhaps the DLC has finally gotten its head out of its ass:

Months after the centrist Democratic Leadership Council called him too liberal, Dean is winning converts within the DLC for supporting gun rights and balanced budgets in Vermont.

"For many of our issues, he's not just talking about them, he's actually put them into action," said Ken Cheuvront, a state senator in Arizona and member of the DLC.

And, finally, we can only hope...

Senior Republicans see an outside chance that Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) of Arizona, who gave Bush a scare in the 2000 GOP primaries, might consider mounting a third-party bid or even bolt to the Democratic ticket. McCain dismisses such speculation.

Dell hates its customers

An amusing tale linked to from Dan Gillmor's blog.

Apparently, Dell (Canada, anyway) has a startup screen on its computers that says you must read the licenses for the included software and then click a button to agree to the terms of those licenses in order to use the computer.

The licenses are sealed in the packages with the software CDs and the label says on the package "By opening this package you are agreeing to the license."

So, in other words, it's impossible to comply with Dell's terms. They don't give you a means to read the license without agreeing to it and you can't agree to the license without reading it.

Normally, like on Apple products, such startup screens contain the text of the license - so you know what you're agreeing to.

Dell, however, being run by a collection of dunderheads, has decided to force the user to be a liar.

Switch

Some Dean supporters have copied Apple's Switch campaign and created Switch2Dean (link via Dean's Blog for America).

They need to find a Janie Porsche.

Is This Anything?

Some Republicans in New York may be watching a little too much David Letterman.

Trying to play Dave's "Is This Anything?", where he and Paul decide if what's behind the curtain is "anything" or if it's "nothing," they're attacking Dean (and, please, it's "Dr." or "Governor" - not "Mr.") for standing in front of a graffitied wall at his rally in Bryant Park.

While I can see how one could object to unsolicited graffiti on a public or private structure, it's just an exercise in trying to throw something at Dean to see if it will stick to complain about a commissioned work of art on a backdrop that was removed after the rally.

I suspect they were more offended by what the graffiti said - "Take back America" - than the style it was written in.

The artist's response to the charge of "romanticising vandalism" were the best, though:

"The vandals were an ancient tribe that used to run through countries, plundering and pillaging," he said. "I don't do that. That's what the Republicans are doing. I try to beautify my surroundings. I may fall short of that goal, but at least I'm trying."

And yet again!

EPA Quietly Cut Budget of Energy Star.

But the across-the-board cut was only about one-half of 1 percent, meaning Energy Star should have lost no more than about $250,000.

Instead, the $12.5 million was syphoned away to pay for other programs and projects within the agency, including so-called "pork barrel" projects that lawmakers demanded be fully funded, said EPA and private sources familiar with the budget process.

Boy, it's getting so that when the administration praises a program, you should probably expect it to get cut. This one is not the administration's usual slight of hand in getting credit for things it never planned to support in the first place - it was simply a program that didn't have a dedicated budget line item so it was ripe for the picking.

But, still, I'm sure people will be happy to know that they can look forward to continued pressure on antiquated power grids so Cheney's pals at Halliburton can get $50,000,000 for building bridges in Iraq that should only cost $300,000.

Yikes.

A scary post about electronic voting machines on Demagogue.

We have to be worried about stuff like this.

TCB 2

Krugman paints an accurate and dismal picture of the situation.

The Coalition Provisional Authority, which has been operating partly on seized Iraqi assets, is about to run out of money. Initial optimism about replenishing the authority's funds with oil revenue has vanished: even if sabotage and looting subside, the dilapidated state of the industry means that for several years much of its earnings will have to be reinvested in repair work...

For now, the administration is in denial. "There will be no retreat," President Bush says — Churchillian words, but where are the resources to back them up?...

Still, even the government of a superpower can't simultaneously offer tax cuts equal to 15 percent of revenue, provide all its retirees with prescription drugs and single-handedly take on the world's evildoers — single-handedly because we've alienated our allies. In fact, given the size of our budget deficit, it's not clear that we can afford to do even one of these things. Someday, when the grown-ups are back in charge, they'll have quite a mess to clean up.

Well, here's a novel thought on how to save some money - stop handing out ridiculously overpriced no-bid contracts.

Do we see what's happening here yet? Everyone in this this scenario has been screwed but one party. The U.S. taxpayers (where are those lower gas prices I was promised?), the Iraqis, and the troops have all been fucked.

Who's making out like a bandit?

Rhymes with "hella hurtin'."

Padding the bid

About four years ago I was a technology project manager in the finance department of a financial services company. We had a client/server accounting system and needed a billing module for the company's consulting and data businesses. Rather simple billing - either time-based or fixed price.

I contacted our IT department and they priced it out at $1.2 million.

The hell? We said, well, gee, thanks, we'll think about it.

Then, over the next six months, I built one that, including my time, probably cost the company about $75,000.

This is why I don't find this story on Baghdad Burning hard to believe (link sent by Lee Benning).

As May was drawing to a close, his manager told him that someone from the CPA wanted the company to estimate the building costs of replacing the New Diyala Bridge on the South East end of Baghdad. He got his team together, they went out and assessed the damage, decided it wasn’t too extensive, but it would be costly. They did the necessary tests and analyses (mumblings about soil composition and water depth, expansion joints and girders) and came up with a number they tentatively put forward- $300,000. This included new plans and designs, raw materials (quite cheap in Iraq), labor, contractors, travel expenses, etc.

Let’s pretend my cousin is a dolt. Let’s pretend he hasn’t been working with bridges for over 17 years. Let’s pretend he didn’t work on replacing at least 20 of the 133 bridges damaged during the first Gulf War. Let’s pretend he’s wrong and the cost of rebuilding this bridge is four times the number they estimated- let’s pretend it will actually cost $1,200,000. Let’s just use our imagination.

A week later, the New Diyala Bridge contract was given to an American company. This particular company estimated the cost of rebuilding the bridge would be around- brace yourselves- $50,000,000 !!

It's no wonder Iraqis can't find jobs if all the work is going to U.S. firms that are charging 166 times more. And, as Riverbend points out, it's not like the Iraqis can't build a bridge. They built the damn thing in the first place.

I'd never read Baghdad Burning before and this is simply one person's anecdote, so you have to take it for what it is. But my experience in the corporate world shows this is completely possible. Conservatives love to talk about how inefficient government is and how efficient business is. I have my ideas about inherent business inefficiencies that I might get into some day, but it's undeniable that business is pretty damn inefficient when it's given sweetheart deals that it doesn't even have to compete on.

Doin' a little TCB

Takin' care of business.

The business of your buddies, that is.

Halliburton, the company formerly headed by Vice President Cheney, has won contracts worth more than $1.7 billion under Operation Iraqi Freedom and stands to make hundreds of millions more dollars under a no-bid contract awarded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, according to newly available documents.

The size and scope of the government contracts awarded to Halliburton in connection with the war in Iraq are significantly greater than was previously disclosed and demonstrate the U.S. military's increasing reliance on for-profit corporations to run its logistical operations. Independent experts estimate that as much as one-third of the monthly $3.9 billion cost of keeping U.S. troops in Iraq is going to independent contractors...

Cheney served as chief executive of Brown and Root's parent company, Halliburton, from 1995 to 2000, when he resigned to run for the vice presidency.

A salient detail that was left out of the article is, of course, that ol' Dick still receives compensation from Halliburton. In fairness to Dick, it is less than $180,000 a year. I mean, a guy like Dick probably doesn't get out of bed in the morning for less than $200,000.

Why this is all not massively illegal is beyond me.

All the conservativeness, without the compassion!

Ah, the Texas education miracle. They wanted to bring it to the nation, and we got it!

Are we all edumacated yet?!

From an article in the NY Times:

At Jack Yates High School here, students had to make do without a school library for more than a year. A principal replaced dozens of experienced teachers with substitutes and uncertified teachers, who cost less.

And yet from 1998 to 2002, Yates High reported that 99 percent to 100 percent of its graduates planned to attend college.

Across town, Davis High School, where students averaged a combined SAT score of 791 out of a possible 1600 in 1998, reported that every last one of its graduates that year planned to go to college.

Sharpstown High School, a high poverty school that falsely claimed zero dropouts in 2002, also reported in 2001 that 98.4 percent of its graduates expected to attend college.

"Absolutely, positively, no way," said Larry Blackmon, a Yates parent and alumnus who knows graduates without the means or plans to go to college. "You'd get more of an accurate count asking elementary kids if they plan to go to college."

And Bob Herbert points out on the editorial page:

Mr. Bush fights ferociously for the things he really cares about: enormous tax cuts for the wealthy, for example, or launching a war against Iraq. He has never showed a similar passion for improving the public schools. The administration tried to cut funding for the No Child Left Behind Act less than two weeks after the president signed it into law.

The tax cuts and the ever-increasing costs of the war are submerging the nation in a sea of red ink, and the hopes of millions of school-age youngsters are sinking right along with it.

As for the Texas education miracle — more smoke. The largest and most frequently praised district, Houston, is being monitored by the state after an audit showed that more than half of the 5,500 students who left school in the 2000-2001 year should have been counted as dropouts, but were not.

President Bush was apparently serious about bringing the Texas model to the nation. He made the superintendent of the Houston school district the nation's education secretary.

Are you feeling the compassion?! I know I am!

Oh, wait, that's my cell phone on "vibrate."

Ass-Clown

Bill O'Reilly's at it again. (Link via TAPPED.)

To paraphrase Dr. Forrester on Mystery Science Theater 3000, "Ah, it does my heart good to see [Bill] burned beyond all recognition."

(Mr. Moltz's lawyers would like to point out that Mr. Moltz does not advocate the actual burning of Mr. O'Reilly. Only the burning in a cartoon sense, where he's blackened and his hair is all frazzled and it's funny and stuff. Also, the use of the term "ass-clown" is meant to be ambiguous. It is possible, although highly unlikely, that Mr. Moltz is referring to himself, the writer of TAPPED or the fictional Dr. Clayton Forrester.)

(No, look, we're not saying he's not, we're just saying we wouldn't say it in a public forum. But it's your blog. You do whatever you want. You pay us by the hour anyway so knock yourself out.)

Bush's Base Vows To "Pitch In" On Iraq.

With President Bush slipping in recent polls and increasingly vulnerable on issues of security and the war in Iraq, his base of mega-wealthy, white, privileged individuals has vowed to "pitch in" to help.

"Why, George gave me a $200 million tax cut," said Laughton Oswold-Degroot, III, of Greenwich, Conn., while adjusting his cravat. "The least I can do is pitch in on this whole... Iraq, is it? Mmm, yes. This whole Iraq mess."

Oswold-Degroot was not able to immediately pinpoint exactly where an "old money" Republican such has himself might be able to help out.

"I don't suppose they need someone to sit around and look smarmy, do they? Ha-ha! Ah-ha-ha! Ha! Ha. Ah... mmm, I suppose rather not."

Brandishing an unused hand trowel she found in their 5-car garage, Oswold-Degroot's wife, Beverly, said "I daresay our boys just haven't done enough digging for those weapons of most disruption!"

Surprised by the laughter of her husband, Beverly asked "What? What did I say?"

But rich suburban socialites are not the only ones willing to help out the President. Rich oil men, cattle ranchers and lumber barons have also vowed to chip in.

Bob Cranston, President of Cranston Oil in Houston, Tex., said "Now, I know ol' W has a thing worked out with ol' Dick about them ol' Halliburton boys getting everything under the hot desert sun, but I sure as shootin' heck wouldn't mind gettin' me a piece of that Iraqi pie, neither.

"Actually, just a chance at biddin' on it'd be nice. You know, just as a common courtesy."

Lumber tycoon E. Lamont Graveston said, "Bush has done such a swell job promoting our need to cut a swath through the forests... with the saws and the bulldozing and the little animals running, yelling 'Ooh! Help us! Help us environmentalists!' Ha-ha! And, finally, the screaming and the grinding and the flying of blood-soaked sawdust and fur and..."

"I'm sorry. What was the question?"

Wow

Dean Surges To 21-Point Lead Over Kerry.

Kerry has done absolutely nothing to distinguish himself in this race. Dropping incessant references into your speeches about how you're a veteran just doesn't cut it. Democrats are tired of the supposed leaders of their party rolling over and playing dead. Clinton may have been a DLC Democrat, but he was a fighter and it paid off for him. That's the one thing he and Dean have in common and that's why people like them.

These games end in tears

Krugman.

As for the additional help everyone expected: don't get me started. There wasn't a penny of federal aid for "first responders" — like those firefighters and police officers who cheered Mr. Bush at ground zero — until a few months ago, and much of it went to sparsely populated states. The federal government spends much more protecting the average resident of Wyoming from terrorists than it spends protecting the average resident of New York City.

Eventually Bush just has to run out of people to make grand promises to and then stab in the back. Then he's left with his friends who, while wealthy, are a rather small portion of the population. Wyoming? Well, they're never going to vote for a Democrat anyway. But you screw New York at your peril.

Incompetence

There was a brief power outage in Tacoma (non-grid related, a downed line) and my cable modem went out for a couple of hours so I tuned into CNN for a little while and saw Judy Woodruff interviewing Tom McClintock.

I didn't see the whole thing, but what I saw was Woodruff hounding McClintock about why he wouldn't drop out in favor of Schwartzenegger who was "reaching out to people" and "had a lot of name recognition." Woodruff did let McClintock go off on Schwartzenegger as a "big taxer" without challenging him on how he'd solve California's problems without raising taxes.

God forbid a TV news person ask a question about someone's solutions. All they're interested in is campaign tactics and giving them time to talk about what's wrong with the other guy.

Bob Sommersby, call your office.

Dean Rally

Here are some pictures of Sunday's Howard Dean rally in Seattle.

Yeah, that'll work

Sometimes you can't even make stuff like this up.

Congressional investigators say the Environmental Protection Agency relied on anecdotes from industries it regulates, not comprehensive data, when it claimed that relaxing air pollution rules for industrial plants would cut emissions and reduce health risks.

Uh... huh. "Anecdotes"?

Sigh. "Anecdotes."

Pff. C'mon. I mean, just go ahead and make it up. If you're going to go so far as "anecdotes" you might as well just fricking make it up.

Whoa. "Issues"!

So, in addition to having a really crappy record on policies that might actually stop terrorism, the administration also has a liability on the whole "compassionate conservative" thing (New York Times article). I can't believe they're even trying that bullshit again, but apparently they are. Pull the other one, already. I guess that's the problem with having no sense of irony.

President Bush is running for re-election as a "compassionate conservative" who has sought to bring a new Republican approach to poverty and other social ills. Indeed, his campaign Web site is lush with a "compassion photo gallery" showing him reading to schoolchildren, helping out at a soup kitchen and visiting an AIDS treatment center in Africa.

But supporters, some administration officials among them, acknowledge that Mr. Bush's "compassionate conservative" agenda has fallen so far short of its ambitious goals, in a number of cases undercut by pressure from his conservative backers, that they fear he will be politically vulnerable on the issue in 2004.

Yow! People in the administration think he's vulnerable on the lame-assed marketing concept!

Can I just pause and bask in the glow of administration sources actually telling the truth about Bush instead of successfully duping wide-eyed New York Times reporters like Judith Miller?

And then there's this:

Mr. Wallis said Mr. Bush had told him as president-elect that "I don't understand how poor people think," and appealed to him for help by calling himself "a white Republican guy who doesn't get it, but I'd like to." Now, Mr. Wallis said, "his policy has not come even close to matching his words."

Pardon me for saying so, but dur-hey. President Priviledge doesn't understand poor people? Golly, who'd ah-thunk it? And, surprise surprise, he didn't end up doing anything about it.

At issue is Mr. Bush's willingness to demand financing from Congress on his signature "compassionate conservative" issues, like education reform and AIDS, with the same energy he has spent to fight for tax cuts and the Iraq war.

Critics say the pattern has been consistent: The president, in eloquent speeches that make headlines, calls for millions or even billions of dollars for new initiatives, then fails to follow through and push hard for the programs on Capitol Hill.

Hey, an actual article in an actual nation-wide print publication pointing out what folks like Atrios, Kos, Hesiod and others have been saying for a year and a half or more. "Bait and switch" ring a bell?

Good on terror?

Not if you read Cheney's energy policy.

Among the proposals: drilling in the Arctic wildlife refuge and possibly reviving nuclear fuel reprocessing, which was abandoned in the 1970s as a nuclear proliferation threat. (Italics mine)

Because we all know how great nuclear proliferation is for stopping the threat of terror.

Oh, wait, no it isn't. It sucks for that. Kinda like gas on a fire, actually.

Huh. That's weird. Because I had read everywhere that the administration was so strong on the terrorism issue. Which is true... unless you're paying attention. I mean, crap, even their energy policy - with continued reliance on fossil fuels so lots of cash goes to Saudi Arabia and then to terrorists, and all kinds of fun with fissionable materials - promotes terrorism.

What the heck's the deal with that?

Ugh.

The Mariners have staged another late-season collapse. There are few teams I'd rather see them lose a 4-game series to than Boston, but even still, I couldn't bear to watch more than an inning or two.

The woman in the office next to mine is Cyndy Christofferson, the wife of Bob Christofferson who's the head groundskeeper at Safeco Field. She stopped by this afternoon and asked "Could we get any worse?"

I said, "No. Well… no."

For the past several years now, the Mariners have depended on great pitching, sterling defense and the ability to capitalize on mistakes made by the other team. In the past two series, their pitching and defense has failed them enough that no amount of screwing up by the other team was going to allow them to win. When you can't pull off a 3-6-1 or 3-4-1 double play three games in a row, it's gonna cost you. When balls pop out of your glove for home runs, it's gonna cost you. When your first baseman is batting .040 below his career average and your third baseman is batting .080 below his career average, it's gonna cost you.

There are no real answers for this team. The only player of significance on the DL, Greg Colbrun, will be out for the season, it seems. They either have to suck it up, start pitching, start hitting and stop "lollygagging" around the field, or look forward to some time off in October.

Fight smarter, not harder!

Anyone who's worked in a corporate environment has probably heard the refrane in this AP story before.

Top U.S. officials oppose sending more troops to Iraq, citing better intelligence and increased cooperation with Iraqis as keys to countering the rising number of terrorist attacks that have hampered rebuilding efforts.

"We can't afford more headcount - we'll just have to work smarter, not harder!" Boy, ol' Wolfie sure doesn't want to back down on that whole "number of troops needed" thing.

Bremer told "Fox News Sunday" it was "hard for me to see how the U.N. itself can play a further military role because the U.N., in my experience, normally insists on commanding its own troops."

At least some U.N. control is a condition that France, India and other nations have insisted on before sending troops. Bremer said all military forces should remain under command of the U.S.-led coalition, although "the U.N. clearly has a vital role to play in the reconstruction of Iraq."

Ah, he went on Fox News for a little softball, did he? And I'm glad to see Bremer got the same memo Powell did. I think they just forgot to send it to the U.N.

Later

I've gotta mow the lawn then I'm off to the Dean reception and rally in Seattle later this afternoon.

My chin and beard made the front page of the News Tribune yesterday.

Our Iraq problem

Taking on those who point to the influx of troublemakers to Iraq, Friedman says:

But I totally disagree that this is a sign that everything is going wrong in Iraq. The truth is exactly the opposite...

Friedman essentially goes on to talk about, in glowing terms as he always does, the injection of western democracy into the region, of

coming into the heart of their world to promote more decent, open, tolerant, women-friendly, pluralistic governments by starting with Iraq...

Hmm. Boy, that doesn't sound like anything the Bush administration would do, just because that doesn't sound like the Bush administration. And take a look at this post by Billmon at the Wiskey Bar and ask yourself how they're going to make progress toward those goals.

The issue at hand in Iraq is a grim one. Conservatives like to talk about Iraq like the U.S. in its infancy. The problem with that analogy is that in the U.S., the next most powerful alternative to the British was a group of well-educated property owners. In Iraq the next most powerful alternative is a group of religious leaders bent on imposing Islamic law. This has forced the administration to turn back to the people who were in power in the first place. You have to have someone with connections and an established support system - well-meaning outsiders can't maintain control.

Maybe this is why George Will rhetorically asks "When did the Reconstruction of the American South end? The 1870s? The 1970s?"

So... we should be done anytime from 2008 to 2108. Did the American public know this going in? Was this the mission we bought off on? Was this sold as "bringing democracy to the Middle East" or was it sold as "preventing attacks against the U.S."?

We're stuck with this problem. We can't make it go away, we need to do whatever we can to fix it. But it's still important to remember who created the problem.

Ooh! Owie, owie, owie!

This has gotta sting.

With public confidence declining in President Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, nearly 70 percent of Americans feel the United States will be bogged down in the country for years without achieving its goals, a poll finds.

Ouch! But... but... they seemed so sure they knew what they were doing...

The war costs the United States roughly $1 billion per week.

Whaaaa...? Holy crap. That's... that's... that's a lot of dough. I mean... I know the mission was accomplished... it's just... I didn't know the check would be so big. I mean, when I yelled "A round for the house, on me!" I was... well... I was drunk is what I was. I don't think I should have to be held to that.

Military figures show that 135 U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq since May 1, when President Bush declared the end of major combat operations there.

135 soldiers have died since Tom Terrific single-handedly landed his personal super-secret fighter jet on an aircraft carrier in hostile enemy waters, dodging... Iraqi...um... Zeros and, uh, I think personally fighting some enemy combatants that had somehow gotten inside the cockpit. I'm not sure how that happened. But I understand he killed them with a mechanical pencil. It wasn't his. It was Condi's. She gave it to him before the mission. "Good luck, Mr. President! You're the greatest!"

And for the first time in a Newsweek poll, the percentage of registered voters who would not like to see Bush re-elected as president outnumbered those who supported a second term (49 percent to 44 percent).

Ooh. Second time in a week. Mr. Rove ain't gonna like that.

It's for the kids

By now we all know that Al Franken was victorious in his defense of the use of the phrase "Fair and Balanced" on the cover of his book Lies And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them. We even know that Fox's laughable claims were actually laughed at in the courtroom, thereby legally confirming their laughability, and that Franken's book has jumped to the top at Amazon.com.

Additionally, we know that well-known alien reptile Ann Coulter and aging vaudvillean Bill O'Reilly are too scared to face Joe Conason (link via Media Whores Online), author of Big Lies.

Based on the success of these valiant scribes, the time is ripe for me to announce that I have started work on a book of my own: Mommy, Why Are The President's Pants On Fire? - A Parent's Guide To Explaining The Lies Of The Bush Administration.

I don't have a lot done so far. Just a stick figure drawing of Bush that says "Liar, liar, pants on fire" over top of him. And his pants are on fire.

I'm also trying to work in this boss drawing I did of an orc when I was in seventh grade. It's really boss. I'm thinking I could work it into the chapter on Dick Cheney if I make the orc a little paler and make the fangs a little bigger.

I don't have any children of my own, but I think I'd be really good at communicating to them on their level.

Setup

Embattled Democratic governor faces harsh questions about energy-related crisis.

California? No. Arizona.

Anyone sensing a pattern here?

You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to see that energy companies in this country are exherting their influence to turn the wheels of politics to their advantage outside of the democratic process. The creation of Cheney's energy policy, Enron, the California "crisis" and now the Arizona "crisis" are all examples of gigantic energy companies working political magic that is unavailable to you or me. I don't know about you, but I can't fuck up a state's energy surplus or cause vast lines at gas stations in an attempt to unseat elected Democrats. Bush's friends can.

This is the stealing of our democracy, ladies and gentlemen. It is the cynical manipulation of markets fully under their control in the pursuit of greater wealth.

This isn't new. This battle happens all the time. Corporate executives threaten to take their companies out of state if they don't receive special tax breaks. Companies push politicians for infrastructure and rules that favor their industry.

But an emboldened cabal of profit-seekers has noticed that there are only foxes guarding the hen house. With all branches of the Federal government under Republican control, who's going to stop them?

The only chance is for us to stop them. The people of California don't have to play along with this charade. They don't have to vote for the Austrian with no answers. They only need to pay attention a little. Fortunately, it looks like the citizens of Arizona are wise to what's really going on:

Napolitano's message that the pipeline company and the petroleum sector as a whole fouled up — and may even be taking advantage of the shortage by price gouging — resonates with many of her constituents, said pollster Earl de Berge.

"She raised an issue that a lot of people suspect is the case," de Berge said. "I think it's probably shaking out well for her."

Let's hope Californians don't fall for the setup, either.

ADDENDUM: Whoops, forgot to link to the article.

Tacoma rally

Attended a rally organized by the Sierra Club in Tacoma this morning to protest Bush's visit to the Northwest. I took some pictures but my batteries died after just a few. If there are any that are any good I'll post them later.

I'd guess there were about 200 people there (although I'm terrible at that kind of estimating), which probably isn't bad per capita. Rep. Adam Smith spoke for a few minutes about the Bush administration's record on the environment and so did some folks from the Sierra Club. Smith's quite a good speaker, although one guy in the crowd felt it necessary to point out that Smith had voted for the resolution to go to war with Iraq. A little out of place since the topic was the environment, but I guess you have to take your jabs at your elected officials when you can.

There was one guy wearing a Bush button sitting on a bench a little ways away, but he just quietly watched.

UPDATE: And this post on Uggabugga says it all on Bush's duplicitous rhetoric when it comes to the environment. "I don't think it should be voluntary. Of course, all of my policies are aimed at making it voluntary..."

SECOND UPDATE: And then there's this AP article.

The Environmental Protection Agency's internal watchdog says White House officials pressured the agency to prematurely assure the public that the air was safe to breathe a week after the World Trade Center collapse...

For example, the report found, EPA was convinced to omit from its early public statements guidance for cleaning indoor spaces and tips on potential health effects from airborne dust containing asbestos, lead, glass fibers and concrete.

WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT?! "Really, the best cure for the sense of dread a devastating terrorist attack can leave you with is a nice case of cancer!"

What... the... fuck? "Here you go, people of New York! Enjoy your lung cancer! Oh, don't thank us... Save your breath for the respirator!"

The Rasputin of bills

Frightening Wired piece about the parts of the Victory Act that are resurrected pieces of Patriot Act II. Here are some of my favorites:

Force defendants who are trying to exclude illegal wiretap evidence to prove police intentionally broke the rules

Good luck proving that. And, apparently, just accidentally violating your civil rights is OK.

Further restrict judges' sentencing discretion in drug cases

Because, remember, judges should only be lenient on you if you're a Bush with a drug problem.

Remove gradations of sentencing for those convicted of selling amphetamines so that anyone convicted of possessing more than 250 meth pills would automatically go to jail for 200 years

This relates to terrorism how? And this is another classic example of creating legislation that looks great until you compare it to real-world examples. Send meth dealers away for 200 years? Sure! Great idea! The guy in the next cell who hacked his girlfriend up and got 15 years is laughing his ass off.

"You did what?! Ha-ha! Sold some pills and you're in for 200?! Ha-ha! Oh, I'm sorry! I know I shouldn't laugh but... Ha-ha-ha-ha! 200!"

The Justice Department did not return repeated calls for comment on its involvement with the draft.

Well, yeah. Johnny's on the road trying to convince people to give him more powers. "I must have more powers! Give them to me! I must feed upon the living before the sun rises!"

Critics said the attempt to connect drugs to terrorism may be an effort to raise support for the so-called war on drugs.

Nyuh-huh.

War on Drugs? Meet War on Terrorism. War on Terrorism? Meet War on Drugs. I just know you two are going to be the best of friends!

Now, how to get school vouchers into the Victory Act...

Finish the sentence

From this AP story:

"We're looking at reaffirming our determination to succeed in Iraq," Powell said. "The president has always felt that the U.N. has a vital role to play."

...by helping clean up after his messes.

...by getting its people killed in the aftermath of his war.

...by making him appear to be more of a consensus builder than he is. We are approaching an election, you know.

Between Bush and anybody else...

...more Americans will take anybody else, according to the latest Zogby poll. (Link via Atrios.)

That's gonna leave a mark.

(Changed "most" to "more" since neither is over 50%.)

That's what I'm talkin' 'bout!

Tomorrow, former Clinton press secretary Joe Lockhart and Democratic political consultant Mike Lux will launch a web site titled BushRecall.org under the auspices of a new committee, the Fair and Balanced PAC, the AP reports.

Kudos to these gentlemen for pointing out the obvious hypocrisy of the California recall while at the same time skewering Fox's lame-ass lawsuit against him… Al Franken. That is classic.

Spot the original

Yeah. It's number 4.

ADDENDUM: On that last one, despite Ashcroft's prudish reputation, he's a huge Sir Mix-A-Lot fan. Huge.

Increase, decrease, what's the difference?

Again, I'm sure Tim Russert will be holding Bush fully accountable for his misstatement on our troops in Afghanistan.

"We've got about 10,000 troops there, which is down from, obviously, major combat operations," he said. "And they're there to provide security and they're there to provide reconstruction help. But both those functions are being gradually replaced by other troops. Germany, for example, is now providing the troops for ISAF [International Security Assistance Force], which is the security force for Afghanistan, under NATO control. In other words, more and more coalition forces and friends are beginning to carry a lot of the burden in Afghanistan."

In fact, the 10,000 troops in Afghanistan represent the highest number of U.S. soldiers in the country since the war there began. By the time the Taliban government had been vanquished in December 2001, U.S. troops numbered fewer than 3,000 in Afghanistan. And three months later, in March 2002, when the last major battle against remnants of the Taliban and al Qaeda took place in eastern Afghanistan, about 5,000 U.S. troops were in the country. (Link via This Modern World via CalPundit.)

After all, as commander in chief, he should know that!

Thanks, but no thanks

The Times seems all over John Ashcroft's Victory Tour. Here's a lead you wouldn't have seen six months ago:

The Bush administration, under increasing criticism over its terrorism policies, is beginning an unusual counteroffensive this week in an effort to shore up support for the prized legislation that grew out of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

The pitchman for the campaign-style initiative is Attorney General John Ashcroft, a politically divisive figure who plans to deliver more than a dozen speeches around the country beginning on Tuesday in defense of the administration's terrorism efforts.

And let's hear it for the civil libertarians of both parties in Congress.

Some Republican Congressional leaders have hinted that they want to introduce legislation expanding powers granted under the act. They have also sought to extend the life of the law by removing the so-called sunset provisions, only to be beaten back by concerns from civil libertarians in Congress who say the legislation needs greater scrutiny.

Hopefully, like me, a lot of people in the states Ashcroft is visiting saw "Judgement at Nuremberg" last night on TMC and paid attention when the Germans were talking about how they thought the Nazis were only going to rule with an iron grip "for a little while." They thought as soon as things got better, they'd relax conditions, but soon it became the law of the land.

What we need is more security, not more round-ups, intimidation and beatings.

Powellian

Michael Powell believes (or says he believes) that innovation comes from a handful of companies that have a lock on their particular market.

Powell insists the rule changes will benefit consumers by promoting competition and innovation.

Even Bill Gates disagrees with Powell. From a speech by Lawrence Lessig, we see that Gates said "Established companies have an interest in exluding future competitors." Straight from the horse's mouth.

There is no rational explanation for Powell's belief other than that he's so interested in giving the large media companies what they want he has lost the capicity of critical thought.

Well, or he knows it's not true and he's just trying to sell it.

But we're not that cynical, are we?

(Edited for spelling. "Innoviation." Sheesh.)

This is news?

According to the AP, the Bush campaign will use a "web site" to reach out to those who aren't connected enough to get invited to pay $2,000 for a hot dog with Vice President Dick Cheney. A "web site" is something on the "world wide web" (WWW) that all the young people are talking about these days. It uses state of the art "technology" to display "things" that "enable" those duped by fear and the false lure of riches to contribute part of their "severance packages" or their "reduced combat pay" to the Bush campaign. While sources were sketchy about details, the "web site" may have "buttons" and a "progress bar" showing how many legal black voters the administration has managed to wipe from the rolls this time around. It is unknown at this time whether visitors to the "web site" will "get" the "irony" of Bush trying to reach out to people he doesn't know, when the benefit of every policy decision he makes lands firmly in the lap of one of his "good buddies."

Back in the lead

According to eWeek (no link as I read a downloaded version), Microsoft doesn't know when Longhorn is going to be released.

Panther will be out before the end of the year, according to my pals at Apple. As far as I'm concerned, Jaguar (Mac OS X 10.2) is already a superior interface to Windows XP (and, yes, I use both), so this means Apple will, by all reasonable measure, be firmly in the lead in the desktop interface.

So I don't want to hear any "Oh, there's no difference anymore..."

Well, anyway, I don't want to hear that after the end of the year.

Mac world entertainment

Following a link from Damien Barrett's site, I see famous Canadian Shawn King is now taking down scam artists.

Jack Campbell has a rather sordid history in the Macintosh community and reading threads on Shawn's forum is not only entertaining, it's an education on hucksters and how they operate. The whole thing spans multiple threads and started over a month and a half ago, but my favorite part is here, where we learn that Jack's threatening with lawyers he hasn't engaged and lying about having spoken with them.

Oops.

Hugs?

Any hugs for the wife and four kids of this Reuters photographer?

U.S. Troops Shoot Dead Reuters Cameraman in Iraq.

Hmm. Probably not. I guess that would be a little uncomfortable.

California Lemonade

I've (mostly) stayed out of the whole California thing because: A - I don't live there, and B - it's been such a freak show.

The hubub about Schwartzenegger has been ridiculous. He has no experience for the job, he's as deep as, uh, something not very deep, like a thin-crust pizza or, um, a, uh, very small note pad like charities send you for free that say "Mr. John Moltz" in small letters and "HUMANE SOCIETY OF AMERICA" in huge letters.

He's also got skeletons in his closet that make Clinton's look like, well, very small skeletons.

Can you tell I just got up?

Anyway, the point is, I followed a link off Atrios to this article indicating Bustamante now leads Schwartzenegger in the polls by a statistically insignificant amount. Even so, it's a little silly how the Post tries to make lemonade for Schwartzenegger from them there lemons by subtitling: "Schwarzenegger Tops the Other Calif. Hopefuls."

As a friend of mine likes to say, "So, of all the losers... he's number one."

Personally, I think Schwartzenegger's a loser for the Republican party. I'm certainly no political strategist, but as far as I can see the only things he's got going for him are the people he's surrounded himself with and the fact that people know who he is from his movies. To me he sounds like an idiot when I hear him speak and he clearly doesn't know squat about the issues. Then there's the alleged groping and his family history and the nude pictures and, well, the list is rather long.

I just think it's a sad state of affairs when that's your party's golden boy. And what's the deal now - is it OK for actors to be political? Because, you know, pardon me for noticing, but I thought for a while there actors were just supposed to shut up and act.

(Edited to add "(mostly)" in the first sentence. Edited for spelling.)

Upgrades OF THE FUTURE!

I just opened Sherlock to look up something in the Phone Book channel and for a second a message appeared that said "You must upgrade to Mac OS 10.3 or later to use the Phone Book channel in Sherlock."

Fortunately, it then went away and I was able to use the Phone Book normally, but I think it would be better if they actually released 10.3 before they put those kinds of messages up.

I mean, is that Fair and Balanced?

No. It is not.

It's working!

Hey, I was just served by Fox News! Excellent! Check it out:

Dear Sir or Madam,

It has come to our attention that you have wrongfully infringed on our copyright of the phrase "Fair and Balanced." Fox News obtained a lawful copyright of said phrase after a weekend bender and that one dude - what's that dude's name? Tony. Right, it was Tony. After Tony came up with the whole idea to sell the channel as being "Fair and Balanced."

We were like, dude, you are so wasted! I mean, the dude was drinking cheap scotch with packets of strawberry Quick in it! He was so fucking wasted.

Anyway, when Monday morning rolled around, we were like, whoa, what did we do this weekend? Did Tony suggest copyrighting "Fair and Balanced"? Did O'Reilly really sleep with that Pollack guy? Did Ann Coulter really swallow that hamster whole?

Still, after a mess of coffee and some carbo-loading we were still thinking... hmm... "Fair and Balanced."

So, we copyrighted it. I was like, no way they're going to let us copyright two words of the English language that, let's face it, so don't apply to us, strung together by a conjunction. The lady at the copyright office kept lookin' at us funny because we kept snickering when she said "Fair and Balanced"! Ha-ha! Oh, man, that was funny.

But they let us have it! I could not believe it!

So, um, yeah, so that's why you can't use it. Because it's ours now. So shove off.

Also, Tony patented scotch with strawberry Quick and he's going to sell it as "Strawtch" or maybe "Scoberry". I dunno. He's working on a name. But don't drink scotch with strawberry Quick. First of all, because it's nasty and second because Tony patented it.

Actually, I think maybe you can drink it but you need to send him a quarter.

OK, look, we'll catch you later, bud. We go a whole mess of these to send out.

Rock on.

I'm not sure who Fox's legal representation is but, um, they should look into that.

Fair and Balanced Day STARTS NOW!

Yeah! Awright! Welcome to Fair and Balanced Friday! I am stoked! How y'all doin'?!

Excellent!

OK, we're gonna kick it off and get this mutha on the road! Whoo-yeah! First off, let's take a look at the words of those sly foxes at Fox on just what's the deal with this "fair and balanced" crap anyway?

We are fair and balanced. Just look at our lineup of guests, packed with Democrats, former Gore staffers, former Clinton administration officials, former Carter officials. That, coupled with putting on the other side and letting the debate rage, is what we call fair and balanced.

"Putting on the other side and lettin' the debate rage!"

That is so awesome! We're gonna get them Demo-rats and put 'em on and shout 'em down and cut their mikes! Fair and balanced will rawk your sawks!

Now let's take a look at this whole flap with him... Al Franken. Just what's the prob with the subtitle "A fair and balanced look at the right"?

Franken's "intent is clear -- to exploit Fox News' trademark, confuse the public as to the origins of the book and, accordingly, boost sales of the book," [Fox's lawsuit] said.

"Confuse the public as to the origins of the book"? Righteous!

Now some of you might be sayin', "Yeah, but don't you think the title, 'Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them,' would make it pretty clear that he's not writing for Fox?" Some of you might be sayin', "Wasn't it actually this dumb-ass lawsuit that boosted sales of the book, rather than the really rather obvious parody in the subtitle?" Some of you might be sayin', "AAAGH! OH, MY GOD THERE'S A SCORPION IN MY UNDERWEAR! OH, DEAR GOD, HELP ME! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE HELP?!"

But, look, those of you who don't have a scorpion in your underwear, it is so totally obvious that this guy... Al Franken... is trying to get people to think he's someone from Fox! I mean, he's wearing a suit on the dust jacket of the book! Liberals don't wear suits! They wear tie-dyed shirts and ratty old jeans! C'mon! I mean, if he had been falling out of the back of a VW microbus filled with pot smoke and driven by Saddam Hussein, then YES, I can see how there would be no confusion that he was coming from the left in writing this book, but a suit?

I just hate it when liberals try to steal conservative shtick.

So, in summing up...

FAIR AND BALANCED! WHOOOOOOOO-HOOOOOO! YEAH!

Uh... someone should check on that guy with the scorpion in his underwear.

Fair... and balanced.

Do you have Fair and Balanced Fever?

I do. I've got it bad and I can't wait for tomorrow! See, Neal Pollack has called for tomorrow to be Fair and Balanced Day. Or some such name. I'm not sure if he really gave it a name. Fair and Balanced Daze. Ye Olde Faire and Balanced Dayse. Something like that. Whatever you want to call it is fine.

Just don't call it late for dinner! Ha-ha! Ha! Ha! Heh! Heh... ooohkay.

The point is, if you have a blog, you should make some point on it tomorrow about how stupid Fox is for trying to sue him... Al Franken... for using the words "fair and balanced" in the subtitle of his new book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them.

If you don't have a blog (cough - Pete - cough), YOU ONLY HAVE A FEW HOURS TO SET ONE UP AND GET IN ON...

Fair and Balanced... Day.

Or whatever it is.

It's hard to think when you've got a bad case of Fair and Balanced Fever.

ADDENDUM: It just occured to me: with the power down on the east coast, the west coast is so gonna own Fair and Balanced Day! Yeah! Whoo-hoo! Excellent!

Power outage

Now, if I remember my NY power outage history correctly, what we're looking at is a baby boom in the making.

So, maybe this will help out with the whole social security thing about twenty+ years from now.

Of course, we all know people were friskier in the seventies, so...

Some reason

Well, at least no one's screaming "terrorism" about the power outage:

Gov't: N.Y. Power Outages Not Terrorism-Related

TERROR! AAAGH! IT'S TERROR!

Oh. Oh, wait, maybe it's not (Link via Tom Tomorrow).

Administration officials are leaving out key facts and exaggerating the significance of the alleged plot to smuggle a shoulder-launched missile into the United States, law enforcement officials told ABCNEWS. They say there's a lot less than meets the eye.

Apparently whatever the Times was smoking down below, ABC's not smoking. And wasn't Demagogue just talking about stuff like this?

The missile shipped into the New York area last month was not a real missile — just a mockup — also arranged entirely by the government. The government also arranged the meetings at a New Jersey hotel and elsewhere...

The government also arranged some flowers in the hotel room and arranged for the whole thing to be catered by Quiznos, makers of fine quality subs. That was nice. They didn't have to do that. I mean, your normal sting operation would just have some snacks, like chips and dip or something, but not a full meal.

"One would have to ask yourself, would this have occurred at all without the government?" said Gerald Lefcourt, a criminal defense attorney.

No way, man! They went to a lot of trouble to set this up! Little party hats, crepe paper, the whole nine yards.

Supportin' the troops

Congratulations, troops! You won't have to work with them nay-saying ferners!

Oh, and don't worry about moving up to a higher tax bracket! (Link via Daily Kos.)

Aw, you don't have to thank us.

Sad, but true.

Bob Sommersby asks "Good God! Can there really be a single American who still thinks Gore said he “invented the Internet?” which is the first sign I've seen that he might be a litte naive.

I've had friends jokingly refer to "Mr. Invented The Internet" to me.

Last night at the Windows-patch-a-rama, some of the more notorious conservatives where I work (and, sadly, there's a lot of competitions for the title) got talking about the Dixie Chicks. Here's how the conversation went:

"Why, what's wrong with the Dixie Chicks?" "Oh, they're un-American." "How come?" "They said they were embarrassed George Bush was from Texas at a concert and they got booed." "Well, they should [get booed]!"

Gaaaaaah.

Uggabugga turns one

Congrats to Uggabugga on its first anniversary. Quiddity has also posted some blogging etiquette which sounds like solid advice. I'm going to try to emulate these rules.

It's days like yesterday...

...that make me glad I own Macs.

I was at the office until 10pm helping the IT department go machine by machine to install patches to fix the RPC hole that was being exploited by the most recent worm. I finally left because, well, I don't work for IT anymore. But those guys were probably going to be there into the wee hours of the morning.

Somebody did go buy some sandwiches and Krispy Kremes, though. Damn those things are good.

Ah-HA!

I was RIGHT! Here's what I said, now here's an AP story (link via Atrios).

Attorneys general in two New England states suggested Monday that the White House is behind a lawsuit that seeks to invalidate a federal report on global warming...

Blumenthal said a June 2002 e-mail between a CEI executive and White House staffers "indicates a secret initiative by the administration to invite and orchestrate a lawsuit against itself to discredit an official United States government report on global warming dangers."

Yes, kids, your cynicism about this administration is justified.

Pollin', pollin', pollin'

The Post assures Bush his approval ratings have "stabilized".

Overall, 59 percent approve of the way Bush is handling his job. While his approval rating has dropped 18 percentage points since early April, his current level of support represents a good foundation as he begins the campaign year ahead. (emphasis mine)

Ah. Really? What were his father's numbers at this time? I bet they were better. Now, Bush is not his father and he has managed to get people to believing we're at war with... terror... which will go on until he decides it's over.

But his father only had the economy to drag him down while Bush also faces a credibility gap on the war itself. Just last month, a CNN-Time poll showed that 47%, less than half for the math-challenged, thought Bush was trustworthy.

In the Post's poll...

Asked whether they would vote for Bush or a Democratic nominee if the election were held today, 48 percent said Bush, 40 percent said the Democrat.

So, before people even know the Democrat, there's only a difference of 8% between them. Hmm. And, uh, what about the other 12%? 'Cause... you know... 48+40=88.

Perot? Nader?

Kodos?

By the way, please welcome the "Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kodos" gif to the left column. I haven't quite figured out what to link it to yet.

(NOTE: Edited for correction.)

Spot the connection

Spotted on the New York Times' website as of 3:30 PM PST:

In the article:

Another law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity said the British man does not appear to be connected to a known terrorist group. The suspect is thought to be more of an arms dealer or smuggler, the official said.

So, why the "Targeting Terror" sub-link?

WHOOOOO! YEAAAAAH!

The Daily Show sent Rob Cordry chasing Snow, Chao and, uh, the other guy, on the Monsters of Government Tour (also known as spinning the tax cut). The whole thing was a riot but here's the best quote:

[Secretary of Labor] Elaine Chao is causing significant growth in my private sector!

Too, too much.

Fair and balanced.

Fox is suing Al Franken for putting the phrase "fair and balanced" on the cover of his book so I'm joining Atrios and the gang in a sign of solidarity with him... Al Franken.

Man, that's showing my age. Email me if you get the reference so I won't feel like the only old fogey.

How 'bout a little something for the effort?

This kind of crap Krugman describes is reprehensible.

One writer reported that in his unit, "each soldier is limited to two 1.5-liter bottles a day," and that inadequate water rations were leading to "heat casualties."...

According to the Newhouse News Service, "U.S. troops in Iraq suffered through months of unnecessarily poor living conditions because some civilian contractors hired by the Army for logistics support failed to show up."

Remind me again why the military loves Bush?

Air marshals have told MSNBC.com that a "witch hunt" is now under way at the Transportation Security Administration, and that those who reveal cost-cutting measures to the media are being threatened with the Patriot Act.

And what a great job he's doing in the war on terror?

Who Watches The Watchmen?

The Tacoma News Tribune's front page was graced with this AP story today: Powell's UN Case For War A Shambles.

Bob Herbert's column for Tuesday concludes:

The Bush administration has managed to dodge the hard questions and benefit from an atmosphere in which the media and much of the public would rather contemplate Jennifer's navel and Arnold's fading pecs than pursue a possible pattern of deceit at the highest levels of government.

Some reporters are making the right connections and seeing what those who have been paying attention have seen for quite some time. This may dip below the front page but as our soldiers continue to die in Iraq, this won't go away.

So who should the American people turn to for the truth? Members of Congress who voted to approve Bush's rush to war and turned a blind eye to trumped-up intelligence, or those who've questioned the action from day one?

Sorry, Nellie!

Good weekend for the Mariners, taking two out of three from the Yankees and increasing their lead in the AL West to 4.

It's disturbing that Arthur Rhodes continues to have trouble in Yankee Stadium and Benitez gave up a run in the one inning he pitched on Friday, although they still would have lost the game. But Gil Meche pitched one of his best games yesterday, Shigetoshi Hasegawa came away with two saves and Jeff Nelson was on the mound while four runs scored today.

Hasegawa has been flawless as a closer - as with everything outside the All-Star Game - since Sasaki went down and I don't expect to see him moved from that role until Sasaki's velocity returns.

Whaaaaa?

Dick Lugar thinks that the assumptions the administration had about Iraq were "flawed". (Link via Buzzflash.)

Even the war itself has yet to be won, said Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind.

But, but... what about "Mission accomplished"?

Some Mac geek stuff

Gruber's got a keen post up about how to delete kernel extensions in OS X. I'm particularly glad to learn about receipts since the days of looking for changes in your Extensions folder or relying on Conflict Catcher are gone.

Speaking of Macs, I was over at Albert's last night and the Tacoma News Tribune's embedded reporter, Mike Gilbert, was there telling us stories of his time in Iraq. He wanted to show us the pictures photographer Peter Haley took there but whatever application he had been using to slide show them was shareware and the trial period had expired.

As you can imagine, this whole thing quickly devolved into geeks on parade.

Gilbert's iBook was running OS 9 and Albert's first thought was to delete the preferences for the app to see if the trial period would reinstate but that didn't work. Most savvy programmers wouldn't put that in the preferences file but it was worth a shot. I managed to find some digital camera software on the hard drive that would do a slide show and Albert got the idea to do video out to his wide-screen TV. For whatever reason, the iBook's desktop wouldn't show up on the TV (I suspect it was OS 9) so Albert grabbed a Firewire cable and copied the pictures over to his iBook which was running OS X. He hooked it up to the TV and imported the photos to iPhoto and showed them from there.

They were really quite exceptional and Gilbert had some interesting stories. One of them began "It was April 28th, Saddam's birthday, and we were playing wiffle ball…" As with any exceptional journey, good or bad, he said it was hard coming back. Even if it's the kind of trip where you were just happy to have a comfortable place to go to the bathroom, you get used to every day being an adventure.

Welcome back... The Dark Ages! Yeah!

I forget which movie it is, but there's some guy lamenting his upbringing who says (and I'm paraphrasing) "They make you take a test to drive a car, but they let any idiot have a kid." The same can be said of getting elected (or selected as the case may be).

Apparently you don't even have to believe in science to be President. Score one for those who can't be bothered with all that tedious book-learnin'!

Mr. Krugman sees it and so does Henry Waxman (who may just be the ugliest guy in congress).

Anyone remember what the Dark Ages were all about? After the fall of the enlightened empires of Greece and Rome (enlightened because they believed in the scientific principle), Europe was plunged into about 1,500 years of leeches, burnings, inquisitions and, I'm pretty sure, Bill O'Reilly. Countless scientific fields were set back by religious ideology that dictated that the sun revolves around the Earth, diseases were caused by "ill humors", and you can't question the king because he was annointed by God.

Well, buckle up, Nancy, because that's where we're headed again if the administration has anything to say about it. It's hard to tell if they really believe what they're saying or they're simply so concerned with advancing their friends

- who work in the oil business and don't want to hear about ice sheets melting or how drilling would devastate ANWR
- who run the abstinance-only programs that don't work
- who run the prison ministries that don't prevent recitivism
- who make a living preaching against abortion and want to fabricate a link between the procedure and cancer
- who make a living preaching against homosexuals and want to blame them for AIDS

that they don't care how much they have to lie and set the world back as long as they all get rich doing it.

Personally, I believe most of them believe these things. Some people don't think critically, they don't see the connection between cause and effect and they don't get held accountable for things that they do. They're caught in an audacity spiral and it's time for an intervention.

Illusory connections.

The Daily Howler is all over Fred Barnes' hi-larious claim that Bush not only never said there was a connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda, but that he said "the opposite." Quiddity's pulled some choice quotes from the Pres on this issue to show how much of a liar Barnes is, but inexplicably leaves out this one, which was in the State of the Union address. When you read it, remember to read it in the George Bush voice. Make a lot of unnecessarily long pauses between each sentence.

Our intelligence sources have found a clear and direct link between Saddam and members of Al Qaeda, particularly Osama bin Laden himself - the man responsible for 9/11. The British government recently learned that Saddam and bin Laden were seen at a Dairy Queen in Kirkuk, holding hands and sharing a… uh… Blizzard… I think they call 'em. With jimmies on it. And possibly some... M&Ms. Little… silver BBs… whattayacallem… nonpareils… I like to call 'em BBs.

But that's not the point, the point is the British believe Saddam and bin Laden may be lovers. According to MI5, Saddam did secretly describe bin Laden as "a good kisser" to a close friend and satellite imagery shows bin Laden on the Pakistani border carrying a three-ring binder with "Mrs. Osama Hussein" and "Osama and Saddam 4 ever" written on it inside a heart.

I know some "revisionist historians" will find it hard to accept that Saddam and bin Laden are homosexual lovers… butt buddies… anal swashbucklers, I like to call 'em… and to them I would say the old proverb of the goat… or it might have been a lamb… no, no, it was a goat, the goat that… uh… tried to revise history… and, uh… was forced to pay... substantial fines. "The Revisionist Goat" is the name of the story.

It's also possible I just made that up. Strangely, it's, uh, getting kind of hard to tell.

Poor Ann.

Live rat swallower Ann Coulter strikes back at those who would malign her book sales number with, uh, uncomfortable facts.

"Bookstores hide conservative books, so outfits like Premier create 'alternative bookstores' at places like Six Flags Great Adventure-and The New York Times bills 1,000 individual Americans buying my book as a 'bulk sale,'" she said. (Quote via Media Whores Online.)

Duuuh? I'm not sure which stores she's going into - maybe the New Canaan bookstore was bought by an outlandish gay couple and now only features great tales of sodomy - but she is, again, full of crap. I actually pay attention to things like this and her steaming pile thinly disguised as a "book" for "reading" is always prominently displayed. Quite prominently, considering it's so chock full-o-lies and it sucks so badly and she's a grotesque alien that has skinned some poor New Canaan debutant and been wearing her around like Bush in a flight suit lo these 41 years.

I think what might be happening is progressive book shoppers are putting Sid Blumenthal's book in front of hers.

I know that's what I do.

Our position on that is...

Steve Martin sums up Bush's position on the 16 words.

And how do I know you're not saying "halve?" "Did Iraq halve weapons of mass destruction?" How should I know? What difference does it make? That's a stupid question.

Mission Accomplished?

Sadly not.

Kos notes more U.S. soldiers have now been killed since the ridiculously over-scripted landing/speech/crotch exposition than before it.

Piling on.

Well, Atrios started it and then Hesiod posted one (you have to scroll down on both - something wrong with the links), so here's my Bush/flight jockey jockeys image.

Californication

I won't be fully satisfied until OJ runs.

Now pitching... ARMANDO BENITEZ!

Well, Jeff Nelson wanted the Mariners to trade for someone and they did. And they traded him to do it.

I like the Nelson for Benitez trade from the Mariners perspective. Neither one was under contract for next year and with Sasaki still not 100% they could use someone with closing experience. Benitez is also good against lefties which gives them an option besides Rhodes.

Benitez has had some, let's say, "unfortunate" experiences in some big games, but I like him. He's an impressive figure on the mound. Nelson looks like the guy who fixes your car.

Administration sued!

Yes! Someone is suing the Bush administration! Excellent! Let's see what for!

A conservative group sued the Bush administration yesterday in an effort to force the government to stop distributing a report on climate change that the group contends is inaccurate and biased.

It was filed in Federal Court in Washington by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a group with industry backing that contends global warming poses no significant risks.

Ah, crap. What the...? Jeez. I mean... What is this? "OK, we'll put out the report and then you sue us... ha-ha! Isn't it great?! And then we'll do a really half-assed job defending it..."

So the only thing Bush gets taken to task for is something he already doesn't believe in?

I would just like to point out that soylent green is made of people, OK?

Daring indeed!

This is why I like reading Jon Gruber's weblog:

When I last wrote about Andrew Stone, I accused him of dishonesty regarding his blatantly inaccurate anti-Carbon propaganda… But now, a few months later, I’ve come to a different conclusion: Andrew Stone is out of his fucking mind.

Mmm, important distinction! Thanks for the update! I think he's right, of course, but I'm sure I wouldn't have phrased it so... daringly.

It's been a few weeks now and I'm starting to miss making up Apple rumors. There really hasn't been much going on in the Apple world but I probably could have made something out of this.

Billmon, call your office.

Someone at the Whiskey Bar (I'll get a sidebar link up soon) should start collecting quotes denying Powell's leaving if Bush does win a second term.

And while Mr. Powell appears to be vigorous and in good health at 66, he may be growing tired of life in the public eye.

Ha-ha! Yeah! It's life in the public eye that Powell's tired of! Not the repetitive stress he gets hurling administration talking points in the air while yelling "I'm not saying that! It's bullshit!" Oooh, no!

"Washington loves speculation," Mr. Bush remarked good-naturedly to one reporter. "Clearly, you love speculation. You love it!"

Ha-ha! Yes, that's why we love you, Mr. President! What with your speculation on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, the macro-economic benefits of tax cuts for the rich, the idea that if we pretend global warming doesn't exist it'll just go away… You are so cute! Yes, you are! Who's a cute little President?! You are!

But, seriously, here's what I expect you'll see on the Whiskey Bar in early 2005:

"The fact that he is here in Crawford, Tex., talking about issues of importance, should say loud and clear to the American people that he's completely engaged and doing what he needs to do, and that is serve as a great secretary of state." - George W. Bush, Crawford, 8/6/2003

"I am resigning to spend more time with my family and to have arthroscopic surgery on my right arm."
- Colin Powell, Washington D.C., 1/5/2005

Tune out!

Robert Samuelson in the Post claims there's nothing to worry about in media consolidation.

If you don't like radio, you can listen to a Walkman or pop a CD in your car player; in 1970, people had only bulky stereo systems.

Ah! So, if I don't like Rush Limbaugh, I can just listen to They Might Be Giants! Liberals shouldn't have airtime, they should tune out!

His entire column is a fine example of lying with statistics. He mentions with glee how many more FM stations there are now than there were in 1970, but neglects to mention how many of them are owned by ClearChannel.

They confuse size with power. It's true that some gigantic media companies are getting even bigger at the expense of other media companies. But it's not true that their power is increasing at the public's expense.

Popular hostility toward big media stems partly from the growing competition (aka more "choice''), which creates winners and losers -- and losers complain. Liberals don't like the conservative talk shows, but younger viewers do.

Seems to me my "choice" is between which channel I'm going to tune into to get conservative views rammed down my throat. Who, exactly, is the liberal alternative to Joe Scarborough or any of the hosts on Fox? There isn't one. How exactly do we know younger viewers prefer conservative talk shows when there aren't any liberal talk shows on?

These networks regularly prop up conservative hosts with low ratings and jettison liberals, not because of poor ratings, but because they're afraid of the impropriety of someone questioning the administration.

What a crock.

I think we've found our Gigi!

Khomeini's grandson wants to be the Iranian Chalabi. He's so sure Iranians would be dancing in the streets if we invaded.

Jeez, would they pull the other one, please?

When sidebar links collide.

Dan Gillmor is spending a few days visiting the Deanies.

Now if I could just get, oh, let's say... Damien Barrett to visit, uh... how about... Oinkernet.

Them desert winds.

TAPPED has the goods on Lieberman's anti-Dean platform.

"I'm not going to stand back and let this party be taken over by people who would take us into the political wilderness again."

Maybe one of Lieberman's high-priced consultants could sit him down and explain to him the fact that the Democrats are already in the political wilderness. And that they got there with him at the helm, as the vice presidential candidate in 2000.

Bad management.

For seven years I worked for a great company that was consistently named in the Forbes Best Places To Work list. One of the CEO's mottos was "Always hire people who are smarter than you."

Krugman shows how that's not the model in Bush's White House.

And even if you aren't bothered by an administration that systematically misleads the public, you ought to be worried about the decisions of an administration that systematically misleads itself. A leader who is told only what he wants to hear is all too likely to make bad decisions about the economy, the environment and beyond.

More bad management practices from our MBA president.

Dean on Larry King.

I missed Dean on Larry King and only caught the clip Joe Scarborough played on MSNBC, but Hesiod has a reasonable review that jives with what I saw in the clip. The guy sounds great on the stump, but he looks stiff in the studio.

And, sadly, because the world has gone mad, no one seems to notice Bush talks like the village idiot, so it's something the Dean Team should work on.

Now I remember why I don't watch this crap.

Hideous reptile Ann Coulter was just on Joe Scarborough and the whole thing was a exercise in who can mug to the camera best and plug Ann's crappy-assed book the most (AGAIN!). You'd think with the number of times her dessicated corpse has been dragged on to these shows she'd be a better speaker, but she umm-ed her way through it, her eyes darting back and forth, nervously.

The two took shots at Howard Dean, with Scarborough repeating several times the claim that Dean is "the media's choice" and running pictures of Dean with the caption "Democrats move to the left."

What an ass-clown.

My favorite part was when Scarborough said that if the economy gets better and U.S. soldiers stop dying in Iraq, the Democrats don't have a chance, SO for Democrats to win, America has to lose.

You have to be pretty desperate to try to sell that kind of logic.

ADDENDUM: And I'm confused as to why Joe can't be bothered to wear a tie.

It's a vending machine.

I happened to purchase a soda (a pop, for those of you in the midwest) today and noticed the sign on the machine that said:

Do not attempt to tilt vending machine which may cause it to topple, resulting in serious injury or death. Vending machine will not dispense free items. (Italics mine.)

Ah! Hence the name! Vending machine.

I remember in college someone had left a sign on one of the machines in the dorm saying "This fucking machine doesn't work." This being Kenyon College, populated by a bunch of snarky English majors who take everything literally, someone had put a sign underneath it that said "You're obviously not using it the right way."

Faith

I think it's arguably true that people who support Bush would largely describe themselves as "people of faith." I'm somewhat confused, however, about what Bush has ever done to earn the faith of the American people, particularly on the economy.

Mr. Dutschmann, a Democrat who supported Mr. Bush in 2000, said he was still behind the president, although he had trepidations about the economy. "We just put our trust in him, and we hope he knows what he's doing," he said.

Around the time of the second tax cut, there was a lot of talk about Bush being one of those people who do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. You know… crazy people. Looks like the people who voted for him suffer from the same affliction.

What's the thought process there, you've gotta wonder. It's the law of averages! Eventually he will stumble onto the solution! Dumb luck just dictates that it'll happen!

It's frightening to think about, but there is a large segment of the voting population that votes on image and personality. I just wish that if they're going to do that they would recognize they're doing that instead of pretending it was something else.

ADDENDUM: The quote above reminds me of one of my favorite band names of all time: Blind Idiot God.

My life is a lie.

Boy, I'm feeling a little down. I was having a pretty good day - went out to see the Mariners beat the White Sox - but then I came home and, well, found out my marriage is a sham. Yeah. Check it out. According to Rick Santorum, marriage is...

...principally because of children. I mean, it's -- it is the reason for marriage. It's not to affirm the love of two people. I mean, that's not what marriage is about.

I just... I just don't know how I'm going to break it to my wife.

(Thanks to Uggabugga for pointing this out.)

Apple Registers On InfoWorld Poll.

Apple made a strong showing in InfoWorld's Reader's Choice Awards. Why is that surprising? Well, InfoWorld's primarily a magazine for enterprise technology users, and Apple's been counted out of the enterprise space for years. But Mac OS X 10.2 took Best Product (although, strangely, Windows Server 2003 took best OS - go figure) and the iPod was named Best Gadget, both by large margins. Apple and Microsoft were a statistical tie for Best Vendor.

More than the fact that Apple actually won a few things, this goes to show that folks in the enterprise do know about Apple, but I suspect that Apple is benefitting, again, from a strong core. Your average Windows user does not feel a strong bond with Microsoft and would look at a list of products and pick which ever one he or she liked the most. The average Mac user is going to look at the list and see if there's an Apple product on it. Chances are it's going to be their favorite anyway, but they might vote for it even if it weren't.

You're Both Right!

The Times asks… can't we all just get along?

The logical leaps in this piece are mind-boggling. Pushing the idea that Saddam had destroyed his weapons of mass destruction before the war with the intent to restart the program once the heat blew over, Michael R. Gordon says,

If true, it means that the Iraqi threat was less immediate than the administration asserted but more worrisome than the critics now suggest.

Actually, no, because what critics of the war wanted was not only proof that he had the weapons but proof that he was going to use them against us. Gordon adresses that question but doesn't tie it in to the burden of proof critics were placing on the administration that Iraq represented a real threat to the U.S. Instead he simplifies the argument of critics of the war.

And it means the decision to use military force to pre-empt that threat was not an urgent necessity but a judgment call, one that can be justified as the surest way to put an end to Iraq's designs but still one about which ardent defenders of the United States' security can disagree.

See? You're both right. I… I just wish you could see what I see! Two loving, caring, sides… It breaks my heart to see you fight like this! All I want… is peace in this family!

Frankly, this is bullshit, because it suggests that if Iraq did have WMD, the only way to stop it from attacking us was to invade. It tries to lend credence to the idea that it was OK to invade because of fear Iraq might restart its WMD programs. Not that it might hit D.C. with a dirty bomb, but just restart its programs.

It also makes the odious implication that you can't be an ardent defender of the United States' security if you also expect the administration to prove, not just that WMDs exists, but that there was a threat they could be used against us.

Personally, I thought he had the weapons! I thought, yeah, sure, he's probably got a bunch lying around. But the thing about Saddam was, yes, he was a bully, but he was a bully in his own back yard. He knew that if he attacked us he'd get the ass-kicking of a lifetime so why would he? Unlike Bin Laden, we knew what Saddam's address was. The weapons were there to scare the Shiites, Iran and the Kurds, not us. If they were there to scare us, then why did we sell them to him?

Gah.

What the…?

From the AP:

"Economic historians would say that the recession of 2001 was one of the more shallow recessions. Some would probably say, well, maybe you shouldn't have acted and let the recession go deeper, which would have made — may have made — for a more speedy recovery," Bush told reporters after meeting with his Cabinet.

He did not elaborate, but his spokesman, Scott McClellan, later told reporters: "We acted to address the recession. We acted to make sure the economy came back to a path of growth."

He cited the three tax-cut and economic stimulus measures passed since Bush took office in January 2001.

Had Bush not acted and allowed the recession to get worse, the recovery now might look more pronounced. But, McClellan said, "More people would have been hurt, more people would have been looking for work."

Well! I guess we're just lucky the Pres didn't try to pad his numbers a bit! I'm no economist but I do have an MBA and Bush's statement makes absolutely no sense to me. Plus, it's always a red flag when the press secretary's clarification does not agree with the President's statement. Bush is clearly saying the deeper the recession, the faster the recovery. McClellan is saying the recovery would just look bigger because it was a deep recession.