John Moltz

A sweet idea

TAPPED brings us a great idea for Democrats to take the fight to Republicans on the "cultural war" issues.

Which means they'll never do it in a million years.

"Awwww... but trying to push our own agenda is so hard! Can't we just steal a Republican idea and water it down and support it half-heartedly and then give in when the Republicans bully us into going along with their original proposal?"

Enjoy a normal holiday and... OH, MY GOD, WHAT IS THAT!

Americans Urged To Go On With Holiday Plans

Well, fortunately for me, I spend every Christmas sitting in the basement underneath the work bench hugging my knees and sobbing softly to myself!

I'm glad to see, however, that we're so much safer after Saddam's capture! Clearly, now that the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks is in custody, we can return to our normal lives and...

OH, MY GOD! TERROR LEVEL ORANGE! TERROR LEVEL ORANGE! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!

With something like two thirds of the country still deluded that Saddam had something to do with 9/11 (including, apparently, Peggy Noonan), do you think there are people out there who are saying "Well, jeez, what the...? I mean, we just caught that 9/11 guy, didn't we? Why the hell do I have to have a cavity search to get on this hay ride?"

Boola boola boola

Dean's Yale Transcripts Are Released

Dean took more than one class on Marxism and studied the "History of Soviet Union," "Soviet Foreign Policy," "International Communism" and "Chinese Politics."

Waiiiiiiit for it...

Waiiiiiiit for iiiiiit...

Aaaaaaaaaaand now!

Yes, out there, somewhere in the dark, a conservative writer just wrote about how Dean's transcripts show he's a communist (probably Mark Alexander who, for the record, never returned my email about lying about which hand Dean was holding up). Another conservative writer also wrote about how his high grades prove he's an angry know-it-all. And, as a finalé, another wrote that the fact that he went to Yale shows he's an elitist east coaster who's out of touch with real American values.

Yes, despite the fact that Bush went there, too. Remember, there is no irony in most conservative discourse.

What he said

Saddam baaaad. Ghadafi goooood.

Ah, the blinding light of conservative moral clarity.

[cough] - Rowland - [cough]
[cough] - Thurmond - [cough]
[cough] - Stevens - [cough]

No one is judged "good" or "bad" by whether they committed acts of terrorism, misappropriated public funds, fathered a child out of wedlock he wouldn't have go to the same schools as his other kids, or misused his position for personal financial gain. They're judged "good" and "bad" by how much they help advance the cause.

No, I will not "read more..."

One of the more annoying blog features is the ability to split a post between the main page and a linked page.

The problem with this ability is that it is almost entirely misused by the average blogger. Newspaper writers hate "the jump" (i.e. "Continue reading Bush: Super-Keen Or The Ginchiest? on page A4") because, for the most part, no one ever makes "the jump".

The beauty of a weblog is that it does away with the constrictions of the print paper medium. So why the hell would you put one of them in deliberately?

Bloggers do it because they don't want people to have to scroll past a really long post if they're not interested.

We all know how hard scrolling is.

But, really, that's a perfectly reasonable goal. If I'm really interested in your snarky remarks about Dick Cheney and his secret penchant for wearing women's lingerie, I don't want to have to scroll past your long post about your cat's urinary tract infection.

So the problem is not wanting to keep your main page readable. The problem is the mid-post jump.

I'm just not going to jump. I'm not a jumper. I've been on many ledges before and I've never jumped.

The rest of the post could be vitally important or it could contain something really interesting, like a picture of John Ashcroft imitating Dieter from Sprockets and telling everyone that the death penalty makes him "as excited as a little giiirl!" But I'll never see it.

Moveable Type is a primary cause for posts such as these. It provides great flexibility by allowing a synopsis and separate fields for the part of your entry that goes on the main page and the part that is added to the complete text on the jump page. The problem is they go so far as to encourage you to split up long posts. That's crazy talk.

The correct way to handle long posts is to put a brief synopsis of the post on the main page and then link to the complete post. That way the reader can make a decision about whether or not he wants to read the thing up front, before the emotional investment. He won't get halfway into it and be told "Click here for the exciting conclusion to My Views On The Designated Hitter Rule!"

Despite this complaint, I'm still adding Pandagon to the list of political links, even though they occasionally violate what I feel should be a basic tenet of blogging. They also have the heinous calendar at the top of the blog. Has anyone ever clicked a date in one of those? I know I haven't.

But Pandagon's good reading, even if I only read half of some of them because, like I said, I don't do "the jump".

Also, I should explain something about the list of political blogs. It's not meant to be conprehensive. It's just the ones I read every day. There are many other worthy blogs out there, but there are only so many hours in my day.

No bullet proof vests

"If Clark is the nominee, Bush will never be able to attack his patriotism!"

Riiiight.

Krugman.

Go. Read. And thank whatever or whoever you thank that at least someone writes about reality.

But even if all that happens, we should be deeply disturbed by the history of this war. For its message seems to be that as long as you wave the flag convincingly enough, it doesn't matter whether you tell the truth.

Herbert Hoover - Four More Years!

It occured to me after reading this post by the Thumb filling in for Atrios and this column by Bob Herbert that that would make a great bumper-sticker.

Never give up

If you think Bush's election is inevitable...

Chris at Interesting Times has a good post about just how far Dean's comments about Saddam are "out of the mainstream" (hint: actually about right in the middle of it).

And here's the one everyone is talking about - Tom Kean, chair of the 9/11 probe, says the attack was preventable, and they'll start public testimony in January.

Plus, and this is something I've been thinking about over the past few days, consider all the other ways Bush is unelectable: the environment, the deficit, the weak dollar, energy-company cronyism, the Plame affair, John Ashcroft's conflicts of interest, the thin veneer of Bush's "folksy" appeal, still no WMDs... the list goes on.

So buck up.

And on that note, I'm off to see the Return of the King.

(Whoops - link fixed.)

Tom Friedman IS The Shadow!

Moment of Truth (link via Uggabugga)

I don't believe Mr. Chirac ever intended to go to war against Saddam, under any circumstances.

Yes, Tom Friedman has the ability to see into the hearts of men! He can also cloud men's minds! He IS... The Shadow!

Oh, wait a minute, maybe he's Santa.

Oooh! What a burn!

Matthew Gross on the Dean campaign weblog gets in a particularly sweet jab at the president.

And Liberal Oasis has extended commentary on the testy exchange between a defensive President Bush and Diane Sawyer during his ABC interview, which aired last night:

SAWYER: Um, again I’m just trying to ask -- and these are supporters, people who believed in the war who have asked the question.

BUSH: Well you can keep asking the question, and my answer is going to be the same. Saddam was a danger, and the world is better off because we got rid of him.

SAWYER: But stated as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction, as opposed to the possibility that he could move to acquire those weapons still --

BUSH: So what’s the difference?

We'll explain it to you later, Mr. President.

Looking foward to that.

Mahwage

(Think Princess Bride...)

Frederick Maryland has a good post at Demagogue about Bush's "sanctity of marriage" talking point.

It reminded me of a post I wrote a while back about much the same topic, as well as a terrific quote from Jon Stewart.

Let's get something straight...

Uh... and by "straight" I mean... um... uh... well, you know what I mean.

The government cannot force your church, synagogue, mosque, or altar to Gorto to marry homosexuals in a religious ceremony.

Only years of bitter intra-faith arguing can do that.

The government cannot make you attend lavishly gay ceremonies, featuring an erotic cake with a depiction of the happy couple wearing nothing but leather chaps and performing an act still illegal in some states.

It cannot force you to stand really close to the altar, so close that you get "accidentally married" to a large man named Trent with a handlebar moustache and a lifetime subscription to "Out" (I swear I think that's what these people are afraid of).

What the government can do is grant same-sex couples the same legal rights afforded to straight couples. You know... so when Legolas' long-time companion Gimli finally dies, Legolas gets to keep his axe, which has strong sentimental value. You know, from that time they killed all those orcs together.

So all this talk about "gay marriage" is designed to stir people up, to get their worst impulses working. It's mis-direction. The government cannot, does not, shall not, legislate sanctity. Sanctity, like cleanliness and underpants, is between you and the Lord God.

Or Gorto, as the case may be.

So, when someone says they support the Constitutional amendment because they want to preserve the "sanctity of marriage", ask them when the government got into the business of legislating what's sanctified.

Back

And my Computer Architecture final continued my unbroken streak of studying completely the wrong things. Eh, as long as I passed the class. If anyone asks to look at my GPA at my age, they're not going to be someone I'm going to want to work for anyway.

Busy

I have a Computer Architecture final today. Back tomorrow.

[/nedra]

Well, as the sun sets on a successful write like Nedra Pickler day, let's close with a tribute to the woman herself.

While the AP continues to send Nedra Pickler out to write about the Democrats, they cannot deny she's a partisan hack.

May the spirit of write like Nedra Pickler day stay with you throughout the holidays.

Dean's speech

Dean Says America Not Safer After Capture

[/nedra] When did they capture Howard Dean? [nedra]

The capture of Saddam posed a political problem for Dean, whose candidacy has been fueled by his opposition to the war.

While Howard Dean is sticking to his stance against the war, he cannot deny that it was actually waged.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Nedra Pickler covers the presidential campaign for the Associated Press and still, strangely, smells of catfish.

Winning the hearts and minds

Iraq Car Bomb Kills Nine Day After Saddam's Capture (link via The Whiskey Bar)

If anyone imagined Saddam's capture would bring swift peace, the words of U.S.-trained Iraqi policeman Ahmed Ali may cause them to think again.

"We want this to lead to more attacks on the Americans. There will be a holy war against them. It will be much worse. We all love Saddam," he said, standing near U.S. soldiers he works with in Falluja, confident they would not understand his Arabic.

While U.S.-trained Iraqi policemen may hate the U.S., they are not permitted to vote for Howard Dean.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Nedra Pickler covers the presidential campaign for the Associated Press and, in her spare time, writes George Bush fan fiction.

Mission Re-Accomplished!

When Juan Cole notes that Saddam's capture will be a dim memory by October, 2004 (link via Daily Kos), he neglects to remember that time is standing still as we bask in the glow of Dear Leader's job well done.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Nedra Pickler covers the presidential campaign for the Associated Press and suffers from that memory disease the guy in Memento had.

Worst... season... ever!

While the Seattle Mariners feel that Scott Spiezio and Quinton McCracken are fine additions to their club, they neglect to recall that some pitchers throw with their left hand.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Nedra Pickler covers the presidential campaign for the Associate Press and is happy she won't have to watch the Mariners next year.

Political commentary by Terry Tate

When Hesiod notes that the triumphant key-pressing by pro-war bloggers is like celebrating sacking the quarterback in the final two minutes of a game despite your team being down by three touchdowns, he neglects to point out that those Terry Tate commercials are really fucking funny.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Nedra Pickler covers the presidential campaign for the Associated Press by calling the Republican National Committee and asking them what they'd write.

Happy holidays, unemployed!

Another Battle for Bush

When Bob Herbert says he hopes that the capture of Saddam will let Bush focus on doing something about unemployment in this country, he neglects to mention that Bush captured Saddam single-handedly.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Nedra Pickler covers the presidential campaign for the Associated Press and collects Hummels, those little glass poodles they blow at the mall and George Bush action figures.

Dean defies God

While the Dean campaign weblog provides insufficient enthusiasm for Saddam's capture, they also neglect to note that David Frum indicates God wants Bush re-elected.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Nedra Pickler covers the presidential campaign for the Associated Press and is probably off her meds.

Write like Nedra Pickler day!

And let's kick it off right with a lesson from the artiste herself!

Democrats Press Bush Despite Capture

President Bush scored a major political victory with the capture of Saddam Hussein, but it won't give him a break from Democratic rivals who continue to argue that he mishandled the war in Iraq.

Can you believe it? Those Democrats are unrepentant in their views that the war was waged under false pretenses, is a distraction from fighting actual terror, and that the reconstruction is being handed over to close administration buddies who are price-gouging, while potential allies are being treated like playground interlopers, DESPITE the fact WE JUST CAUGHT SADDAM!

EDITOR'S NOTE: Nedra Pickler covers the presidential campaign for the Associated Press and is possibly in love with the President.

Indeed

From the comments over at Atrios:

Will someone please explain how capturing Saddam justifies all the lies and deceptions about this war?

[sound effect] chirp chirp chirp [/sound effect]

We have a winner!

And the biggest Saddam-capture-related Bush blowjob award goes to...

Well, really, it's way too early to be handing out that award yet. BUT, this has got to be in the eventual running.

The AP's Terence Hunt brings us Saddam's Capture Lifts Weight From Bush.

Saddam Hussein's capture lifted a huge political weight from President Bush after months of rising casualties and growing doubts about his handling of Iraq. Around the world, it sent a thundering message of America's resolve to prevail in the war against terrorism.

All will be well now! We have Saddam! Everything is right with the world! Sleep safe, children of America! Huzzah! All praise Dear Leader!

Look, not even Bush is spinning it that way, and rightly so. And define "war against terrorism" in this context, Terry, citing specific terrorist acts Saddam committed or was a threat to commit against the United States.

For months, Saddam's ability to remain at large despite one of the world's biggest manhunts had been a blow to U.S. prestige and claims of progress in Iraq.

Sure, that was a blow to U.S. prestige, but I thought the bigger blow was the whole "didn't find any WMD" thing. I know we're not supposed to talk about that...

But with Saddam's capture, the critics were silenced, at least for the moment, and Bush was expected to get a big boost in the polls as he moves into a re-election year.

Hmm, I feel strangely un-silenced. And, actually, I'm thinking it's possible he's peaked too early. We'll see.

"The Democrats can't touch him at the moment," said Columbia University historian Henry Graff. "He said he was going to get him. He got him. What more do you want? Now if we can lower the level of violence over there, he's going to look good."

Actually, Kerry got in a pretty good jab about bringing in other nations. And "What more do we want?" How about an investigation into why the administration pushed for a war on trumped-up intelligence? That'd be a start.

And here's a telling paragraph about Donna Brazile.

"This is a huge victory for Bush. It's clear by getting Saddam early, bringing him to trial, the president can send out a message that he's winning the war on terror," said Democratic strategist Donna Brazile, who managed Al Gore's 2000 campaign.

Yes, I managed Al Gore's campaign and, yes, I'm all too willing to play along with the administration's attempts to tie the war against Iraq to the unrelated war on terror!

Fucking idiot.

ADDENDUM: Jeez, the AP just cannot pick one headline and stick with it! Now it says "Saddam's Capture Gives Bush Huge Boost." But is it Saddam's capture? No, Terry... you were the wind beneath Bush's wings all along.

Really Bad Santa

I know someone who's getting coal in his stocking! Who's been a bad boy!? Who's been a bad boy!? Yeeeeeessssss, YOU have! A-goo-gah-goo-gah-goo-boo! A-goo-gah-goo-gah-goo-boo!

Jiles: Don't taunt him.
Xander: W-why? Can he still hurt me?
Jiles: No. It's just... tacky.

(Idea and original image from a post by Kevin Drum.)

Saddam Captured

And lookin' good, S-man! That beard is... uh... is that a mouse in there?

Anyway, good news. Don't need him running around.

The AP still needs some work on their headlines, though.

Democrats Mostly Pleased by Arrest

Reading through the thing I see, hmm, Gephardt pleased, Clark pleased. Kerry pleased. Dean pleased. Lieberman very pleased. And Moseley Braun also pleased.

Apparently wanting our troops to come home as soon as possible is equivalent to not being pleased by Saddam's capture.

I can't wait for the first column about how this somehow proves the Democrats were wrong about the war.

UPDATE: They've changed it. Now it says "Democrats (sic) Candidates Pleased by Arrest." Changed it so hastily they couldn't get it grammatically correct.

Poor sportsmanship

I'd expect this kind of thing from the Bush campaign. It's disgusting to see it from other Democrats, who happen to be associated with Gephardt and Kerry.

Clearly these people don't "get it."

Oooh...

...look at me. All linked to from Atrios and stuff.

That boy does get a lot of hits. I'm honored to share a piece of the action.

And Monday's write like Nedra Pickler day! Remember, take your thinking caps off and just pass on those GOP press releases verbatim!

So much for accuracy

Found this charming article by Mark Alexander on Townhall via Pandagon and thought this was strange.

ABC's Ted Koppel opened the slugfest by asking the nine candidates to "raise your hand if you believe that Governor Dean can beat George Bush." Of course, only one candidate -- Dean -- raised his hand (appropriately, his left hand).

See, get it? He's so far left he only uses his left hand!

Except, well, he did, in fact, use his right hand.

(Via the Daily Show, and their video confirms the image behind Stewart wasn't flipped.)

But, you know, when you're trying so hard to make a point, who cares about accuracy?

Mixed message

Democratic Head Expects Fewer Candidates

Even though some Democratic candidates have harshly criticized their rivals, McAuliffe said all the candidates have promised him they would endorse the eventual nominee in their quest to unseat President Bush.

Well, that's nice, Terry, but then why didn't they fucking raise their hands when Koppel asked if Dean could beat President George "I'm Unelectable" Bush?

C'mon! Get with the program, folks! Let's hear a little chatter out there! Heeeeyyyyyy, battah, battah!

Eeeeexcellent...

Democrat Dean Tells Republicans: "Bring It On"

As the former Vermont governor traveled the snow-covered plains of western Iowa with Al Gore's surprise endorsement tucked away, nobody seemed able to agree on whether he was a dangerous liberal or a closet conservative.

The longer it takes the press to decide on a "story" about Dean, the better off he and anyone who wants to see a Democrat elected are. They had made up their "Al Gore is a liar" story well in advance of the 2000 election and were all set on their game plan. Dean's keeping them off-balance.

Republicans are saying "He's too liberal!" and Democrats are saying "He's too conservative!" All I can say is, keep it up.

Meanwhile, dim-witted AP Republican mouthpiece Nedra Pickler (and, hey, little Ron Fournier gets a "contributed to..." credit at the bottom!) would have you think Dean's in trouble!

Surging Front-Runner Dean Under Attack

Just the other day he seemed on top of the world but now he's...

Caught in a crossfire of criticism...

Bang-bang! Oh, no! They've got Dean pinned down! Look out, Howard!

The one-two punch came three days after former Vice President Al Gore endorsed Dean...

Biff! BAM! Now... apparently... they're, um, boxing... instead of shooting at each other! Which... they were doing just a minute ago... They must have run out of bullets... I guess... but when she switches metaphors so quickly it's hard to... OK! Uh...

Dean bristled at the criticism...

Aaagh! He's bristling! His back is... quite furry! Look out! He's an animal! He... uh... may take on other forms!

...the former governor interrupted and tersely replied...

No, you fool! Don't make him angry! He'll kill us all! My god, don't put your hands near his mouth! There's nothing more dangerous when backed into a corner! Possibly the badger or the wolverine, but... he's... very high on the list!

The criticism is a sign of Dean's dominance a month out from the first voting. Democratic strategists say they are watching to see whether he can weather it.

Yes, because we know how hard it is when... losers... attack you. And... and... you have nothing to console yourself with except... the $500,000 you raised in 48 hours... because... yes... that can be very... uh... troublesome... and... um...

Conspiracy Theories

Chris at Interesting Times has posted his own conspiracy theory about the Clintons, Clark and Dean.

I think that if there was any political calculation involved in the Clintons' encouragement of Wesley Clark to enter the race it was the simple idea that he could act as a safety net for the Democrats if Dean's high-wire act should falter.

See, the problem with that is it's too reasonable. Conspiracy theories are supposed to be crazy!

Here's one I just came up with that I think the wingnuts will love: the Clintons pushed Clark into the race knowing he'd get the vice presidential nomination on a Dean/Clark ticket. If they win the White House, the Clintons plan to have Dean assasinated and Hillary will be installed as Clark's Karl Rove! Bwaaaaa-ha-ha-haaaaaa!

Oh, Christ, this is going to appear on NewsMax now, isn't it.

Get Your F-ing War On

Get Your War On page 28 is up, in which you will learn the difference between:

"The Bush administration has exercised a troubling reluctance to seek genuine international support before manifesting its doctrine of preventive self-defense."

and

"Did I expect George Bush to fuck it up as badly as he did? I don't think anybody did."

Yowza

Via Daily Kos I see Dean is polling at 42% in Iowa.

That's... that's a lot.

I'm SHOCKED!

Pentagon Audit Finds Halliburton Overcharged

Shocked anyone in the Pentagon was ballsey enough to raise the issue.

"Oooh, CLM, dude! Career... Limiting... Move!"

Who gets it?

Atrios gets it.

Chris gets it.

Lane gets it.

Billmon doesn't get it.

Is Bush beatable? Unless you believe he's doing the best possible job that can be done of course he's beatable.

Is Dean electable? See previous paragraph.

ADDENDUM:

Roger Ailes (the good one) gets it.

Steve Gilliard gets it. (although I don't think he's mastered the permalink yet - you have to scroll down to "Missing the point".)

And reading Steve's post, I occurred to me that someone should ask Dick Gephardt why the fuck he thinks Dean can't beat Bush, given that he's the one who called Bush "a miserable failure." Nitwit. That dumb-ass play in itself should disqualify the rest of the field.

The right answer was "ANY ONE OF US COULD BEAT HIM."

This is why Dean is kicking their asses.

ADDENDUM II (12/12/03): Bob Herbert gets it. (Link via Interesting Times.)

ADDENDUM III: Hesiod gets it.

ADDENDUM IV: More!

Jesse at Pandagon gets it.

Michael Tomasky gets it. (Link via Dean's Blog for America.)

The right way and a wrong way

U.S. Calls Iraq Contract Restrictions Appropriate

The United States said on Wednesday its decision to bar Iraq war opponents like France, Germany and Russia from $18.6 billion in U.S. reconstruction projects was appropriate and a reward for U.S. supporters.

This stance is morally bankrupt for two reasons.

First, it means those countries will have no incentive to provide troops and no incentive to support the process at all. More pressure on the U.S. militarily, politically and financially.

Second, and this is the one that never gets talked about because if you question any of the tenents of capitalism YOU'RE A GODLESS COMMUNIST, but by providing a no-compete zone to U.S. companies, you're making this type of occupation all the more attractive to them.

Let's be honest, corporations do not have souls. They exist to maximize the profits of their shareholders. Now, there's nothing wrong with that, until it starts bleeding over into, in this case, international conflict. By saying to U.S. corporations, "When we invade and occupy a country, YOU get the spoils exclusively!" you are inviting them to support this kind of thing in the future.

That is bad. Incenting U.S. corporations to support adminstrations that seek out invasions and occupations is categorically a bad thing. It also seems to be the other, uncomfortable, side of this story no one wants to bring up.

The shallow view is one that says we fought the war, we took the risks, we should reap the rewards. That is the administration's view.

"These are countries that have been with us from day one. These are countries that are contributing forces, that have been making sacrifices, and that's why this decision was made," McClellan said.

A more thoughtful, long-term view would be one that says:

• We are big enough to compete with companies from other countries.
• We are interested in doing this in a manner that puts as little financial burden on us and the Iraqis as possible.
• We want to get as many countries as possible invested in this process.
• We don't want to provide companies in our country with bad incentives.

In other words, a view that looks toward the future instead of holding grudges about what happened in the past. This is not the kind of view you will see from the administration. This is the kind of view the Democratic candidates have.

ADDENDUM (12/12/03): Frederick Maryland at Demagogue has an excellent collection of quotes taking the administration to task on this.

(Edited for spelling.)

Jesus

I didn't see the debate, but Atrios says it took Ted Koppel 19 questions before he asked anyone about policy.

What a fucking farce. The TV media thinks it's all about the behind-the-scenes machinations.

Policy? Who gives a crap about what someone's positions are? What does Hillary think about Gore jumping behind Dean?! Al Sharpton, what do you think Hillary's doing right now?!

Why I'll never be a candidate

I was thinking about the previous post and about one of Bush's major flip-flops, from being against nation building to getting us involved in some big-time-Dick Cheney's-buddies'-pocket-lining nation building in Iraq. Of course, what conservatives will tell you is that 9/11 "changed everything".

See, I'd just start using that to explain everything I ever changed position on. Changed my position on Medicare? Oh, well, 9/11 "changed everything". My evolving position on free trade? Maybe you haven't heard of a little thing called 9/11, you heartless bastard.

Of course, the other reason I won't ever be a candidate is because I've got a thing for hot monkey sex. In the grand scheme of things, that's probably more of an issue than my penchant for snarky retorts.

It's not that voters will reject me because of it, it's just that I take my interest in hot monkey sex very seriously, so I just don't have the time to run for public office.

The Dean campaign SUCKS!

To hear the AP tell it.

Gore Urges Dems to Unite Behind Dean

Dean hopes the coveted endorsement eases concerns among party leaders about his lack of foreign policy experience, testy temperament, policy flip-flops, campaign miscues and edgy anti-war, antiestablishment message.

Apparently these are verifiable, quantifiable, endemic problems of Dean's campaign. In other words, everything you've been reading in GOP press releases about Dean is true.

I'm sure the AP will provide a similar list of Bush's shortcomings when he gets endorsements.

Cough.

Well, thank GOD!

New Campaign Law Gives Wealthy a Voice

Because for a while there I was worried they'd only have the same voice everyone else had.

Well, OK, I wasn't really.

Wow

Gore to Endorse Howard Dean, Sources Say

If true, this could be a positive sign that the reported rift within the party is not so big as they would like you to believe.

Of course, you can already hear the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity and Scarborough howling about how this is the kiss of death, but, you know, whatever.

Shorter George Will

Dean shows shallowness has no party

"Dean is only as smart as Bush, and neither are as smart as I."

Get Howard Dean!

The tarring of Dean has begun in earnest. Rather than link to those who would tar him, let me link to those who are taking the air out of them.

Horrors! Dean is trying to win the nomination! (from Bad Attitudes)

One question only, for the Washington Post: When will Charles Krauthammer be fired? (from the Daily Howler)

Dean's polls are up all over the place and the right is getting ready to lie through its teeth about the man.

Krauthammer's piece in particular is egregious. It's Al Gore all over again. I encourage you to write to the Post (letters@washpost.com) and let them know we're not going to take it this time.

(Edited for spelling)

Well, FINALLY!

Just got a call from Apple legal. So, it took me two years to figure out where the line is.

With most people it doesn't take me NEARLY that long. I mean, sometimes it's like MINUTES...

They requested I take down an image I altered from their web site where I made it seem like... they were selling holiday stuff for porn aficionados.

Which they're not. Just for the record.

Well, technically, they are... I mean any computer is a nice gift for the porn lover in your family... it's just that they're not specifically targeting that market.

Yet.

Actually, the only reason I picked up the phone was I thought it had something to do with the iBook I have in for repair. If I had known she was with legal I never would have picked up.

No, I'm all to happy to comply with my evil overlords from Cupertino. I'm a big fan of their work. If I had really liked the joke I might have thought about it but, frankly, today I was phoning it in.

And... plus... Apple legal. I don't need that kind of trouble.

Intellectually dishonest Hannity

I'm watching the tape of Hannity and Colmes from the Daily Show last night. Hannity, shortly after proclaiming himself an intellectually honest conservative, performed a popular intellectually dishonest conservative switcheroo.

Asked why he supported the president, he said it was because Bush stood up to terrorists. When Jon Stewart suggested that invading Iraq was more of a distraction to the war on terrorism than a part of it, Hannity started talking about mass graves.

Why don't you liberals care about the poor Iraqis!?!?

Uh, well, gee, you were just talking about terrorism... so... I started talking about terrorism, and then... uh... what were we talking about again?

Stewart rightly said "Yeah, but then we have to take over Africa and North Korea and then, at a certain point, you run out of National Guard."

Some In Ohio May Vote Safe

Ohio Halts E-Voting Machines

The state's top elections official said Tuesday that security problems found in new touch-screen voting systems mean they won't be in place statewide in time for the November 2004 presidential election.

But they will be in use in some counties.

What were the security problems?

Companies that tested the security systems of the four machine types found software that permits votes to be counted more than once, and a risk that unauthorized poll workers or others could gain access to the system.

Identical passwords were discovered for more than one poll worker, while voting booth cases did not provide for locks, leaving a risk of tampering during transportation of ballots.

Each of the voting systems provided by the four vendors -- Diebold Election Systems, Sequoia Voting Systems, Election Systems & Software and Maximus/Hart Intercivic/DFM Associates -- has multiple but not identical problems, Blackwell said. (Emphasis mine)

Keyboards

Recently my lower back has been bugging me, mostly because of my cyclical lack of exercise (I'll get to it! I'll get to it!), but also because my desk arrangement has been less than ergonomic.

I hope to have one of these before the holiday is out. In the mean time, my PowerBook is perched on my Panther box which is on top of my Jaguar box. Not exactly stylish, but it's higher and that's the goal, ergonomically speaking. My Kensington Studio Mouse is plugged into the lousy keyboard that came with my 400 MHz PowerMac G4 and that's plugged into the PowerBook.

Does anyone have any keyboard recommendation? I have an Adesso split-key jobbie that I use with the PowerMac that I like fairly well. Any other recommendations?

Crazy wingers get their day in court

Supreme Court Hears Foster Photo Case

I actually grew up in the house next to Robert Fiske and his family. He was the first Whitewater investigator, the one that hadn't cut his palm with a knife and sworn a blood oath to get Bill Clinton no matter the cost. He was the good one.

I knew Mr. Fiske (and his son Bob, or "Frisky" as my brother and his friends used to call him) and my parents know him quite well and I have an extremely favorable opinion of him. So I have more than one reason to take exception to the crackpots who, because they can imagine something happened, think they know better than a respected district attorney who never backed down from a chance to take on mobsters - guys who actually do kill their enemies. Yes, the crackpots would have you believe that after a long career taking on organized crime, one in which he was sure to have ample opportunity to either run away scared or turn the other way for fabulous cash prizes, Fiske, a Republican, finally decided to do one or the other... for the Clintons.

This is the kind of theory guys like Allan Favish are pushing.

Multiple investigations determined that a depressed Vincent Foster shot himself in the head, but California attorney Allan Favish and some others say he may have been murdered as part of a cover-up by the Clinton administration.

Ah, yes. Murdered to cover up... that stuff that was... investigated at great expense by a highly partisan Republican (Starr, who replaced Fiske when Rehnquist decided Fiske wasn't fanatical enough) for years on end without finding any wrongdoing other than lying about consensual sex.

That cover-up.

So... they murdered him... to cover up... nothing.

Uhhhhhhhh... huh.

The Bush administration is, of course, coming down on the side of keeping the photographs private, mostly because they'd prefer it if all government documents were private, at least right now. I'd have to say I'm more for government openness than not and if these clowns want to waste their time and money trying to prove the Clintons are evil lectoids from the eighth dimension, well, it keeps them off the backs of the Democrats currently running for president. But it's hard to get worked up about government openness when these people are either insane or so obsessed with getting Bill Clinton they'll try anything.

Or both. It's probably both.

But Scalia was playing Randy Newman's "You've Got A Friend In Me" to the crackpots on his wacky whistle flute.

While Scalia seemed at times sympathetic to Favish, there was skepticism from many of the other justices.

Why does that not surprise me?

ATTORNEY: Your honor, opposing counsel is clearly out of his gourd. We ask that his repeated incantations to Gorto the Evil Clown God requesting him to afflict Bill Clinton with boils, something called "gigantic eyeball syndrome" and the condition known as "hotdog fingers" be stricked from the record.
SCALIA: Hmm. Yes. Yes, he is out of his gourd, counsellor. But... I'd like to see where he's going with this. I'm going to allow it.

Here's an actual gem from the article, though:

"It is a difficult argument to make that Judge Starr conspired with members of the Clinton administration" in the death, Hamilton told Scalia.

"Mr. Starr might have been protecting (Former House Speaker) Newt Gingrich," Scalia replied, drawing laughter from the courtroom. "We really don't know."

Is he kidding or is he just grasping at any possible explanation that might drag on the witchhunting of the Clintons?

I'm guessing it's the latter.

The good professor's impeccable logic

Via Atrios I learned that Glenn Reynolds believes that because Valerie Plame is appearing in Vanity Fair in a picture that won't identify her, the whole incident of her being "outed" by administration sources is "bogus."

Fair enough. But, then, here are some other events Glenn Reynolds must now declare "bogus":

• Lance Armstrong's bout with cancer (Just how much DID he get paid to be on the Wheaties box and to do those TV commercials? J'accuse!)
• The Central Park mugging and rape case (She wrote a book about her experience so, clearly, how could she be a victim?)
• Jessica Lynch's capture by Iraqis (We all know what SHE did.)

See, this is why I don't read Instapundit.

It's unavoidable

This disgusting display as detailed on the Daily Howler is a prime example of why it does no good to try to watch what you say and do to try to keep the Republicans from attacking you. Senator Clinton said exactly the right things - praised the troops, even complimented Bush - and she gets attacked as being "un-American".

Of course, Hillary is a favorite target, but remember, they will do it to anyone, as Max Clelland found out.

October surprise

Take one Republican congressman's loose talk (via TPM), the speculation of a political scientist about an October surprise, shake well, and you've got a delicious left wing conspiracy theory!

Of course, I don't see why catching Saddam Hussein would provide a huge boost to Bush's numbers. You could argue that he should have been caught months ago and, if I remember correctly (and I do), the war was still waged under false pretenses.

Hesiod presents: "What double standard?!"

Hesiod points out the uncomfortable double standard inherent in the "we had to help those poor Iraqis!" argument.

And, while you're over there, read this fun post and the comments.

Republican nut job not to run

N.C.'s Ballenger Won't Seek Re-Election

Republican Rep. Cass Ballenger, who stirred controversy with criticism of an American Muslim group and a black congresswoman, said Tuesday he will retire rather than seek re-election to a 10th term in Congress next year.

"Criticism"? Actually, it was more like paranoid delusion bordering on slander brought on by a desire to absolve himself of blame for failures in his personal life.

You remember Ballenger, right?

In October, he blamed the breakup of his 50-year marriage on the stress of living near a leading American Muslim advocacy group and on a 1995 decision by House Republicans to ban gifts from lobbyists.

Aw. I'm gonna miss him, the big lug.

OK, one more thing on the iPod video

John Gruber's provided an excellent list of Alternative Stencil Slogans for the 'Neistat Brothers'.

Krugman

On Diebold (via Atrios).

To my knowledge, he's the first of the "big columnists" to write about it, hence the opening reference to a story most of the blogging community heard months ago. Glad to read he's going to write again about it, too.

Laziness on the Mac web

MacNN gets it wrong in its latest blurb about the iPod smear.

How can it be both a smear and a "problem with the popular music player"? Either the accusation is true or it's false.

And, as we know, the accusation is false. If MacNN did five seconds of research they'd know that. It's the laziness of sites that simply regurgitate press releases that results in misleading garbage like this.

UPDATE: Casey Niestat has a new message up on the web site offering further explanation and stating he thinks Apple's new policy is fair. Despite his experience, people DO replace their iPod batteries successfully with third-party options. Maybe his problem wasn't with the battery at all. Frankly, the manner in which this was presented doesn't lend him any credibility. Anyway, this will hopefully be the end of it.

There

Sen. Clinton Urges Bigger U.S. Presence In Iraq

U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton said on Monday the United States needed a "bigger presence" in Iraq and urged the Bush administration to seek U.N. involvement to give more legitimacy to rebuilding efforts there.

Think Friedman will shut up now?

Yeah, neither do I.

He won't be happy until anti-war demonstrators carry signs that are twenty feet high and include detailed plans in 9-point font on how to implement democracy throughout the Middle East, ending with a nice note to President Bush thanking him for the opportunity.