Sunday, May 28, 2006

 

Our Leader's E-Z Darfur Solution


 

Memorial Day Security Feeling....

So Judy Miller was told by a White House leaker of the possibility of 9/11 but W denies any advance knowledge.

God, that makes me feel so secure. And this is the national security party. Or the Nat/Se Party. So to speak.

Wonderful.

 

Marriage, Clinton Style


It's, what, 15-odd (hmmm) years since we all got a sense that the Clinton marriage wasn't 100% traditional (of course disregarding the extent to which, God forbid, maybe it worked for them)?

So why a front-pager at the N.Y Times? (I feel generous for the Memorial Day weekend; article's below.)

Still no answer.

But both the equal time and glass houses provisions require a look at Times Exec. Ed. Bill Keller's pathetically common approach to marriage:

Walk out on a pregnant wife: here and here and here and here and here and here and here and, with Slick Willie's response, here (the Dems' piece is particularly, delightfully snarky).

And here's this major, insightful, necessary page 1 story:

May 23, 2006

For Clintons, Delicate Dance of Married and Public Lives

Bill and Hillary Clinton flew to Chicago together last month to deliver speeches a few hours and a few miles apart. And like any couple, they thought about having dinner at day's end. But life is not so simple when you are married to a Clinton.

The former president kept a low profile and left early for Washington, in part to avoid distracting the news media from his wife's speech. They decided later that dinner would not work, so Mr. Clinton did what he often does: He rounded up some familiar faces — former aides including Joe Lockhart and Mike McCurry — and went out for a late bite at Lauriol Plaza, the bustling Tex-Mex restaurant in Dupont Circle. Only afterward did the Clintons end up at home together.

Mr. Clinton is rarely without company in public, yet the company he keeps rarely includes his wife. Nights out find him zipping around Los Angeles with his bachelor buddy, Ronald W. Burkle, or hitting parties and fund-raisers in Manhattan; she is yoked to work in Washington or New York — her Senate career and political ambitions consuming her time.

When the subject of Bill and Hillary Clinton comes up for many prominent Democrats these days, Topic A is the state of their marriage — and how the most dissected relationship in American life might affect Mrs. Clinton's possible bid for the presidency in 2008.

Democrats say it is inevitable that in a campaign that could return the former president to the White House, some voters would be concerned or distracted by Mr. Clinton's political role and the episode that led the House to vote for his impeachment in 1998.

"There's no question that it's a complicated candidacy for a lot of voters because of the history of that relationship and what they've been through," said Leon E. Panetta, Mr. Clinton's chief of staff from 1994 to 1997. "They've been through a lot of challenges as a couple, though in the end if you're with them together, you know there's something there that basically bonds them."

The dynamics of a couple's marriage are hard to gauge from the outside, even for a couple as well known as the Clintons. But interviews with some 50 people and a review of their respective activities show that since leaving the White House, Bill and Hillary Clinton have built largely separate lives — partly because of the demands of their distinct career paths and partly as a result of political calculations.

The effect has been to raise Senator Clinton's profile on the public radar while somewhat toning down Mr. Clinton's; he has told friends that his No. 1 priority is not to cause her any trouble. They appear in the public spotlight methodically and carefully: The goal is to position Mrs. Clinton to run for president not as a partner or a proxy, but as her own person.

Many of those interviewed were granted anonymity to discuss a relationship for which the Clintons have long sought a zone of privacy. The Clintons and, for the most part, their aides declined to cooperate for this article and urged others not to cooperate as well. Their spokesmen, Jay Carson (his) and Philippe Reines (hers), provided a statement about the relationship:

"She is an active senator who, like most members of Congress, has to be in Washington for part of most weeks. He is a former president running a multimillion-dollar global foundation. But their home is in New York, and they do everything they can to be together there or at their house in D.C. as often as possible — often going to great lengths to do so. When their work schedules require that they be apart they talk all the time."

Since the start of 2005, the Clintons have been together about 14 days a month on average, according to aides who reviewed the couple's schedules. Sometimes it is a full day of relaxing at home in Chappaqua; sometimes it is meeting up late at night. At their busiest, they saw each other on a single day, Valentine's Day, in February 2005 — a month when each was traveling a great deal. Last August, they saw each other at some point on 24 out of 31 days. Out of the last 73 weekends, they spent 51 together. The aides declined to provide the Clintons' private schedule.

Aides say the two want as much private time together as possible; last fall, for instance, Mr. Clinton left Manhattan for home to squeeze in a few hours with Mrs. Clinton before turning around for a flight out of Newark. Mr. Clinton has told his staff that he would rather not be in Washington when his wife is not there, aides said.

Friends — eager to smooth any rough edges on the relationship — tell old-married-couple stories of them gardening, playing Scrabble, and dining out at Le Cirque, Rasika, and Bayou in Harlem with old pals like the former party leader Terry McAuliffe, the power broker Vernon Jordan and others. On Christmas Eve, they wandered through the near-empty Chappaqua Village Market together, noticed by the occasional fellow shopper.

Public Distance

Rarely, however, do the Clintons appear in public when they are together. That is largely driven by their careers, but it is also partly by choice. Mr. Clinton has become involved in a legion of causes that have taken him out of the country, like as AIDS in Africa and third-world poverty. He sometimes takes part in her strategy sessions, but the sensitivity about his political role is so great that her advisers differed on his influence and frequency of participation — though all agreed that at home, his sway is felt.

Yet in choosing to keep their public lives separate, people around the Clintons say, there is a political calculus at work, beyond the natural evolution in a marriage that has had plenty of stresses and betrayals.

Mrs. Clinton may be the only Democrat in America who cannot look at Bill Clinton as an unalloyed political asset. He is a complicated figure for his wife, who has grown from a controversial first lady, while intertwined with him, into a popular senator by standing on her own two feet.

"Her national appeal and national strength is not based upon her relationship with Bill Clinton, but her extraordinary stature and success as a U.S. senator," said Robert Zimmerman, a Democratic donor and supporter of the couple.

Democrats preparing for 2008 describe the political challenge this way: Mrs. Clinton could prosper as a presidential candidate, yet the return of "the Clintons" could revive memories including the oft-derided two-for-the-price-of-one appeal of his 1992 presidential campaign, Mrs. Clinton's role in the universal health care debacle, and the soap opera of infidelity.

Because of Mr. Clinton's behavior in the White House, tabloid gossip sticks to him like iron filings to a magnet. Several prominent New York Democrats, in interviews, volunteered that they became concerned last year over a tabloid photograph showing Mr. Clinton leaving B.L.T. Steak in Midtown Manhattan late one night after dining with a group that included Belinda Stronach, a Canadian politician. The two were among roughly a dozen people at a dinner, but it still was enough to fuel coverage in the gossip pages.

Private Worries

Just as it is difficult to predict how voters would feel about Mrs. Clinton as a presidential candidate, Clinton advisers say, it is hard to foresee how they would judge the Clintons' baggage in the context of their third White House bid.

"There are a lot of people who will work for her if she runs for president and who are worried about the relationship," said Lanny J. Davis, an old friend of the Clintons' and a lawyer who helped see the president through his scandals in the White House. "The conventional wisdom is that the relationship might hurt her — all those old memories and scandals will be evoked. But I'm betting, and maybe this is wishful thinking, that that's not correct."

Donna Brazile, a Democratic political strategist, said it was impossible to deal the former president out of any bid by his wife, especially given Mr. Clinton's high profile.

"At the same time, voters aren't interested in the Clintons as a couple as much as they're interested in what Mrs. Clinton is doing or saying," she said.

Still, it was only a few years ago that the Clinton relationship was the stuff of best-selling books and saucy debates on television talk shows. In private, too, the marriage was under a microscope when the Clintons sought counseling, as Mrs. Clinton disclosed in her memoirs. Some of their friends said when they left the White House, they also tried to leave behind the bad blood of the scandal caused by Mr. Clinton's involvement with Monica S. Lewinsky, a White House intern. But other friends said they saw tension and disappointment in the marriage. For a time the new senator considered Washington home, putting energy into work and entertaining at the new Clinton mansion on Embassy Row, while Mr. Clinton hunkered down in New York to write his memoirs and work on new projects.

"Over time she came to consider Chappaqua home, too, and she likes spending time there with the president when they can find the time," said one longtime friend of the couple's, who was granted anonymity because the Clintons did not want this person to speak. "That says a lot about the state of their marriage.

"She needs to be in her own separate orbit, so if something explodes in his world, she will have at least some space and distance to manage it," this friend said.

Some friends say that they do not notice any tension now, though they are not sure when, or how, it lifted.

"Who knows how any couple conquers the issues in their marriage, but they did it," said Chris Korge, a Democratic fund-raiser who is close to both Clintons. "It's like when he bought her a new diamond ring recently, you just saw the look in her face. When someone shows you something like that, 'This is what Bill bought me,' kind of gleaming, it meant something to get it — it meant more to her that he bought it for her than what it actually was."

Yet even now, the couple is on a constant learning curve about the interplay of politics and their marriage. When the Clintons appeared at Coretta Scott King's funeral in February, several Democrats remarked that the former president's emotive tone and remarks were pitch perfect — and that Mrs. Clinton sounded starchy by comparison.

Partly as a result, Mr. Clinton is often sent to political events on his own, instead of introducing her, standing by her side, or sitting raptly at her important speeches like an admiring spouse. Alan Patricof, a New York fund-raiser who is an ally of the Clintons, said it was Mr. Clinton's solo appearances on behalf of his wife that made both of them sparkle, such as at a recent fund-raiser that Mr. Patricof attended.

"It was all about Hillary, about why she was an effective senator, how hard she was working," he said.

Approaching 60 and with major heart surgery not yet two years behind him, Mr. Clinton has been more reflective in public about the marriage than Mrs. Clinton, who is 58.

When they appeared together at a Manhattan fund-raiser in December, the former president said he had sometimes "kicked myself" for encouraging her to run for office. There were times he wished she were not in the Senate so they could travel more, learn more, he said.

When Mrs. Clinton joined him onstage, Mr. Clinton gave her a kiss on the forehead, and then stepped away. Mrs. Clinton appeared a little choked up. Moments later, as she recalled their 30 years of marriage, she looked out into the dimly lighted room to try to find him.

"I'm so grateful to you, Bill, wherever you are," she said.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company



I mean, a little perspective: This is a paper that still thinks imbecilic hagiography of the worse president ever, particularly during an election campaign, is justifiable.

And Atrios graces the reader with an alternative:

Monday, May 22, 2006

State of Candidates' Marriages A Question for Republicans

The article not running in the Times tomorrow.

Washington, DC, May 23 - Republicans say it is inevitable that some voters would be concerned and even distracted by the numerous personal indiscretions of the various candidates likely to seek the office of president, and express concern about whether they would be likely to repeat such behavior while in the White House.

While former New York mayor Rudi Giuliani's popularity increased after the events of September 11, pushing his personal issues into the background, Republicans worry he would bring to the White House the kind of activities which marred his tenure at Gracie Mansion.

Giuiliani's behavior led to a judge barring the presence of Judith Nathan, with whom he began having an affair during his last term as mayor, from the mayoral home. The judge's order also criticized Giuliani for the emotional harm he inflicted on his children.

Twice-married Virginia Senator George Allen faces questions over claimed sadistic treatment of his siblings and his fondness for confederate memorabilia despite his having grown up in California. While divorce alone may not disqualify him from the ballot in Republican voters' eyes - they overlooked it in 1980 when Ronald Reagan became the first, and only, divorced man to be elected president - it is still expected to impact his standing with conservative religious voters. Senator McCain of Arizona is in a similar position.

Thrice-married former Speaker of the House New Gingrich also concerns Republicans as he gears up for a potential presidential run. Gingrich, currently 62, began dating his geometry teacher, and future wife, while he was still in high school. He later served her divorce papers at her hospital bed where she was receiving treatment for cancer. He divorced his second wife after it was revealed that he had been having a long-running affair with a staffer 23 years younger than him during the Clinton impeachment saga.

-Atrios

And wait a second! What about the perfect marriage between the dry drunk and the killer drunk driver -- W and his Missus?

Equal time and fairness and the reader's convenience (and prosperity) all require running the entire piece:

Coming soon to The New York Times? Globe reports Bush marriage breakup

Summary: In Patrick Healy's recent front-page New York Times article on the state of the Clintons' marriage, Healy noted that a "tabloid photograph" of former President Bill Clinton "was enough to fuel coverage in the gossip pages." Media Matters does not endorse the decision by elite media figures to take their cues from tabloids, but if they do so, we expect them to be consistent. As it happens, the cover of the May 29 edition of the Globe magazine contains a headline about another high-profile political couple: "BUSH MARRIAGE BREAKUP! EXCLUSIVE! SEPARATE LIVES IN THE WHITE HOUSE."

In his May 23 front-page article in The New York Times, staff writer Patrick Healy asserted that "[w]hen the subject of Bill and Hillary Clinton comes up for many prominent Democrats these days, Topic A is the state of their marriage" and how it "might affect Mrs. Clinton's possible bid for the presidency in 2008." Healy offered no specific reasons for this purported interest among "prominent Democrats" aside from the amount of time the Clintons spent apart, a mention of a decade-old affair, and a reference to year-old "concern[]" over a "tabloid photograph showing Mr. Clinton leaving B.L.T. Steak in Midtown Manhattan late one night after dining with a group that included Belinda Stronach, a Canadian politician." Healy continued: "The two were among roughly a dozen people at a dinner, but it still was enough to fuel coverage in the gossip pages."

It was also enough to fuel a front-page New York Times article, and the rapt attention of the Washington press corps, as Media Matters has documented.

Healy did not identify the "tabloid" in question, but he seems to be referring to the Globeheadline about Clinton and Stronach that read "Bill caught with blonde AGAIN! New divorce battle with Hillary." magazine, which in the spring of 2005 ran a

Media Matters does not endorse the decision by The New York Times, NBC's Tim Russert, MSNBC's Chris Matthews, The Washington Post's David Broder, and countless other elite media figures to take their cues from tabloids like the Globe, or to pry into the personal lives of political figures. But if they are going to do so, we expect them to be consistent.

As it happens, the cover of the May 29 edition of the Globe contains another sensational headline about another high-profile political couple:

BUSH MARRIAGE BREAKUP!

EXCLUSIVE!

SEPARATE LIVES IN THE WHITE HOUSE

  • Nasty fights
  • Booze problems
  • Laura urges counseling

On Pages 20 and 21, the Globe announces "Bush and Laura's 29-year marriage FALLS APART," adding: "They barely talk to each other," "[t]hey argue when they do speak," and "[s]he's afraid he'll hit the bottle." Quotes in the article attributed to "a longtime friend" include the assertion that "[w]hen the cameras aren't on, they have nothing to do with one another," and that "[f]or all practical purposes, they've broken up." The "family friend" continues: "After their last fight over booze, they just stopped talking -- period." The Globe's report that Laura Bush is concerned that President Bush may "hit the bottle" is reminiscent of a September 21, 2005, National Enquirer article about "Bush's booze crisis," which reported: "Faced with the biggest crisis of his political life, President Bush has hit the bottle again."

Media Matters wonders when we can expect The New York Times to assign a reporter to tally the number of nights the Bushes spend together and to conduct 50 interviews with Republicans to assess their interest in the state of the Bush marriage, or in President Bush's reported relapse -- and when it will run a 2,000-word front-page article on the topic. If it does so, we wonder if Broder will refer to the article as "anything but unsympathetic" to the Bushes.

— J.F.

Posted to the web on Friday May 26, 2006 at 12:05 PM EST



Thursday, May 25, 2006

 

The National Review's Greatest Hits

Or you could say Why it' the choice of discriminating people.

From Brad DeLong's blog:

It was the culmination of a weekend of demonstrations against the admission of a Negro.... [T]he nation cannot get away with feigning surprise at the fact that... the demonstration became ugly and uncontrolled. For in defiance of constitutional practice, with a total disregard of custom and tradition, the Supreme Court a year ago illegalized a whole set of deeply-rooted folkways and mores...

The statute... a law the Reconstruction Congress enacted in 1871.... [T]he President can send in troops... only when... the local authorities must have shown themselves either unable or unwilling to deal with the situation. Yet the authorities in Birmingham [police chief "Bull" Connor and Governor George Wallace] apparently did have the matter under control before Kennedy pushed the button...

[T]he legality of the 14th amendment.... The argument that it was improperly ratified is historically irrefragable...

Martin Luther King will never rouse a rabble; in fact, I doubt very much if he could keep a rabble awake... past its bedtime...

Martin Luther King... [his] lecture... delivered with all the force and fervor of the five-year-old who nightly recites: "Our Father, Who art in New Haven, Harold be Thy name"...

The central question... is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes.... National Review believes that the South's premises are correct...

The axiom... was Universal Suffrage. Everyone in America is entitled to the vote.... That, of course, is demagogy.... The great majority of the Negroes of the South who do not vote do not care to vote, and would not know for what to vote if they could...

Bush and Rice are... wrong to insist that support for democracy... [is] support for elections. In reality, supporting democracy... means supporting democrats.... In countries where [democrats] speak for substantial numbers of their fellows as, Walesa and Havel did, it makes sense to press for elections. In countries where they are more akin to lone voices, crying in the wilderness, it does not...

NOT THAT I WANT TO OFFEND ANYBODY [Jonah Goldberg] But it would be pretty cool if Fox... repeatedly referred to the hurricane as Katrina vanden Heuvel. "The destruction from Katrina vanden Heuvel is expected to be massive." "...the poor and disabled are particularly likely to suffer from the effects of Katrina vanden Heuvel ...." "Coming up: how to explain Katrina vanden Heuvel to your children"...

Lincoln was the Caesar Lincoln claimed to be trying to prevent; and that the Caesarism we all need to fear is the contemporary [Civil Rights] movement, dedicated like Lincoln to egalitarian reforms sanctioned by mandates emanating from national majorities...

Francisco Franco was our century's most successful ruler.... [H]e outstayed all his great contemporaries, friend and enemy: Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Churchill, Eisenhower, de Gaulle.... Franco commanded the winning side in a ferocious civil war... held Spain aloof from World War II...

The whole concept of "fascism" for that matter has been a fraud from the beginning. Like "peaceful coexistence" and "detente," it is a tactical invention of the Soviet Agitprop, and boils down in practice to the simple definition: fascism is any regime that outlaws Communism...

[Francisco] Franco is a part, and an integral part, of Western civilization... [the] convergence of the multifarious political philosophical, religious, and cultural tendencies that have shaped Spanish history... the man to whom the Spanish people look--as the Chinese have looked to Chiang [Kaishek], for all his faults--for leadership...

The Communists, in fact, invented the term "McCarthyism," and devised most of the ideology that went with it.... The liberals, on a roaring civil rights jag... lowered their guard and the Communists closed.... "[A]nti-McCarthyism" as a movement... was a united front, the broadest and most successful the Communists have ever catalyzed in this country...

[T]he bayonets have displaced the law in Little Rock.... General Walker is in Little Rock as the commander of an army of occupation... enforcing unconditional surrender...

What Joe McCarthy was... can[not]... be judged by weighing in the balance the niceness of his discriminations or that tactical acuity of his actions.... His was not a common role. It comes to few men to play it--sometimes to a poet, sometimes to a politician sometimes to someone of no particular position.... Joe McCarthy, who bore witness against the denial of truth that is called moderation, and died for it: "He was a prophet"...

[Joe] McCarthy was in a business that permitted a certain latitude: it was politics, not physics. [Bozell and Buckley say that] "McCarthy's record is... not only much better than his critics allege, but, given his metier, extremely good." Thus he "should not be remembered as the man who didn't produce 57 Communist Party cards but as the man who brought public pressure to bear on the State Department to revise its practices and to eliminate from responsible positions flagrant security risks"...

We cannot avoid the fact that the United States is at war against international Communism, and that McCarthyism is a program of action against those in our land who help the enemy. McCarthyism is... nine parts social sanction to one part legal sanction. But that one part legal sanction is legitimate...

If McCarthy is to be censured for saying he had a list of 57 card-carrying Communists when he did not, what of his nemesis, Senator Millard Tydings, who told the Senate he had in his hand a recording of McCarthy's Wheeling speech when he did not?... What of the many violations of normal standards of procedure and indeed decency committed by the Left? These were never condemned by the Senate, nor were they ever the subject of much attention by the press...

 

Too G@dd@m Bad....

The Times does a rant dissing the Clinton marriage but our beloved leader seems to have his own problems.... From The Globe via firedoglake:

George and Laura Bush’s marriage has collapsed as his approval ratings plummet and a host of mounting personal problems rip the first couple apart and push them to secretly lead separate lives!

GLOBE has learned that while George and Laura still appear as the first couple at various public functions, they hardly speak to one another in private and don’t even want to be in the same room together.

"When the cameras aren’t on, they have nothing to do with one another," a longtime friend confides to GLOBE. "There’s no interaction at all."

"For all practical purposes, they’ve broken up."

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

 

Just Click and Go

Go keep th internet free (or as free as it is) and open here.

 

A Big Welcome for Big Brother

The old ATT, at least, is full of crap: it's been rolling over for the NSA.

wired.com has more than you want to know but what you need to know here and more here.

Yes, read it and weep.

Sunday, May 21, 2006

 

Fairness for Nazis and Fascists

Equal time requires us to provide a brief couple of sentences equating our leadership with the Soviet Union.

One of the big shiboleths of the USSR was that party was the state (and hence one party rule was obviously therefor OK.)

You cannot say with any credibility that that is not the goal of the zero-tolerance nutjobs controlling the GOP. Rather, you can say it but you'd be dead wrong.

On the other hand, where the state controlled the economy in the USSR, the economy -- that is, the capitalist state, so to speak -- controls the state. The American government exists to serve business. Indeed, it's the primary focus of the present leadership.

But query whether that's a significant difference: state controls business or business controls state. Or rather, in theory it's a big difference but in practice...? Business control of course results in far greater material wealth but other than that is there any significant benefit to the average citizens?

And while we're despairing, let's remember this:

The good news is that this whole trend of, oh, let's call it GOP neo-fascism, is doomed on the electoral level, even with Diebold in charge -- I hope! But the little disasters the present leadership is planting, as it were, will long survive the current political state.

But the administration is like a cancer. And cancer very often is fatal. A democracy lasts only as long as the people enables it to and I fear we dropped the ball, that we will never recover fully from this administration. And shame on us all for this, those who did us wrong and those of us who allowed it.

Indeed, instead of calling this the Rove/Cheney/Bush Adminstration, we can just call it the Traitor Administration.

 

Grossly Unqualified

Of course, this administration isn't about competence but accumulation of power. If you know what you want to do, of what possible use is a CIA?

Hayden shows here that he knows how to play the game. It doe not require any truth, just parroting a party line. The line: illegal "wire-tapping" would have prevented 9/11. Of course, anyone who's paying any attention, is reality-based and has any recollection knows that is absolutely not true. And it's spelled out here for one cite.

There's some sort of joke here that the rightists will do a better job of destroying right-wing institutions than the left ever could. (It was the right-wing capitalist class that nearly destroyed capitalism in the 20s.)

 

Women, Be Warned!!

New federal guidelines ask all females capable of conceiving a baby to treat themselves -- and to be treated by the health care system -- as pre-pregnant, regardless of whether they plan to get pregnant anytime soon.

Among other things, this means all women between first menstrual period and menopause should take folic acid supplements, refrain from smoking, maintain a healthy weight and keep chronic conditions such as asthma and diabetes under control.

While most of these recommendations are well known to women who are pregnant or seeking to get pregnant, experts say it's important that women follow this advice throughout their reproductive lives, because about half of pregnancies are unplanned and so much damage can be done to a fetus between conception and the time the pregnancy is confirmed.

The recommendations aim to "increase public awareness of the importance of preconception health" and emphasize the "importance of managing risk factors prior to pregnancy," said Samuel Posner, co-author of the guidelines and associate director for science in the division of reproductive health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which issued the report.

(via salon)

 

Well Put

Jane Smiley is of course a professional writer so she of course puts it better than I can or would but she's also, as always, dead spot on:

Let's Pile On Joe

Hey, Joe

I'd like to know, what is an "America-hater"? How come the words "America-hater" always come up when we're talking about people on the left and never come up when we're talking about, say, that percentage of the US population who believes that the world is going to end and they are going to be "raptured up", leaving those Americans who disagree with them behind to suffer indescribable torments on, I suppose, American soil?

Or how about this--was Martin Luther King "an America-hater" like Michael Moore, because he recognized that the US was a two-track nation, with an opportunity track for white people and a dead-end track for black people, and he wanted to change it? Was Woody Guthrie an "America-hater" because he wrote songs like "Deportee" and "This Land is Your Land" and my favorite, "Do Re Me"? Do you qualify as an America-hater if, as I did, you wept at the election of Ronald Reagan, because you knew that the take-over of the government by the corporations was imminent? And speaking of that, why don't you refer to companies who don't pay their corporate income taxes as "America-haters"? Isn't a person who maintains that "Capital" has to be free to move around the world, and can't be kept in America an "America-hater"? And with regard to taxes--there are lots of people on the right in America who hate to pay taxes, who have made a political movement out of not wanting to pay taxes, who gutted the enforcement branch of the IRS in the nineties (I'm talking about Gingrich and his cronies). I think people, especially rich people, who aren't willing to pay taxes ("Club for Growth") hate America, don't you? Let's talk about The Nation magazine. You are willing to specifically designate the writers of The Nation as "America-haters". I read every issue of The Nation. Many times those writers do deplore things that are happening in America, like the rise of the anti-choice movement or the loss of American influence for good in the world because of a failed, misconceived, and tragic war in Iraq, or the closing of the separation between the church and state in America, but does wanting America to do the right thing and avoid the wrong thing qualify as "America-hating"? Did you read the piece about Pete Seeger in this week's New Yorker? According to that piece, Pete Seeger has always believed that "All men are created equal", and that has offended people for years. Does quoting the Declaration of Independence qualify as "America-hating"? You would surely call me, as a Nation reader and a fan of Michael Moore an "America-hater", so let me fan the fire. The other night I watched the old Cagney movie, "Yankee Doodle Dandy". At the beginning of that movie, war begins, and you see newpapers lying in the streets with the headline "Congress votes to go to War, 378-0". I guess you would say that it is an example of my "America-hating" nature that it made me sick to see those headlines and reflect that Bush and his friends never even bothered to declare war in the consitutional fashion, but just usurped the powers of the Congress and sent the army to fail and die in Iraq. And speaking of that, wouldn't you call someone who referred to the Constitution as "just a god-damned piece of paper" an America-hater? I would--George W. Bush, who made that remark (according to Karen Kwiatkowski, who posted it on this board) is an America-hater in my book. And Grover Norquist, who wants to drown and strangle the Federal government in a bathtub qualifies as an America-hater, too. And Tom Delay, who set out to corrupt the government beyond repair--well, that's a good example of "America-hating". And Sam Brownback, who is taking instruction in right-wing Catholicism and hopes to turn the US into a christian theocracy, according to Rolling Stone--there's "America-hating' in spades.
Let me tell you something about "America-hating". When I was a kid in St. Louis, Missouri, my grandparents epitomized what I thought American was. My grandfather, whose family had come to Virginia in the early 1600's, and who himself had homesteaded in Idaho in the 1920s, knew what seemed like every folk song and every Civil War song there was. When he sang "Sweet Betsey from Pike" or "Shenandoah" as we drove over the Missouri River not far from where it emptied into the Mississippi, I saw in my imagination the whole country unfolding around me, in every direction, up and down the Mississippi from St. Paul to New Orleans, up the Ohio to Pittsburgh, out the Missouri to Montana. It was thrilling to know that the Graveses and the Jeffersons had set out in every generation to find a life somewhere in America between Virginia and California, and for the most part, they had succeeded--middle class people with a sense of freedom and ambition, making their way for hundreds of years. My grandmother had a family odyssey, too. Her grandfather was an abolitionist and her father was a progressive newspaper editor who interviewed Jesse James when he was in jail in Minnesota. Her mother was a Norwegian immigrant who left Norway for Minnesota by herself when she was sixteen. I adored my grandparents and I felt supremely lucky to be an American. But along with this luck, I soon realized, came the responsibility to be vigilant about what was being done in America and to America in my name, and in their names.

So, Joe Klein, I wonder if you've noticed in the last five years that in the name of patriotism, the right wing has decimated the treasury, broken the army, wrecked the bureaucracy, silenced the media, gelded the opposition party, handed the public lands over to private interests to exploit as they please, dirtied the air and water, impoverished the working class, damaged the schools, outsourced the jobs, and laid waste to the public health. You haven't said much about that, but that's what I call America-hating.

Friday, May 19, 2006

 

Another Traitorus Hater of Democracy

Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, President Bush's nominee to run the Central Intelligence Agency, appeared before lawmakers considering his appointment and offered a stout defense of the government's domestic surveillance programs. The nominee said that after thousands of Americans died in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, "I had to make this personal decision ... the math was pretty straightforward. I could not not do this." He said the government used a "probable cause" standard that made it unlikely that average Americans would come under surveillance, and emphasized that "we always balance privacy and security."


(Quoted from an online Wall Street Journal column.)

Sure, he had no alternative, the liar:

Michael Hayden will face all sorts of questions at his confirmation hearing today, and here's one that ought to be at the top of the list: Shortly after 9/11, did your National Security Agency kill a Clinton-era surveillance program that might have allowed it to analyze huge amounts of communications data without violating privacy laws?

The Baltimore Sun says the answer is yes. According to a report by the Sun's Siobhan Gorman, the NSA shelved the program, called "ThinThread," because of what one official called "turf protection and empire building."

As Gorman explains, the NSA's ThinThread program involved the collection and automated analysis of phone and e-mail records in encrypted form. To alleviate privacy concerns, human analysts could request decryption of specific records only after the NSA's computers identified a pattern or a threat. The system also contained an automated auditing function that would have prevented analysts from misusing the data that was being collected.

Gorman's sources says ThinThread underwent "rigorous testing" in 1998 and got "high marks" for everything it was supposed to do. So what happened to it? After 9/11, Gorman says, Hayden's NSA shelved the program "because of bureaucratic infighting and a sudden White House expansion of the agency's surveillance powers." Translated: NSA officials didn't want to pursue the program because they thought it would "humiliate" another program, called Trailblazer, that Hayden himself had initiated.

The result? Gorman says the NSA is now working with a program that is less useful and more intrusive than ThinThread would have been. "Without ThinThread's data-sifting assets," Gorman says, "the warrantless surveillance program was left with a sub-par tool for sniffing out information, and that has diminished the quality of its analysis, according to intelligence officials."

-- Tim Grieve

And it goes without saying -- in a normal world, I mean, as opposed to here in Bizarro Amurica -- that an active-duty military man per se de not belong in the position of Director, Central Intelligence.

Sunday, May 14, 2006

 

A Traitor

Outs a covert intel agent for partisan reasons. Without assets on the ground (we don't know, of course, but in all liklihood we hane no significant assets), an anonmyous agent is of significant value.

In a reality- and fact-based world, you never expose an agent like that. There is never justification.

But in Bushydo, it's all about partisanship and, ultimately, your wallet. Peace and security don't matter.

That is, you do what's good for you, not what's good for your country and the world.

When your de facto president of the U.S., that's inexcuseable.

It is in fact treasonous.

 

A Faker and a Liar

Just in case anyone still has any doubt that John McCain is in any way worth considering as president, the answer is:

Absolutely not.

Straight talk my @$$. He as dishonest as any of them and as a politician is an absolute coward, a water carrier for the anti-democratic establishmnt.

 

They're All Clueless

Even Atrios:

UnAmerican

Dick Cheney hates this country:

WASHINGTON, May 12 — In the weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, Vice President Dick Cheney and his top legal adviser argued that the National Security Agency should intercept purely domestic telephone calls and e-mail messages without warrants in the hunt for terrorists, according to two senior intelligence officials.

-Atrios


For these people, it's all about power and the wealth-tapping, so to speak, that comes with it. America means NOTHING to them other than that. That's why they can steal elections without inhibition. It's why a radical right Justice of the Supreme Court can write a decision saying that the decision is legally wrong but they're making it because it's the decision they want to make.

But for a matter of degree, they are like the Nazis in the early 1930s: Democracy is merely a means to an end -- accumulation of absolute power -- and once the end is met, there is no longer than any need for anything democratice. Democracy goes, the police state comes.

These guys are little different.

How any true conservative can support people like this eludes me. There is nothing conservative about this administration. They are radical destroyers of democracy and our freedoms.

And, unfortunately, destroyers of our security as well. But that's a rant for another day....

Saturday, May 13, 2006

 

Easy Reading for the Day

Buy the book or, if you're too, cheap, read it here in glorious black and white.

 

Newspaper I Really Wanna See


Make one yourself here.

 

Why Films Suck

Joe Morgenstern has part of the story but accurately so. Films are made by dopes for dopes in a dumb and sub-literate market. (But I still can't wait for X3.)

Film's Know-Nothings
The young careerists of Hollywood need to get out more

May 13, 2006; Page P4

At breakfast a couple of weeks ago in a restaurant in Santa Monica, I happened to overhear -- all right, happened to eavesdrop on -- a conversation between two young screen writers at the next table. One was telling the other about a feature-film idea he planned to pitch to a studio: "It's, like, 'Kill Bill' meets 'Napoleon Dynamite.' "
That's not exactly what he said, though his concept was equally dim. I've plugged in substitute titles because it's not my purpose to sabotage a real-life pitch that I shouldn't have been listening to in the first place. But that X-meets-Y formulation is a familiar one among writers, directors and the studio executives who listen to their pitches. (An equally familiar variant is the verbal-pie-chart pitch: "It'll be two-thirds 'Wedding Crashers' and one-third 'Wedding Singer.') As useful as these shorthand descriptions can be, they're symptoms of a cultural wasting disease that has beset Hollywood in recent years. Many -- though certainly not all -- of today's filmmakers know very little, and care less, about the real world. Their movies derive from other movies. Clever with shorthand, they've never learned longhand.
That's not to suggest there's anything wrong with drawing from a deep knowledge of one's medium. The young rebels of the French New Wave -- Truffaut, Godard, Chabrol, Malle -- knew what they loved in their nation's film history, as well as what they found ossified and risible. The same was true of our own great innovators of the 1960s and 1970s -- Spielberg, Coppola, Scorsese, Altman.
It's a far cry, though, from those artists to the shallow careerists of contemporary Hollywood, fixated by whatever seems to be selling at the moment and striving to sell more of it. A producer friend recently elicited a blank stare from a young screenwriter when she mentioned Fredo, the unforgettably sad, troubled brother played by the late John Cazale in the seminal "The Godfather" trilogy. I've been told by a number of film-school students that they don't like to watch black-and-white films -- many of which represent Hollywood's Golden Age -- because the past (meaning anything before "Jaws" or "Star Wars") says nothing to them.
Sometimes the present says nothing to me -- the present, that is, as expressed by studio films made of interchangeable, recyclable and utterly disposable, parts. Every now and then, though, I'll be startled to find a movie that's inexplicably original. Such was the case when I first saw David O. Russell's "Three Kings" (1999), a fearlessly funny, deeply felt film about the Gulf War, and one of the most unlikely features to be produced by a major studio in decades. As I left the screening room in a happy daze, I thought to myself, Where in the world did that come from?
The answer was fairly simple -- from a writer-director who'd already done two interesting features, and who, in addition to being steeped in film culture, had taught literacy in Central America and Boston's South End. The same explanation applies to many other movies of distinction and lasting value -- they're the products of filmmakers who have been out in the world, doing more than making films.
Worldliness was once the industry norm. Billy Wilder was a reporter before he became a screenwriter. John Huston became a boxer after growing up in vaudeville and around racetracks. Preston Sturges was a rich kid who attended private schools in America and Europe, then served some time in his mother's cosmetics business. (He invented kiss-proof lipstick.)
Howard Hawks studied mechanical engineering. George Miller ("Mad Max," "The Witches of Eastwick") was a practicing physician in Australia before he went to film school. John Boorman ("Hope and Glory") was a journalist and documentarian. Pedro Almodóvar worked for Spain's telephone company. Robert Altman was a bomber pilot in World War II, experimented with sound, dabbled in such inventions as a dog-tattooing system, then churned out scores of industrial films, educational films and employee training films before making his mark as a feature director with an unquenchable appetite for unusual projects. And Orson Welles, that peerless genius of American film, spent a prodigious childhood and young manhood performing magic, painting, writing poetry and sketching on a tour of Ireland, all of it before he founded the Mercury Theatre and the Mercury Theatre of the Air.
Worldliness was also once a consequence of Hollywood careers. John Ford was no intellectual, far from it. But he, like Alfred Hitchcock a few years later, came up through the ranks in an era when feature films were low-risk undertakings ("Making a film was not a big deal at that time," Jean Renoir once told me as we talked about his glorious 1932 comedy "Boudu Saved From Drowning"), when young directors worked constantly, gaining priceless experience in a vast variety of productions. Unworldly though today's Hollywood careerists may be, they are surely to be pitied as well as censured. So many meetings, so many calls to agents and managers, so many studio notes, so much ignorance in high places, such ardent input for such negligible output. "Hope and Glory" meets "The Brain Eaters" every day.

 

Correction: Diebold Machines Work Perfectly

They get better and better at what they are designed to do: make it easy to rig elections.

What? You thought they're suppose to count votes accurately??

Please. Free elections where each vote is counted accurately is not the way of Bushydo.

Friday, May 12, 2006

 

Wingnut Morality

The f*cks really love our country and all it represents. That why they're destroying it, bleeding the public sector dry of money and competence, spying and all of us (here and here).

Me, I'm waiting for the usual rightist defense: If you're doing nothing wrong, you nothing to fear -- from imperfect policing, destroying of rights, an so on and so forth.

The utter crap this administration is blessing us with is absolutely radioactive. It'll be left behind for years -- like the latest round of economically unwarranted taxcuts that will be with us for five years regardless of the economy. The cuts that if ever rescinded will tank the economy....

It will be a very long time before this country is made right again (pun intended), no matter what happens in 2006 or 2008. Actually, these elections may well be of minimal significance.

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

 

Why We hate Microsoft

It ain't just the crappy product rammed down our throats.

Here. First clue: M$ [heart] Ralph Reed.

And more info is here.

 

Hav-A-Laff!

From the emailbag:

The Most American

Two families move from Afghanistan to America. When they arrive, the fathers make each other a bet: In a year's time, whichever family has become more American wins.

A year later, it's time for them to meet again and compare notes.

The first guy says, "Today I had a McDonald's breakfast, bought a case of Budweiser, and I'm about to pick my son up from football practice in my brand-new SUV. How about you?"

The second guy says, "Screw you, terrorist!"

 

Wall Street Journal Op-ed Humor Piece

What if the purpose of the CIA was to, you know, collect and analyze intelligence instead of creating fictions for a deranged administration?

Why, then, this piece would have some relevance in the real world. Meanwhile, this administration has clearly shown that it is a political tool. Of course, given that reality has no relevance for our leaders, who needs an intel gathering and analyzing agency anyway?

Have a chuckle -- if you can:

Kosher Cures for the CIA
May 9, 2006; Page A19

Morale at the agency is rock bottom, as is its reputation with the public. The director has been forced to resign. Relations with the politicos are under strain. There have been several high-profile operational fiascos, one of which nearly wrecked relations with a key Middle Eastern ally.

Porter Goss's CIA? Wrong. This was the Mossad, Israel's fabled spy agency, circa 1997. In September of that year, a botched Mossad attempt on the life of Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal in Amman, Jordan, forced an acute political crisis between the Jewish state and its Hashemite neighbor. Five months later, another Mossad agent was arrested while wiretapping a phone line in Bern. The agency's travails attracted wide notice: "Swiss Confirm New Fiasco by Agents for Israel," was how the New York Times covered the story.

Today, the Mossad is again at the top of its game. Among other coups, it is believed to have assassinated Hezbollah terror masters Ali Hussein Saleh in 2003 and Ghalib Awwali in 2004. So it's worth taking note of how the Mossad repaired its own house -- and of what two former Israeli spymasters have to say about how CIA Director nominee Michael Hayden might go about repairing his.

In a telephone interview, Efraim Halevy, Mossad chief from 1998 to 2002 and author of the memoir "Man in the Shadows," offers this advice. The new director "must first work quickly to repair the image of the organization by producing results. He must re-establish credibility at the political level, and this isn't going to be easy because political leaders will be wary of intelligence judgments. He must pass a message of confidence in and respect for the troops. He has to stand up for his people, and not take a back seat while someone else takes the rap. And he has to be creative and allow creativity and courage to show themselves."

Mr. Halevy knows whereof he speaks. "I entered my job in a crisis situation," he recalls. Not long into his tenure, a Turkish newspaper claimed -- falsely, according to Mr. Halevy -- that the Mossad had been involved in the capture of Abdullah Ocalan, the Kurdish leader of the terrorist PKK. The report, which put Israelis at risk of PKK reprisals, had to be discredited in a way that would be believed. Rather than issue a public denial, Mr. Halevy circulated a memo within the Mossad disavowing any link to the Ocalan operation. The memo then "leaked," achieving the desired impression.

There are lessons here for Gen. Hayden, starting with the fact that it helps to run an organization where leaks, when they happen, are authorized and purposeful. In recent years, the CIA has lost that ability, in part because of a deep-seated ideological animus to the Bush administration (witness the careers of anti-Bush partisans Valerie Plame, Paul Pillar, Michael Scheuer and Mary McCarthy), but also, it seems, as payback from careerists who felt rudely handled by Mr. Goss. If you want to plug leaks -- and manage change -- try getting the troops on board.

On the whole, however, Mr. Halevy is fairly sanguine about CIA prospects. "I think the quality of the intelligence is very high," he says. Mr. Halevy has interacted with the CIA for nearly four decades, during which he "has not seen a decline" in the caliber of its work. It isn't clear if he's only being polite.

Less optimistic is Uzi Arad, a former head of the Mossad's intelligence division and now the director of the Institute for Policy and Strategy at Israel's Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya. "My impression," he says, "is that rather than galloping ahead to compensate for years of absenteeism and lagging behind, you have a kind of vegetating system."

Mr. Arad compares this to what's happened to the U.S. military in recent years. "The field of intelligence has been going through a revolution analogous to the revolution in military affairs," he says. Yet while the Pentagon is devising new technologies and strategies to cope with a new geopolitical landscape, the CIA is adapting "retroactively, as one mishap follows another."

An instructive example: "In the past," Mr. Arad says, "secrecy and compartmentalization were considered to be virtues in the intelligence community, often at the expense of synergy. That made sense during the Cold War, when the U.S. was confronting an enemy capable of penetrating the system. But al Qaeda and Iran probably aren't capable of penetrating the system the way the KGB was. So perhaps we need to tilt away from the culture of secrecy and bring more jointness, more synchronization, more pooling of scarce resources."

Nor is this the only problem Mr. Arad sees. "Despite the current reforms," he says, "the American system is very big, very complex, with many redundancies to protect institutional interests rather than security interests." The Mossad employs an estimated 2,000 agents and officers. The CIA is perhaps 10 times that size, and it's just one of 16 American intelligence agencies. Yet the quantity of resources has done little to improve the quality of U.S. intelligence. On Iran's nuclear program, for instance, last year's Robb-Silberman Report suggests America knows frighteningly little.

The creation in 2004 of the office of Director of National Intelligence was supposed to have streamlined the system, bringing the kind of synergy that Mr. Arad calls for. Instead, under John Negroponte, the office has become yet another player in the broader intelligence bureaucracy, trying to impose its will on a recalcitrant (but weak) CIA and an even more recalcitrant (and strong) Defense Intelligence Agency. How a CIA director can find his way through this maze is anyone's guess; it certainly defeated Mr. Goss.

Still, the Israeli example should give the CIA reason to hope it can become effective again -- provided it has the right leadership. "All too often in the history of both the Israeli and the American systems," Mr. Arad says, "leaders have been parachuted into the intelligence services because they were great admirals or great generals or great managers. But intelligence remains a peculiar field. You've got to have the touch for it. The instincts for it. The love for it."

We'll find out, eventually, whether Gen. Hayden has got the love.


Tuesday, May 09, 2006

 

Makes You Proud

W is a source of pride, specially when he says brilliant stuff like this:

BERLIN (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush told a German newspaper his best moment in more than five years in office was catching a big perch in his own lake.

"You know, I've experienced many great moments and it's hard to name the best," Bush told weekly Bild am Sonntag when asked about his high point since becoming president in January 2001.

"I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound (3.402 kilos) perch in my lake," he told the newspaper in an interview published on Sunday.


But you know, implicitly he's right. Maybe. What can the worst president ever have to be proud about as president?

Or maybe not. One would hope he would be proud of his economically unjustifiable tax cuts for his supporters. Is he not proud of abusing government to give his supporters all these goodies?

Rest of the story (as if that's not enough) is here.

Sunday, May 07, 2006

 

The Scum Also Rises

No, doesn't quite make sense to me either but sounds neat.

The c^nts running our country....

Guess when and where it was OK to sign the national anthem in Spanish?

Hint:

Our leader's 2001 inauguration.

 

Fair and Balanced

Was Imus at least funny? My opinion of Colbert's performance is based on a transcript so we'll do the same for Imus, whose speech allegedly set the standard for insulting the Prez.

U decide:

The following is the text of radio personality Don Imus' speech at the Radio/TV Correspondents Association Annual Dinner, Thursday, March 21, 1996.

Thank you very much ...um... this is kind of interesting, these don't appear to be my notes....(you still have the folder I gave you? where did this come from? Well, nobody just leaves stuff like this just layin' around....

Heh, heh, heh .. let me see if I can see what it says: "S. McDougall called again ...says bank needs check and statement; told her both were in mail, ha ha ha. Jesus, she looks stupid in those tank tops. " I think I'll just hang on to these.

Ah, here we go. Good evening Mr. President, Mrs.Clinton, honored guests, ladies and gentlemen, radio and TV scum.

You know I think it would be fair to say, back when the Clintons first took office, if we had placed them all in a lineup -- well, not a lineup -- if we were to have speculated about which member of the First Family would be the first to be indicted... I don't mean indicted -- I meant to receive a subpoena -- everybody would have picked Roger. I mean, been there done that. Well, in the past 3 years, Socks the cat has been in more jams than Roger. Roger has been a saint. The cat has peed on national treasures. Roger hasn't. Socks has thrown up hairballs. Roger hasn't. Socks got his girlfriend pregnant and hasn't... oh no, that was Roger. And as you know, nearly every incident in the lives of the first family has been made worse by each and every person in this room of radio and television correspondents -- even innocuous incidents. For example, when Cal Ripkin broke Lou Gherig's consecutive game record, the President was at Camden Yards doin' play by play in the radio with John Miller. Bobby Bonilla hit a double, we all heard the President in his obvious excitement holler "Go Baby!" I remember commenting at the time, I bet that's not the first time he's said that. Remember the Astroturf in the pickup? And my point is, there is an innocent event, made sinister by some creep in the media.

In some cases, the Clintons have not exactly helped themselves. Imagine if back in 1978 Mrs. Clinton had NOT said to Mr. Clinton, "Honey, Jim and Susan are here and they've got some river front land for these great vacation homes, maybe we can make some serious money. And he said "God I love this Reaganomics!" Or later, she'd said, "Bill, I talked to Web and he said 'put down 600 hours' and he'd said, "well, that's a lot," and she'd said, "yes, I think 60 makes more sense." And recently somebody said, "I don't know, I left them on the table in the book room."

Which reminds me, in light of the controversy that surrounded the publication of Mrs. Clinton's book, perhaps Anonymous should have written It Takes a Village. And then there's Senator D'Amato -- It Takes a Village Idiot.

The Senator suggests the Clintons hung around with unsavory characters. What the hell was he talkin' about? All of his friends have bodies in the trunks of their cars. By the way, my candidate for Primary Colors is Susan Thomases. I think she wrote it and simply can't remember. When I was asked to speak her tonight and was told who would be in attendance, my initial thought was 'well, I' ve already said almost every awful thing you could say about almost everyone in the room. And then I thought, well, almost everyone.

And I recognize I'm not going to be invited to Renaissance Weekend, or that Bohemian deal where Newt, Rush and Dick all sit in a teepee naked, beatin' on tom-toms. I won't be having lunch with Peter Jennings and some Hollywood nitwit, so this could actually be fun.

Let's start at the bottom with you folks in the media and work our way up. Do you remember the infamous curbside shooting from the Vietnam War? Well, I'm watchin' the CBS Evening News with Dan Rather and Connie Chung and things are not going well, and I'm thinking were a couple a nights away from another hideous photograph. I mean everybody knows Dan Rather is capable of anything, including pulling a gun out on the set of the CBS Evening News. Dan has these utterly incomprehensible bucolic expressions he punctuates the conversation with. Several times after talking with him, he would say to me "Tamp 'em up solid." Having something to do, I later learned, with fortifying underground tunnels his father dug, for reasons that remain unclear. Now I'm hearing impaired a little bit from wearing headphones for a long time. I thought he was saying "tampons up solid" and I'm, why would he say that? I mean, I know he's nuts, but what does that mean? Anyway, I'd laugh and I'd say uh huh, and I would hang up. And he's a great reporter, but he does not have all of his bait in the water. And he's a little tense. Watchin' Dan Rather do the news, he looks like he's making a hostage tape. They should have guys in ski masks and AK47's just standin off to...

And yet, he is one of the 3 or 4 people most people get their news from. Along with Tom Brokaw, of course. By the way, nobody wants us out of Bosnia more than Tom Brokaw does. Just so he doesn't have to pronounce Slobian Milosovich. Or report on fighting on the outskirts of Vilikakladusa *. Or describe how Slobidan Milo... Slobidan Milso...I can say it... and we know Brian Williams is standing in front of the White House thinking "I'm two Serb war criminal names away from Tom Brokaw's job."

And then there's Peter Jennings, who we are told more Americans get their news from than anyone else -- and a man who freely admits that he cannot resist women. So I'm thinking, here's Peter Jennings sitting there each evening, elegant, erudite, refined. And I'm thinking, what's under his desk? I mean , besides an intern. The first place the telecommunications bill should have mandated that a v-chip be placed is in Mr. Jennings shorts.

My favorite moment on World News Tonight was when Peter threw it to Cokie Roberts who we were told was standing outside the Capitol building, remember that when they chromo-keyed Cokie outside the Capitol. That happened during my friend Rick Kaplan's watch. Bill Clinton's worst media day, when Kaplan left as executive producer of World News Tonight because he'd humped the Clinton Administration harder than OJ has his video. The only thing he didn't do was run a crawl of the Clinton's defense fund 800 number with a shot of Sally Struthers sobbing into the camera. By the way, I like Sally Struthers. And I think she's a sweet harmless soul doing God's work. But, if you're going to go on television and beg for food for starving children shouldn't you maybe like eat a little less of it yourself? I mean, I don't think the plight of suffering children is amusing. I've personally raised millions of dollars for children with cancer, and millions of dollars for parents who've lost children through Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. But what are these people thinking about when they send her to a village in Ethiopia full of starving people? They might as well send the fat guy from Wendy's.

By the way, and this is really awful, if you're Peter Jennings and you're telling more Americans than anyone else what's going on in the world, shouldn't you at least have had a clue that your wife was over at Richard Cohen's house? She wasn't at my house! Bernard Shaw and Peter couldn't be here tonight -- he went to the movies with Alanis Morissette -- Bernard Shaw and Judy Woodruff round out our network news anchors and deserve mention only to recognize that Bernie has greater nut potential than even Dan Rather. If not for CNN, Bernard Shaw is at the post office marching somebody around at the end of a wire coat hanger and a shotgun.

And then there are the Sunday morning news programs. This Week With David Brinkley. I love Mr. Brinkley. He's an American icon. He and I both had similar surgery and I recognize that Mr. Brinkley is 75 years old. He's adorable. He also looks like ET. One of these mornings I expect him to say, "Cokie: phone home." Now he's not the only extraterrestrial on the program. There's also Sam Donaldson and George Will. Sam, the New Mexico sheep rancher -- you would think that anybody who's taken as much money from the government in wool subsidies as he has could come up with something better to put on his head -- I mean what is that?

Something Strom Thurmond threw out? A cheap doily he swiped at Arianna Huffington's house? And then there's George Will -- and they call Steve Forbes a geek -- anyone that buttoned up, I guarantee ya, is spending part of his weekend wearing clothes that make him feel pretty. Things he's picked up we now know at Victoria Secret over in Georgetown.

Meet the Press with the utterly charming and gregarious Tim Russert has brought a new sense of adventure and enthusiasm to Sunday morning television. Mr. Russert's unique and probing interrogation of guests is widely seen as bold and refreshing. Pawing off Bob Kerry's wooden leg was a special moment. Good natured, however, and patient to a fault, Tim is to be admired for enduring frequently insipid observations and questions from corespondents who for some inexplicable reason include the coma-inducing William Safire, the terminally tedious David Broder, and Elton John-look-a-like Mary McGrory Where did she get those glasses? By the way, Russert as many of you know came to television from the world of politics having once worked in New York for Senator Moynihan and Governor Cuomo. He was a fine aide whose duties included hiding the bottles for Pat and the bodies for Mario.

Some of you may have noticed Mike Wallace wandering around here tonight. For some insane reason I agreed to be interviewed by Mr. Wallace, it's a good thing actually, because frankly time is up over there at "60 Minutes." I mean , they've gone from biographical essays of Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, Stephen Hawking to profiles of loud -mouthed morons on the radio. I mean, have they no standards? And if they're going to fold up like a two-dollar suitcase every time some blood-sucking weasel in a Brooks Brother suit threatens to haul them into court, then off-load the entire cast in an ambulance now and ship them off to the drug tests. I mean I hate to be harsh here, but where are the days when Mike Wallace used to stick a camera in somebody's face and beat him like a rented mule? Where are the sobbing confessions? And they been doing this for a hundred years. It is over. Except perhaps for Steve Croft and he's hoping he can go over to NBC and blow up trucks. And Ed Bradley: we think the earring thing, Ed, you're a newsman, not a pirate

Molly Ivins is going to be a commentator -- why not just go ahead and get Florence King? I told Nina Totenberg plagiarism jokes weren't funny. Speaking of people whose place on the planet is a waste of space -- the White House press corps --- I mean no wonder the President doesn't want to hold any news conferences. Who needs to be assaulted by a pack of rodents whose idea of a question is to confront the President with an insulting observation designed to impress their equally rude and arrogant colleagues. "Mr. President, Rita Braver, CBS News, we all know you're a pot smokin' weasel, that you once ate an apple fritter the size of a baby's head, that you actually run a 12 minute mile. Can you, therefore, tell the American people why that thing on your lip looks like a Milk Dud, and if it is a Milk Dud, and I'd like a follow-up." "Sir, Brit Hume, ABC News. Sir, everybody knows the closest you ever came to standing in a chow line was the cheeseburger window at McDonald's. So tell the American people, is that where you came up with 'buy one, get one free?'"

The president gets treated better by Rush Limbaugh. Rush may not, as Al Franken suggested, be a Big Fat Idiot, but I'm sick of him. The radio show, television show, the stupid books and now men's ties -- bold, vibrant, colorful, and all designed to look great with a brown shirt. What a surprise that Rush is selling something that goes around a person's neck. Rush didn't date in high school, you're kidding? You mean the varsity cheerleaders weren't falling all over a fat pig-eyed schmoo who looked like a cross between a red dog and one of those Budweiser frogs?

He should be on a beach somewhere in a pair of Bermuda shorts, white socks, sandals, holding a metal detector. He couldn't get a date in high school? Maybe they should have had his senior prom at Sea World. Remember the old joke, what's got a hundred feet and four teeth? You know, the front row at a Willie Nelson concert. Well, of course now it's a Rush room. How appropriate that these ditto dorks all get together and eat and listen to lard butt.

And then there's Newt. Who names a child Newt? It seems only slightly better than a Boy Named Sue:
Well, he came into the world from the right side a town,
a Georgia boy who was diggin' around,
dreamin' one day he'd wield power absolute.
He's a guy who spends a lot of time in the fridge
and it's no wonder he wants to bring back the orphanage,
you would too, if your parents named you Newt
Now all you atheists had better be ware
cause school children's heads'll be bowed in prayer
beseechin the Lord to get rid of the poor and the queer
Member Newt and his conservative proteges
are going to fix this in a hundred days
and he was so proud he was on the edge of tears.
But now the ethics folks are snoopin for cash
And his cheesy book was less than a smash and
all the polls reportin he's held in disrepute
His sister's a thespian and appeared on Friends
And his poor old Mom's still tryin' to make amends
I'll tell you, life ain't easy for a boy named Newt.

And it was Newt, remember, who wanted to give every kid mired in the poverty of urban America a laptop computer. Not nearly as popular as Phil Gramm's plan to give every white male in the country a lap dancer. A friend, Kinky Friedman, who headed Gay Texans for Gramm told me early on that the Senator wanted to be president. Now, of course, we all know that. I was in Las Vegas when the news broke that Senator Gramm had financed a porno movie. It was better than having Ed McMahon hand me a check for ten million dollars.

The only better news woulda been had Senator Gramm actually appeared in a movie. I mean, how great would that have been? I tend to like one of those farmer's daughter's deals. I could see Phil in the role of the traveling salesman, Lamar Alexander as the farmer, Pat Buchanan as the weird ranch hand. One of John Kerry's old dates, right off the ballet at Hee Haw. What's the deal with the wagons? Pull the wagons. Push the wagons. Get in the wagon. What wagon? Where did he think he was, the Ponderosa?

Senator Gramm was fond of saying he was too ugly to be President. Well, that was not his problem. I know he has a Ph.D. in economics. But you can't sound like you just walked out of the woods in Deliverance and not scare people. "You got a real purty mouth on you their, Bubba..." Not happening.

Bob Dole. What else does Bob Dole want? Willard Scott's already wished Bob Dole a happy birthday ... Twice. Bob Dole should be pleased. Bob Dole says tell Willard Scott to stop lying about Bob Dole's age.

And I agree with Ted Koppel, Pat Buchanan has a certain inherent charm. However, if he gets elected President, two weeks later somebody's going to come knockin on the door at three o'clock in the morning: "Just checking. What kind of a name is Imus?" Although, all this stuff about Pat Buchanan being anti-Semitic, I don't know about that. A lot of people aren't aware that he lost a relative in the concentration camps. His uncle fell out of a guard tower.

Mort Saul made the original observation that people who talk most about family values are all on their second and third wives. And I would point out they all have families you could rope off and charge admission to view. You throw up a tent, put Pat Buchanan, his brother Bay, Newt, Mom, Candace, Hugh Rodham in it, and you're lookin at a theme park.

Now I love Ronald Reagan, as do most Americans, regardless of politics. But man, what a weird family. Nancy starin' at him like a glass-eyed moonie on mushrooms, checkin' with this nut log out on the west coast who's charting the course of the country out on a ouija board. What's that all about? And the kid, Ron, trampin' around in his underwear on Saturday Night Live and Patty's naked in Playboy, and each of them had these Mommy Dearest book deals. And of course, they all still hate Michael.

Weird families are not confined to Republicans, of course. Remember the Carters? Ham Jordan, Willie Nelson are smokin' dope on the roof of the White House and Billy's out in middle of an airport, hosing down the runway, while Jimmy's flailing away at a killer bunny with a canoe paddle asking Amy to weigh in on America's role in the nuclear age.

And while President Clinton's cabinet is not technically a family, they are the single oddest looking group of people ever assembled. Like the bar scene out of Star Wars. I mean, watching them file in for the State of the Union reminded me of seein' all those clowns falling out of the Volkswagen at the circus.

And speaking of Congress, while Al D'Amato, Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond are mildly amusing as the Chairmen of various committees, I miss the Democrats that were in charge. Especially Joe Biden. And Joe Biden's head. Tracking the progress of his plug job was like watching time-lapse photography of a chia pet. He was most entertaining, however, as a committee chairman conducting hearings because Senator Biden always looked to me like he was comin' on to the witnesses. Usually women. "So Anita, when this is all over, you want to have a drink?" And although he's disappeared, he hasn't as have 13 of his colleagues, actually quit. Of course there are those Democrats who are not only staying, but doing so with renewed vigor and enthusiasm, mostly by becoming Republicans, with several noble exceptions. John Kerry of Massachusetts among them. This now gives me the opportunity to express my regret at having referred to my friend, Senator Kerry upon his marriage to Theresa Heinz as the Larry Fortensky of the United States Senate. Which reminds me of poor old John Warner. The Senator marries Elizabeth Taylor, one of the most beautiful women in the world, and three weeks later, he comes home and she's sitting in the kitchen playing Deal A Meal with Richard Simmons. How do you get that fat, that fast, and not live in a trailer? And then he has to choose between Chuck Robb and Oliver North. I mean, what's the deal with his karma?

But back to Senator Kerry. I also now recognize that it was irresponsible to suggest that he was a suspect in his own wife's unfortunate mugging. If the authorities thought it made sense that a senator from Massachusetts would be in Puerto Rico on a fund raising mission during the time of family crisis, it should have made sense to me as well. However, when I initially thought about it, it seemed only slightly more plausible than chipping golf balls at ten o'clock at night. But the senator and I are past that and in fact it has drawn us closer.

And yes, some unanticipated good for other Democrats came out of Republicans gaining control of Congress. Senator Kennedy for example, was forced to focus and take a bribe... leaving Chris Dodd the opportunity to get his bearings and realize, "Hey I'm a United States Senator, maybe I shouldn't be crawling around on the floor of this restaurant." In fact, as you know, Senator Dodd has recovered sufficiently to become the General Chairman of the Democratic National Committee and will play a pivotal role in the President's re-election efforts. In fact, he has a couple of bumper sticker ideas: "Clinton/Gore Please Raise Your right Hand." Or perhaps, "Clinton/Gore / Four More ...or five to Ten." Now we're not sure what role James Carville or his dog will play in all this, but isn't it just like a Democratic consultant to come along and make a mess and then expect somebody else to clean it up.

And while I' m not one of , obviously, Bill Clinton's advisors and it's not that I think Al Gore has done a horrible job, however, if I was president, and I wanted to make sure I won in November, I'd ask Colin Powell to run with me. Stick Dole with that dork from Michigan. However, it appears that it will be Clinton and the albatross Al Gore for the Democrats. And Bob Dole and someone slightly less cranky for the Republicans. Add the jug-eared little Martian from Texas for laughs.

One of the things that it seems to me that the media ought to think about in the coming months, particularly in this election year, consumed by the chaos of the campaign, is the sensibilities of the people you are covering. The way you cover them, and your treatment of them as individuals. For if nothing else, they are all good and decent people who, for whatever reason, have chosen to devote the bulk of their adult lives to public service. People who possess a passion for ideas and ideals to which they have committed extraordinary energy. It is almost always irrelevant and short-sighted to seize only on the unfortunate human imperfections of people who frankly have demonstrated an often puzzling willingness to endure great sacrifice, both personally and professionally, for what they see as a noble summons to serve the greater good. More often than not, however, that is exactly the case. You folks focus on each misstep, every misspoken word, each testy outburst. Do they not deserve some degree of our respect? To be treated with the dignity that at least acknowledges the mission of altruism they believe they're conducting. Shouldn't we be willing to give them some benefit of the doubt?

I don't think so.

Thank you all very much.

Saturday, May 06, 2006

 

How Full of Crap our Leaders Are

Here's a lying right wing nutjob's take on Iraq. And it's bad news. If our leaders' supporters believe it sucks....

 

Demented Leadership

Yeah, yeah, what else is new. But when you're falling down that slippery slope -- e.g. us (or U.S.) -- you pick up speed. A piping hot fresh example:

West Point' Off Limits to Anti-War Alums
May 5, 10:48 PM (ET)

By WILLIAM KATES

SYRACUSE, N.Y. (AP) - The Army warned an anti-war group of former U.S. Military Academy cadets to stop using the words "West Point" in its name, saying they are trademarked.

A co-founder of West Point Graduates Against the War countered Friday that his organization is simply following the cadets' code.

"At West Point, we were taught that cadets do not lie, cheat or steal - and to oppose those who do," said William Cross, a 1962 West Point graduate. "We are a positive organization. We are not anti-West Point or anti-military. We are just trying to uphold what we were taught."

The group, open to West Point graduates, spouses and children, claims about 50 members.

West Point spokesman Lt. Col. Kent Cassella said the academy sent the April 12 warning letter because the group failed to go through a licensing process to get permission to use the term "West Point." The group's anti-war stance is irrelevant, he said.

"This is not a political issue. They did not ask for permission. We are doing what any college or university would do to enforce its trademarks," Cassella said.
The Army registered the words "West Point" - as well as "United States Military Academy,""USMA," and "U.S. Army" - as trademarks in 2000 to control their use on educational material and commercial goods.

An attorney hired by Cross and his colleagues said the warning raises questions of First Amendment speech protection and selective enforcement. Joseph Heath said he noted the concerns in a response sent to the Army on Monday; he has not yet received a reply, he said.

"I would hope that the Army would be proud of these men and their willingness to promote democracy and freedom of speech," wrote Heath, a Navy veteran who also opposes the war.

Heath also noted widespread commercial use of the words "West Point."

Cassella said the Army has negotiated agreements with local businesses allowing them to use the phrase in their names.

As Atrios would rightly ask, What will we tell the children?

Indeed.

The rest of the story (if you need more) is here.

Friday, May 05, 2006

 

Image of the Day

Via those wonderful, fabulous folks at whitehouse.org (you know, the honest White House site, the one that practices truthiness).

Thursday, May 04, 2006

 

Justice -- GOP-style

The stench of corruption.... This is inexcuseble. A black man is framed and the GOP c^nt Haley Barbour just can pardon him decades after the fact. These people have no shame -- or whatchamacall Christian humility. I'd say "shame on them," but that is nowhere enough....

The Times has it (albeit buried... and it's by way of the good ol' AP...):

Miss. Gov. Denies Pardon for Black Veteran

Published: May 4, 2006

JACKSON, Miss. (AP) -- Gov. Haley Barbour won't grant a posthumous pardon to a black Korean War veteran who was wrongfully convicted in segregationist Mississippi after he tried to enroll in an all-white university.

Clyde Kennard was convicted of purchasing $25 worth of chicken feed he knew to be stolen in 1960 and sentenced to seven years in prison, but the only witness against him has recanted his testimony. Kennard died in 1963, after being released early because he had intestinal cancer.

Barbour agrees Kennard was wronged but says he won't grant a pardon, despite calls for him to clear the man's name.

''The governor hasn't pardoned anyone, whether they be alive or deceased,'' Barbour spokesman Pete Smith said Thursday. ''The governor seems to think Kennard's rights would have been restored prior to him being governor, if he was still alive.''


More here (as if that's not enough).

What's so conservativ about these immoral neo-fascists?

 

Speaking of the Colbert Meme

A traitor to the cause, so to speak, is offended. Our Leader deserves some respect.

Yet, maybe, but not enough to stop a dose of good old hysterical satire.

 

To Me This is Funny

Too many sources to cite: the courtiers' meme is that Colbert wasn't funny at the courtiers' dinner Saturday night.

I read the transcript -- haven't seen a clip yet -- and peed my pants.

Read it and pee your pants. Via Kos:

STEPHEN COLBERT: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Before I begin, I've been asked to make an announcement. Whoever parked 14 black bulletproof S.U.V.'s out front, could you please move them? They are blocking in 14 other black bulletproof S.U.V.'s and they need to get out.

Wow. Wow, what an honor. The White House correspondents' dinner. To actually sit here, at the same table with my hero, George W. Bush, to be this close to the man. I feel like I'm dreaming. Somebody pinch me. You know what? I'm a pretty sound sleeper -- that may not be enough. Somebody shoot me in the face. Is he really not here tonight? Dammit. The one guy who could have helped.

By the way, before I get started, if anybody needs anything else at their tables, just speak slowly and clearly into your table numbers. Somebody from the NSA will be right over with a cocktail. Mark Smith, ladies and gentlemen of the press corps, Madame First Lady, Mr. President, my name is Stephen Colbert and tonight it's my privilege to celebrate this president. We're not so different, he and I. We get it. We're not brainiacs on the nerd patrol. We're not members of the factinista. We go straight from the gut, right sir? That's where the truth lies, right down here in the gut. Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. I know some of you are going to say "I did look it up, and that's not true." That's 'cause you looked it up in a book.

Next time, look it up in your gut. I did. My gut tells me that's how our nervous system works. Every night on my show, the Colbert Report, I speak straight from the gut, OK? I give people the truth, unfiltered by rational argument. I call it the "No Fact Zone." Fox News, I hold a copyright on that term.

I'm a simple man with a simple mind. I hold a simple set of beliefs that I live by. Number one, I believe in America. I believe it exists. My gut tells me I live there. I feel that it extends from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and I strongly believe it has 50 states. And I cannot wait to see how the Washington Post spins that one tomorrow. I believe in democracy. I believe democracy is our greatest export. At least until China figures out a way to stamp it out of plastic for three cents a unit.

In fact, Ambassador Zhou Wenzhong, welcome. Your great country makes our Happy Meals possible. I said it's a celebration. I believe the government that governs best is the government that governs least. And by these standards, we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq.

I believe in pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. I believe it is possible -- I saw this guy do it once in Cirque du Soleil. It was magical. And though I am a committed Christian, I believe that everyone has the right to their own religion, be you Hindu, Jewish or Muslim. I believe there are infinite paths to accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior.

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe it's yogurt. But I refuse to believe it's not butter. Most of all, I believe in this president.

Now, I know there are some polls out there saying this man has a 32% approval rating. But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in "reality." And reality has a well-known liberal bias.

So, Mr. President, please, pay no attention to the people that say the glass is half full. 32% means the glass -- it's important to set up your jokes properly, sir. Sir, pay no attention to the people who say the glass is half empty, because 32% means it's 2/3 empty. There's still some liquid in that glass is my point, but I wouldn't drink it. The last third is usually backwash. Okay, look, folks, my point is that I don't believe this is a low point in this presidency. I believe it is just a lull before a comeback.

I mean, it's like the movie "Rocky." All right. The president in this case is Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed is -- everything else in the world. It's the tenth round. He's bloodied. His corner man, Mick, who in this case I guess would be the vice president, he's yelling, "Cut me, Dick, cut me!," and every time he falls everyone says, "Stay down! Stay down!" Does he stay down? No. Like Rocky, he gets back up, and in the end he -- actually, he loses in the first movie.

OK. Doesn't matter. The point is it is the heart-warming story of a man who was repeatedly punched in the face. So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't.

I stand by this man. I stand by this man because he stands for things. Not only for things, he stands on things. Things like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares. And that sends a strong message: that no matter what happens to America, she will always rebound -- with the most powerfully staged photo ops in the world.

Now, there may be an energy crisis. This president has a very forward-thinking energy policy. Why do you think he's down on the ranch cutting that brush all the time? He's trying to create an alternative energy source. By 2008 we will have a mesquite-powered car!

And I just like the guy. He's a good joe. Obviously loves his wife, calls her his better half. And polls show America agrees. She's a true lady and a wonderful woman. But I just have one beef, ma'am.

I'm sorry, but this reading initiative. I'm sorry, I've never been a fan of books. I don't trust them. They're all fact, no heart. I mean, they're elitist, telling us what is or isn't true, or what did or didn't happen. Who's Britannica to tell me the Panama Canal was built in 1914? If I want to say it was built in 1941, that's my right as an American! I'm with the president, let history decide what did or did not happen.

The greatest thing about this man is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday. Events can change; this man's beliefs never will. As excited as I am to be here with the president, I am appalled to be surrounded by the liberal media that is destroying America, with the exception of Fox News. Fox News gives you both sides of every story: the president's side, and the vice president's side.

But the rest of you, what are you thinking, reporting on NSA wiretapping or secret prisons in eastern Europe? Those things are secret for a very important reason: they're super-depressing. And if that's your goal, well, misery accomplished. Over the last five years you people were so good -- over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew.

But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works: the president makes decisions. He's the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know - fiction!

Because really, what incentive do these people have to answer your questions, after all? I mean, nothing satisfies you. Everybody asks for personnel changes. So the White House has personnel changes. Then you write, "Oh, they're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." First of all, that is a terrible metaphor. This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring. If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!

Now, it's not all bad guys out there. Some are heroes: Christopher Buckley, Jeff Sacks, Ken Burns, Bob Schieffer. They've all been on my show. By the way, Mr. President, thank you for agreeing to be on my show. I was just as shocked as everyone here is, I promise you. How's Tuesday for you? I've got Frank Rich, but we can bump him. And I mean bump him. I know a guy. Say the word.

See who we've got here tonight. General Moseley, Air Force Chief of Staff. General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They still support Rumsfeld. Right, you guys aren't retired yet, right? Right, they still support Rumsfeld.

Look, by the way, I've got a theory about how to handle these retired generals causing all this trouble: don't let them retire! Come on, we've got a stop-loss program; let's use it on these guys. I've seen Zinni and that crowd on Wolf Blitzer. If you're strong enough to go on one of those pundit shows, you can stand on a bank of computers and order men into battle. Come on.

Jesse Jackson is here, the Reverend. Haven't heard from the Reverend in a little while. I had him on the show. Very interesting and challenging interview. You can ask him anything, but he's going to say what he wants, at the pace that he wants. It's like boxing a glacier. Enjoy that metaphor, by the way, because your grandchildren will have no idea what a glacier is.

Justice Scalia is here. Welcome, sir. May I be the first to say, you look fantastic. How are you? [After each sentence, Colbert makes a hand gesture, an allusion to Scalia's recent use of an obscene Sicilian hand gesture in speaking to a reporter about Scalia's critics. Scalia is seen laughing hysterically.] Just talking some Sicilian with my paisan.

John McCain is here. John McCain, John McCain, what a maverick! Somebody find out what fork he used on his salad, because I guarantee you it wasn't a salad fork. This guy could have used a spoon! There's no predicting him. By the way, Senator McCain, it's so wonderful to see you coming back into the Republican fold. I have a summer house in South Carolina; look me up when you go to speak at Bob Jones University. So glad you've seen the light, sir.

Mayor Nagin! Mayor Nagin is here from New Orleans, the chocolate city! Yeah, give it up. Mayor Nagin, I'd like to welcome you to Washington, D.C., the chocolate city with a marshmallow center. And a graham cracker crust of corruption. It's a Mallomar, I guess is what I'm describing, a seasonal cookie.

Joe Wilson is here, Joe Wilson right down here in front, the most famous husband since Desi Arnaz. And of course he brought along his lovely wife Valerie Plame. Oh, my god. [looks horrified] Oh, what have I said? I -- Je- minetti (sp?). I am sorry, Mr. President, I meant to say he brought along his lovely wife Joe Wilson's wife. Patrick Fitzgerald is not here tonight? OK. Dodged a bullet.

And, of course, we can't forget the man of the hour, new press secretary, Tony Snow. Secret Service name, "Snow Job." Toughest job. What a hero. Took the second toughest job in government, next to, of course, the ambassador to Iraq.

Got some big shoes to fill, Tony. Big shoes to fill. Scott McClellan could say nothing like nobody else. McClellan, of course, eager to retire. Really felt like he needed to spend more time with Andrew Card's children. Mr. President, I wish you hadn't made the decision so quickly, sir.

I was vying for the job myself. I think I would have made a fabulous press secretary. I have nothing but contempt for these people. I know how to handle these clowns.

In fact, sir, I brought along an audition tape and with your indulgence, I'd like to at least give it a shot. So, ladies and gentlemen, my press conference.

BEGINNING OF "AUDITION TAPE"

Colbert shows a video of a mock press conference. It opens with an empty podium. Colbert's head rises from behind the podium until Colbert is standing at the podium. He addresses the assembled Washington press corps.

COLBERT: I have a brief statement: the press is destroying America. OK, let's see who we've got here today.

COLBERT (acknowledging various reporters): Stretch! (David Gregory nods)

Sir Nerdlington! (reporter nods)

Sloppy Joe! (reporter nods)

Terry Lemon Moran Pie! (Terry Moran nods)

Oh, Doubting Thomas, always a pleasure. (Helen Thomas smiles)

And Suzanne Mal -- hello!!

(Suzanne Malveaux stares at Colbert, looking unhappy. Colbert mimics putting a phone to his ear and mouths "call me.")

REPORTER: Will the Vice President be available soon to answer all questions himself?

COLBERT: I've already addressed that question. You (pointing to another reporter).

REPORTER: Walter Cronkite, the noted CBS anchor, . . .

COLBERT (interrupting): Ah, no, he's the former CBS anchor. Katie Couric is the new anchor of the CBS Evening News. Well, well, how do you guys feel about that?

You, tousle-haired guy in the back. Are you happy about Katie Couric taking over the CBS Evening News?

DAN RATHER: No, sir, Mr. Colbert. Are you? (Laughter)

COLBERT: Boom! Oh, look, we woke David Gregory up. Question?

DAVID GREGORY: Did Karl Rove commit a crime?

COLBERT: I don't know. I'll ask him.

(Colbert turns to Rove) Karl, pay attention please! (Rove is seen drawing a heart with "Karl + Stephen" written on it.)

GREGORY: Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003 when you were asked specifically about Karl, and Elliott Abrams, and Scooter Libby, and you said "I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me that they are not involved in this." Do you stand by that statement?

COLBERT: Nah, I was just kidding!

GREGORY: No, you're not finishing. You're not saying anything! You stood at that podium and said . . .

COLBERT (interrupting): Ah, that's where you're wrong. New podium! Just had it delivered today. Get your facts straight, David.

GREGORY: This is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us after having commented with that level of detail and tell the people watching this that somehow you've decided not to talk. You've got to . . .

(Colbert is seen looking at three buttons on the podium, labeled "EJECT," "GANNON" and "VOLUME." He selects the "VOLUME" button and turns it. We see Gregory's lips continue moving, but can't hear any sound coming out.)

COLBERT: If I can't hear you, I can't answer your question. I'm sorry! I have to move on. Terry.

TERRY MORAN: After the investigation began, after the criminal investigation was underway, you said . . .

(Colbert presses a button on the podium and fast-forwards through most of Moran's question.)

MORAN (continuing): All of a sudden, you have respect for the sanctity of a criminal investigation?

COLBERT (seen playing with rubber ball, which he is bouncing off attached paddle): No, I never had any respect for the sanctity of a criminal investigation. Activist judges! Yes, Helen.

HELEN THOMAS: You're going to be sorry. (Laughter)

COLBERT (looking vastly amused, mockingly): What are you going to do, Helen, ask me for a recipe?

THOMAS: Your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands (Colbert's smile fades) of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime.

COLBERT (interrupting): OK, hold on Helen, look . . .

THOMAS (continuing): Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war?

COLBERT (again interrupting): Helen, I'm going to stop you right there. (Thomas keeps talking.) That's enough! No! Sorry, Helen, I'm moving on. (Colbert tries to turn her volume off, but the knob falls off his controls.)

(Various reporters start shouting questions at Colbert.)

COLBERT (agitated): Guys, guys, please don't let Helen do this to what was a lovely day.

(Reporters keep shouting at him.)

COLBERT (putting his fingers over his ears and shouting in a high-pitched voice): Bllrrtt! No, no, no, no, no. I'm not listening to you!

Look what you did, Helen! I hate you!

(Helen Thomas glowers at Colbert.)

COLBERT (frantic): I'm out of here!

(Colbert pulls back the curtain behind him, desperately trying to flee. He says, "There is a wall here!" The press corps laughs. Colbert has difficulty finding a door from which to exit the room, echoing Bush's experience in China. He finally finds the door and hurries through it.)

COLBERT: It reeks in there! Ridiculous! I've never been so insulted in my life! Stupid job.

(Colbert continues walking away. We hear sinister-sounding music playing. We see Helen Thomas walking behind Colbert.)

(Colbert looks behind him, sees Thomas, and starts running.)

(Colbert trips over a roller skate. He yells "Condi!" We see a close-up of Helen Thomas' face, looking determined and angry. Colbert, increasingly panicked, gets up and continues running, running into a parking garage. He reaches an emergency call box, and yells into it.)

COLBERT: Oh, thank God. Help me!

ATTENDANT: What seems to be the problem, sir?

COLBERT: She won't stop asking why we invaded Iraq!

ATTENDANT: Hey, why did we invade Iraq?

COLBERT: NO!!! (runs toward his car)

(We see Helen Thomas, still walking toward him.)

(Colbert reaches his car, and fumblingly attempts to open it with his key. He is in such a desperate hurry that he fumbles with the keys and drops them. When he picks them up, he looks back and Helen is even closer. In his frantic rush, Colbert just can't get the key into the lock.)

(Just as his anxiety is getting completely out of control he suddenly remembers that he has a keyless remote -- so he just pushes the button on the keychain and the car unlocks immediately with the usual double squeak noise. Colbert jumps in and locks the door, and continues to fumble trying to start the car. He finally succeeds, and looks up to see Helen standing in front of the car, notepad in hand.)

COLBERT: NO!!! NO!!!

(Colbert puts the car into reverse and drives off, tires squealing. Thomas smiles.)

(Colbert is shown taking the shuttle from Washington, D.C. to New York. A car and driver are waiting for him at Penn Station. The uniformed man standing alongside the car opens the door and lets Colbert in.)

COLBERT: What a terrible trip, Danny. Take me home.

(The driver locks the doors, turns around, and says, "Buckle up, hon." IT'S HELEN THOMAS!!!)

COLBERT (horrified face pressed against car window): NO!!!

END OF "AUDITION TAPE"

STEPHEN COLBERT: Helen Thomas, ladies and gentlemen. Mr. Smith, members of the White House Correspondents Association, Madame First Lady, Mr. President, it's been a true honor. Thank you very much. Good night!


Hey, wait, where were the courtiers when Imus dissed the Clintons -- but didn't bother to be particularly funny doing so? At least Slick Willy had the good manners toact somewhat amused. But you have to a partisan dope to claim that Our Leader has any class as a human being.

Web Counter
Website Counters

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?