« August 2005 | Main | October 2005 »
Arabs: Anti-American or Not?
(Cross-posted at Blogmeister USA)
I read this extremely interesting commentary by Iraninan Amir Taheri, whose columns are featured regularly in the New York Post. Using Karen Hughes' current good will tour of the Middle East as a springboard, Taheri poses the question: "Are Arabs the most anti-American people on Earth?" What he discloses in order to answer the question is illuminating.
In addition to many American products and business outlets in Arab countries, one will find that:
More than 70 percent of what's broadcast on Arab TV stations (including those regarded as "obsessively anti-American") is U.S.-made; 80 percent of the films shown in Arab cinemas are made in Hollywood. There are more than two dozen English dailies, all using the American version of the language. Go through them, and you see that much of the content comes from U.S. agencies and syndication services.
The above paragraph will be important later. Here's more:
Only God and the U.S. immigration service would know how many Arabs hold green cards or even dual Arab-U.S. citizenship. With the possible exception of Libya, which has a weird regime, and Syria, whose leaders fear they may be targeted for "regime change," almost all Arab regimes are well-disposed toward the United States. Sixteen of the 21 member states of the Arab League host some U.S. military presence. The FBI maintains offices in at least 12 Arab capitals.
I imagine Iran is among the few whose government is anti-American, but this information isn't what one would expect to hear.
Remember the paragraph I said would be important? Here's why:
In Arab newspapers, the bulk of the material that could be classified as anti-Bush and/or anti-American is translated from U.S. sources. Stroll in the streets where books and video and audio tapes are on sale at the curbsides and you will see that 90 percent of the items vilifying America come from American, French and British authors.
Thanks, Noam Chomsky! You've found an audience after all.
At any given time, one can find a horde of American activists visiting the region to urge the natives to hate America:
* Two years ago, a group of Americans appeared in Arab capitals to stop people in the bazaars to "apologize for the Crusades," although the United States didn't even exist when those wars were fought between Europe and the Middle East.
They took a page out of Bill Clinton's book, who apologizes for--well, everything.
* One American professor recently published an op-ed in The New York Times relating his trip to Iran, where he was "disappointed" to see that students not only did not hate George W. Bush but, horror of horrors, also craved for an American-style democracy instead of an Islamist utopia.
If only this professor had those students in his classes, he could have shown them the "light."
* A friend, who happens to be a minister in an Arab state, was saddened this summer when, spending holidays with his family in the United States as he had always done since student days, he had to quarrel with an old American schoolmate. The point of the dispute was that the American insisted that the United States was an "evil empire," while the Arab believed that it could be a force for reform in the Middle East.
Read the article for more startling examples. Taheri's conclusion:
There are many issues on which the Arabs disagree with the United States. But most Arabs don't see that as a sign of anti-Arabism on the part of America. Hughes should not regard it as a sign of anti-Americanism on the part of Arabs.
It's nice to know that so many are doing their part to crumble the wall of misunderstanding between Arabs and Americans...not. Anti-Americanism exists in the Arab world, of that there is no doubt. If it didn't, 9/11 would never have happened. But is it as widespread as we think it is?
If not, some of our very own countrymen will do their best to encourage it.
Posted by Pam at 09:33 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Priscilla Owen Out?
Rumor that she pulled her name out of consideration for SCOTUS.
With everything going on about Bill Bennett's comments, I am salivating (more than usual) for Janice Rogers Brown. Brown!
Posted by Aaron at 04:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Cindy Sheehan and MSM Blindness
Let's get something straight here, even if MSM members won't.
Cindy Sheehan isn't a "peace mom".
A person who wants peace understands that there are times when you have to fight.
Americans, in general, want peace, but they won't tolerate being attacked.
USA will not have peace as long as terrorists threaten the USA and its allies. Thus, the USA has sent its military into Afghanistan and Iraq.
A "peace mom" would understand the need for such military action.
Cindy Sheehan, however, has demonstrated that she isn't a "peace mom".
Over at PoliPundit, someone suggested that Ms. Sheehan be called a pawn, probably because she is being used by Marxists, as seen at that rally that took place in Washington, D.C.
A fitting word to describe Ms. Sheehan is enabler, because she is enabling the enemies of the USA, which is the opposite of what her son Casey was doing when he was killed.
You don't have to approve of the fighting in Iraq in order to see that there is something wrong with an American enabling America's enemies.
When it comes to Ms. Sheehan, some MSM members have selective blindness.
Posted by Dodo David at 02:50 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Brock, Bennett, Clinton, Jess and Sullivan
I am going to post extensively on this later, but I have a few quick questions...
1. Has anyone checked to see what level the Andrew Sullivan freak-out meter is at today?
2. Where's Hillary?
3. Where is Jesse--"Abortion is black genocide...What happens to the mind of a person and the moral fabric of a nation that accepts the aborting of the life of a baby without a pang of conscience?"--Jackson? [Yes, Jesse said it back in 1977]
Posted by Aaron at 01:20 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
INTERBLOGATORY HIT'N'RUNS
|
(Caution; language:)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted by kitty at 11:24 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Democrats Plan to Go Positive in 2006
So reports Mort Kondracke.
Democrats have an answer to the question, "OK, what's your alternative to the Bush policies you constantly criticize?" It is: "We're working on it." When it emerges, in a form yet to be determined, it's likely to include proposals for tax reform, health insurance, energy independence, national security and retirement reform.
Tax reform? The only kind of tax reform the Democrats ever propose is the kind that reforms your wallet by making it a little thinner. Health insurance? Wow, that's exciting and new: HillaryCare 2006. Energy independence? Arguably a laudable goal, but there are two aspects to achieving that: Energy conservation, and finding new sources of energy. So far the Democrats have only mustered enthusiasm for the former. Are they going to propose new hydroelectric dams, or nuclear power plants, or drilling in ANWAR?
One key outside consultant told me he once thought Democrats needed to come forward with positive messages immediately, but that he's changed his mind. "The Republican numbers are bad now, bad across the board," he said. "So, we have time. Let them stew in their juices a bit longer. They perfected this in '94 and it worked for them. What's the one thing we've done? We've held the line on Social Security. Did we do anything else? Not that I can tell."
Hey, it worked in 2002 and 2004, why not try it again?
According to the latest Democracy Corps poll, Democrats now enjoy a 9-point advantage in a generic Congressional preference poll and are running stronger in unidentified seat-by-seat matchups.
Yet the poll found that the public's general opinion of Democrats is no better than it is of Republicans, that "feelings about Democrats are at a 2.5-year low" and that Democrats receive only 48 percent of the 2006 preference ballot - the same as their 2004 showing.
Buncha problems there. Democracy Corps is not non-partisan, the ballot that voters face is not a generic Congressional preference poll, and it's hard to argue that the Democrats are going to pick up anything when feelings about them are lower than since 2003.
Roy Blunt, new House Majority Leader, puts it well:
"I think the problem our friends on the other side have is that they can't win without ideas and they can't win with the ideas they have. If they don't come forward with the kind of proposals that Republicans brought to the public arena in 1994, they're not going to win the majority. And the kind of ideas that Leader Pelosi will come up with are not likely to be the kind of ideas that will appeal to the country."
See also the Viking Pundit
Posted by pat at 10:33 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Will Harry Reid Step Down
Rush was absolutely right yesterday. He said that the Democrats and the media are overplaying their hand on the delay indictment. Just like the non-story about travel reimbursments when every democrat refiled all their paperwork when they realized they were just as guilty as Tom DeLay. San Fran Nan Bella Pelosi was asked about why she was criticizing Tom DeLay when she did the same thing. Nancy replied that this was not about her, its about Tom DeLay.
Well lets see if Senator Reid will receive the same breathless attention that Tom DeLay has received:
Senator arranged for grant now involved in indictment of pastors.
WASHINGTON -- The money that led to the indictment this week of two Las Vegas pastors and the wife of one of them came from federal grants arranged by Sen. Harry Reid in September 2001, a Reid spokeswoman said Wednesday.
Moving to distance Reid from a possible scandal, aide Tessa Hafen said the senator sought the money on behalf of a nonprofit social services agency and not for the churches or persons who have been accused of mishandling the money.
"The money was administered by the Department of Justice, and it went to the agency in Nevada (Alliance Collegiums Association of Nevada)," Hafen said.
The Rev. Willie Davis, the longtime pastor of Second Baptist Church, and his wife, Emma, were indicted Tuesday on fraud charges with an associate minister, the Rev. McTheron Jones.
They are accused of spending $330,000 from federal grants on themselves although the money was intended for halfway houses for prison inmates in Southern Nevada.
The indictment identifies Willie Davis as president of the Alliance Collegiums Association of Nevada board of directors.
How is this different than the DeLay indictment? Well it's $140,000 more than what's involved with DeLay. Also, there is no zealous prosecutor charging conspiracy because there's actually EVIDENCE in this case.
Posted by Aaron at 09:05 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Bozell on the Bush Haters
Brent Bozell has an interesting comparison piece on the coverage of last weekend's anti-war protest and a pro-life gathering with similar numbers of people in Washington D.C.
The Washington Post won for the best biggest puff piece, a front-page story hyping how "Antiwar Fervor Fills the Streets." Reporter Petula Dvorak began: "Tens of thousands of people packed downtown Washington yesterday and marched past the White House in the largest show of antiwar sentiment in the nation's capital since the conflict in Iraq began.""Tens of thousands" also marched in the last pro-life march in January, but that story landed on page A-3, which is better than most years. Reporter David Snyder noted "tens of thousands of antiabortion advocates marched on the Mall yesterday as part of an annual protest of the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision guaranteeing women the right to abortion." That's an interesting difference in terms. Pro-lifers were advocates marching against a landmark guarantee for women, not people "packing the streets" to show growing "antiwar sentiment."
Click here to read the whole thing.
I'm sure it was simply a difference in editorial style...
Posted by Pam at 02:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Stop It Drudge!
Why is he driving me insane by putting JRB's photo up as a possible nominee? God I wish it were true.Posted by Aaron at 02:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Guardian Columnist: Why Does America Celebrate Heroes?
(Crossposted at Brainster's)
We don't have any newspapers quite like the Guardian in the US. It's kind of an amalgam of the Nation and the New York Times; mostly far left but with an occasional dollop of sense. This column, by Timothy Garton Ash, unfortunately lacks that latter quality.
This was the enactment of a dream, of course. The statistical reality of social mobility in today's United States is rather different. But a dream in which enough people believe is itself a kind of reality, and that has long been the case of the American dream. It's a remarkable fact that, in surveys, many poorer Americans oppose high taxes on the rich - presumably because they believe they might one day be rich themselves. There are just enough success stories of outstanding individuals from poor and immigrant backgrounds to keep the dream alive.
That is not entirely the reason why sensible people oppose high taxes on the rich. In fact, we had those high taxes right up until Ronald Reagan. The reason why we oppose high taxes on the rich is that the rich have the capital stock of the country. If they are taxed highly on their investments, they will tend not to invest. And then the rest of us suffer the ill-effects. Perhaps the classic case of this was when the Clinton Administration decided to raise taxes on the purchase of luxury goods, like yachts. Inevitably what happened was that rich people decided not to buy yachts. Who suffered? The folks who made their living building them.
Two months later we saw America at its worst, as members of the black underclass in the ninth ward of New Orleans drowned, grew sick and were preyed upon by violent gangs, while government failed to help or protect them. There are even reports (unconfirmed, and perhaps apocryphal) of American women changing their name from Katrina, since Hurricane Katrina has become a synonym not just for natural disaster but for human and political failure. How could the richest and most powerful country in the world, capable of hitting a flea in Afghanistan with a precision laser-guided missile, fail its own poor so miserably?
Sigh. Perhaps Mr Garton Ash is unaware that the number of dead in Katrina was vastly overstated, that the reports of violent gangs appear to have been completely made up. I don't know anybody named Katrina myself, but I doubt if many women so named would change it just because of the hurricane.
Then he diverges onto another path which I found interesting:
It would be interesting to do a word count for mentions of the word "hero" in American public life, as compared with Britain, France or Germany. A hundred years ago, conservative nationalist Germans used to characterise the "true" Germans as heroes and the Jews as wheeler-dealers: Helden against Händler. Today, we have a different stereotype: true Americans as Helden and limp-wristed Europeans as Händler. Yet in practice, of course, you had the same mix of true bravery and, as one journalist on the spot noted, "real raw panic" in the response to Rita and Katrina as you would in most societies.
I have no doubt that the word "hero" is used more commonly in the United States than in Europe and for a simple reason: Leftists hate heroes. Indeed, I suspect Mr Garton Ash is not a big fan himself. Note his immediate (and inane) evocation of the Germans and the Jews; the implication is clearly that if you like heroes you must have loved the Holocaust.
Why does the Left denigrate heroes? Because when we celebrate heroes, we are elevating an individual over the common man. We are saying that this person is better than average, that he or she is deserving of admiration and emulation. The Left realizes that heroic individuals undercut their argument that people on their own cannot succeed, that a collective, community effort is needed. It takes a village, remember?
Think about the reaction of "cartoonist" Ted Rall to the death of Pat Tillman. Tillman, a multimillionnaire athlete, had quit professional football after 9-11 to enlist in the army, where he became a Ranger. He was tragically killed in Afghanistan in a friendly fire incident. Rall created a cartoon depicting Tillman as bloodthirsty to kill Arabs. In the final panel, two newspaper reporters are talking with their editor about what they think of Tillman. "Uh--Idiot?" says the first reporter. "Sap?" suggests the second. "Hero!" says the editor.
That's why the continuing theme of Brainster's (my solo blog) is the hero, the individual who rises above the moment to achieve greatness. It is to celebrate people like Marine Captain Brian Chontosh, or Phillip Bullard, or Sgt Paul Smith.
Yes, I blog on a lot of topics. But the word "hero" definitely pops up more often in my blog than most. It appears in 17 different posts in September alone, according to a quick search.
Posted by pat at 10:55 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Fetus Smuggling
Colombian police have found the bodies of three human foetuses hidden in statues destined for the United States.
The discovery was made by officers searching for contraband at Bogota Airport on Tuesday.
The corpses were wrapped in plastic and concealed inside statues of Christian icons, which were smashed open.
Colombian police chief Gen Jord Alirio Varon said the four- to five-month-old foetuses could have been intended for use in Satanic rituals.
Gen Varon said the foetuses were found alongside crucifixes and medals.
He said officials are trying to find out who sent the packages, which came from Barranquilla in Colombia and were destined for Miami in the US.
Posted by Aaron at 10:47 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Feminists Laud First Female Suicide Bomber in Iraq
(The following piece is a political satire.)
The first known woman suicide bomber in Iraq, killing at least six Iraqi army recruits and wounding 35, has been hailed as a trailblazer by feminists.
Gloria Steinem, considered the mother of modern feminism, had only words of praise for the nameless woman. "When a woman steps into a role formerly dominated by men and makes it her own, then women everywhere benefit by her courage and fortitude. She is an example of where perseverance and persistence can bring you." Steinem then had a pertinent question regarding the bombing. "Was she wearing a bra?"
Echoing those sentiments was Eve Ensler, creator of the Vagina Monologues and crusader against violence toward women. "She sounds like an amazing person. By killing these men she is fighting back against the cycle of violence perpetrated by men upon women. Of course, it's too bad she had to die with them. I hope she shouted, 'My vagina wins!' when she pulled the cord."
Others were wondering how they could be a part of this groundbreaking occurrence. Lawyer Lynne Stewart offered to help with the woman's defense, but upon being reminded that the woman was dead, revised her offer to defending those who recruited the female bomber--should they decide to go public. "Of course, they'll have to wait until I find out how long I'll be in prison," the convicted lawyer chuckled.
Even some Hollywood stars are in awe of this woman whom they have never met, and now never will. "It's like, so totally awesome," said Cameron Diaz, host of the MTV show Trippin'. " "I'd love to try that on my show, but, um, I don't think the producers would go for it. It's way too dangerous. But I'm with her in spirit, you know?" she added as she boarded her private jet with Drew Barrymore as they flew to an impoverished country in Africa to shoot another episode of the program.
Finally, grieving mother Cindy Sheehan blamed the woman's act on President Bush. "People are saying this woman was brainwashed, or maybe even forced, into doing this heroic act," she declared from her jail cell in Washington D.C. "But I know what she was thinking. She knew that by blowing herself up and taking a few evil Iraqi army recruits with her, she was actually going to blow a big hole in the reason for the U.S. being in Iraq. I'd love to meet her mother. Maybe she can join my tour."
Posted by Pam at 09:01 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Jesse Jackson to go on trial
John Hawkins at Right Wing News has picked up on a story that is bound to become a hot topic beginning next year.
Rev. Jesse Jackson will be a defendent in a civil trial that is to take place next January.
To learn more about the story, click here.
Posted by Dodo David at 06:18 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Replace DeLay with Gay?
UPDATE: Dreier was not asked to replace DeLay.
This is quite interesting:
The latest target of a Capitol Hill outing campaign — designed to expose closeted homosexual Republicans who oppose civil rights for gay people — is San Gabriel Valley Congressman David Dreier.
The powerful 12-term congressman — chairman of the House Rules Committee, chairman of the California Republican House delegation, co-chairman of Californians for Bush, chairman of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s transition team — is in the cross hairs of Mike Rogers and his Blogactive.com Web site, whose outing campaign has already forced one GOP congressman out of politics. Representative Ed Schrock, a reactionary from Virginia, ended his re-election campaign last month after Rogers put on his Web site an audiotape of Schrock trolling for tricks on a gay chat line.
Now, Rogers — a former development director for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force — has given Dreier the “Roy Cohn Award, in recognition of 24 years of working against gay and lesbian rights while living as a gay man yourself.” He is pummeling Dreier with almost daily revelations as a response to the GOP’s anti-gay crusade for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages.
Rogers’ campaign against Dreier got a major boost when it was taken up by Raw Story, the hot new liberal gadfly newsblog. Raw Story — which is edited out of Cambridge, Massachusetts, by 23-year-old John Byrne, who is also gay — last week published an interview with Dreier’s Democratic opponent in 1998 and 2000, Dr. Janice Nelson, who said she was aware during her 2000 campaign that Dreier was living with his chief of staff, Brad Smith. “Brad was like an invisible presence,” she said. “They really have the routine down slick.”
First of all, you will recall I met and confronted this Rogers fellow at the National Press Club. He firmly believes that all gay Republicans are shams and in hiding unless they are actually sodomizing each other on C-Span. I didn't see Rogers shouting down McGreevy at any press conferences.
And until I see the "Anti-Gay Person's Act H.R. 666" that Dreier authored and voted for, then excuse me for not being exited by this information. Dreier would be a gayhater to this crowd unless he was actually signing Andrew Sullivan and David Brock's marriage certificate.
Posted by Aaron at 03:58 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
On DeLay
I don't know if he did it, but it sure doesn't look good.
I don't care how good he is for the Party. If he did it then good riddence and I hope he spends all two years behind bars.
UPDATE: Okay, maybe I shouldn't just throw him under the bus. Here is what Mark Levin had to say at the corner (and I really trust his opinion in judicial matters):
DELAY [Mark R. Levin]
Here's my first take on this indictment (I've only read the indictment and nothing more for now): The indictment is three pages in length. Other than a statement that "one or more" of 3 individuals, including Tom DeLay, entered into an illegal conspiracy, I can't find a single sentence tying Tom DeLay to a crime. That is, there's not a single sentence tying DeLay to the contribution. The indictment describes the alleged conduct of two other individuals, but nothing about DeLay. You would think if Ronnie Earle had even a thin reed of testimony linking DeLay to the contribution, it would have been noted in the indictment to justify the grand jury's action. Moreover, not only is there no information about DeLay committing acts in furtherance of a conspiracy, there's no information about DeLay entering into a conspiracy. I honestly believe that unless there's more, this is an egregious abuse of prosecutorial power. It's a disgrace. I understand that not everything has to be contained in an indictment, but how about something!
This is a reasonable argument not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. However, I am sticking to my statement above if he is in fact involved.
UPDATE II: From Media Blog
Personally, I'm not a huge fan of Tom DeLay, for reasons that have entirely to do with the expansion of entitlement spending under his watch (see Bruce Bartlett's excellent piece on NRO today for details). But having said that, this indictment is totally phony. Here's why:
The indictment centers around a money swap that took place between the Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC), to which DeLay has ties, and the Republican National State Elections Committee (RNSEC). TRMPAC sent $190,000 to RNSEC, and RNSEC then sent the same total amount in seven checks ranging from $20,000 to $40,000 to Texas House candidates in 2002. Travis County DA Ronnie Earle, a Democrat, calls this money laundering, because the money that TRMPAC sent to RNSEC came from coporations, which are barred from contributing to campaigns in Texas.
What you won't hear in the press is that A) This is a perfectly legal move, and B) the Democrats did the exact same thing. An Institute on Money in State Politics study reveals that on Oct. 31, 2002, the Texas Democratic Party did the same thing when it sent $75,000 to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and received $75,000 back from the DNC the very same day.
Here's what I wrote about this case last summer:
Just to put this $190,000 deal into perspective and demonstrate the petty, vindictive nature of this partisan investigation, the study also reveals that Democrats transferred a total of approximately $11 million dollars in soft money from its national parties to fund Texas campaigns in 2002, compared to $5.2 million transferred by Republicans. I've been watching TV all day and no one has provided this context. I'll keep watching to see if the coverage gets more than fingernail-deep.Bottom line: Even people who aren't fans of Tom DeLay should show some intellectual honesty and admit that this is an out-of-control prosecutor and a phony charge.
Posted by Aaron at 02:05 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack
DeLay Indicted
So, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay has been indicted by a Texas grand jury.
DeLay has accused the district attorney involved in the case of conducting a political witch hunt.
The Dodo doesn't buy that argument.
First, the grand jury had to have sufficient evidence in order to indict DeLay.
Second, the fact that the district attorney is a Democrat doesn't automatically mean that the district attorney is letting politics influence his work.
Third, being a Republican doesn't mean that one is incapable of committing a crime. Republicans aren't more saintly than Democrats.
Power can corrupt a politician no matter which side of the U.S. House of Representatives that the politician sits on.
Posted by Dodo David at 01:59 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Kitty Sure Gets Around
Not only does she blog her and at Kitty Litter, but she is down saving elderly men Louisianna. God bless her!
Posted by Aaron at 12:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Evil Inspires
What does one say when they come across an article titled 'Honour killing' inspires reflection among Pakistanis?
Calm and methodically big brother stoops over his little sister while shooting one projectile after the other into her. Her spouse, affected by several shots to the abdomen, can only look on helplessly, while his wife is executed by her own family. [Translation from FreeRepublic]
A so-called 'honour killing' involving a Pakistani family leads members of the immigrant community to reflect on the practice.
A Pakistani man's alleged shooting of his younger sister in a so-called 'honour killing' over the weekend has led members of the Pakistani community to discuss ways of halting the practice.
The sheer idiocy of the community's reaction is breathtaking: you get pee-pee on the Koran--you must take to the streets in violent, deadly protests; a man in Denmark murders his own sister in broad daylight--you must pause and reflect.
Where is the outrage?
And more importantly, where's Hillary?
[nod to Danegerous]
Posted by Aaron at 11:44 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack
You know that . . .
You know that you’ve been working with pre-schoolers too much when . . .
. . . the home page of your web browser is NickJr.com.
. . . while at McDonalds you order a Happy Meal, and you are by yourself.
. . . there are crayons where you used to keep ink pens.
. . . at night you can’t fall asleep until you look for monsters underneath your bed.
. . . you anxiously await the arrival of the next Winnie the Poo movie.
. . . at the state fair you try to get on the kiddie rides.
. . . you listen to Sesame Street songs while driving to work.
. . . at home you use bowls and plates decorated with cartoon characters.
. . . when you go to a movie theater, you ask for the child discount, and there are no children with you.
. . . you name your own children Dora and Diego, and you name your dog Blue.
Posted by Dodo David at 10:57 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
It's All About Cindy--What About Lynndie?
You know, for all the press the Abu Ghraib photos received, why isn't anyone interested in the outcome of Lynndie England's trial?
England was sentenced to three years in prison for her involvement, as well as a dishonorable discharge. Where's the excitement about this example of the American military doing the right thing? Ah, gotcha--we only talk about the military when it goofs, not when it makes things right. George W. Bush can commiserate, I'm sure.
Lynndie England may be one of the only people I can think of who is thrilled that Cindy Sheehan's popularity with the press has seen a resurgence, as it's taking much of the heat off of her.
While I think it's right that those who participated in that distasteful photo shoot be punished, I find it amusing that the incident at Abu Ghraib, which dominated the headlines for weeks on end, has had its conclusion shunted aside for the "fresher" spectacle of Cindy Sheehan and her followers being arrested in front of the White House.
The MSM should adopt a new slogan: all the news that's fit to occupy the attention span of a gnat. And you wondered what that annoying buzzing sound was!
Posted by Pam at 09:58 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Update on story about Sheehan jealousy
Journalist Jennifer Harper of The Washington Times has called into question the authorship of that controversial "Cindy Sheehan" post at DailyKos.
Harper writes the following:
The someone called "Cindy Sheehan" wrote at the DailyKos.com Web site early Saturday evening: "I am watching CNN and it is 100 percent [Hurricane] Rita. Even though it is a little wind and a little rain, it is bad, but there are other things going on in this country today ... and in the world."
The comment was one of a dozen entries, including speech transcripts and press releases, credited to Mrs. Sheehan at the site, which says 79 percent of the "page viewers" are Democrats. Bush-bashing is the daily ritual.
But was "Cindy Sheehan" actually Cindy Sheehan?
"I am very certain she did not post it," says Morrigan Phillips, a spokesman (Mrs. Sheehan has three) who has taken questions for Mrs. Sheehan on her cross-country protest tour. "She was pretty busy on Saturday."
So is the "Cindy Sheehan" who wrote the controversial post the real Cindy Sheehan?
Here are some observations.
#1 Ms. Harper states, "The comment was one of a dozen entries, including speech transcripts and press releases, credited to Mrs. Sheehan at the site."
If DailyKos credits other entries as being from the real Cindy Sheehan, then why not credit this latest, controversial entry as being from the real Cindy Sheehan? Didn't DailyKos verify that the person with the user name "Cindy Sheehan" was really Cindy Sheehan?
#2 Sheehan spokesman Morrigan Phillips stated, "I am very certain she did not post it."
Well, Sheehan is very certain that President Bush lied about there being WMDs in Iraq. Being certain isn't the same thing as being right.
#3 Sheehan denied writing anti-Semitic remarks in e-mail that she sent to others. Yet, the recipients of her e-mail confirm that Sheehan did write those remarks. It wouldn't be out of character for Sheehan to say something controversial and then deny saying it.
#4 Sheehan got herself arrested in order to draw media attention to herself, which explains why she was smiling while being arrested. If Sheehan is that starved for media attention, then it wouldn't be surprising if Sheehan did post that controversial statement at DailyKos.
For its own good, DailyKos needs to investigate the authorship of the controversial "Sheehan" post.
If the real Cindy Sheehan didn't write it, then all other DailyKos entries credited to Cindy Sheehan are also questionable.
If Ms. Sheehan didn't write the post, then out of fairness to Ms. Sheehan, the real author needs to be outed.
Even if Ms. Sheehan isn't popular with conservatives, it would still be wrong for someone to impersonate her.
That's a fact that both Ms. Sheehan and President Bush would agree on.
Posted by Dodo David at 07:32 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Interesting Omissions/Additions on SCOTUS Pick
Here is an earlier list of possible SCOTUS picks:
Widely mentioned candidates include federal appellate judges Janice Rogers Brown, Edith Brown Clement, Edith Hollan Jones, Emilio Garza, Alice Batchelder, Karen Williams, J. Michael Luttig, J. Harvie Wilkinson, Michael McConnell and Samuel Alito. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former deputy attorney general Larry Thompson, lawyer Miguel Estrada and Maura Corrigan, a member of the Michigan Supreme Court, are also considered possibilities.
Here is the latest list:
President Bush, close to nominating a successor to retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, has narrowed his list to a handful of candidates that outside advisers say includes federal judges and two people who have never banged a gavel--corporate attorney Larry Thompson and White House counsel Harriet Miers.
...
He declined to say if the president had interviewed any candidates and wouldn't speculate about Bush's favorites, but legal analysts monitoring the selection process say others often mentioned are federal appellate judges Alice Batchelder, J. Michael Luttig, Edith Jones, J. Harvie Wilkinson, Priscilla Owen, Samuel Alito, Karen Williams and Michael McConnell. Also said to be on the list are Maura Corrigan, a judge on the Michigan Supreme Court, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Who was added to the list?
Priscilla Owen
Who didn't make the second list?
- Edith Brown Clement
- Emilio Garza
- J. Harvie Wilkinson
- Samuel Alito
- Miguel Estrada
- and...Janice Rogers Brown
Personally, I think the three most likely candidates are:
- Edith Jones
- Alice Batchelder
- Priscilla Owen
My dream list would be:
- Janice Rogers Brown
- Miguel Estrada
- J. Michael Luttig
Who are your top three?
Posted by Aaron at 07:27 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Islands for Sale
Who knew you could buy an island online.
Posted by Aaron at 06:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Tax Dollars at Work
I am simply beside myself. This should be a crime:
With little to do, some evacuees are blowing their $2,000 checks from FEMA. One family hired a stretch limo to go shopping. Local hustlers are hanging about, offering, for a fee, to take evacuees to bars or casinos.
That's hip-hop culture for ya!
Posted by Aaron at 06:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
More on that "anti-war" rally
Thanks to Michelle Malkin, the Dodo has been examining photos taken at the anti-war rally held in Washington, D.C. The photos give the Dodo the impression that the rally had little to do with the war in Iraq. The photos indicate that Cindy Sheehan’s supporters had another agenda.
In case you didn’t know, Cindy Sheehan’s support comes from an organization that calls itself International ANSWER. It turns out that this particular organization is a front organization for the Worker's World Party.
Writing for Slate, Christopher Hitchens states the following:
I can tell you that the Worker's World Party — Ramsey Clark's core outfit — is the product of a split within the Trotskyist movement. These were the ones who felt that the Trotskyist majority, in 1956, was wrong to denounce the Russian invasion of Hungary. The WWP is the direct, lineal product of that depraved rump.
According to Hitchens, the Worker’s World Party “openly supports Kim Jong-il, Fidel Castro, Slobodan Milosevic, and the "resistance" in Afghanistan and Iraq.”
Thus, International ANSWER is, in the words of Hitchens, “a front for (depending on the day of the week) fascism, Stalinism, and jihadism.”
Neal Boortz states the following about International ANSWER:
In the leadership of International A.N.S.W.E.R you will find people who have been supporting communist causes and working for the weakening of America for many many years. The groups behind International A.N.S.W.E.R have also called for the abolition of private property.
Photos taken at that so-called “anti-war” rally verify what Hitchens and Boortz are saying.
Here are some of the things stated on the signs and banners that were at the rally, along with the Dodo’s commentary:
“Build the Socialist Equality Party”
[DD: Socialist equality? In Socialism, some people are more equal than others.]
“Party for Socialism and Liberation”
[DD: In some nations, socialism and liberation are opposites.]
“Freedom Road Socialist Organization”
[DD: What an oxymoron.]
“Break with the Democratic Party of War and Racism – For a Workers Party That Fights for Socialist Revolution!”
[DD: The Democratic Party is racist? Want to tell that to the N.A.A.C.P.?]
“Young Communist League”
[DD: Finally, a group that admits to being Communist.]
“Hands Off Iran and north Korea!
Socialist Workers Campaign”
[DD: A group that supports North Korea’s Communist government; they forgot to capitalize “north”.]
“From Baghdad to New Orleans –
Capitalism Means Mass Murder!
Socialist Revolution
Is the Only Solution!”
[DD: Communists are known for their opposition to Capitalism; someone forgot to tell them about the mass murders committed by Saddam Hussein . . . and by Stalin.]
There you have it. The rally was a pro-Socialism rally. Its participants seem to have forgotten about a couple of famous Socialist organizations.
Remember the USSR? Well, the letters “USSR” stand for “Union of Soviet Socialist Republics”.
Remember the Nazis of 20th-Century Germany? Well, “Nazi” is the shortened form of the German word “Nazionalsozialist”. “Nazi” was the name for a member of the National Socialist German Workers Party.
What will Cindy Sheehan’s Socialist supporters do next?
It wouldn’t surprise the Dodo if the Socialists started saying, “Heil Cindy!”
Clarification: This post is not about Cindy Sheehan. It is about the people who are supporting her. The Dodo doesn't have any evidence that Cindy Sheehan supports either Socialism or Communism.
Posted by Dodo David at 06:28 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
CNN.com Spinning Brown
Here is how CNN quotes Michael Brown: You want me to be a hero.
But that's NOT what he said!
"I guess you want me to be the superhero that is going to step in there and suddenly take everybody out of New Orleans."
There is a big difference between a hero and a superhero. But I guess that's just CNN "nudging."
Posted by Aaron at 05:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
They lie and lie and lie...
Is anything about the Democrats real anymore other than their hatred for Bush? Wizbang has the donation record or this "republican" (aka democratic hack).
Andrew Sullivan was unavailable for comment.
Posted by Aaron at 03:37 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Caption Contest Winner
Winner goes to GayPatriotWest! Who knew he reads this site? Is he single? Heh.
"I Thought Cindy Was Arrested, not Eaten"
Posted by Aaron at 02:44 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Typical, Typical
World according to the MSM:
Posted by Aaron at 12:59 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
INTERBLOGATORY GEMS
|
Ben Stein's
|
|
|
Scroll down to
Posted by kitty at 10:04 AM | Comments (4)
Kalb and Teflon
Here's a particularly stupid article by Marvin Kalb on the sudden unleashing of the press:
Suddenly, as if the flood waters had smashed not only the levees in New Orleans but the teflon-protected presidency of George W. Bush, networks and newspapers have again found their voice. An embarrassing four-year period of media deference to the president and his policies has ended.
Sigh. Yeah, we all know how deferential the press had been to the president right up until Katrina. Talk about nutty myths, this is the nuttiest of all.
For the first time since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, when an understandable feeling of patriotism induced timid coverage of White House policy in Afghanistan and Iraq, journalists have now returned to their traditional role as fearless chroniclers of the passing parade, blasting the administration for its tardy, ineffective response to the hurricane. Indeed, they have even gone beyond their traditional role.
Marvin, Marvin, Marvin! Have you forgotten that "everybody supported Afghanistan", that lovely and phony meme that the left went along with that war, but Iraq was just a step too far?
The media feels free to criticize a president whose poll numbers are collapsing....
Now wait a minute. First the media are plural, so it's "The media feel free...." Second, I thought they were becoming fearless chroniclers of the passing parade, not merely folks feeling free to kick somebody when he's down. And as for Bush's supposed "collapsing poll numbers", they are not evident in Rasmussen's polling, which has shown him at between 44 and 49 percent approval both before Katrina and afterwards.
Update: Aaron points us (in the comments) to this article in the LA Times on all the mistakes in the coverage of Katrina. Could it be that the reason the press has gained the courage to resist Bush is because they got away with lying during the aftermath of the hurricane?
Posted by pat at 10:00 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Where was Kerry?
The Dodo has a question about the anti-war rally held in Washington, D.C. on September 24th of this year.
Where was Senator John Kerry?
During his 2004 presidential campaign, Senator Kerry spoke against the war in Iraq.
So why didn’t he appear at Cindy Sheehan’s rally?
Could his absence have anything to do with the speech that he gave on October 9, 2002?
You remember the speech, right? Kerry gave it on the floor of the U.S. Senate.
You don’t remember?
That’s probably because most of the mainstream media didn’t report the speech. If MSM members did report the speech, then they forgot about it during the 2004 presidential campaign. How convenient for Senator Kerry.
So what is in the speech that would make Senator Kerry stay away from Cindy Sheehan?
Answer: Evidence that President Bush did not lie.
Here are some excerpts from Kerry’s speech. Take note of the parts in bold print.
With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question: Why? Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?
He [Hussein] has supported and harbored terrorist groups . . .
In 1991, the world collectively made a judgment that this man should not have weapons of mass destruction. And we are here today in the year 2002 with an uninspected 4-year interval during which time we know through intelligence he not only has kept them, but he continues to grow them. I believe the record of Saddam Hussein's ruthless, reckless breach of international values and standards of behavior which is at the core of the cease-fire agreement, with no reach, no stretch, is cause enough for the world community to hold him accountable by use of force, if necessary. The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons.
It is clear that in the 4 years since the UNSCOM inspectors were forced out, Saddam Hussein has continued his quest for weapons of mass destruction. According to intelligence, Iraq has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of the 150 kilometer restriction imposed by the United Nations in the ceasefire resolution. Although Iraq's chemical weapons capability was reduced during the UNSCOM inspections, Iraq has maintained its chemical weapons effort over the last 4 years. Evidence suggests that it has begun renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard gas, sarin, cyclosarin, and VX. Intelligence reports show that Iraq has invested more heavily in its biological weapons programs over the 4 years, with the result that all key aspects of this program--R&D, production and weaponization--are active. Most elements of the program are larger and more advanced than they were before the gulf war. Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating agents and is capable of quickly producing and weaponizing a variety of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery on a range of vehicles such as bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers, and covert operatives which could bring them to the United States homeland. Since inspectors left, the Iraqi regime has energized its missile program, probably now consisting of a few dozen Scud-type missiles with ranges of 650 to 900 kilometers that could hit Israel, Saudi Arabia and other U.S. allies in the region. In addition, Iraq is developing unmanned aerial vehicles UAVs, capable of delivering chemical and biological warfare agents, which could threaten Iraq's neighbors as well as American forces in the Persian Gulf.
Iraqi defectors who once worked for Iraq's nuclear weapons establishment have reportedly told American officials that acquiring nuclear weapons is a top priority for Saddam Hussein's regime.
According to the CIA's report, all U.S. intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons. There is little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop nuclear weapons.
As bad as he is, Saddam Hussein, the dictator, is not the cause of war. Saddam Hussein sitting in Baghdad with an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction is a different matter. In the wake of September 11, who among us can say, with any certainty, to anybody, that those weapons might not be used against our troops or against allies in the region? . . . And while the administration has failed to provide any direct link between Iraq and the events of September 11, can we afford to ignore the possibility that Saddam Hussein might accidentally, as well as purposely, allow those weapons to slide off to one group or other in a region where weapons are the currency of trade? How do we leave that to chance?
The Iraqi regime's record over the decade leaves little doubt that Saddam Hussein wants to retain his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and, obviously, as we have said, grow it. These weapons represent an unacceptable threat.
In the clearest presentation to date, the President laid out a strong, comprehensive, and compelling argument why Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs are a threat to the United States and the international community.
If in the end these efforts fail, and if in the end we are at war, we will have an obligation, ultimately, to the Iraqi people with whom we are not at war. This is a war against a regime, mostly one man. So other nations in the region and all of us will need to help create an Iraq that is a place and a force for stability and openness in the region. That effort is going to be long term, costly, and not without difficulty, given Iraq's ethnic and religious divisions and history of domestic turbulence.
So there you have it. A few months before President Bush claimed that Iraq still had WMDs, Senator Kerry claimed that Iraq still had WMDs. Before the Bush Administration claimed that Saddam Hussein was trying to develop nuclear weapons, Senator Kerry claimed that Saddam Hussein was trying to develop nuclear weapons. Senator Kerry even said that Saddam Hussein had been aiding terrorists.
So if President Bush lied about Iraq having WMDs, about Saddam Hussein being a threat to the USA, then Senator Kerry lied, too.
Certainly you didn’t expect a “liar” like Senator Kerry to be welcome at Cindy Sheehan’s rally.
A big “Thank You” to Giacomo of Joust The Facts for finding Kerry’s speech, blogging about it and providing a link to it.
Posted by Dodo David at 07:32 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Line Item Veto
Even though I was in the fifth grade, I remember seeing the Bush/Clinton/Perot debates in 1992. And I still remember Bush discussing a line item veto and he held up his pen showing him zapping the fat of bills. Its funny the things one remembers...
I just bring that up because of this:
Senators Jim Talent (R., Mo.) and George Allen (R., Va.) are holding a press conference tomorrow announcing that they are going to introduce a constitutional amendment to create a line-item veto.
Posted by Aaron at 02:50 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Caption Contest
linked to by EU Rota...and I cannot verify it's authenticity.
Posted by Aaron at 02:37 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack
Cindy Sheehan Arrested
I am assuming she threw a temper-tantrum and the secret service said enough was enough.
Ah, I was right.
Posted by Aaron at 02:03 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Alone in Iraq
That's the message we get daily from the left and the MSM: we're "going it alone" in Iraq, and the rest of the world has abandoned not only us, but the Iraqis.
Not true.
As Allan Wall points out on Front Page Magazine, there is a coalition in Iraq:
The U.S. presently has 26 coalition partners here in Iraq, with a total of over 23,000 troops which are neither American nor Iraqi.
Here is a list of our 26 partners, in descending order of troop strength: the UK, South Korea, Italy, Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, Romania, Japan, Australia, Denmark, Bulgaria, El Salvador, Azerbaijan, Latvia, Mongolia, Lithuania, Albania, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Estonia, Kazakhstan, Norway and the Netherlands.
Just because France, Germany and Russia declared they would not be a part of the mission in Iraq (and we all know why now), that doesn't mean there is no coalition. It makes me think of my high school days, when the kids who thought they were cooler than everyone else would consider any gathering without them a "non-event," even when everyone else was having a great time without them.
Here in Iraq, we have allies with worthy traditions, distinguished units, good equipment and dedicated soldiers. They deserve our respect and appreciation, and we can learn from them. As the Operation Iraqi Freedom continues its fight, we should not forget the contributions of our coalition allies.
Hear, hear.
UPDATE: Oops...click here for that Frontpage Magazine link.
Posted by Pam at 01:29 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Cindy Sheehan jealous of Hurricane Rita
The blog Angry in the Great White North has a story that seems too good to be true. However, Michelle Malkin has confirmed the story.
This past Saturday, members of the Main Stream Media were focusing on Hurricane Rita and its victims.
Well, Cindy Sheehan became jealous of Hurricane Rita. Cindy wanted the media attention that Rita was receiving.
Cindy responded by posting the following statement on the blog Daily Kos:
i am watching cnn and it is 100 percent rita...even though it is a little wind and a little rain...it is bad, but there are other things going on in this country today...and in the world!!!!
How did the other readers of Daily Kos respond?
To find out, read the story at Angry in the Great White North.
Hat Tip to Michelle Malkin.
Posted by Dodo David at 12:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
About those Dead at the Dome
After five days managing near-riots, medical horrors and unspeakable living conditions inside the Superdome, Louisiana National Guard Col. Thomas Beron prepared to hand over the dead to representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Following days of internationally reported killings, rapes and gang violence inside the Dome, the doctor from FEMA - Beron doesn't remember his name - came prepared for a grisly scene: He brought a refrigerated 18-wheeler and three doctors to process bodies.
"I've got a report of 200 bodies in the Dome," Beron recalls the doctor saying.
The real total was six, Beron said.
Of those, four died of natural causes, one overdosed and another jumped to his death in an apparent suicide, said Beron, who personally oversaw the turning over of bodies from a Dome freezer, where they lay atop melting bags of ice. State health department officials in charge of body recovery put the official death count at the Dome at 10, but Beron said the other four bodies were found in the street near the Dome, not inside it. Both sources said no one had been killed inside.
Posted by Aaron at 11:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
A Happy Ending
Here is a story that has a happy ending.
When New Orleans was evacuated, 22-month-old Kaila Hernandez and her 4-year-old brother Angelo became separated from their mother, Amelia Hernandez.
The children, their maternal grandmother and other relatives ended up at Camp Gruber in northeastern Oklahoma. Amelia ended up at the Houston Astrodome.
After 2 weeks of separation, the children and their mother were reunited.
Since then, the entire family has relocated to Tulsa, where they are living in 2 apartments next door to each other.
Photo Credit: Kelly Kerr/Tulsa World
Posted by Dodo David at 08:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
LOSER REVISITED
I remember when Pat and I first saw a picture of Kerry's campaign plane. We were busy with his KerryHaters blog at the time. We looked at that picture and couldn't quite believe what we saw. "JOHN KERRY PRESIDENT" ?!? Not "FOR PRESIDENT," just PRESIDENT." If anyone had doubted his incredible arrogance before, the sight of that plane should have erased all reservations. He formally launched "Hair Force One" in May of '04. (Lots of great photos on that link.) Later, when he chose Edwards as his running mate, only the names were changed; the word PRESIDENT was left intact. I wonder if this plane is captured in Rosenbaum's documentary?
Kerry's not- so-amazing race, on film
I hear that John Kerry loyalists are kicking themselves for cooperating last year with filmmaker Steve Rosenbaum on "Inside the Bubble," a potentially devastating behind-the-scenes look at the Massachusetts senator's failed presidential campaign.
I'm also told that Hillary Clinton partisans are licking their chops to see the film, which "could end up being the silver bullet that kills Kerry's presidential chances for 2008," says a Lowdown spy.
Posted by kitty at 08:23 AM | Comments (1)
Babs Declares Global Warming "Emergency"
While promoting her upcoming album in an interview with ABC's Diane Sawyer (ain't retirement grand?), scientist and foreign policy expert Barbra Streisand said, "We are in a global warming emergency state, and these storms are going to become more frequent, more intense."
The Drudge Report obligingly points out the numerous deadly hurricanes that have taken place not just within the past year or two, but within Babs' lifetime--and she's no spring chicken.
Perhaps if she's that worried about global warming, Ms. Streisand should consider keeping her piehole shut.
Posted by Pam at 08:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Will Rogers Says . . .
Will Rogers was a popular entertainer during the first half of the 20th Century. His popularity was due in part to what he said in his syndicated newspaper column titled "Will Rogers Says". Some of the statements that Rogers made are applicable today. Here are some of his statements*:
About all I can say for the United States Senate is that it opens with a prayer and closes with an investigation.
Alexander Hamilton started the U.S. Treasury with nothing, and that was the closest our country has ever been to being even.
Ancient Rome declined because it had a Senate; now what's going to happen to us with both a House and a Senate?
Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for.
Everything is changing. People are taking their comedians seriously and the politicians as a joke.
I bet after seeing us, George Washington would sue us for calling him "father."
Our constitution protects aliens, drunks and U.S. Senators.**
Things in our country run in spite of government, not by aid of it.
This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer.
I'm not a real movie star. I've still got the same wife I started out with twenty-eight years ago.
In Hollywood the woods are full of people that learned to write but evidently can't read. If they could read their stuff, they'd stop writing.
**These days the expression "drunks and U. S. Senators" is often redundant.
Posted by Dodo David at 07:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
GOT GAS?
Here in the greater Corning/Painted Post (NY) area where I live, the price of gas has always been notoriously high. Travel ten minutes outside of town in any direction, but especially right across the border into PA, and you'll find gas is cheaper. We always attributed it to the tourist trade, although I don't know why exactly.
When Katrina hit, the prices escalated at an alarming rate, sometimes changing a couple of times during the day. Before Katrina, the average price was maybe $2.59. Within days after Katrina, the price shot up and leveled off at $3.59. Then almost as suddenly as it shot up, the price began to fall, leveling off at $2.87.
When Rita threatened, the price held, except at one gas station. They raised their price to $3.27. At first I thought it was a mistake. But I think they were trying to gauge what the other stations would do if they spiked the price. They found out that same day because they sold almost nothing while the other stations had lines of cars waiting literally down the road.
As it stood yesterday, the average (low) price of gas here is $2.87.
What do you pay?
Cartoon by Sean Delonas of the NY Post.
*
Posted by kitty at 10:27 AM | Comments (8)
Live Blogging the Anti-American Anti-War Rally in DC
First there is chanting in a foreign language--where are the protestors from?
Rap music in the background
There are maybe 25,000 people.
"New day to destroy the Bush war machine."
"Enemies are not out there but they are are in there" (pointing to the White House).
****
Virginia Redino wants us to end the occupation of Palestine.
****
Oh, Lord, Cynthia McKinney! Who elected this fool?
She talks about Bush STEALING the 2004 election...
****
Curtis Muhammad: welcome friends and COMRADES!
Blacks are poor and uneducated.
The country is hiding the black people from New Orleans. We need to find all the black people, lock them in a space and tell them our message.
Unions need to pay for apprenticeships of people building their homes.
****
Woman attending the event lost her son. Good job!
****
Raging Grannies had a cute song about Bush's lies
****
Some liar is on stage lying about 100,000 innocent Iraqis dying. He said they hate us because we are stopping their electricity and hospital.
****
Another announcement for Adam Hathaway, who was lost by his family.
****
Another liar is on stage saying there are "people as far as the eye can see." There are MAYBE 25,000. More greed and empire building nonsense from Leslie Cheung, bitter dike.
****
Oh, God! Jesse Jackson! Says Cindy Sheehan is like Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks. Her heat is being felt around the world.
National security begins in New Orleans (Is that where bin Laden is?).
Panama was not such a war, Iraq was a lie, 2000 Americans dead (lie), and the WMD yarn.
More praise for Cindy Sheehan. Change the congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008.
What a hasbeen.
****
Adam has been found!
Oh my Lord! Cindy is up! I will get it all....
She is escorted on stage by Jesse Jackson.
"Wow." is her first word.
"WOOOO! I read all the signs are great! You're part of history!" She does not look like a grieving mother. "Our good friends in the media aren't doing their job!" Take that as you will...
****
I'm sorry, I have to stop. I want to throw up. She just said she would be sitting in a ditch if it wasn't for the "thousands and thousands" of people who came to Crawford.
Last question: WHERE'S HILLARY?
Posted by Aaron at 11:33 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
To Take the Senate, It Must Be Janice Rogers Brown
I am reposting this since the O'Connor seat is back up for debate...I love Janice Rogers Brown!
I remember praying numerous times on the day of the 2004 election. Like many of us, we would crawl across broken glass to keep Bush in office. I held three parties for the president. I pounded pavement twice knocking on liberals' doors asking for a moment of their time.
We won. And if the president is the man I believe he is, we will win again. His WOT strategy is LONG TERM. His SS plan is LONG TERM. His Culture of Life is LONG TERM. He must understand that if he suggests Alberto Gonzales to SCOTUS, he will immediately become a lame duck. I would even suspect that Gonzales would be voted down BY REPUBLICANS! By nominating Gonzales, he would ensure that the Democrats would take back the Senate. We will lose ALL inertia. We will lose all funding. Bush would look like, pardon the expression, an idiot.
I voted for him because I believed he was not an idiot. If he appoints Alberto Gonzales--I will be an idiot. I will state that publicly. Because if he really wants to win this War on Terror, he needs his base. If he refuses us then he really does not care if we succeed or not becuase we will NOT show up in 2006. Who amongst us did not think after the War on Terror: Judges? To nominate Gonzales would be a betrayal from which Bush could not recover.
However, President Bush can secure his legacy by nominating Janice Rodgers Brown. She will be filibustered. And would become the central issue during the 2006 campaign. Americans will not be voting on just Senators, but they will vote to reaffirm our society. I would personally donate at least $1000.00 to put her on the bench. Bush should nominate this brilliant, black woman and then take her across the nation and introduce her to the people. Bush should put her on Oprah Winfrey. Bush should take her to every red state that democrats are running in and let her talk to the people. She is a genius. She will convince any person she is speaking to in person why liberalism has failed our people.
Bush must do this. He MUST nominate someone that will ensure a fillibuster. If he does not, he--dare I say this--will shred our constitution.
Brown, Brown, Brown. She will not be confirmed until 2007, but she will be confirmed by more than 60 Republicans in the Senate. It doesn't take a genius to know this! We will support her to no end. We will donate MILLIONS OF DOLLARS and we will demonstrate how liberalism is a dead ideology.
And if Bush believes in conservatism and how it will save our (Janice's and Mine) from ongoing poverty, he will do it. He might not for O'Connor, but if he has two, she MUST be amongst them. Otherwise, Bush will fail. He will rally NONE for Social Security. He will rally NONE for the War on Terror. In fact, he will become Howard Dean.
No thanks, you change-coat. We conservatives are unconcerned with your legacy.
But this is Bush; let us hope he is the same man we elected.
Pray. Believe.
Posted by Aaron at 07:33 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Wesley Clark: Ass
He was on O'Reilly last night and I wanted to throw up. Now I find out it is worse than I thought. He is nothing but a joke:
On Friday, Sheehan appeared on a Congressional Black Caucus breakfast panel with General Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander and presidential hopeful, who was there to address the issue of whether the U.S. can “win” the war in Iraq.
“We’re involved in a war that we didn’t have to fight. That’s the simple truth,” Clark said. “Now it’s in trouble, deep trouble. I wish it was just as simple as saying, Mr. President, you made a mistake, get those troops out now."
The trouble is, he continued, that the Islamic extremists “really do want to attack us. Getting out of Iraq will be a great defeat for us unless we do it in the right way.”
Clark said the anti-war movement should demand that Bush establish a “regional dialogue with other Arab states, including people we don’t like, like Syria and Iran,” and focus on “changing the minds and cutting off the recruiting” of those now blowing up tanks and buses in Iraq.
“We need to turn off the flow of weapons and fighters going into Iraq and turn off the invective and fears and create a climate where the Iraqis don’t need to fight each other,” he said. “And then we can come home.”
When can we come home from Bosnia??? Clean up your own damn mess before you start whining like a little girl about Iraq.
Posted by Aaron at 06:54 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Show Review: Three Wishes
If you did not watch the premiere of NBC’s new reality show Three Wishes, and if you are thinking about watching a future episode, then the Dodo has a warning for you: Keep a box of facial tissue near you while you watch.
Three Wishes is such a tear-jerker that the show can make a Vulcan cry in public . . . even if the Vulcan has completed Kolinahr.
The show’s premiere featured three main wishes.
The first wish was for a young girl who had been in an automobile accident. The girl’s face had been disfigured, and her skull was missing some pieces. The wish was that the girl could undergo reconstructive surgery so that she could once again participate in the sports that she enjoyed.
The second wish was for a high school. Its football field was in such bad shape that football players frequently became injured as the result of slipping in mud. The wish came from the school’s cheerleading coach, who was undergoing treatment for cancer. Her wish was that the school’s football field could have artificial turf.
The third wish pertained to a boy whose biological father had been killed. When his mother re-married, the boy’s step-father became the boy’s hero. The step-father had wanted to adopt the boy, but bureaucratic red tape had prevented the adoption. The boy’s wish was that his adoption by his step-father could finally take place.
Other smaller wishes were featured, but the show focused on three main wishes, which is why the show has its particular name.
The Dodo is pleased to report that all three main wishes were granted.
And speaking of “granted” . . .
If Amy Grant shows up in your community, and she isn’t there to perform in a concert, then you can be certain that wishes will soon be granted and lives will be transformed for the better.
Posted by Dodo David at 11:37 PM | Comments (2)
Cindy Sheehan and Lew Rockwell--Birds of a Feather
For those of you who haven't gotten enough of Cindy Sheehan's pearls of wisdom, you have yet another opportunity to worship at her feet of clay.
Sheehan will be a featured speaker at Gold, Freedom and War, a conference in November to benefit LewRockwell.com. Here are some of the topics on tap:
- The warmongering schemes for perpetual war for perpetual statism.
- The Camp Casey revolution and the tipping point for peace.
- Has the regime been fatally wounded?
- The real reasons the neocons hate LRC.
- How hurricanes and the "War on Terror" embolden the US police state.
Who is Lew Rockwell? Before stumbling across this conference on the Internet, I'd never heard of him. According to his website, he's a libertarian who "is an opponent of the central state, its wars and its socialism." The being against socialism is something I can agree with, but being an opponent of a central state and war? That smacks of anarchy to me. War, while not something to wish for, is a necessary evil when you're being attacked--and please remember that America was attacked on 9/11. And, some kind of government is necessary if humanity is to have any kind of stability and civility. Some governments are more preferable than others.
When I think of libertarians, I think of guys like Neil Boortz. Reading what Rockwell stands for and reading some of the posts on his blog (written by various minions), he doesn't sound like much of a libertarian to me--he sounds more like a crackpot with visions of grandeur. A little Web research shows that someone with more credibility than I have agrees with me.
Back in 2001, Jonah Goldberg wrote about LewRockwell.com for the National Review. Here's a little of what he had to say:
It's a site for angry libertarians. Kick-the-cat, yell-at-the-TV, demand-a-refund, take-your-marbles-and-go-home libertarians. They want their government smaller — a lot smaller — and they're willing to march into the kitchen and make a big stinking scene if they don't get things their way: Now!
Ouch! Goldberg wrote a followup to that column, click here to read it.
Here are a few things Rockwell himself had to say about the war in Iraq (and Afghanistan) back in 2003 on Bill Moyers' now-defunct PBS show (all emphases mine):
So you have all kinds of money taken out of productive private savings and investment to build bombs and missiles that it's economically dangerous. And then it of course like every single war in our history it empowers the government to suppress dissent, to abolish civil liberties, to grow. That's one of the reasons governments love a war. Because it does enable them to grow and to brand anybody who disagrees with them as unpatriotic.
So all of the dissent we've been exposed to in the past couple of years has been officially oppressed by the government? What have we been seeing then, reality TV on the streets?
I'm sure Saddam Hussein is not a good guy, after all he's a politician. But it is the most liberal regime in the Arab world in many senses. You can get a drink in Baghdad. Unlike in Saudi Arabia. Women don't have to wear any particular kind of clothing. Christianity is tolerated.
Gee, according to Rockwell, Hussein got a bad rap. Click here to read the whole interview.
So we really shouldn't be surprised that Rockwell and Sheehan have gotten together. Maybe we should wonder why it took so long. And for $200 plus travel, food and lodging expenses, you can get two for the price of one!
Also posted on Blogmeister USA
Posted by Pam at 09:31 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack
Dittoheads
Rush Wins His 4th National Association of Broadcasters
Marconi Award for Syndicated Personality of the Year
"I would like to once again thank my audience for making this possible. Their loyalty and support are unprecedented and I am grateful. And I am the first to realize that this kind of recognition doesn't come without the help, support and partnership of each and every single radio station carrying my program. I appreciate them all and will never take them for granted. Eighteen years into this phase of my career, and I am still humbled by this award." - Rush Limbaugh
Well, Rush, you're quite welcome. Who else provides 3 hours of therapy a day, five days a week for only $6.95 a month? No one.
Posted by Aaron at 12:00 PM | Comments (0)
Ignatius: Don't Expect Love
Here's a pretty sensible column on what to expect out of our Arab friends.
I've had a lesson in our unpopularity in Egypt, where I've been hearing anti-American broadsides from activists who should be thanking the Bush administration for its pro-democracy stance. These are people who, but for the administration's pressure over the past few years on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, might well be in prison. But do they appreciate President Bush's help? Not on your life.
-snip-
Another leading democracy activist, Hisham Kassem, said he warned the secretary of state when she was in Egypt not to expect any bouquets. "I told Rice your administration is the most unpopular ever in the Arab world and will remain so until Bush leaves office." He thinks that this anti-Americanism is unfair and that Arab historians will eventually realize the importance of Bush's pro-democracy policies. But not anytime soon.
By now, you all know where I stand. Bush will be remembered as a giant among US presidents, respected and revered both by Americans and Arabs. Not in the first draft, of course; that's already being written by the pinheads in the legacy media. Maybe not even in the second draft. But well before the book is finished.
Posted by pat at 10:08 AM | Comments (0)
Three Wishes
"If you had one wish in the world and could ask for absolutely anything from the heart, what would it be?"
This is the question being asked by NBC's new reality show Three Wishes, which is hosted by Amy Grant. The show premieres September 23rd at 9PM Eastern/8PM Central.
The show's website gives viewers the ability to submit their own wishes to the show. (Click here to submit a wish.)
Well, the Dodo has already submitted his wish. It is unlikely that the wish will be granted, but the Dodo submitted it anyway.
What would you wish for?
The following is the Dodo's submission letter to the Three Wishes TV show.
I wish to meet the girl who calls me “Daddy”.
Her name is Ruth, and she is 17 years old.
Ruth and I have never met because she lives in the South American nation of Colombia.
With all of her heart, Ruth believes that I am her real father, and she dreams of meeting me. I would be a poor father to her if I didn’t do everything within my ability to make her wish of meeting me come true. Sadly, I can’t. I recently lost my job, and I have hospital bills to pay. My wife worries about how we will pay those bills. Thus, I am writing to you.
I would like to share with you excerpts from letters that Ruth has sent to me over the years. Her own words explain why I am writing to the Three Wishes program.
December 1994 (first letter): “Dear Sponsor: I am happy because in a far place called Oklahoma lives a person who loves me. I was sad because my father doesn’t think about my needs.”
July 19, 1999: “I wish you could come to visit one day so we could enjoy a sunset together.”
November 12, 1999: “I love you as my very own father as you have been with me so that I can grow up and accomplish my goals. I have a prayer request, and I hope you help me to pray for this. I’d like to travel to your country so that I can meet you and hug you in person.”
October 26, 2000: “In my life I have had moments of sadness because I have not had a paternal figure, and you have been a father to me, and for that reason I love you, because you have seen me grow. May God bless you! When I receive your letters, they encourage me, and they give me happiness.”
February 23, 2001: “I’d love to meet you and your family one day since God has given you as a second family to me, and I am very happy. I pray to God that my dream will become true one day. . . Remember, Dad, that there is a child here in Colombia who loves you.”
June 7, 2005: “Each day I have more reasons to love you; some are the mountains of letters you send with pretty words, that when I just read them I cry; I have never felt anything so pretty in my heart, that fill me with love and safety. . . I have never been tired to thank God for having giving me the best dad in the world.”
There are a couple of facts about me that Ruth doesn’t know, that I want you to be aware of.
First, there was a time in my life when I was so poor that I sold my plasma so that I could afford to sponsor Ruth.
Second, I suffer from chronic depression. My depression has been so severe that on more than one occasion I have had suicidal thoughts. On those occasions, Ruth gave me the will to keep on living. Whenever I wanted to leave this world, I would read Ruth’s letters and remember that Ruth was depending on me. To this day, whenever I feel myself slipping back into depression, I look at Ruth’s photo and immediately recover.
I am not the only person to be blessed by Ruth. Ruth has inspired other people to sponsor children trapped in poverty. Now those children have the means to escape poverty.
Perhaps you won’t think that my wish is deserving of your show’s generosity. However, a girl in Colombia wishes to meet her daddy, and I don’t have the ability to fulfill that wish.
By the way, I blame one of your show’s stars for Ruth becoming my daughter. Back in 1987, I listened to a particular song just because it featured Amy Grant. The song was being used to promote Compassion International. Amy’s involvement with Compassion International inspired me to become involved, also. Thus, I began sponsoring children. That is how Ruth came into my life.
If Three Wishes doesn't grant the Dodo his wish, then can someone send the Dodo an oil lamp with a genie in it?
Posted by Dodo David at 09:50 AM | Comments (3)
Gay Cowboys Eating Pudding
I am dying to see this movie after watching this trailer...what will Republicans say? I don't know. What I do know is that Andrew Sullivan will use this movie to advance his agenda of gay penis pride...
click on image to view trailer...
Posted by Aaron at 09:22 PM | Comments (2)
Cohen: Guns or Butter
There is a danger with judging things four days into an experiment, but I'm beginning to think that perhaps the NY Times may be onto something with their policy of charging for their columnists. There's almost always an interesting column over at the Times. Dowd and Krugman are eminently fiskable, Brooks and Tierney are capable of enlightening commentary and Friedman varies back and forth between the fiskable columns and the marvelous columns.
And then there's Bob Herbert. The Washington Post's version of Bob Herbert is Richard Cohen: sincere, earnest, liberal and boring. The difference is that most of the other Post columnists are the same. Is Robert Samuelson on vacation?
Richard Cohen today: George W. Bush is LBJ without the honesty. But even his memories of LBJ are tainted with his liberal sentimentality:
For Johnson, the realization that bills come due came too late. Early on he said, "We can continue the Great Society while we fight in Vietnam," but he sensed -- canny pol that he was -- that the American people would pay for the former but not, if they had to choose, the latter.
Yes, they would pay for the Great Society, but not for the Vietnam War. But that's in fact exactly reversed. The Vietnam War was still basically popular with the American people in 1968; it was the American Left that opposed it, much like in 2004. And the American people weren't so sure they wanted to pick up the tab for his Great Society giveaways.
When Johnson finally had to ask for a tax increase, he was on his way out as president. Less than a year after delivering his message about hard facts, he had to face the hardest one himself: He announced he would not seek reelection.
Johnson was pretty much a nut, as anybody who's heard his phone conversations can attest. People forget he got into a snit in 1964 and decided he wasn't going to run for reelection. He was facing determined opposition from within his own party by 1968; Bush is facing determined opposition from a segment of the other party.
Bush has been luckier. He came into office -- as he did life itself -- with a huge surplus. He spent it.
This is, of course, untrue. He came into office with a big projected surplus, but the surplus was projected based on assumptions that did not come true as far as the economy was concerned.
The Federal Reserve is increasingly concerned about inflation and this week raised interest rates for the 11th consecutive time since June 2004.
Yes, and they have now raised it by a grand total of 250 basis points (by 2.5%) in about 15 months. In 1994-95, after the Clinton tax increase, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates by 225 basis points in about 9 months. So despite Richard Cohen's "analysis", tax increases do not lead to lower interest rates, nor do tax cuts lead to higher interest rates.
In fact, what leads to higher interest rates is the overall economy. When things get chugging along good, inevitably money gets more in demand and interest rates start to rise. Higher interest rates are a sign of strength in the economy, not of weakness; as it was in 1994-95, it is today.
When asked by a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll how they'd prefer to finance the (at least) $200 billion Hurricane Katrina relief effort, only 6 percent proposed cutting domestic spending and just 15 percent supported increasing the deficit. A majority -- 54 percent -- chose "cut spending for the war in Iraq."
We'll see whether that turns out to be true now that Porkbusters is getting rolling.
The curse of Texas is once again upon the land -- an elective war, important enough to fight, not important enough to pay for. Up to now, it's been manageable if only because few have been asked to sacrifice anything for the grand cause of . . . well, it's hard to say, isn't it?
The "Equality of Sacrifice" meme again. Will somebody explain to me why liberals find this so persuasive? And as for a grand cause, it seems to me that liberals used to find the idea of liberating some 50 million people from cruel and despotic regimes somewhat grand. At least, when it was done by somebody with Marxist credentials.
Posted by pat at 08:33 PM | Comments (2)
Rita Inserts Herself into the Gulf
I hardly ever go to Sullivan's site anymore, but he had this amusing picture:
Posted by Aaron at 07:00 PM | Comments (0)
Hospital Etiquette
The Dodo recenty spent a few days in a hospital as a patient. During that time, the Dodo observed the behavior of hospital visitors. Some of that behavior was inappropriate. So now the Dodo wishes to point out some things that one should and shouldn't do while visiting a hospital.
#1: Don't use a cell phone!
These days, hospitals have signs posted stating that cell phones are not to be used. Yet, numerous cell phone users ignore the signs. This behavior is - in the words of Captain Hook - bad form.
Cell phones can disrupt the operation of older medical equipment. It would be bad if a heart monitor at a nurses' station malfunctioned because Susie Celluser just had to keep her cell phone on at all times.
So, as an ex-hospital patient, the Dodo is begging you to turn your cell phone off whenever you enter a hospital. Better yet, inquire as to where in the hospital a cell phone may be used. If a patient's room is off limits, then keep your cell phone off while you are in there.
That reminds the Dodo of another rule of hospital etiquette:
#2: If you are visiting a patient who is in a semi-private room, and if there is another patient in the room, then keep your visit short.
The patient you are visiting may be well enough to have visitors, but the patient's roommate may be in bad shape. If you stay too long, then you may prevent the other patient from having needed rest. Plus, the other patient may need moments of privacy that require the absence of visitors.
Besides, the longer you stay, the more you will talk, and the patient in the other bed may not want to hear you give the latest news about your relatives.
#3: Respect the hospital's established visiting hours.Late evening a busy time for hospital personnel, and they can't do their jobs properly if visitors get in the way.
Besides, visitation hours exist so that patients will have the time that they need to rest.
Well, that's the latest from the Dodo's soap box. Now the Dodo wants to get some sleep. If you think that hospital patients get plenty of sleep, then obviously you haven't been a hospital patient.
Posted by Dodo David at 06:31 PM | Comments (1)
Solving Ebony Turner's Problems
I just read the article Kitty linked to below. This passage is what caught my eye:
Ebony Turner, a New Orleans health technician, struggled to keep her optimism but frustration had her near tears. She was staying at a temporary shelter -- a Motel 6 -- in Lewisville, Tex., which has a black population of 7 percent and is 22 miles from downtown Dallas. Officials from federal, state and private agencies were set up at the Dallas Convention Center to help her access the services she needed, but Turner was having a difficult time connecting her needs with their suggestions.
She was told she could get food stamps. "But, Miss," Turner pleaded, "where are we going to cook the food? We're in a shelter." She was told she could get unemployment benefits, that a letter could be mailed to her in two weeks. "Miss, where are you going to send the letter when I don't have an address?" She was told she was eligible for a low-interest federal loan. "Miss, how am I going to pay it back to you? I don't have nothing."
She was told the Salvation Army could provide clothes for her son, a ninth-grader who has a 40-inch waist and wears a size 12 1/2 shoe. The Salvation Army didn't have clothes that fit him, she already knew, and now she was at her wit's end.
"I'm not sending my child to school in flip-flops," she said angrily. "I'd rather go live in swampland than send my kid to school in flip-flops. Where is the government right now? I don't know what to do."
To demonstrate the impact of liberalism on the poor, I will attempt to solve all of her problems in one post:
1. Where is she going to cook the food?
Answer: buy food that doesn't need to be cooked.
2. Where are you going to send the unemployment checks?
Answer: Motel 6, 1705 Lakepointe Dr, Lewisville, TX 75057; she will need to specify a room number.
3. How is she going to pay back a federal loan?
Answer: By using the loan for what it is intended: find an apartment, find work and then pay the loan back.
4. What should she do with her fat, big-footed son?
Answer: Send him to school in flip-flops; we wore them all the time in Arizona. [the way her son looks is more important than his education???]
5. Where is the government right now?
Answer: In the Dallas Convention Center trying to help you while you kept peppering them with these dumb questions.
Posted by Aaron at 01:50 PM | Comments (11)
IS THERE A CHANGE IN THOSE WINDS?
For the Poor, Sudden Celebrity
All of a sudden the poor have emerged from the shadows of invisibility, lifted onto a temporary pedestal by natural disaster. Whether it is because of guilt, pity or the nation's generosity in times of crisis, those who lost everything -- many of whom had little to begin with -- find themselves in a strange wonderland of recognition.
The destitute people sent fleeing by Katrina have been offered free housing, free clothing, free cars, free toys, special admission to universities and preferential job treatment. Athletes come to them, bestowing jerseys and autographs. Entertainers sing for them, and Bennigan's restaurants here and in Houston announced Katrina's kids could eat without paying for a while.
This is what it's like for the celebrity poor, a new subculture created by Hurricane Katrina.
...
Added former GOP House speaker Newt Gingrich: "This is one of the most important moments in modern history, and in the next three to four weeks we will find out if the party is ready and able to govern."
Well, we've obviously seen that the Democratic Party has not been able to help the poor -- except to remain poor. Nor is it a matter of money since we've pumped nearly 7 TRILLION DOLLAR$ into the War On Poverty. It's easy to conclude that the Left have a vested interest in keeping the poor poor. I say it's high time for a change.
Posted by kitty at 10:47 AM | Comments (3)
The Greasers have returned (Hurray!)
The DVD's debut took place in Tulsa on September 8th.
The Dodo remembers the excitement in Tulsa when Francis Ford Coppola began making his film-version of The Outsiders.
Several of the Dodo's high school classmates attempted to become extras in the movie.
The Dodo was pleased because much of the movie was being filmed in the part of Tulsa where the Dodo lived - the North Side. When the Dodo was in high school, the wealthy Tulsans considered North Side to be the bad side of the city.
Such was the case when Tulsa teenager Susan E. Hinton wrote The Outsiders. Her novel was based on the real-life friction between the rich and poor people of Tulsa.
Today, The Outsiders is required reading in many high schools.
The movie-version of the book is now a cult classic.
The drive-in theater featured in the movie is still in operation. . .
. . . and a 3rd-generation Greaser writes for the Lifelike Pundits.
Photo courtesy of The Outsiders Official Website.
Posted by Dodo David at 11:35 PM | Comments (2)
Bush Policies Cause Global Warming on Mars
Scientists have discovered that climate change--to be specific, global warming--is taking place on Mars.
...three Mars summers in a row, deposits of frozen carbon dioxide near Mars' south pole have shrunk from the previous year's size, suggesting a climate change in progress.
Environmental lawyer (and Kennedy dynasty minion) Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was quick to call a press conference.
"We can see where this is headed. Mars' polar caps will continue to melt and all chaos will break loose there. You thought flooding in New Orleans was tragic? Think of it on a global scale. And the cause of this warming is clear: Thanks to President George W. Bush's refusal to sign the Kyoto treaty and his pandering to big business interests, this gem of a planet, named after the Roman god of war, will suffer the consequences. Bush and his friends probably thought the warming of the Earth's climate wouldn't affect other planets, but they obviously weren't thinking 'solar system-ally.' We've really got to start thinking outside the sphere."
The White House declined to comment, although White House spokesman Andy Card said Karl Rove encouraged reporters to speak to Kennedy about his theories.
Scientists say its too early to tell whether or not Earth's global warming could be having an impact on Mars' climate, but they said they could not rule anything out at this point. Standing outside his wife's Boston mansion, Senator John Kerry picked up on this theme, with a few words of wisdom for the President.
"If I had been elected president, this wouldn't be happening. Check out my website for my comprehensive plan on keeping Mars' climate stable for our children and their children. Leadership is not ignoring the plight of uninhabited planets. George W. Bush doesn't have what it takes to be a leader of this solar system. His insensitivity to our own environment is proving to be costly to planets other than our own. Not only is that selfish, it's un-American." Waving off questions, Kerry slipped into his family's SUV and headed for his private jet at the airport.
The Sierra Club is planning a protest outside of the White House next week. Invited notables include Arianna Huffington, who requested that a black Chevy Suburban with a full bar be sent to pick her up at Dulles International Airport.
Posted by Pam at 08:34 PM | Comments (1)
Contrasts in Competence
Conservative:
Liberal:
I just went to Malkin's site. She did the same thing. I did not copy her...it only shows that if two people see the same thing in pictures, more Americans will as well.
Posted by Aaron at 06:10 PM | Comments (3)
INTERBLOGATORY TRAVELS
|
|
|
|
|
|
And now, for THE BEST QUOTE THIS YEAR, not to mention good advice ...
|
Posted by kitty at 11:40 AM | Comments (3)
Porkbusting I
I asked LLP writers to identify money being wasted in their states in an effort to show the government where to cut spending to pay for reconstruction of the gulf coast. We have some good recommendations for Instapundit and NZ Bear.
In Maryland, we are getting $750,000 for pedestrian walkways in Silver Spring and $500,000 to restore the B&O Railroad Museum.
In Arizona, Pat says the feds are going to shell out $2.4 million to build a pedestrian bridge over Tempe Town Lake.
In New York, Kitty finds that we are going to pay $5,000,000 for Syracuse University to establish the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Global Affairs Institute.
Our grand total: $8,650,000. If you give the children victims a $7500 voucher for school this year, cutting these four items could send 1153 students to school for the year.
Posted by Aaron at 09:45 AM | Comments (1)
Applebaum on the Beach
Here's a pretty good column from the Post's Anne Applebaum on the subject of beachfront property:
But it's also true that many people build houses along the water because it makes economic sense to do so. Houses or apartments with ocean views command higher prices. Beachfront property owners can demand higher rents. Beachside businesses -- casinos, hotels, restaurants -- spin money. And, best of all, the risks of owning beachfront property -- risks from floods, hurricanes and erosion -- are covered by other people. Federally subsidized flood insurance programs and state-subsidized beach "re-nourishment" programs ensure that taxpayers -- rich, poor, local, national -- pay for damage to property built close to the water. To put it differently, Lott's house was on the beach because you and I paid for it.
Yep. We let them build there, we subsidize the costs of their flood insurance, and then we help them rebuild when it all gets blown away by the storm. It's like when you go out to lunch with a bunch of friends and decide to just split the check evenly; inevitably people buy the higher-priced entrees and indulge themselves with the dessert.
Posted by pat at 09:45 AM | Comments (0)
Hurricane Rita vanden Heuvel: The Players
Let's all see the vast difference in response when there are competent (republican) people on the ground at the state and local level:
Lyda Ann Thomas, Mayor of Galveston
Rick Perry, Governor of Texas
Now, Perry is a little soft around the edges. He's more of a rancher than a cowboy, but I suspect he will manage the disaster just fine.
Posted by Aaron at 09:21 AM | Comments (0)
John McCain: Republican?
McCain is doing a fine job on Hardball tonight. He threw blame at the president for Katrina--but we all have. He also accepted blame as a senator and accepted responsibilty as a Republican to make sure the money is spent wisely. He praised Bush for his speech, supported all the initiatives Bush discussed in his speech and said they will be paid for by...drumroll...cutting pork, not raising taxes.
Transcript soon.
Posted by Aaron at 07:23 PM | Comments (1)
Extension Cords
Question: Why can't TEN light water reactors be built, five in South Korea and five in China and just have the power wired to NoKo? OR Why can't the United States offer to build nuclear plants in both Iran and NoKo with the understanding that only Americans will build and run the facility, but Iran and NoKo can use all the energy?
Am I missing something here?
Posted by Aaron at 06:38 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Conservative New Urbanism
I just read a wonderful essay by Paul Weyrich (I thought of Pam when I read it). It is just a great abstract piece of political theory arguing that conservatives have won the argument with rural, exurb and suburban constituents. We now need to reach out and have conservative urbanism as we build or rebuild conservative urban cities.
Many conservatives dislike cities, for reasons I understand and sympathize with. Sin and the city is an old, old story; you can find it in the Confessions of Blessed Augustine.
But cities are also the birthplace and necessary home for high culture. Without living cities, we will not have symphony orchestras and great music, classic theater, art museums, serious public libraries or any of the other venues high culture requires.
Nor will we have the good used bookstores, artistic and literary cafes, salons or other informal but important places where ideas can be exchanged and culture can grow. No, the Internet is not a substitute; there can be no full replacement for people talking face to face.
Just as the next conservatism needs to make the culture its centerpiece, it needs to include high culture. Conservatism ought not be indifferent to whether future generations get to see Shakespeare's plays, hear Mozart's music or see Dürer's engravings. And if conservatives want that to happen, we need cities. God knows we dare not entrust culture to the universities.
He is absolutely correct. We can have successes in urban areas--just like we are beginning to see successes in academia. But conservatives need to stop being hostile to urbania. I am not sure that conservatives are actually hostile to urban culture--but urban decay. Weyrich goes on:
Over the past several decades, a movement has arisen to restore our cities and even to build new urban communities, towns, as an alternative to suburbs. It is called "new urbanism." As a conservative, I think new urbanism needs to be part of the next conservatism. But I also think we need a conservative new urbanism, which differs from much of what now goes under the new urbanist label.
The difference is this. Much of present-day new urbanism is statist. It envisions using the power of government to force people to adopt new urbanist ideas. An example is Portland, Oregon's, "urban growth boundary," a line drawn on a map by government bureaucrats that tries to stop sprawl by decree. Guest what? It doesn't work. Not only does it violate property rights, if you actually go to Portland and look at what has been built inside the boundary, most of it is still sprawl.
Let me say that I am not necessarily against sprawl. Suburbs are great places for families to raise kids. What we need is suburbs and living, thriving cities, not one or the other.
Here is where conservative new urbanism comes in. Conservative new urbanism should be built on property rights. Its basis would be dual codes. At present, virtually every building code in the country mandates sprawl. One developer told me that in order to build a traditional town (something most conservatives like), he had to get 150 variances at immense expense and delay.
The next conservatism should call for dual codes nationwide. Under one code, a developer would be perfectly free to build a sprawling suburb. But he could also choose to build under a new urbanist code, which would be consistent with the way towns and cities were traditionally designed and built.
Creative thinking like this is why I am proud to be a conservative; he demonstrates that our political and social philosophy is not defined by soundbites and stereo-types. We can think outside the box and find ways to extend the system past where it has worked until now.
Obviously, developers would make their choice based on demand in a free market. They would build suburbs where the market wanted suburbs, and towns or even small cities (or redevelopment in existing cities) where the market wanted that.
Good new urbanism should welcome a dual-code approach. Why? Because good new urbanism sells. Sometime when you are in Washington, go look at the architect Andres Duany's Kentlands development in Montgomery County, Maryland. It is a beautiful traditional town. And houses there are selling for tens of thousands of dollars more than houses with the same floor space in surrounding suburbs.
Here, as so often elsewhere, the problem is government interference in the marketplace. The next conservatism should end the monopoly government building codes give to suburban sprawl and allow the free market to restore our cities. That is conservative new urbanism, and I think it needs to be part of the next conservative agenda.
Foreward thinking, dynamic applications and growth--these are the principles of a growing majority instead of the same hash we have on the left.
Posted by Aaron at 06:27 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
The Next Grisly Countdown Begins
Get ready folks...we're going to have another media frothfest with the countdown to the 2,000th military death in Iraq.
Click here for a breakdown of casualties of all wars America has taken part in. While we can't give a final count for Iraq because our presence there hasn't ended, please take a look at the other numbers. If we withdrew from Iraq today, the numbers don't even come close to other wars--the Civil War in particular.
This analysis comes from Rosenblog.com (written in May of 2004; all emphases mine):
In fact, during World War II, more American soldiers died in three days on average than in all of fourteen months of operations in Iraq. Despite the tragically higher fatalities rate of World War II, the media of its day kept a respectful distance, and allowed the families of the dead to grieve privately in dignity. There was no complaint that American soldiers were dying "needlessly in a war of aggression" against a Nazi Germany that did not bomb Pearl Harbor.
There was no talk of a "quagmire" as thousands of American died on the beaches of Normandy in one day and as thousands more died in the jungles of the Pacific, facing suicide attacks from a fanatical foe. No one was accused of hyped intelligence when the actual German atomic weapons program turned out to be substantially less advanced than estimated. Instead, the families of the Greatest Generation, already having survived a crippling Depression, quietly endured the deaths and supported the military endeavors to defend American interests and to extend the boundaries of freedom.
Not to mention,the draft was reinstated for the first time since the Civil War by President Woodrow Wilson (a Democrat!) in 1917, when America entered World War I. (Funny, I don't remember being attacked by Germany prior to our joining up...) The draft continued up until 1973, when it was abolished. Then Congress, in 1980, once again began requiring 18-year-old men to register for a draft, although that has yet to be enforced. During the 2004 election there was quite a bit of talk about enforcing draft status, but it was from the Democrats as they did their best to stir up a stewpot of controversy.
Just remember this: While each death is mourned by family, friends, and a grateful nation, these soldiers joined the military on their own. They are, for the most part, proud of their service. (There are always some who aren't, but aren't there always a few malcontents in every profession? Teachers who hate teaching, for example.) And please, spare me the usual "they join because they are too poor to do anything else" mantra. There are always other options.
The media, in its zeal to rake the Bush administration over the coals, is using military deaths to what it perceives to be an advantage.
But most Americans aren't fooled. We are appalled when the MSM starts counting the dead like Ebenezer Scrooge counting his gold. Will Ted Koppel list them all by name again in a ghoulish Nightline extravaganza?
Honoring our military dead does not include using their sacrifices in order to highlight one's hatred of an administration and its policies. That's self-serving claptrap. Our troops, alive and dead, deserve better.
Posted by Pam at 02:29 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Clinton's Legacy
As a contraceptive:
CLINTON THE CONDOM
Bill Clinton may have been a smoothie as a politician but he's now proving to be the ultimate contraceptive in China.
The ex-US president and the woman he had a fling with, Monica Lewinsky, have found their surnames being used on a new brand of condoms.
The Guangzhou Haokian Bio-science company has registered their names as trademarks for the contraceptives.
They will be given the Chinese spellings of their names - Kelitun and Laiwensiji.
Befitting his former status as the world's most powerful man a pack of 12 Clintons will be the more expensive of the brands, costing the equivalent of just over £2.
Enjoying the use of a dozen Lewinskys will cost around £1.20.
The manufacturer's general manager, Liu Wenhua, said he was not afraid that using the two names would get him into trouble.
He said they were the "trademarks of two foreign surnames and can't be seen as a violation of rights".
I will order a pack for myself.
Thank KJL.
Posted by Aaron at 01:40 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Feint Praise from Cohen
I believe the term "damning with faint praise" comes from Shakespeare. Richard Cohen, a far less skillful writer, tries the tactic on President today.
Conveniently enough, he sometimes wears it on his sleeve -- never more so, as I discovered, than when he talks about poor kids and racial and ethnic minorities. His feelings for them -- especially for poor kids -- are genuine. This is what I believed then and this -- his incompetent performance regarding Hurricane Katrina notwithstanding -- is what I believe now.
It's not racism, it's just incompetence. He goes through Kanye West's claims and Al Sharpton's innuendo, but then rides again to the president's rescue:
I have two problems with all this. The first is not just that it's unfair -- Bush, in this case, was an equal opportunity bungler
However, Cohen's generosity doesn't extend to the rest of the Republican Party:
The GOP, after all, became a safe haven for Southern bigots who fled the Democratic Party (as Lyndon Johnson knew they would) in the civil rights era. The fight for the rights of blacks turned Dixie as Republican as it once was Democratic. To its everlasting shame, the GOP continues to benefit from raw bigotry.
How, Richard? Because we get the votes of bigots? That may be true, but somebody has to mention that all the bigots are getting out of it is principled opposition to quotas and racial set-asides. Democrats got the votes of bigots when it meant segregation, and no prosecutions for lynchings.
Another dollop of "fairness" from Cohen late in the piece:
We owe the poor our special consideration. We especially owe the black poor an appreciation of their plight and their dolorous history. But in general it was incompetence, not racism, that slowed the relief effort -- incompetence on the local and state levels, too, and incompetence on the part of black as well as white public officials. The search for racist scapegoats does the poor no good. This relief effort ought to start, above all, with some clear thinking.
Never mind that Cohen doesn't have any specific examples of incompetence he can point to on the federal side; he probably thinks he's being generous by acknowledging the obvious mistakes made by state and local officials.
BTW, it's amusing that the Washington Post's Op-Ed page includes a big blurb about Andrew Sullivan knocking the New York Times for putting their columnists behind a pay curtain.
Posted by pat at 01:15 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Black Lunacy
Yes, these are MY people:
The Red Cross has been praised for its tireless efforts assisting storm victims in Middle Tennessee. But there are concerns in the black community that the organization lacks diversity, especially in an effort helping mostly black evacuees.
A number of minority churches and groups are offering to help, but say they've been left out.
The Red Cross Shelter in Franklin opened its doors to storm victims last week. It’s only one of two shelters in Middle Tennessee. The other is in Nashville.
Both shelters are in suburban areas, and the volunteers are predominately white, while the evacuees are almost all black.
Some members of the African-American community say that’s not good enough.
...
[R]everend Enoch Fuzz says in times like this, the volunteer corps should be more diverse, “Who in Brentwood would know where a black beauty shop or barber shop is?” asks Fuzz.
The Red Cross acknowledges most of it’s volunteers are white, but says training is open to anyone. Since then, Joyce Searcy went through training, and is signing up others.
A number of black churches are helping evacuees on their own even though it isn't through the Red Cross.
Also they are assembling teams of 50 take turns volunteering at the Red Cross shelters.
I am utterly speechless. This is the stupidity liberalism wrought. The Red Cross is a VOLUNTEER organization. If there aren't enough black people its because they are not signing up. That doesn't mean black people don't volunteer. Many do through the Church. But to bitch and moan about people saving lives is contemptable at best.
Thanks, Michelle.
Posted by Aaron at 10:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Ontario's Good Decision
With all of the talk here at home centering on Katrina and the Roberts SCOTUS nomination, it's easy to forget the things that are going on elsewhere in the world. Germany, for example, had a ho-hum election that promises nothing to no one. Mark Steyn has some excellent words on the matter.
In other interesting news, Ontario made the decision on September 11 (an ironic date, considering the topic) to outlaw all forms of religious arbitration--including Islamic law, known as Shari'a. The whole thing goes back to a precedent set in 1991 that allowed family and business legal suits to be passed on to religious bodies by the Ontario courts.
Things rolled along fine until December of 2003 when the proposition was made to include Shari'a law a part of the above precedent. It was then that Homa Arjomand, exile from Iran and director of the International Campaign Against Sharia Court, did all she could to prevent it.
Why the outcry against Shari'a? Arjomand explains:
Within the first five years of Iranian revolutionary rule, Arjomand says, the government executed more than 150,000 people under the Shari'a law. “I knew 2,000 to 3,000 people who were killed,” she says today, “including my closest friends. These were the activists, the ones who organized hospital workers, [who agitated for] safety and health [and] children's rights, who were all arrested. Within the first two days, there were mass executions. According to the United Nations, these are not lies. The papers are there.”
Click here to read more about Arjomand's crusade on FrontPage Magazine. And, click hereto read more about her organization.
It's something we should all pay attention to.
Posted by Pam at 09:19 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Moonbat Quiz!
From Best of the Web:
See if you can guess who said this:
[President] Bush, in his dealing with what was left behind by . . . the devastating Hurricane Katrina, which revealed to the entire world the great helplessness in dealing with the destruction caused by this hurricane, because of the tremendous attrition of the American army's resources in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This hurricane has once again brought to mind the manifestations of racial discrimination among the American people, and has exposed the fragility of the foundations upon which it is structured. The acts of assault and killings have spread, as well as robbery and looting, and what is still to come will be even more terrible.
Was it:
(a) Howard Dean
(b) Kanye West
(c) Nancy Reid and Harry Pelosi in a joint statement
(d) Cindy Sheehan
Click below to see the correct answer...
The correct answer, of course, is (e), none of the above. It was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al Qaeda's Iraq franchisee.
Hmmmm. Company you keep?
Posted by Aaron at 07:06 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
New York Times Approves of Scotus Nominee
The editorial board at the NYTimes writes:
While members of the Senate Judiciary Committee droned through John G. Robert's hearings last week, the nominee could have been forgiven for thinking, Don't scoff, hang on a little longer and you're in. Endure he did, showing not only knowledge, but also the patience and courtesy befitting a justice of the highest court.No thanks to the committee, the hearings displayed the workings of a focused legal mind. He dwarfed not only his questioners but all the recent nominees to the Supreme Court he will soon join. Fortunately the senators realize this much: He deserves speedy confirmation.
Judge Roberts--scholar, 13 years as a distinguished litigator and a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, DC--outclassed those entrusted to advise and consent on his nomination to replace now deceased Chief Justice Rhenquist. Fittingly, most of the senators admitted they were not in his league, although the chairman, Arlen Specter, and other preening members insisted on their own shows, largely in the form of erratic questions. . . .
While the politicians repeatedly pressed for bottom lines on particular issues like civil rights and abortion, Mr. Roberts asked to be judged as a judge, not as an advocate. Senators who could not be educated yielded anyway--to the reality that Judge Roberts enjoys overwhelming Senate support.
Well not exactly. James Taranto points out that this is what they said about about Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg. In, what appears to be an act of total hypocrisy, this is what they actually said:
The unknowns about Mr. Roberts's views remain troubling, especially since he is being nominated not merely to the Supreme Court, but to be chief justice. That position is too important to entrust to an enigma, which is what Mr. Roberts remains. . . .If the test were legal skill alone, Mr. Roberts would certainly pass. But the Senate and the American people have a right to know whether he would use his abilities to defend core rights and liberties, or to narrow them. . . .
Over days of testimony, he dodged and weaved around many . . . critical legal issues. On abortion, church-state separation, gay rights and the right of illegal immigrants' children to attend public school--all currently recognized by the court--he asks to be accepted on faith. That just isn't good enough. . . .
If he is confirmed, we think there is a chance Mr. Roberts could be a superb chief justice. But it is a risk. We might be reluctant to roll the dice even for a nomination for associate justice, but for a nomination for a chief justice--particularly one who could serve 30 or more years--the stakes are simply too high. Senators should vote against Mr. Roberts not because they know he does not have the qualities to be an excellent chief justice, but because he has not met the very heavy burden of proving that he does.
Remember one of Ann Coulter's axioms: for liberals, history begins every morning. The New York Times says screw consistency, its all about now and now is not good for liberals so...no.
Posted by Aaron at 06:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Katrina Tax
I've mentioned a Hollywood Tax before where members who whine and complain that taxes are too low can opt to pay a higher tax bracket--so that anytime they complain, we can ask what bracket they are paying.
I suggest the same for Katrina. Cut the pork, but offer a special tax to anyone who wants to pay a higher federal tax in 2.5% increments up to 10% more. Also, guarantee that all proceeds will go to Katrina Relief and will not be spent on the military, social security or any other projects.
I wonder how that would fly. Is it such a bad idea? Hell, I'd even do 2.5% I just don't want people with my income that might have 3 mouths to feed be forced to do it. Better yet, we could use that tax to set up private accounts and set up three-year private annuities to be paid out only to things like housing and health care!
Posted by Aaron at 02:05 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Burger King Bows Down to "Offended" Muslim
Hat tip Right Wing News:
The fast food chain, Burger King, is withdrawing its ice-cream cones after the lid of the dessert offended a Muslim.
The man claimed the design resembled the Arabic inscription for Allah, and branded it sacrilegious, threatening a "jihad".
What? Here's a picture of the offensive design:
The offending lid was spotted in a branch in Park Royal last week by business development manager Rashad Akhtar, 27, of High Wycombe.
He was not satisfied by the decision to withdraw the cones and has called on Muslims to boycott Burger King. He said: "This is my jihad. How can you say it is a spinning swirl? If you spin it one way to the right you are offending Muslims."
What's next? You know, Christians are often mocked when they find offense in "artistic images" that show their symbols either dunked in urine or plastered with elephant doodie...but when a Muslim cries that a swirl on top of an ice cream cone at Burger King is a direct insult to his religion, the world comes to a halt. Oodles of money is spent and bowing and scraping to the Muslim community ensues in order to show "good will" and "understanding."
As the Brits would say, that's just bollocks. When the sensibilities of one group of people become more important than those of anyone else in the name of "political correctness," than something's rotten in Denmark.
What a bunch of babies.
Posted by Pam at 11:13 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
Raspberry: Community Lost
Bye-bye to the New York Times Op-Ed columnists and hello, Washington Post. William Raspberry has a column today about the lack of community in America as revealed by Hurricane Katrina. This is laughable:
A part of what is so dismaying about the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina is the discovery that in some important ways we can't count on each other. We prey on each other, as some of the carjackers, rapists and killers did in the Superdome and elsewhere.
Well, if you expect carjackers, rapists and killers to show some sense of community, you're going to be waiting a long time.
We accuse each other, as when we blame neglectful government officials at all levels for allowing the conditions that made Katrina so devastating -- or when we repeat the horror stories of bureaucratic bungling, tinged with race, that delayed (often fatally) the rescue of flooded New Orleanians.
Yes, let's not accuse each other, just remember that it was bureaucratic bungling.
The loss of our sense of community goes well beyond New Orleans, of course. We are just about to confirm a new chief justice. It's no libel on John Roberts to say his nomination is divisive. I think it was meant to be -- not because the president who nominated him enjoys division but because the political culture practically mandates pushing for maximum partisan advantage. (It seems not to occur to anyone that it might be an unhealthy thing, in an electorate split virtually down the red-blue middle in the past two elections, to drive the Supreme Court definitively toward one side.)
The problem with this "divisive" meme is that it's always aimed at the Republicans. The Roberts nomination could have been non-divisive, if the Democrats had said, Bush won two elections in a row, he has the right to nominate the judges he wants, and Roberts is certainly qualified. I suspect rather strongly that when the votes are counted, Roberts will have divided the Democrats.
But it isn't just partisan advantage that erodes community. So does inequality of sacrifice. Franklin Roosevelt might have had a tougher time preparing America for war if he had appeared unseemly eager to help his pals in the armaments and munitions business.
There's the old "inequality of sacrifice" theme that the liberals keep referring to. As with Bob Herbert, Raspberry doesn't spell out what would equalize the sacrifice, but I strongly suspect it's higher taxes.
Raspberry does make one good (if obvious) point:
Don't blame it all on government, however. Part of our loss of community may be explained by the simple fact that we don't put down deep roots as individuals and families because we don't stay put the way we used to. How many of your friends live in their parents' home towns?
Posted by pat at 10:08 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO
In case you missed this biting piece of hypocrisy over the weekend ...
DRIVING MISS ARIANNA: I asked Antebi whether any of the staff at the Sierra Club headquarters owned and drove SUVs. He stumbled and said the group didn't keep track of who drove what. It's "a personal decision," he explained. "People drive different cars for different reasons."
Pat points this out: By the way, do you know why Airiheadda is rich? She married a rich man, Michael Huffington, and later divorced him. Michael Huffington got his money from the family business established by his father, Roy M. Huffington. What sector of the economy was Roy M. Huffington, Inc., involved in? You guessed it, oil and gas!
Posted by kitty at 08:36 AM | Comments (2)
EJ Dionne Makes Case Against Roberts
Hey, somebody's gotta make the effort, to reassure the Democrats that not only are they right to oppose Roberts, but that there is something noble about doing so.
Unfortunately, E.J. Dionne is not really up to the task.
"Where are you?"
That was the question Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) almost plaintively posed to Judge John Roberts as the Senate Judiciary Committee's hearings neared their conclusion. It is the right question.
Yes indeed. Is Roberts in Nazi Germany of the 1930s? Or Soviet Russia of the 1950s?
If senators simply vote "yes" on Roberts, they will be conceding to the executive branch huge power to control what information the public gets and doesn't get about nominees to life positions. The administration has stubbornly refused to release a share of Roberts's writings as deputy solicitor general. This is a dare to the Senate, and the administration is assuming it will wimp out. A "yes" on Roberts would be a craven abdication of power to the executive branch.
One to clip and save the next time a Democrat is nominating a Chief Justice, say around 2040. Of course E.J. will be dead and buried and the new tribunes of the Democrats will disavow any obligation to live up to that standard.
Schumer got so frustrated that he was reduced at the end of the hearing Thursday to asking Roberts what question he would ask himself that might be revealing. Roberts, with great affability, said he thought the committee had been "very effective" in the questions it had already asked.
Yes, I commented over at Brainster's that Schumer should ask the next nominee, "If you were I and I were you, what questions would you, as I, ask me, as you."
That's right, and it's why as many senators as possible should vote no on Roberts -- by way of saying no to this charade. A majority of "no's," very unlikely to be sure, need not mean the end of his nomination. It would constitute a just demand for Roberts (and whoever Bush names next) to answer more questions in a more forthcoming way and for the administration to provide information that the public, and not just the Senate, deserves.
How many senators will have the guts to make that statement?
My guess is somewhere around 25. It will be interesting to see what different groups of senators do. How will those facing reelection in 2006 vote? I suspect you'll see some pretty significant defections, especially among blue senators in red states.
Posted by pat at 10:20 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Donna Brazile: American
New Orleans is my hometown. It is the place where I grew up, where my family still lives. For me, it is a place of comfort and memories. It is home.
Now my home needs your help, and the help of every American. Much of my city is still underwater. Its historical buildings have been wrecked, its famous streets turned to rivers and, worst of all, so many of its wonderful people -- including members of my own family and my neighbors -- have lost everything.
On Thursday night President Bush spoke to the nation from my city. I am not a Republican. I did not vote for George W. Bush -- in fact, I worked pretty hard against him in 2000 and 2004. But on Thursday night, after watching him speak from the heart, I could not have been prouder of the president and the plan he outlined to empower those who lost everything and to rebuild the Gulf Coast.
Read more here.
Posted by Aaron at 06:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Farm Aid or Scam?
Well, I am glad I never donated:
Last year, Farm Aid donated less than 28 percent of its revenue, according to a review of the non-profit's records and policies. An organization should be giving away at least 65 percent of its revenue to be considered performing adequately, said Naomi Levine, a New York University expert on philanthropy.
The high-profile concert itself, which is also burdened by high expenses, provides only a small percentage of revenue to philanthropic causes.
Farm Aid, which has been more successful than any other group -- maybe even farmers themselves -- at advocating the need for family farms, dispensed $387,641 in 57 grants to local organizations in 2004. This was on total revenue of slightly more than $1.4 million, according to records filed with the Internal Revenue Service.
Evelyn Shriver, president of Bandit Records and a director on Farm Aid's board, said she was "shocked" that such a small percentage of the money raised went to grants last year.
"Farm Aid prides itself on the fact that the majority of the money goes to the grants," she said. "I truthfully don't know how to justify that they raised so much money and only gave that amount in grants."
By contrast, the Band Aid Trust, which like Farm Aid began in 1985, spent $144.1 million, mostly on African projects, between its first Live Aid concert in 1985 and when it shut down in 1991. The trust spent less than $2.5 million, or 2 percent, on administration and salaries, according to numbers released by the British organization.
Posted by Aaron at 05:00 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
The Big Unit's Big Mouth
Imagine my disappointment when I found out that Randy Johnson's nickname, Big Unit, is about his height. Damn. We get on musicians for making political statements (Shut up and sing!). I wish he would just shut up and pitch. I hate whiners.
Posted by Aaron at 12:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
INTERBLOGATORY WEEKEND
For our blast from the past:
"I'm an internationalist. I'd like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations."
* Check out the Bunnies in SCREAM and THE WAR OF THE WORLDS.
* Check out the boobs at AwfulPlasticSurgery and at GoodPlasticSurgery.
* Here comes the story of the Hurricane (after Dylan)
* LEFT-WING POLITICIANS - And their accomplices in the media!
* LuckyDawgNews ... just b'cuz.
* Remember the Incredible Shrinking Military?
* Find the "coffee bean man" while having your morning coffee.
Posted by kitty at 10:48 AM | Comments (1)
Mother Moonbat Off the Rails
Our buddy the Leather Penguin pointed me to Cindy Sheehan's latest ravings, and while it's not my normal beat, I just had to do a little fisking.
The title? "Amid the Miserable Failures on the Same Planet". Now, considering that Cindy's a miserable failure herself, and she's writing on Michael Moore's website (currently #2 on Google Search under "miserable failure") and she's hanging out with Malik Rahim, perhaps we should give her credit for truth in advertising. Unfortunately, the rest of the piece does not live up to that standard.
The people in LA who were displaced have nice, if modest homes that are perfectly fine. I wonder why the government made them leave at great expense and uproot families who have been living in their communities for generations.
Well, the homes that are perfectly fine are probably being moved back into as we speak. Of course, the ones that are rotted and waterlogged won't.
One thing that truly troubled me about my visit to Louisiana was the level of the military presence there. I imagined before that if the military had to be used in a CONUS (Continental US) operations that they would be there to help the citizens: Clothe them, feed them, shelter them, and protect them. But what I saw was a city that is occupied. I saw soldiers walking around in patrols of 7 with their weapons slung on their backs. I wanted to ask one of them what it would take for one of them to shoot me.
But remember, Cindy respects the troops! And this bit strikes me as nothing more than a ridiculous lie:
Sand bags were removed from private property to make machine gun nests.
Yeah. Machine gun nests. Whatever, Cindy.
The vast majority of people who were looting in New Orleans were doing so to feed their families or to get resources to get their families out of there. If I had a store with an inventory of insured belongings, and a tragedy happened, I would fling my doors open and tell everyone to take what they need: it is only stuff.
LOL! As long as the insurance company's footing the bill, right?
When our fellow citizens are told to "shoot to kill" other fellow citizens because they want to stay alive, that is military and governmental fascism gone out of control. What I saw today in Algiers lifted up my spirits, but what I also saw today in Algiers frightened me terribly.
Anybody know if any looters were actually shot? I know there was that group of five or six people on a bridge who were shot after firing on a military convoy, but I don't think anybody actually got shot while looting (except for that one guy who was shot by another looter).
Even though Algiers came through Katrina relatively unscathed, our federal government tried to force (mostly successfully) the people out of the community.
In fact, it has been rather well-reported that agents of the federal government (the military and FEMA search & rescue teams) have not been trying to force people out of the community, because they do not have the power to force anything. Local police do.
But Cindy closes with a bang here:
George Bush needs to stop talking, admit the mistakes of his all around failed administration, pull our troops out of occupied New Orleans and Iraq, and excuse his self from power.
Occupied New Orleans?
Posted by pat at 03:35 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack
Lucille Meeks
My grandmother, Lucille Plaster Meeks, died Sunday night due to complications with several illnesses she had due to old age and smoking. She was 76.
I went three days without a single emotion other than empathy for my mother who is now an orphan.
I could not make it to Arizona because of cost, logistics and Dutch (my dog who I believe would die of a heart attack if I boarded him for several days; I am being completely serious; I got him at the pound and he suffers from severe abandonment issues).
I asked my father to call me on his cell phone during the service and put me on speakerphone so I could hear the eulogy. The first voice I heard was my pastor from Tucson, whom I have not heard in five years, and I lost it. It is very surprising when emotion will hit you--especially when you assumed that you were not going to do so.
To hear my pastor talk about God's grace; totally free salvation through the sacrifice of the Christ; and to know that my grandmother's broken and aged body is in the ground and she now has her resurrected body and can see my grandfather who died 24 years ago overwhelmed me.
With all the issues I've discussed on this site, I want you to know that the most important item for all of us is to have eternal life. Eternal life is nothing anyone can earn (through money, works or political affiliation) but something that is quite free and wonderful.
I will not preach, but if anyone who comes across this site and wants to know the Joy that can only be obtained by knowing that you will live forever with the Lord, please spend five minutes here.
God made Him who had no sin to be sin as a substitute for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God. (2 Corinthians 5:21)
He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. (1 Peter 2:24)
Whosoever believes in the Son has eternal life; but whosoever rejects the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. (John 3:36)
How wonderful that in my grandmother's death that I am joyous about her shedding her broken body only to receive a perfect one.
The word of God is alive and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul and the spirit, and of the joints and the marrow, and is a critic of thoughts and intents of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12)
All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God might be mature, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (2 Timothy 2:15)
I love my grandmother very much. It would be selfish for me to wish she was still here; I look forward to seeing her again.
Posted by Aaron at 12:48 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Attention MSM: Black Folks Ain't Stupid!
This is Pulitzer Prize winning footage; ABC News discovers that black people are not stupid. Reporter wants to know, are you gonna believe the MSM or your lying eyes?
I just heard clips of the interview on Rush. Here is the video at the Political Teen via Polipundit.
It's ironic that the RNC newsletter is called "Rising Tide." How accurate.
Posted by Aaron at 12:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
73 Year Old "Looter"
I am just beside myself. I've made my position clear on looting: food, water, diapers, formula, medical and survival supplies (hell, I'll even throw in cigarettes--if my city was destroyed, I'd need a smoke too) do not count. People running around with DVDs, TVs, 15 pairs fo jeans, jewelery, 20 pair sneakers should be shot on site.
Of all the bad things listed about the NOLA police, this crap takes the cake:
Merlene Maten undoubtedly stood out in the prison where she has been held since Hurricane Katrina. The 73-year-old church deaconess, never before in trouble with the law, spent two weeks among hardened criminals. Her bail was a stiff $50,000.
Her offense? Police say the grandmother from New Orleans took $63.50 in goods from a looted deli the day after Katrina struck.
Family and eyewitnesses insisted Maten was an innocent woman who had gone to her car to get some sausage to eat only to be mistakenly arrested by tired, frustrated white officers who couldn't catch younger looters at a nearby store.
Despite intervention from the nation's largest senior lobby, volunteer lawyers from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and even a private attorney, the family fought a futile battle for 16 days to get her freed.
Maten's diabetes, her age, not even her lifelong record of community service could get the system moving. Even the store owner didn't want her charged. "She has slipped through the cracks and the wheels of justice have stopped turning," her attorney Daniel Beckett Becnel III said, frustrated.
The woman was taking food. A lazy cop arrested this 73 year old woman. And her bail was $50,000.
I would send her $100 just for having to suffer this ordeal when all these teen and tween looters were just running away, laughing, pulling up their ill-fitted shorts.
Posted by Aaron at 12:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Friedman: Best Math Teaching Methods on the Internet
I debated taking one last good whack at Krugman, but he's got a snark-filled and fact-free column today, which means that any debating would be on opinions, not on facts.
Tom Friedman has a somewhat predictable column on how the Singaporeans are eating our lunch in math. I suspect they have been doing this for the last 30 years; remember all the talk about how we'd never be able to compete with the Japanese? Funny how that one worked out.
The most interesting part of his article is here:
With a team of Indian, British and Chinese math and education specialists, the HeyMath group basically said to itself: If you were a parent anywhere in the world and you noticed that Singapore kids, or Indian kids or Chinese kids, were doing really well in math, wouldn't you like to see the best textbooks, teaching and assessment tools, or the lesson plans that they were using to teach fractions to fourth graders or quadratic equations to 10th graders? And wouldn't it be nice if one company then put all these best practices together with animation tools, and delivered them through the Internet so any teacher in the world could adopt or adapt them to his or her classroom? That's HeyMath.
Sounds like a terrific idea. I don't have any kids myself, but if you do, you could do worse than to check out HeyMath.
Posted by pat at 10:20 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Australia Deports American Peace 'Hippy'
From CNSNews.com:
An American "peace activist" was kicked out of Australia Thursday after Prime Minister John Howard's government declared him a threat to national security and revoked a six-month tourist visa.
Scott Parkin, a 36-year-old teacher based in Texas, was escorted onto a flight to Los Angeles, four days after being arrested on the advice of the Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO).
Attorney-General Philip Ruddock told Australian radio Parkin was arrested because his visa was canceled. And it was canceled, he said, because ASIO had given an "adverse security assessment" relating to concerns about "politically motivated violence, including violent protest activity."
Read the rest here.
Heh.
Posted by Pam at 10:41 PM | Comments (12) | TrackBack
Judge Roberts Supports Kelo Decision?
Here is an interesting take on Judge Roberts I hadn't heard before (from the Lost Liberty Hotel Newsletter):
STOP ROBERTS WHILE YOU STILL CAN
Five Supreme Court Justices took away your property rights on June 23, 2005 and there's nothing you can do about it. We can't remove Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg or Breyer from office. But we can prevent one more anti-property rights judge from being added to the list: John Roberts.
On Wednesday, September 14, Mr. Roberts was questioned about the Kelo vs. City of New London decision. While he tried to conceal his position, his words, lack of words, and past actions, speak volumes. What Roberts didn't say was that the ruling clearly violated the Fifth Amendment. What he did instead was reinterate the position of the majority that voted for the decision: that it is hard to draw a line between public and private use, that the context was an urban renewal project, that the issue is really up to the legislature. Restating the position of a group of people that tore a new hole in the Constitution is not what we need in a Supreme Court Justice.
For those of you who are Republican, please don't take false comfort in the fact that Roberts was nominated by a Republican president. Stevens, Kennedy and Souter were all nominated by Republican Presidents and they have all helped expand the power of government at an alarming rate, in addition to voting for the Kelo decision.
James S. Burling, a property rights attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation (pacificlegal.org) in his op-ed "John Roberts: A Supreme Property Rights Disaster in the Making" reveals the following: 1) In 2002 Roberts argued that several dozen landowners should not receive a penny in compensation after a local land use agency had prohibited all use of their property near Lake Tahoe for nearly 30 years. Roberts argued that impacts to property owners must be "balanced" against the utility of the regulation – in a way that tilts, almost every time, in the government’s favor. 2) In a 1978 Harvard Law Review article on land use law, Roberts argued against clear rules that would put boundaries on government power over property in favor of essentially the same government-friendly “balancing test”.
Once Roberts becomes a Supreme Court Justice and starts eroding more of our property rights it will be too late. The time to act is now! Forward this e-mail to your friends. Contact the Senate Judiciary Committee at the link below. Call your local talk radio host and get the word out. Let's not let another bad nominee slip into power under a veil of silence. Once he's in we can never get him out. But you can get kicked out of your home if the wildfire of eminent domain abuse reaches your neighborhood and six people on the Supreme Court are fanning the fire.
That wasn't my take on his comments yesterday. I thought he essentially said Congress can override a Supreme Court decision with legislation (like in the Schiavo case). I could be wrong. I only took one semester of Con Law in college.
Posted by Aaron at 01:05 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
THE INCREDIBLE LIGHTNESS OF BEING LIBERAL
Accountable Al: The very day [Al Gore] spoke a congressional task force reported that the levees that failed in New Orleans would have been raised higher and strengthened in 1996 by the Army Corps of Engineers were it not for a lawsuit filed by environmentalist led by who else but the Sierra Club. Among those "leaders of our country" to "be held accountable" for the flooding of New Orleans, would Al include the Sierra Club? How about the Save the Wetlands stalwarts? According to a recent report in the Los Angeles Times, a 1977 lawsuit filed by Save the Wetlands stopped a congressionally funded plan to protect New Orleans with a "massive hurricane barrier." A judge found that New Orleans' hurricane barrier would have to wait until the Army Corps of Engineers filed a better environmental-impact statement.Now, because those who would have improved hurricane protection in New Orleans were prevented by the environmentalist rigorists, the wetlands are polluted and imperiled and New Orleans has suffered the damage that practical minds have been trying to prevent for three decades. What has thwarted them are the Al Gores of the environmental movement.
Posted by kitty at 10:53 AM | Comments (1)
Lolita's Collecting Social Security
I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise that the Times has to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the publication of Lolita. Every barrier smashed, every taboo obliterated must be commemorated in the "Paper of Record".
Don't get me wrong; Lolita's a terrific book, certainly surprisingly funny and entertaining. Nabokov was a skilled writer and his hapless first-person professor, Humbert Humbert, is a creature of his time.
But the book has been promoted beyond all reason. In a poll of literary critics for the New American Library Lolita was rated #4 for the entire 20th century, which is risible. Of course, in the same poll, the only science fiction book chosen was Slaughterhouse 5, a book that no science fiction devotee would put in his top 100, and the greatest book was Ulysses, the only book that I have started and failed to finish out of sheer boredom twice.
What's the point of celebrating these books above some legitimate classics of the last century? It's quite obviously politics. Ulysses was important because it broke the taboo on swear words in print (the case went to the Supreme Court). Slaughterhouse 5 was an antiwar tract, vastly overpraised in the Vietnam era, and still revered by boomers who haven't read it in 30 years.
Lolita brought non-traditional sex to the forefront. It's hard to say whether it qualifies as pedophilia; in the movie she was played by Sue Lyon who was 16 at the time and any heterosexual man who didn't find her physically attractive needs to get his prescription checked.
However, the plot summary indicates the Lolita character was supposed to be 14 (say, 8th grade) at the time, which I would say puts Humbert well into the pervert category. My memory of the book is that she seemed younger than Ms Lyon.
Interestingly the Times' article rightly describes their sexual relationship as rape, even though it appears "consensual". Humbert is the narrator, so there are obvious problems--is he really telling the truth when he claims that Lolita was the one to suggest sex? And of course on the writer's level is Nabokov merely adding a plot twist that makes the story more pornographic and thus saleable? As pointed out in the article, it was originally published by the Grove Press in Paris, which specialized in books that were right on the edge of pornography and right on the edge of literature, and usually closer to the former than the latter (albeit not in this case).
Is Lolita a classic, if not quite #4 of the 20th century? That's actually an interesting argument. There's no denying that it taps into the physical attraction men have for girls as they reach physical maturity (but unfortunately before they reach mental or emotional--or legal maturity).
I say it's not going to stand the test of time. Lolita represents to the left a point on a line, which started with Joyce, continued to Nabokov and culminated in the late 1960s when all restraints on print effectively disappeared and porno novels exploded.
But they've succeeded all too well. Nabokov shocks no more unless one is expecting pure literature. And there seems to be a feminist-led backlash against his work, with the 1997 film attracting more controversy than the 1962 version.
Posted by pat at 02:02 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Rice on O'Reilly
This is not a 100% perfect translation. But Dr. Rice was on O'Reilly. I laughed my ass off on this comment (something like this):
I've been black my whole life; I don't need anyone to tell me about what it's like to black in America.
I've had a few drinks. I could be wrong. A transcript is forthcoming.
Posted by Aaron at 08:12 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
Watch Out for those Buzzing Undies
This woman got more thrills than she bargained for:
According to UK tabloid the Sun, a 33-year-old Welsh housewife ended up in hospital after wearing Ann Summers vibrating Passion Pants to her local Asda supermarket in Swansea.
Unfortunately, she became "so aroused by the 2½-inch vibrating bullet inside that she fainted" then "fell against shelves and banged her head". This prompted the attendance of the paramedics who "found the black leatherette panties still buzzing". Having disabled the orgasmatronic underwear, they then whisked the senseless shopper to hospital where she made a complete recovery. Staff handed her back the Passion Pants upon discharge, discreetly concealed in a plastic bag.
I laughed until I cried when I read about this. (I tried finding the original SUN article but was unsuccessful.)
Posted by Pam at 03:37 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
New Term and Definition: Katrinahawks
Katrinahawks: individuals, because they have not given any money, supplies or shelter to Katrina victims, cannot criticize the government's response to the Katrina disaster.
Posted by Aaron at 12:59 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Can It Be? I Disagree.
A professor of sexuality's contract was not renewed because two female students claimed sexual harrasment because of a discussion regarding the shaving of pubic hair for oral sex.
Um, why were these two ladies taking a class on sexuality? I took Human Sexuality in college and I actually found it to be a more practicable course then, say, Combinatorics (that's math).
You know what the class is about before you sign up. You know that you will see movies and visuals depicting sex. If I took a course on Japanese history, I would expect to see pictures and film of Japanese people. You take a course on sexuality and you're going to see sex.
Granted, I would take issue with visual depictions of child pornography or bestiality--but pubic hair shaving is very basic and something any of these two ladies can read about in Cosmo or GQ.
These are adults. This course is not mandated for graduation. My course actually asked for student voluteers to demonstrate how they masterbate. Entirely appropriate (and yes, I did learn a few things). We are there to learn about sexuality.
Now, if one wants to make a claim that government loans/grants shouldn't fund this course, then I might agree. But if a student is on scholarship or is paying for his/her education, s/he should be able to study the subject of his/her choice.
Videos of me masterbating are available upon request.
Posted by Aaron at 12:52 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
MORE FEMA FOLLY (Satire)
FEMA has a reputation for giving money to people who haven't been affected by natural disasters.
It appears that FEMA is once again living up to its reputation.
The Dodo has learned that FEMA has given money to a famous businessperson who wasn't affected by Hurricane Katrina.
When asked why the money was given, a FEMA spokesperson said, "We had to give the money. The person's business was completely under water."
Who is this latest recipient of FEMA generosity?
Posted by Dodo David at 06:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Only One More Free Dowd Column!--Updated!
Starting next Monday, I'm going to be dropping my coverage of the New York Times' columnists, as the Grey Lady converts to a pay service. Oh, I'm sure somebody will post the entire column over at Free Republic, but I'm ready for a new beat; my most likely targets will be the columnists over at the Washington Post.
So this is one of my last chances to take some potshots at Slow-Mo Dowd. She's been somewhat fun to poke at since her writing is such obvious fluff. In fact, she's something of a fluffer-nutter (five trivia points to anybody who knows what that is).
Today's column is on the failure of government.
I hate spending time in hospitals and nursing homes. I find them to be some of the most depressing places on earth.
Maybe that's why the stories of the sick and elderly who died, 45 in a New Orleans hospital and 34 in St. Rita's nursing home in the devastated St. Bernard Parish outside New Orleans, haunt me so.
You're already vulnerable and alone when suddenly you're beset by nature and betrayed by your government.
No, they were not betrayed by their government, but by the nursing home operators.
He [Louisiana Attorney General Charles Foti Jr.] said the owners had plenty of opportunity to move their charges out of the facility. The Manganos were asked if they wanted to evacuate the building and were offered buses; in addition, they had signed last April a contract with Acadian Ambulance to provide transportation in the event an evacuation was needed, Foti said, but "they were never called."
Back to Dowdy Doody:
President Bush continued to try to spin his own inaction yesterday, but he may finally have reached a patch of reality beyond spin. Now he's the one drowning, unable to rescue himself by patting small black children on the head during photo-ops and making scripted attempts to appear engaged. He can keep going back down there, as he will again on Thursday when he gives a televised speech to the nation, but he can never compensate for his tragic inattention during days when so many lives could have been saved.
Ah, yes, those tens of thousands whose bodies are no doubt being uncovered as the water recedes... remember that one, Mo? We know for a fact that the Coast Guard did rescue nine thousand people in the first few days. But there was no way that the feds could have saved the poor old folks at St. Rita's.
Update: Wuzzadem confirms in the New York Times, no less, that the people who died at St. Rita's were killed on Monday, August 29th.
St. Bernard Parish officials say that 32 of the home's roughly 60 residents died on Aug. 29, more than a week ago.
La Dowd:
He made the ultimate sacrifice and admitted his administration had messed up, something he'd refused to do through all of the other screw-ups, from phantom W.M.D. and the torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo to the miscalculations on the Iraq occupation and the insurgency, which will soon claim 2,000 young Americans.
This is what comes from being drunk before 8:00 AM, Maureen; you believe what you want to believe. Here's what the president actually said:
“To the extent that the federal government didn’t fully do its job right, I take responsibility.”
And note the part about "will soon claim 2,000 young Americans". The idiot Left is already starting the countdown to their celebration on that milestone.
Much of the rest of her column is made up of anecdotes from the execrable Evan Thomas Newsweak column. You remember Thomas, he was the one who predicted that Kerry would win because the media would deliver 15% of the vote for him.
We won't have Maureen Dowd to kick around here much longer. Thank goodness!
Posted by pat at 01:05 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
Grace
From a reader:
1) I never defined "hacks" as not being people.
2) I never said this site lacked 'liberal thought', nor did I say such should be required.
What I did say is that the deliberate political slant of this site and gajillions of others, and of many 'news' and talk media commentary sway way too much to the extreme, in my opinion, and way too much in favor of specific parties.
I don't find such efforts to be helpful. I've never said that people don't have the right to express themselves in any way they see fit - whatever their political bend, belief system, what have you.
I merely hope to present to at least some people the idea that some of their expression, while containing some validity, really could be assisted by some broadening of the mind beyond simply that of one side attacking another.
And, of course, it's all my opinion. And, of course I could be COMPLETELY wrong.
That having been said, short of being asked/made to not comment here any further, I see no reason at all I should not call things the way I see them. I've been given, thanks to you, Aaron, the opportunity to express opinions about the posts on this site.
While I have that liberty, and if I deem it necessary, I will continue to decry partisanship for its own sake. I will call hypocrisy when I read it. I will call racist posts for what they are.
And, I'll applaud what I believe to be positive efforts and messages.
I can't declare that I'm particularly the one who has set you off in such a fashion. However, should I be one playing a part, and should your intention be to have people you support posting here, and have guests post comments either in refutation or in support, then I really don't get the point of this post at all.
What you've stated is obviously what's been happening all along.
If calling someone a hack is out of bounds, declare it so. If it's not, commenting on the same thread as the 'hack-calling' incident would suffice, would it not? I'm honestly not telling you how to run your site - I'm trying to understand how, if at all, you really intend readers to react to this post.
Of course, someone own's the site - turns out it's you - great! However, without knowing who was responsible for the overall content, and the beneficiary of the commenting ability, it was rather obvious that the posters here are here at the behest of whoever was finanicially supporting the site.
So, great, you've expressed support for the people who post articles here.
Other than venting your obvious frustration, I guess it leads back to - how am I, if I'm one of the culprits, to respond?
Should I leave? I would certainly do so willingly.
Are there transgressions on my part for which some need of apology is perceived? It's likely that would simply lead to further debate :)...
I don't really know if what I have to say will do anything to change anyone's mind that posts here, least of all yours. That lack of assuredness, however, wouldn't by itself be enough to dissuade me.
And, should my dander be raised, I don't think I've crossed any self-imposed lines as of yet, and I'd likely repeat the same behavior as I have before...Pam's post about white liberals/black welfare recipients being the best, most recent example.
If that type of input from me would engender this type of response (and again, I'm only assuming I'm one of the culprits - it seems rather likely)...gah - I won't continue suggesting my absence, nor that I be banned...it is all up to you, anyway....
Posted by: tj at September 13, 2005 09:05 PM
Posted by Aaron at 09:58 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
LLP? Hacks or People?
Some of our readers have stated in comments that they think we are hacks because our opinions are in line with Christianity, conservatism, republicanism and bushisms.
As the "boss" of the site (I don't normally consider myself such, but I pay for the webspace), I want to comment on this.
LLP has no policy like that of LaShawn Barber, Queen of the Bloggosphere. Comments are open in every post and comments are not deleted except for hackers attempting to advertise. That is not censorship in that this is a private site.
One of the horrible and outrageous things about this site is that contributors offer their own opinions citing facts. Understanding that liberals don't like people to have the right to make their opinions known other than liberal opinions, we understand the hostility towards the theme found in LLP's authors posts.
We are mostly conservatives. That is why we are members of this site. Lack of liberal thought does not make this site fascist--it makes it conservative. LLP does not block you from visiting liberal sites.
We are not deity; we did not write scripture. We base our renderings on intellect, opinion and emotion--we ask our readers to do the same.
So your comments beg a question:
Why can I (and other authors) write posts on this site based on our opinion without deference to your own?
BECAUSE I OWN THIS FUCKING SITE AND THE PEOPLE THAT WRITE HERE I'VE ASKED TO DO SO AND I WHOLLY SUPPORT THEM.
Understood? Good. Feel free to comment liberally (no pun intended); we love debate.
Posted by Aaron at 08:29 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
The Dodo has egg on his face
That's right. The Dodo has egg on his face, because he was wrong about why the school buses in New Orleans weren't used to evacuate people.
Thanks to blog reader jreid, the Dodo read the transcript of the Meet the Press interview of New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin.
During the interview, Mayor Nagin said the following:
Sure, here was lots of buses out there. But guess what? You can't find drivers that would stay behind with a Category 5 hurricane, you know, pending down on New Orleans. We barely got enough drivers to move people on Sunday, or Saturday and Sunday, to move them to the Superdome. We barely had enough drivers for that. So sure, we had the assets, but the drivers just weren't available.
Regarding the non-use of the school buses, the reason given by Ray Nagin doesn't match the reason given by Jesse Jackson.
At the time that he gave it, Rev. Jackson's reason seemed to the Dodo to be logical. So the Dodo supported the reason.
Now that Mayor Nagin has refuted Rev. Jackson's reasoning, the only decent thing for the Dodo to do is to admit to being wrong, also.
It is a good thing that the Dodo likes eggs.
Posted by Dodo David at 08:11 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
Interesting Criticism of Atheism
This is a very interesting piece arguing that people of faith are necessarily more moral and charitable written by an atheist:
The Salvation Army has been given a special status as provider-in-chief of American disaster relief. But its work is being augmented by all sorts of other groups. Almost all of them have a religious origin and character.
Notable by their absence are teams from rationalist societies, free thinkers' clubs and atheists' associations - the sort of people who not only scoff at religion's intellectual absurdity but also regard it as a positive force for evil.
He goes on:
Late at night, on the streets of one of our great cities, that man offers friendship as well as help to the most degraded and (to those of a censorious turn of mind) degenerate human beings who exist just outside the boundaries of our society. And he does what he believes to be his Christian duty without the slightest suggestion of disapproval. Yet, for much of his time, he is meeting needs that result from conduct he regards as intrinsically wicked.
Civilised people do not believe that drug addiction and male prostitution offend against divine ordinance. But those who do are the men and women most willing to change the fetid bandages, replace the sodden sleeping bags and - probably most difficult of all - argue, without a trace of impatience, that the time has come for some serious medical treatment. Good works, John Wesley insisted, are no guarantee of a place in heaven. But they are most likely to be performed by people who believe that heaven exists.
I agree that charity is more likely to come from religious people, but I disagree that atheists are inherently less moral. You have to define what is moral to a person. As we've seen with the latest testaments from the Democratic Party, morality is redistribution of wealth, free health care and racial quotas. If they believe that that is moral, then democrats are highly moral.
Essentially, he demonstrates not only the emperical dysfunction of aetheism, but the theoretical contradiction as well.
He defines charity as moral--but where does this sense of selflessness come from? Religion. We are told that the human condition is greed (used as a justification for taxation and wealth redistribution); but if you are an atheist, the human condition should be what it is--what we evolved into. Charity is a characteristic of people of faith through scripture.
He wants to argue that atheists should be able to live life like a Christian without the faith in Christianity. But if you don't believe in a religion, what is your morality? Should it not be what your human condition compels you to do? In that sense, atheists should be the most moral people on earth. But they are not.
Even if its a vague belief in karma, its still a belief in something other-worldy acting to correct balance. So he makes a true point, but fails to understand the true basis for it.
Posted by Aaron at 06:53 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack
Just a Quick Question
Has a democrat asked for Bush to lay out an exit strategy for FEMA to leave New Orleans?
Posted by Aaron at 02:19 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Blame vs. Responsibility
Bush knows the difference between the two. He was not to blame for the failures, but he is responsible:
President Bush said Tuesday that "I take responsibility" for failures in dealing with Hurricane Katrina and said the disaster raised broader questions about the government's ability to respond to natural disasters as well as terror attacks.
"Katrina exposed serious problems in our response capability at all levels of government," Bush said at joint White House news conference with the president of Iraq.
"To the extent the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility," Bush said.
Posted by Aaron at 12:49 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
INTERBLOGATORY AFTERMATH
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dana, who lives in Slidell, LA, writes
|
And now, for your enjoyment, this week's satire fix courtesy of Mr. Right:
Posted by kitty at 10:09 AM | Comments (2)
What White Do-Gooders Did for Black America--They Gutted It
In this excellent analysis by John McWhorter of the Manhattan Institute, he takes American white liberals to task on the current state of black Americans, using the aftermath of Katrina as a reference point.
...[W}hite America does remain morally culpable — but because white leftists in the late 1960s, in the name of enlightenment and benevolence, encouraged the worst in human nature among blacks and even fostered it in legislation. The hordes of poor blacks stuck in the Superdome last week wound up there not because the White Man barred them from doing better, but because certain tragically influential White Men destroyed the fragile but lasting survival skills poor black communities had maintained since the end of slavery.
Indeed. This is an argument I made to several people over the weekend. The media showed us pictures of hundreds of people--mainly black--standing around, waiting for help that was slow as molasses in arriving. But why did they wait around? Why didn't they take more initiative, like the young man who stole a school bus and picked up survivors on his way to Houston? Because they were used to their basic needs being met by the government. The welfare system taught them that "someone else" would take care of them. When the caretakers dropped the ball, people suffered because their survival skills were either inadequate or nonexistent.
McWhorter explains the welfare phenomenon in depth:
There was a new sense that the disadvantages of being black gave one a pass on civility — or even achievement: this was when black teens started teasing black nerds for “acting white”.
Behaviour that most of a black community would have condemned as counterproductive started to seem normal. Through the late 1960s blacks burnt down their own neighbourhoods as gestures of being “fed up”. But blacks had been “fed up” for centuries: why were these the first riots initiated by blacks rather than white thugs — when the economy was flush and employment opportunities were opening up as never before? Because the culture had changed, in ways that hindered too many blacks from taking advantage of the civil rights revolution. Meanwhile, the most grievous result of the new consensus was black American history’s most under-reported event, the expansion of welfare. Until now, welfare had been a pittance intended for widows, unavailable as long as the father of one’s children was able-bodied and accounted for, and granted for as little time as possible.
So no longer were blacks expected to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, as the old saying goes, but were handed a living. We all like to point to people like Paris Hilton, who cashes in on her family name while spending the family cash, and criticize them for getting what they have from the fruits of someone else's labor. Why should chronic welfare recipients be any different?
The poor black America that welfare expansion created in 1966 is still with us. Poor young blacks have never known anything else. People as old as 50 have only vague memories of life before it. For 30 years this was a world within a world, as is made clear from how often the Katrina refugees mention it is the first time they have ever left New Orleans.
When Barbara Bush said of the Katrina refugees who poured into Houston,"...so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this is working very well for them," she was raked over the coals in the press. However, she was right. These people were disadvantaged--disadvantaged as a result of, not in spite of, the very programs that were supposed to "help" them.
...[W]hat we should all remember from Katrina is a tragic close-up of a group of people staggering after, first, a hideous natural disaster but, ultimately, an equally hideous sociological disaster of 40 years ago.
These are wise words from McWhorton. Will those who need to hear them listen?
UPDATE: I've created quite an uproar, it seems, for those who have been following the comments section. To address a few points:
1. I am not a racist, nor am I a bigot. Those who read that in the lines I wrote are mistaken.
2. Yes, white people who are stuck in the welfare cycle are just as prone to the problems mentioned in my post as blacks--or anyone else, for that matter. But because the population of New Orleans has a greater percentage of blacks than whites, and because racism was brought up by others as the reason for why things went wrong during the Katrina aftermath, then my focus on that group should not be surprising. But yes, anyone who is stuck on the welfare roll generation after generation loses much when it comes to accountability, self-reliance, and often self-respect.
3. It's interesting that white conservatives are often blamed for the ills of the world and they are expected to suck it up. When white liberals are blamed for something, all hell breaks loose. Why is that? Are they unaccountable for anything?
4. If you are interested in a perspective that has much more credibility than mine ever could, do yourself a favor and read up on Star Parker. She's a former welfare mother who broke loose from the cycle, and has not only made a difference in her own life, but in the lives of others. She should be an inspiration to all.
5. Again, the "dissent is patriotic" line is a tired one and a pointless one. We all have the right to disagree or voice alternative points of view. That has never come into doubt either her at LLP or at my own site. If it had, anyone who disagrees with our views would have been blocked from commenting long ago.
*Also posted on Blogmeister USA*
Posted by Pam at 09:28 PM | Comments (18) | TrackBack
Good News about some Student Evacuees
ABC affiliate KTUL has on its website a positive story about some New Orleans-area high school students who were evacuated and sent to Oklahoma. Click here to read the story.
Posted by Dodo David at 07:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
More on those unused N.O. school buses
The Dodo is aware that not everyone agrees with his conclusion as to why the school buses in New Orleans were not used to evacuate people.
That's OK. The day that the Dodo is 100% correct 100% of the time is the day that pigs fly.
Thankfully, the Dodo's post on the subject has generated discussion, which is always healthy.
That discussion has generated a couple of more questions that the Dodo wants answers to.
Question #1: If the school buses were not used because Ray Nagin didn't have safe places outside of New Orleans to send evacuees, then what attempt, if any, did Mayor Nagin make to find safe locations willing and able to accept evacuees?
During the Hannity & Colmes interview of Jesse Jackson, Hannity should have asked Rev. Jackson this particular question instead of changing subjects.
If Mayor Nagin made no attempt to find safe places outside of New Orleans, or if there were safe places to go to, and Mayor Nagin didn't know about them, then the "no place to go" excuse is discredited (and once again the Dodo has egg on his face).
Question #2: Is Jesse Jackson an official spokesperson for Ray Nagin?
Rev. Jackson could still be correct in what he said about the non-use of the school buses. However, if he isn't an official spokeperson for Ray Nagin, then why was Rev. Jackson answering questions on behalf of Mr. Nagin?
When the Dodo agreed with Rev. Jackson's opinion about the non-use of the buses, the Dodo was agreeing with the opinion regardless of who gave it. Yet, if Rev. Jackson isn't an official spokeperson for Ray Nagin, then Rev. Jackson didn't give an official statement about the non-use of the buses.
Until Ray Nagin (or someone authorized to speak for him) gives an official explanation as to why the school buses weren't used, Rev. Jackson's opinion (and the Dodo's) is just an opinion.
If the Dodo's opinion turns out to be wrong . . .
Well, what would you expect from a dodo? :)
Posted by Dodo David at 05:13 PM | Comments (14) | TrackBack
U.S. Dept. of Education accused of being slow in aiding Katrina victims
Last Thursday, U.S. Rep. Dan Boren (D-Oklahoma) sent a letter to U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spelling claiming that the federal Education Department was slow in aiding states that are housing Katrina evacuees. Boren requested that Sec. Spelling release emergency money under the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act.
A spokesperson for the Education Department replied that there was not enough money available to help in such a massive emergency.
[Story Source: Tulsa World newspaper, 09/09/05, Section A-9]
To the Dodo, Mr. Boren's complaint appears to be his attempt to bash the Bush Administration. Here is the reason why.
Title VII-B of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act pertains to homeless children, and this legislation was reauthorized by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
Here are two excerpts from the U.S. Dept. of Education's non-regulatory guidance for the McKinney-Vento program:
The Department awards McKinney-Vento funds to States by formula. The amount that a State receives in a given year is based on the proportion of funds allocated nationally that it receives under Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), for that year.
An SEA (State Educational Agency) must award funds not reserved for State-level activities to LEAs (Local Educational Agencies) on a competitive basis.
The McKinney-Vento Act requires that a state's education department receive federal funds according to a set formula. Then, school districts are required to compete for the funds granted to that state.
The Dodo has no doubt that the federal Education Department has already distributed the McKinney-Vento funds for the current federal fiscal year.
So where is the federal Education Department supposed to obtain the emergency money that Rep. Boren is requesting?
The U.S. House of Representatives is responsible for initiating spending bills. Perhaps Rep. Boren can write a spending bill that gives emergency money to the federal Education Department.
There may be slowness in educational aid, but that slowness may be caused by congressional inaction. Rep. Boren needs to learn that, whenever he points a finger at Education Sec. Margaret Spelling, three of his own fingers are pointing back at him.
Posted by Dodo David at 04:19 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Michael Brown Resigns
I think Bush would give anyone a chance to first resign before he fired him/her.
Link to come soon.
Posted by Aaron at 03:00 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
I Want $20,000 II
James Taranto gets the goods on what I talked about here.
Acuna: [There's] a lot of frustration, and a lot of it stems from the confusion over what a lot of the evacuees have been told is going to happen with regard to their federal assistance coming in. And I have a gentleman standing here with me who helps illustrate that picture. He has chosen not to give his name, he is from New Orleans, and he only says he is for the people.
So if you can explain to me, what has happened with your debit card? You're having a lot of problems, right?
Man: Well, for one thing, you know, they're not activating. You know, they're giving us these cards, and they're not activating these cards, and they're giving us a runaround. Then when we call, you know, for the, you know, to find out if the card is activated, they're giving us the runaround. And they send us back to Red Cross, and we go to Red Cross--nobody knows anything, you know.
I mean, c'mon now, f---, you know, excuse my French, you know, but anyway, you know, we're out here, we're stranded, you know, we don't have any goddamn thing, nobody's not [sic] trying to help us. FEMA is a fake and a fraud. Red Cross is a fake and a fraud, you know. Where do we go from here? I mean, who should we depend on? If we can't depend on our own federal government, who can we depend on? [um, yourself?]
...
Sellers: Could you ask him what he wants? What is he looking for?
Acuna: Sure, hold on one second.
The anchor in New York would like to know--his name is Bob--he would like to know what it is that you would like to happen. What do you want?
Man: What I would like to happen? I would like for them to give us at least $20,000 apiece so we can, you know, get our life together. You know, we didn't ask to come on that bus, slave. It's like a slave ship. It's just like, you know, back in history, you know, they put us on a slave ship. They separated us from our family. They did it--you know, just modern-day slavery, you know? Just give us what the f--- we deserve.
Sellers: Oh, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa! Whoa! Hold on! Hold on! That's, that's, that's enough. I mean, you've made your point, sir. We thank you very much for being with us. But Alicia--
Man: It's like a slave ship.
Sellers: --we know there's frustration there, and a lot of these folks have gone through so much, and we don't want to, you know, minimize or trivialize that. But we still have certain responsibility here in terms of what we're doing as far as broadcasting.
James get's it right: Looks just like a slave ship, doesn't it? Well, except that on a slave ship, he probably wouldn't have his arm around a white woman.
Amen
Posted by Aaron at 02:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Brokeback Mountain
Any movie that discusses a gay relationship that doesn't have scenes of a tweaked-out orgy, a circuit party, a priest, aids deaths, bashes Reagan, or has men in drag will be a welcome site to any movie goer.
December 2005. I look forward to seeing it.
Other observations:
I assure the #1 gay porn film next year will be "Bareback Mountain" and star Jeff Palmer and Tom Sizemore.
Also, the play on words will be in full force, i.e. we discover that Jake and Heath are tops:
Brokeback Mountain, starring Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal, topped 19 other competitors, including favourite Good Night, and Good Luck, George Clooney's black-and-white movie set in the McCarthy era of the early 1950s.
It's a shame. I was hoping to see two bottoms trying to get it on.
Posted by Aaron at 12:26 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
File This Under Ewww: Porn for the Planet
Remember the couple who had sex at the live concert "for the environment?" Tommy and Lenora bill themselves "F*** for Forest," and they've taken it to a new level: They have a website where people whom they have recruited are shown cavorting (nice euphamism, eh?) amongst the trees, and subscription fees to view the site go toward saving the environment--specifically, the rainforests (formerly known as jungles). They call the people who perform in their videos "sexual environmental fighters."
So far, they've raised over $100,000.
"I was just so tired of crying about the state of nature in the world, you know?" says Tommy when he finally pitches up. "Human tragedy, you know, I can deal with. September the 11th, terrorism, war, all those kind of things. But when I see destruction of the forests, the state of rivers, I just feel like killing myself."
As Linus might say, "Good grief, Charlie Brown!"
Posted by Pam at 12:10 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Calame: What Did the Times' Readers Know and When Did They Know It?
The New York Times' Public Editor Byron Calame is back with an thumb-sucker on the paper's coverage of New Orleans prior to the hurricane. The initial focus is on coverage of poverty and race:
"As a close reader of The Times and of poverty trends," S. M. Miller, of Brookline, Mass., told me in an e-mail last week, "I was surprised to learn of the poverty conditions that prevailed in New Orleans. ... Why didn't the economic-social-racial conditions in New Orleans get some attention in the paper?" His conclusion: "The Times let us down."
I might fault the Times for many things, but failure to cover poverty and race is not likely to be included on the list.
It added: "Most of the poor, in a city almost three-quarters black, are African-American." Unfortunately, however, finding these words required reading to the 16th paragraph of the 3,700-word article.
Those of us who watched the Times bury "Christmas in Cambodia" and Kerry's involvement in a VVAW plot to assassinate US senators in the 65th paragraph of 3,700 word articles are, shall we say, not impressed.
Calame does note that while the Times covered the possibility of "overtopping" of the levees, they did not cover breaching:
What had The Times's news columns provided over the past decade to help its readers understand the New Orleans levee system? One major article that focused on levees. The 2,100-word article on the front of the Science section in 2002 made clear that a Category 4 or 5 hurricane would send water over the top of the levees. While the public editor's focus is on news coverage, there was also an Editorial Observer commentary in 2002 that took a detailed look at the problem, based on reporting in New Orleans. But neither the news article nor the editorial commentary prepared readers for the possibility of breaches in the levees or canal walls.
Never mind that the President came in for a torrent of criticism for his comment that nobody "anticipated the breaching of the levees". As I pointed out over at Brainster's all the Monday Morning Presidents claimed this possibility was well-known.
Posted by pat at 11:31 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Good Jeb Quote
Good quote by Jeb I found at Right Wing News this morning.
"If we weren't prepared, and we didn't do our part, no amount of work by FEMA could overcome the lack of preparation," Jeb Bush (demonstrating he knows he is the Governor of a state, not in intermediary to simply blame the feds when things go wrong).
I think that Jeb Bush should go on Oprah with JC Watts to straighten her out.
Posted by Aaron at 11:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Kinsley Making Sense?
Why is it that everytime the Democratic Party seems ready to eat itself alive, someone from the left comes along and well, makes some sense:
AS A GOOD AMERICAN, you no doubt have been worried sick for years about the levees around New Orleans. Or you've been worried at least since you read that official report in August 2001 — the one that ranked a biblical flood of the Big Easy as one of our top three potential national emergencies. No? You didn't read that report in 2001? You just read about it in the newspapers this last week?
Well, how about that prescient New Orleans Times-Picayune series in 2002 that laid out the whole likely catastrophe? Everybody read that one. Or at least it sure seems that way now. I was not aware that the Times-Picayune had such a large readership in places like Washington, D.C., and California. And surely you have been badgering public officials at every level of government to spend whatever it takes to reinforce those levees — and to raise your taxes if necessary to pay for it.
No? You never gave five seconds of thought to the risk of flooding in New Orleans until it became impossible to think about anything else? Me neither. Nor have I given much thought to the risk of a big earthquake along the West Coast — the only one of the top three catastrophes that hasn't happened yet — even though I live and work in the earthquake zone.
Of course, my job isn't to predict and prepare for disasters. My job is to recriminate when they occur. It's not easy. These days the recriminations business is overrun with amateurs, who are squatting on all the high ground. The fetid aroma of hindsight is everywhere.
Mind you, I do recognize that this is also an indictment of me, fellow LLPers, bloggers, reporters, Oprah, and Europe. But what you really need to understand that (at least for me), my reaction to Katrina (llike most sane people), went like this:
1. Not another Florida hurricane!
2. Wow, it was only a category one, Rush Limbaugh is safe, all is well (that second part is a JOKE)
3. Wait, its a category 5? And it's heading straight to Louisianna? I hope they get out!
4. Who is this fool? How did the citizens of New Orleans elect this man?
5. Oh, here's Robert Kennedy blaming Bush for the weather. But he's not really representative of the Democratic Party. He is a single issue advocate.
6. Whew, New Orleans is okay. Little wet, but the French Quarter is okay.
7. Holy cow! There is water everywhere! This is horrible!
8. Mayor loses control, Governor and Mayor bash Bush.
9. Democratic party makes this the rallying cry, "its ALL Bush's fault." Anyone, including the president, that makes any criticism of local response (i.e. criticizes democrats) will be punched in the face.
10. Bush, along with judge John Roberts, hates black people.
Now, I believe was critical mass for conservatives--especially bloggers. We just didn't believe it would play out like this, but deep down, we knew it would. But like everyone else, we saw people suffering and got angry. We see flooded busses, an incompetent mayor, an incompetent governor, an incompetent FEMA director and Bush with his deer in the headlights look. Bush would handle it, but if he was even at the Superdome, the levee would have still broken and all these lives would have been destroyed.
But what is key to this whole thing is the phrase, "shifting blame." SHIFTING blame. Bush is "SHIFTING blame." So who started pointing fingers first?
Likewise, a senator may not be the best judge of the need for a vast federal construction project in her state. Landrieu's I-told-you-so's would be more impressive if the press release archive on her website didn't contain equally urgent calls to spend billions of dollars to build boats the Navy hasn't asked for in Louisiana shipyards, self-congratulations for having planted a billion dollars of "coastal impact assistance" for Louisiana in the energy bill (this is before the flood), and so on. Did she want flood control or did she want $10 million to have " America's largest river swamp" declared a "National Heritage Area"?
Obviously — obviously in hindsight, that is — we should have spent the money to strengthen the New Orleans levees. President Clinton should have done it. Presidents Bush the Elder and Reagan should have done it. As Tim Noah notes in Slate, warnings about the perilous New Orleans levees go back at least to Fanny Trollope in 1832. In fact, the one president who is pretty much in the clear on this is our current Bush — not because he did anything about the levees but because even if he had started something, it probably wouldn't have been finished yet.
Posted by Aaron at 10:40 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
For Kitty
To start off the week with a smile:
Posted by Aaron at 08:46 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
About those unused buses (Agreeing with Jesse Jackson)
Mea culpa.
In a previous post, the Dodo used the now-famous photo of buses in New Orleans sitting in water. The Dodo asked, “Is President Bush responsible for these buses not being used to evacuate people?”
The Dodo didn’t think to ask a more-important question.
Is there a legitimate reason why the buses weren’t used for evacuation?
As it turns out, there may be a legitimate reason, and it has been expressed by Jesse Jackson. The following is an excerpt of an interview that Rev. Jackson gave on the TV program Hannity & Colmes [Source]:
HANNITY: Mayors are supposed to have used buses and evacuate people, and this mayor didn't do it.JACKSON: But he had no place to relocate them. That becomes a state function.
HANNITY: You leave them in the wake of a hurricane because you don't know the exact location of where the bus is going to go? I'd get them the heck out of town. Get them out of the way.
JACKSON: And land them where? There must be some reception.
HANNITY: Dry land, away from the hurricane.
JACKSON: But then you have to be received on dry land. You have to have a rescue operation, but you must also have a relocation plan.
The Dodo rarely agrees with Rev. Jackson on any subject. Yet, the Dodo believes that Rev. Jackson is correct about the non-use of the buses in New Orleans.
If New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin had filled every available bus with passengers prior to the hurricane strike, just where was Mayor Nagin supposed to have sent the buses?
It wouldn’t have been enough to send the buses “away from the hurricane” as Sean Hannity suggested. Not only can a hurricane change its course prior to reaching land, but also, sending buses full of people to unprepared locations would cause all sorts of problems.
Mayor Nagin needed to send evacuees to places that were prepared to receive evacuees, but such places weren’t offered until after the hurricane had passed.
You don't have to like Jesse Jackson or agree with his politics in order to admit that pundits may have been too harsh on Ray Nagin.
Posted by Dodo David at 12:05 PM | Comments (18) | TrackBack
9/11
It's because of the horror juxtaposed against that unbelievably crystalline blue sky that I'll never forget that the day actually began as one of the most truly beautiful days. Its beauty is magnified by the horror in pictures like a cruel joke. Beauty and horror: it was theme which repeated throughout the days to come.
Lucianne had already posted her Short Cuts for the day when the planes struck, yet the first thing she reported seems almost like an omen.
Tuesday, September 11, 2001
Troubled Skies: We begin the morning with one of our spy planes shot down over Iraq and Russian war planes buzzing our planes over the Pacific. Watch for calls today for no more Mr. Nice Guy. It's time already.
Lucianne, who lives in the heart of Manhattan, reported daily on what life was like during those horrific days, better than any reporter.
Wednesday, Sept. 12th
AN HOUR BEFORE DAWN and this gigantic engine of a city that never sleeps is trying to. It has never been so quiet here. There is no traffic. We are sealed off from the world. The tunnels and bridges are closed. People streamed out of the city yesterday and today will not be permitted back in while workers try to determined the enormity of what has happened. The death and suffering has just begun. Whole floors of the twin towers have been blown to kingdom come. There were people there. The sky rained bodies and paper, plaster and steel and burning jet fuel. Inside the towering apartment buildings and brownstones and tenements hearts are seized with horror and apprehension. We know not what the light will bring. We are a six-degrees-of-separation city. Everyone knows someone who knows someone else. They have not told us yet whom we have lost. They don't even know who is gone.
And in the stillness, there are tiny signs that life goes on. The New York Post lands with a soft and reassuring plop outside the door. The other papers are struggling to find a way into the city from their outlying printing plants. An E mail says that a long sought handle to an '89 frig has been located and is on the way. The noisy vent fan on the roof of the Chinese restaurant across the street grinds on. The cat knows nothing, simply wants to be fed.
Thursday, Sept. 13th
I stepped to my open office window that faces south toward the carnage at the World Trade Center and sniffed. The prevailing winds from the war zone downtown had reached us. It smelled of concrete dust, burning plastic, paper, rubber, cardboard, whatever goes into New York skyscrapers when they go up then blow up.
...
As we move across the nearly empty city streets, there were New York State Troopers on every corner. No one can remember ever seeing State Troopers in the city. We see ambulances from Bohemia, New York, York, Pennsylvania, Bridgeport, Connecticut.
...
At l0 o'clock, Josh calls to say he is "standing in front of the hole" at ground zero and will be going in shortly. He has been asked to help search for bodies. He's phoning to say we won't see him until sometime today. This does not ease the heart. Two more buildings are creaking and ready to collapse. Late, they report there are asbestos particles in the smoke.
I finally shut things down. I am afraid to turn off the phone as I usually do. The last thing I hear is that Al Gore is "stranded in Austria" and Bill Clinton is "under protective guard in a resort in Australia." For the first time in a long, long day there is some good news.
Friday, Sept. 14th
The nightly news showed Clinton on the street here in New York. He was in front of Curry in the Hurry on Lexington Avenue miles from the scene or carnage. He had his arms around a comely, crying brunette holding a picture of a missing loved one. He was feeling her .....pain. Doing something for himself, not New York. Sorry, that may be crass but my loathing for his man requires medication. What, dear God, is he doing here in the first place?
...
It is morning now and Josh has not returned from the "hole" where the biggest job is sorting body parts. Matching a leg to another leg, a hand to an arm. If he finds something he gives it to a medic who takes it to be logged. He and thousands are working like this hour on end.
Four years later, Clinton is still in the news.
COMMON CAUSE ANNOUNCES 2005 I LOVE AN ETHICAL NY AWARDS RECIPIENTS!
At the event, The Honorable President William J. Clinton, 42nd President of the United States, will be honored with the John Gardner Spirit Award for his extraordinary efforts together with President George H. W. Bush in raising funds and awareness in the wake of the South Asian tsunami disaster.In these difficult times, with deep partisan divides at home and strain in our relationships abroad, we need more examples of collaborations like these that show the strength of our common cause.
Elsewhere ...
* AnkleBitingPundits: If there's one lesson from 9/11 is that we must hunt down and kill these animals before they get us. And yes folks - Iraq is part of the war on terror. Our brave men and women in the armed forces are fighting in Iraqso we don't have to fight them here and have another 9/11.
* Lorie on the Discovery Channel movie, "The Flight That Fought Back": The movie is about Flight 93 which was hijacked and crashed into a Pennsylvania field on September 11. The movie was not quite what I expected. I thought it would strictly be a drama that might even take great artistic license to help the viewer "imagine" what happened on Flight 93.It is much better than that.
* Lorie at Polipundit: WE WILL NOT FORGET
* LuckyDawgNews has a video and lists all the victims with links to their pictures and bios.
Posted by kitty at 09:16 AM | Comments (6)
Tweaker Sex
[extreme content warning!]
With a last name like Sizemore...
...what would you expect?
Of course, this is brough to you by Ace.
Posted by Aaron at 11:33 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Katrina: A Photographic Timeline
Click here to see an absolutely amazing photographic timeline of New Orleans, from just before Katrina hit to after. Called 5 Days with Katrina, the photos were taken by an ordinary--scratch that, make that extraordinary--citizen with his camera as he sought to take refuge the day the storm hit.
Here are a couple of the quotes that accompany the photo slide show:
The media, of course, was having a field day. Although I'm skeptical about saying they "enjoyed" it, I now have a profound dislike for the media. They distorted everything from the beginning. Making things look even worse than they were. I guess that's their job... so I "guess" that what I'm trying to say is that now I'm confidentally aware that disaster sells.
As I turned unto Saint Louis Street, where I reside, I took probably the last image of the Bourbon Street that everyone has grown to love. For the next 12 hours, I would be stuck in a hotel answering back my voicemails, text messages, and assuring my family and friends that I was in a safe place. I also helped around the hotel providing food for the guests and once in a while snuck a peak that the TV to see the Katrina's path. Around 6:30 in the morning, the power went out in the entire city of New Orleans. Around 8 in the morning on Monday August 29th... hell.
Don't take my word for it, see it all yourself. It's riveting stuff.
Thanks to John for bringing it to my attention!
Posted by Pam at 09:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
My Post at Media Matters for America
Well, it speaks for itself:
Okay. I am growing tired of this so-called "exposition" of right wing news. The posts quotes two articles saying the White House is shifting blame. What can you take from this?
1. You can only shift blame unless people were blaming you first--ergo, Dems used a natural disaster to blame the president for global warming (which is generally called "weather").
2. This post fails entirely to mention the NYT and WaPo articles TODAY that say that first, Louisianna got the most money for the Army Corps of Engineers than any other state; second, that Bush's spending towards Louisianna's ACEs was more in the last five years than the last five years of Clinton's administration.
3. NYT has a front page article demonstrating that Bush would have had to declare an "insurrection" in New Orleans in order to wrestle the control from Governor Blanco. I can only hear the screams now of Dowd and Maher of a White Male President becoming a "dictator" by going around a woman and a black man (both Democrat) to handle the situation.
4. What makes this disaster different? New Orleans and Louisianna. Somehow, under the leadership of Jeb Bush, Florida got through four of the worst hurricanes it ever faced (all in one year) and there was no problem with FEMA (and Michael Brown). But when we are dealing with a democrat governor and liberal mayor and a city who's been in liberal decay for decades--we have this disaster.
Note--the Red Cross was just across the bridge with water and food and medical care, but the governor (DEMOCRAT) ordered them not to help the people on the freeway or in the Superdome because they wanted to starve them out (convince them to leave the city). How humane is that?
And all the footage that followed that horrible, inhumane decision by the DEMOCRAT governor is being laid at the feet of Bush who had no constitutional authority, other than to become a dicatator, to handle the situation.
My fellow brothers and sisters starved and thirsted in the superdome because of a Democrat. Unforgiveable.
I know where I am; can someone provide evidence that I am wrong? Or just comments from Howard Dean--who by the way is a doctor and has helped NO ONE hurting and in need of aid, but the "evil" Bill Frist (who refused cameras and pictures) treated people in New Orleans.
Posted by Aaron at 06:32 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Who padded Michael Brown's resume? (and will he retire?)
The Michael Brown damage-control machine is in full operation, as evident by media reports.
First, an AP story appearing on the WJLA-TV website makes the following statements:
A beleaguered Michael Brown said Friday he doesn't know why he was removed from his onsite command of Hurricane Katrina relief efforts . . .
He [Brown] was assistant to the city manager in Edmond, Okla. "I have no clue" why the FEMA Web site says he was assistant city manager, an important distinction.
A 2003 White House press release incorrectly says Brown was executive director of the Independent Electrical Contractors, which is headquartered in Virginia. Brown said he worked for the group's Denver chapter, and he didn't know why the White House suggested otherwise.
Are we to believe that Michael Brown let other people write his resume for him?
The AP story makes this particularly-interesting statement:
Brown said he will still oversee FEMA, including housing, victims' assistance and other aspects of Katrina recovery efforts. But he may not be there for long, according to two officials close to Brown who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss his plans. They said the FEMA chief had been planning to retire after the hurricane season, and Friday's action virtually assures his departure.
So a 50-year-old man plans to retire this year, while other people his age don't retire until they are much older.
Are we to believe that Brown's retirement plans have nothing to do with the fact that his name is now Mud?
Meanwhile, Brown's hometown of Edmond, Oklahoma has issued the following press release:
Claudia Deakins, Director of Marketing and Public Relations, statement to clarify comments in Time Magazine's story about Michael D. Brown's employment with the city of Edmond."I spoke with two reporters from Time Magazine Thursday. I answered questions about the city of Edmond, the organizational structure and role of the city manager and his staff. My comments were in the context of the organization as it functions today. I explained that my employment with the city of Edmond began in 1997, several years after Michael D. Brown's employment by the city and that I could not speak to the specifics of the organizational structure as it was during that time. I also explained that I could not I speak to the details of Mr. Brown's role within the organization.
The only people who can speak with authority with regard to Mr. Brown's position in the organization are those who were at the city of Edmond during that time and worked with Mr. Brown, such as the city manager or members of the city council.
I regret any misunderstanding that may have occurred as a result of my comments."
What nonsense! There was no misunderstanding. A former Edmond city counselor has stated that when Brown worked for the Edmond government, there was no position of Assistant City Manager [Info Source].
Edmond's public-relations director says that she can't speak of Michael Brown's role when he was a city employee. The Dodo thinks that she is lying. A few days before the Time report was published, the Tulsa World newspaper published a story about Michael Brown's image problem, and the newspaper gave its readers data about Brown's background.
So an Oklahoma newspaper knows what Brown allegedly did as an Edmond employee, but Edmond's top PR person doesn't know? Granted, Okies (the Dodo being one) aren't known for great intellect, but Edmond's PR person should at least demonstrate that she has some.
Perhaps Ms. Deakins is attempting damage-control in regards to her own job. The Dodo has no doubt that she told the truth to the Time reporters, but the truth isn't always welcomed by Oklahoma politicians.
Being that he is an Okie, the Dodo will monitor what members of the Oklahoma media find out about Michael Brown.
Posted by Dodo David at 06:15 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
I Want $20,000
Well, that's what some black guy wants from the federal government. His home was destroyed; he (and his white wife) were packed on a bus like "slaves;" and only received $700 in assistance thus far (in the one week they have been displaced).
Asked by the reporter, "what is it precisely you want from the federal government?"
The guy's reply: "I want $20,000." He went on to use the F-word on national television.
Can I send a shout-out to this guy in Houston?
Fuck you.
Posted by Aaron at 03:14 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
Hold The Presses: NOLA Death Toll Coming In Lower than Expected
Gee who would have predicted that the death toll was being exaggerated?
The city's homeland security chief Terr Ebbert said: "Some of the catastrophic deaths that some people predicted may not have occurred."
He declined to give a revised estimate, but added: "Numbers so far are relatively minor as compared to the dire projections of 10,000."
But Dowdy Doody, who is apparently undaunted by the refutation of her claim that "more and more decaying bodies" would show up as the floodwaters recede is onto the new meme, that Mike Brown was unqualified for his job. Interestingly she starts out with a litany of Democratic examples of cronyism:
At least Bill Clinton knew not to stash his sweeties in jobs concerned with keeping the nation safe. Gennifer Flowers said that Mr. Clinton got her a $17,500 job in Arkansas in the state unemployment agency, though she was ranked ninth out of 11 applicants tested. And Monica Lewinsky's thong expertise led her to a job as an assistant to the Pentagon press officer.
Now of course, "concerned with keeping the nation safe" doesn't excuse Jim McGreedy of New Jersey, but this time Dowdy laughs it off:
Gov. James McGreevey of New Jersey had to resign last year after acknowledging that he had elevated his patronage peccadillo, an Israeli poet named Golan Cipel, to be his special assistant on homeland security without even a background check or American citizenship. Mr. Cipel, however, was vastly qualified for his job compared with Michael Brown, who didn't know the difference between a tropical depression and an anxiety attack when President Bush charged him with life-and-death decisions.
Now isn't that cute? Dowd's making a pun on the word "depression", which will no doubt have the residents of the Upper East Side chortling over their frappacino lattes this morning. But clearly Cipel was not qualified for his job; and Brown had at least the advantage of having worked as general counsel for FEMA, so he had some familiarity with the workings of the agency. And note the delicate way she refers to Cipel and McGreevey's relationship; "gay lover" would have been more precise (but less witty) than "patronage peccadillo".
I'm not defending Mike Brown here, but I do think somebody's gotta point out that a lot of the original charges against him don't hold water (sorry). He was accused of not getting provisions into the refugees in the Superdome; we know now that the Red Cross and Salvation Army, which handle that task for FEMA, were prevented from entering New Orleans by Lousiana National Guard members, acting under Governor Blanco's orders. We know that the evacuation was complicated by the fact that Gretna sheriff's deputies were preventing people from leaving by foot.
The rest of the column is mostly about Brown's past. I don't deny that he comes of as underqualified. What will be interesting to see is what he actually did wrong in the crisis. But of course the braying ninnies like Dowd aren't really interested in Brown, he's just a convenient stick with which to bash President Bush.
Update: Here's some remaining Times' criticism of Brown/FEMA:
Federal Emergency Management Agency officials expected the state and city to direct their own efforts and ask for help as needed. Leaders in Louisiana and New Orleans, though, were so overwhelmed by the scale of the storm that they were not only unable to manage the crisis, but they were not always exactly sure what they needed. While local officials assumed that Washington would provide rapid and massive aid, federal officials, weighing legalities and logistics, proceeded at a deliberate pace.
Russ Knocke, press secretary at the Department of Homeland Security, said that any detailed examination of the response to Katrina's assault will uncover shortcomings by many parties. "I don't believe there is one critical error," he said. "They are going to be some missteps that were made by everyone involved."
FEMA appears to have underestimated the storm, despite an extraordinary warning from the National Hurricane Center that it would cause "human suffering incredible by modern standards." The agency dispatched only 7 of its 28 urban search and rescue teams to the area before the storm hit and sent no workers at all into New Orleans until after Katrina passed on Aug. 29, a Monday.
On Tuesday, a FEMA official who had just flown over the ravaged city by helicopter seemed to have trouble conveying to his bosses the degree of destruction, according to a New Orleans city councilwoman.
Okay some of those seem legit; they should have dispatched more search and rescue teams. But why in the world would you send workers into New Orleans, a city subject to a mandatory evacuation order, before the hurricane passed? That's just risking their lives for no good purpose. And by the time we're to the fourth paragraph, it's about an impression by a city councilwoman that somebody was having a tough time conveying the extent of the devastation.
Note also these pre-levee breach reviews of Brown:
At mid-afternoon on that Monday, a few hours after Katrina made landfall, state and federal leaders appeared together at a press conference in Baton Rouge in a display of solidarity.
Governor Blanco lavished her gratitude on Mr. Brown, the FEMA chief.
"Director Brown," she said, "I hope you will tell President Bush how much we appreciated - these are the times that really count - to know that our federal government will step in and give us the kind of assistance that we need." Senator Mary L. Landrieu pitched in: "We are indeed fortunate to have an able and experienced director of FEMA who has been with us on the ground for some time."
Mr. Brown replied in the same spirit: "What I've seen here today is a team that is very tight-knit, working closely together, being very professional doing it, and in my humble opinion, making the right calls."
Posted by pat at 12:42 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Brown vs. Brown
From the Cassandra Page we have this excellent, forward lookng quote:
Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible.
- Justice Janice Rogers Brown
Posted by Aaron at 12:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Next Margaret Thatcher
Posted by Aaron at 11:32 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Saving Face at FEMA
Wow! Someone in the Bush administration finally got a clue. FEMA director Michael Brown is no longer in charge of FEMA operations in Louisiana. Better late than never.
Coast Guard Vice Adm. Thad W. Allen will now oversee the Katrina relief effort.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi stated the following:
At last President Bush has recognized what I have been saying for more than a week -- the federal response to this disaster must be managed by a capable leader. Admiral Allen is an emergency response professional, which has been lacking from federal management of this crisis. Admiral Allen has a difficult job ahead, but at least he brings to it years of experience.
The Dodo agrees with Ms. Pelosi. Mr. Brown wasn't the leader that the nation needed. In reference to Brown, Mississippi Senator Trent Lott stated, "He acted like a private when he needed to act like a general."
According to Senator Lott, FEMA was slow in moving emergency housing trailers because Brown wanted all paperwork and legal questions resolved. [Info Source]
Brown is still director of FEMA, but his credibility has been shredded.
Meanwhile, according to a FOX News report, information in Michael Brown's resume has been called into question by government officials in Oklahoma, where Brown worked before becoming FEMA's director.
Now for the Dodo's interpretation of this latest development:
Folks, what we are seeing is an example of saving face, a custom practiced in Japan and in politics. The Dodo believes that President Bush wants to be rid of Brown, but also wishes to give Brown a graceful exit. After all, Brown is a presidential appointee. No American president - regardless of political orientation - wants to admit to making errors in political appointments. For the sake of saving political face, it is better for Brown to resign from FEMA than be fired.
Being that President Bush is ineligible for re-election, the Dodo thinks that President Bush errs with the over-use of face saving. The Dodo believes that, for the sake of the USA's morale, President Bush should completely remove Mr. Brown from the position of FEMA's director.
After all, President Clinton had the decency to fire his Surgeon General after she kept making mistakes. Maybe the current president needs to learn a lesson from his predecessor.
As it turns out, President Bush doesn't listen to dodos. Or maybe he does. Why else would he have appointed an ineffective leader to the position of FEMA's director?
Posted by Dodo David at 04:30 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
When the Levee Breaks...
Over at Brainster's I've been covering the Left's insistence that when President Bush said "I don't think anybody anticipated the breaching of the levees," he was lying. I've done some digging and it certainly appears that for the most part, the President was right. This is an ongoing effort, and I welcome anybody who can come up with information that proves me (and President Bush) wrong. What I've found indicates that this is another "98.55% turnout in Miami County, Ohio" story; something that the Left has made a big to-do about but which turns out on investigation to be bogus.
Posted by pat at 01:59 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Brown Stepping Down
I saw it on Drudge and saw it again at Polipundit. Michael Brown will resign and replaced with Vice Admiral Thad Allen (whom I've met once).
Posted by Aaron at 01:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Soledad O'Brien Needs to Prep Better
This video is WONDERFUL! Check out this NoLa resident as she slams O'Brien and the MSM.
Posted by Aaron at 01:03 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Dem's Priorities
Schumer uses Katrina to ask for money, not for victims, but for the Democrats.
UPDATE! Dem's busted with slyly changing website. Here is the old one:
Now check out the site.
Notice that it is now a Red Cross button.
Wizbang caught this.
Posted by Aaron at 12:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Ill Wind
As the full horror of Hurricane Katrina sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if this is the end of George Bush's presidency. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that every copy of the US Constitution was destroyed in the storm. Otherwise President Bush will remain in office until noon on January 20th, 2009, as required by the 20th Amendment, after which he is barred from seeking a third term anyway under the 22nd Amendment.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if the entire political agenda of George Bush's second term will not still be damaged in some terribly satisfying way.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that the entire political agenda of George Bush's second term consists of repealing the 22nd Amendment. Otherwise, with a clear Republican majority in both Houses of Congress, he can carry on doing pretty much whatever he likes.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if the Republican Party itself will now suffer a setback at the congressional mid-term elections next November.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that people outside the disaster zone punish their local representatives for events elsewhere a year previously, both beyond their control and outside their remit, while people inside the disaster zone reward their local representatives for an ongoing calamity they were supposed to prevent. Otherwise, the Democratic Party will suffer a setback at the next congressional election.
Read More
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if an official inquiry will shift the blame for poor planning and inadequate flood defences on to the White House. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody admits that emergency planning is largely the responsibility of city and state agencies, and nobody notices that the main levee which broke was the only levee recently modernised with federal funds. Otherwise, an official inquiry will pin most of the blame on the notoriously corrupt and incompetent local governments of New Orleans and Louisiana.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if George Bush contributed to the death toll by sending so many national guard units to Iraq.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody recalls that those same columnists have spent the past two years blaming George Bush for another death toll by not sending enough national guard units to Iraq. Otherwise, people might wonder why they have never previously read a single article advocating large-scale military redeployment during the Caribbean hurricane season.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnist are asking how a civilised city can descend into anarchy.
The answer is that only a civilised city can descend into anarchy.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if George Bush should be held responsible for the terrible poverty in the southern states revealed by the flooding.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody holds Bill Clinton responsible for making Mississippi the poorest state in the union throughout his entire term as president, or for making Arkansas the second-poorest state in the union throughout his entire term as governor. Otherwise, people might suspect that it is a bit more complicated than that.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if George Bush should not be concerned by accusations of racism against the federal government.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody remembers that Jesse Jackson once called New York "Hymietown" and everybody thinks Condoleezza Rice went shopping for shoes when the hurricane struck because she cannot stand black people.
Otherwise sensible Americans of all races will be more concerned by trite, cynical and dangerous political opportunism.
As the full horror of that sinks in, this columnist is simply glad that everybody cares.
Posted by Aaron at 12:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
INTERBLOGATORY FRIDAY
|
|
Dana, blogging from the flood in Slidell, LA, writes
|
|
|
|
Posted by kitty at 10:21 AM | Comments (0)
Ah, the Liberal Moonbats Have Left
We've had some great comments by leftists arguing (sometimes logically, other times angrily) that Bush is to blame for everything. Katrina was his fault?
I wonder why, with five posts that demonstrably show that Louisianna government was completely responsible for the debacle in New Orleans, there are know comments?
Please respond! I want to hear from our left-leaning readers!
Posted by Aaron at 07:14 PM | Comments (9) | TrackBack
You Could Be a Huffington Post Blogger
Note: Lots of boring goo-goo, pu-pu (good government, public policy) op-eds in the Times today. Richard Cohen has an amazingly bad column in the WaPo today, but I've already blogged that at Brainster's.)
Greg Gutfeld has the application form.
Have you ever written a “one-woman” show?
and you're a man?
Are you into the “spoken word?”
But prefer to tell people you are a “multi-media artist?”
are these words meant to explain to mom and dad why there are only five other people in the audience?
Gutfeld has become the breakout star of the HuffPo by poking fun at all the rest of the pompous asses blogging over there.
Posted by pat at 03:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Anne Rice: America Failed New Orleans
Not content with writing thrillers such as "Interview with a Vampire," Anne Rice has become a social critic in the aftermath of Katrina. This article was penned on September 4, and is not only an attack on the federal government, but the American population as a whole. The New York Times published it, natch.
After sharing a brief history of the city (and it has quite a history), Rice cuts to the chase. Regarding the questions many have asked as to why many didn't leave when they could, she says:
Well, here's an answer. Thousands didn't leave New Orleans because they couldn't leave. They didn't have the money. They didn't have the vehicles. They didn't have any place to go. They are the poor, black and white, who dwell in any city in great numbers; and they did what they felt they could do - they huddled together in the strongest houses they could find. There was no way to up and leave and check into the nearest Ramada Inn.
Okay. I can see that. But what of the local government? Are there any harsh words for them? After all, local government is supposed to be first in response in any disaster or emergency. We've all seen photos of the school buses sitting in flooded parking lots and heard the stories of the Super Dome that should have had emergency provisions but didn't. However, Rice has nothing but sympathy for Governor Blanco and Mayor Nagin:
And where was everyone else during all this? Oh, help is coming, New Orleans was told. We are a rich country. Congress is acting. Someone will come to stop the looting and care for the refugees.
And it's true: eventually, help did come. But how many times did Gov. Kathleen Blanco have to say that the situation was desperate? How many times did Mayor Ray Nagin have to call for aid? Why did America ask a city cherished by millions and excoriated by some, but ignored by no one, to fight for its own life for so long? That's my question.
My question, Ms. Rice, is why didn't Nagin and Blanco follow emergency protocols that were clearly spelled out? Why did Blanco fail to issue a state of emergency, after being urged to do so by President Bush (who had no legal grounds to overstep her leadership in this matter)? And Congress did not act, by the way, staying home until the end of their August recess. Bush cut his vacation short (not enough by the standards of some), yet Congress gets a pass as usual.
Here's the kicker:
But to my country I want to say this: During this crisis you failed us. You looked down on us; you dismissed our victims; you dismissed us. You want our Jazz Fest, you want our Mardi Gras, you want our cooking and our music. Then when you saw us in real trouble, when you saw a tiny minority preying on the weak among us, you called us "Sin City," and turned your backs.
Really? You mean all of that money pouring out of American pockets was a failure? People in Houston opening their hearts, their wallets and their homes is a failure? People like the husband of my coworker, a prison guard who is volunteering to head down to quell the violence, are failures? Where is your criticism of the media? They are the ones spreading more stories about looting and shooting than helping hands and heroes.
Mistakes were made, to be sure--on all levels, from city government on up the line. But, Ms. Rice, Americans didn't "turn our backs" on New Orleans. Nor did we turn our backs on the Gulf Coast in Mississippi or the areas of Alabama and Florida that were affected. New Orleans is a priority, but so are these other areas who aren't getting nearly as much press.
If all of this is abject failure, I want my money back.
*Cross-posted on BlogMeister USA*
Posted by Pam at 01:52 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Smoking Gun: State Wanted to Starve Out Superdome
I am speechless; from the Red Cross' website we have the following FAQ:
Hurricane Katrina: Why is the Red Cross not in New Orleans?
*Acess to New Orleans is controlled by the National Guard and local authorities and while we are in constant contact with them, we simply cannot enter New Orleans against their orders.
*The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city.
*The Red Cross has been meeting the needs of thousands of New Orleans residents in some 90 shelters throughout the state of Louisiana and elsewhere since before landfall. All told, the Red Cross is today operating 149 shelters for almost 93,000 residents.
*The Red Cross shares the nation’s anguish over the worsening situation inside the city. We will continue to work under the direction of the military, state and local authorities and to focus all our efforts on our lifesaving mission of feeding and sheltering.
*The Red Cross does not conduct search and rescue operations. We are an organization of civilian volunteers and cannot get relief aid into any location until the local authorities say it is safe and provide us with security and access.
*The original plan was to evacuate all the residents of New Orleans to safe places outside the city. With the hurricane bearing down, the city government decided to open a shelter of last resort in the Superdome downtown. We applaud this decision and believe it saved a significant number of lives.
*As the remaining people are evacuated from New Orleans, the most appropriate role for the Red Cross is to provide a safe place for people to stay and to see that their emergency needs are met. We are fully staffed and equipped to handle these individuals once they are evacuated.
The Superdome issue is now off the table. Louisianna wanted to starve its citizens so they would flee the city. Criminal negligibility rests squarely at the feet of Blanco and Nagil.
Posted by Aaron at 01:37 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Landrieu Steps in It
Remember when she threatened to punch President Bush in the face for criticizing local and state authorities and workers?
Ace has a great catch on her website:
Emergency management operations for disasters include three phases: preparedness, response, and recovery. In the preparedness phase, state and local governments administer emergency preparedness programs with ongoing activities to help ensure that they are ready to respond to disasters. The Louisiana Department of Emergency Preparedness is responsible for all initial damage assessment prior to federal involvement. [emphasis mine]
It's going to blow-up in their faces.
Posted by Aaron at 10:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Doctor Dean on Race
Doctor Dean plays the race card, again:
Race was a factor in the death toll from Hurricane Katrina, Howard Dean told members of the National Baptist Convention of America on Wednesday at the group's annual meeting.
Dean, chairman of the Democratic party, made the comments to the Baptists' Political and Social Justice Commission. The Baptist Convention, with an estimated 3.5 million members, is one of the largest black religious groups in the country.
"We must ... come to terms with the ugly truth that skin color, age and economics played a deadly role in who survived and who did not," Dean said.
Look at the total moral bankruptcy of this man. Before he was governor of the whitest state in the country, he was a doctor. So while this tragedy befalls our nation, he is out stoking the racial fires instead of volunteering his skills and saving lives in the affected region.
And what did the racist, evil, sexist, corrupt, republican Doctor Bill Frist do?
He went to help.
Can't you imagine what a powerful scene it would have been if the news showed Dean and Frist working as doctors alongside each other saving lives? But alas, no.
Posted by Aaron at 09:06 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
More Disgusting Political Looting
Moveon.org is going to do an ad against Judge Roberts using pictures of the hurricane victims in the background.
'We believe John Roberts' record on civil rights ... is clearly not the direction our country needs to head now,' a MoveOn.org spokesperson said.
I want to throw up.
Posted by Aaron at 08:59 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Louisianna State (democrat) Government at Work
The Corner points us to our must read article today. Here's a clip:
Before Hurricane Katrina breached a levee on the New Orleans Industrial Canal, the Army Corps of Engineers had already launched a $748 million construction project at that very location. But the project had nothing to do with flood control. The Corps was building a huge new lock for the canal, an effort to accommodate steadily increasing barge traffic.
Except that barge traffic on the canal has been steadily decreasing.
In Katrina's wake, Louisiana politicians and other critics have complained about paltry funding for the Army Corps in general and Louisiana projects in particular. But over the five years of President Bush's administration, Louisiana has received far more money for Corps civil works projects than any other state, about $1.9 billion; California was a distant second with less than $1.4 billion, even though its population is more than seven times as large.
Am I surprised? No. This always happens; Democrats see an opening to complain anew and then over reach immediately before waiting for all the facts to come out about the problem. This is going to blowup in their faces again.
Posted by Aaron at 08:53 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
FEMA Bureaucracy (Hillary Could Be Correct)
Paul, a reader of this blog, gave the following feedback to the Dodo's last post:
The question in NO isn't who is to blame; it is why, after so many years of preparation, did it take so many days for the federal bureaucracy to spring into action? Why didn't everybody immediately start delivering the goods they had? Disorganization is bad, but inaction in this instance was worse. Especially when there are people on the ground stating FEMA turned away supplies like water and diesel fuel from the city. WHY?
The Dodo believes that Paul answered his own questions when he used the expression "federal bureaucracy". All too often the word bureaucracy is the opposite of the word speed.
In an interview with Bill O'Reilly, former U.S. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich made the following statement about bureaucratic trouble:
I think that the entire system of homeland security failed. And I want to draw a distinction . . . This is not about the brand new secretary of homeland security. It's not about any individual person. The process by which we try to solve these problems is so bureaucratic, so slow, and so cumbersome, you just had this amazing quote that you showed there, where a very, very smart man, and the secretary's a very smart man, is explaining that he's listening to all these meetings and having all of these conference calls while the television on his desk is telling him about a reality that is totally different.
So what is causing FEMA's bureaucratic trouble?
Senator Hillary Clinton has claimed that FEMA performed better when the agency wasn't under the Department of Homeland Security.
Senator Clinton could be correct. There is a layer of bureaucracy between FEMA and the President that didn't exist until the current presidential administration. Perhaps the additional layer of bureaucracy is slowing FEMA's responses to emergencies.
Could the problem be with Michael Brown, the current director of FEMA?
Michelle Malkin wants President Bush to fire Brown. If Brown is the problem, then Brown should go. The fact that he is a Bush appointee isn't an excuse for giving Brown an automatic pass.
The Dodo still believes that local and state officials are mostly responsible for disaster recovery in their areas. Yet, FEMA exists in order to do things that state and local governments cannot do for themselves during disasters. Whether we are liberals or conservatives, Democrats or Republicans, we all pay taxes to the federal government, and some of those taxes fund FEMA. Regardless of our political orientation, we all expect federal agencies to do what they are paid to do, including FEMA.
If FEMA's director is incompetent, then he should become the ex-director.
If FEMA cannot function properly under the Department of Homeland Security, then restore FEMA's independence. We shouldn't let partisan politics keep us from admitting that Senator Clinton may have put her finger on the problem.
Posted by Dodo David at 09:45 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Brian Williams Proves Rush Is Right
I love it! Brian Williams just reported on Hardball that poor people did not heed the evacuation orders because they were expecting their welfare check on September 1. Liberalism kills.
I will link to a transcript once it's posted on msnbc.com.
Posted by Aaron at 07:05 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Conservative vs. Liberal Management
New Orleans:
The reason New Orleans slid so quickly from civilization into Third World conditions was that it was pretty much a Third World city already, and didn't have too far to go. In its violence, in its corruption, in its reliance on ambience and tourism as its critical industry, in its one-party rule, in its model of graftocracy built on a depressed and crime-ridden underclass that was largely kept out of the sight and the mind of vacationing revelers, it was much more like a Caribbean resort than a normal American city. Its crime and murder rates were way above national averages, its corruption level astounding. The latter was written off as being picturesque and perversely adorable, until it suddenly wasn't, as it paid off in hundreds of buses--that could have borne thousands of stranded people to safety--sitting submerged in water, and police either looting or AWOL.
Houston:
Let us look now at Houston, for it is the second city in this cosmic drama, and one in which Tocqueville would feel right at home. Like so many cities in the Sunbelt, it is expanding, entrepreneurial, based on the future, and the place where the "much celebrated American can-do machine that promises to bring freedom and prosperity to less fortunate people" comes roaring to life. "In l920, New Orleans's population was nearly three times that of Houston," says Kotkin. "During the '90s, the Miami and Houston areas grew almost six times as fast as greater New Orleans, and flourished as major destinations for immigrants . . . These newcomers have helped transform Miami and Houston into primary centers for trade, investment and services, from finance and accounting to medical care for the entire Caribbean basin. They have started businesses, staffed factories, and become players in civic life."
Posted by Aaron at 04:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Just Get Out of the Way
I am in the middle of all this here in Washington, DC. I can tell you that this fall is going to determine 2006 election returns. I smile when politicians will reveal themselves to be naked political opportunists:
Senate Democrats said yesterday that they will invoke the vast disparities in income and living conditions laid bare by the Hurricane Katrina disaster to sharpen their questioning of Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. at his confirmation hearings next week.
You go right ahead and do that. John Roberts should throw it right back in his face and say, "For 60 years Louisianna has been in Democratic hands, having said that, I am here to talk about the law, not your failed policies of the welfare state."
Posted by Aaron at 02:54 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Rush Hits Paydirt
He wants everything investigated including why liberalism failed the people of New Orleans. I am all for it. Also, we should look and study how capitalists will rebuild the area at record speed.
Posted by Aaron at 02:33 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
That American Racism
Check out the great slideshow at Townhall.
Posted by Aaron at 11:39 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Looks Like the Press Isn't Doing Its Job Properly...
Poll results, via Drudge:
Blame Game -- 13% said George W. Bush is "most responsible for the problems in New Orleans after the hurricane"; 18% said "federal agencies"; 25% said "state and local officials"; 38% said "no one is to blame"; 6% had no opinion. -- 29% said that "top officials in the federal agencies responsible for handling emergencies should be fired"; 63% said they should not; 8% had no opinion.
Hmmm...
Posted by Pam at 11:26 AM | Comments (12) | TrackBack
What Babs Meant
Former First Lady and current First Mother Barbara Bush is taking heat for a statement she made yesterday (or the day before) regarding the victims being housed in Houston:
Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality. And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this, this is working very well for them.
The left is comparing her statement to "Let them eat cake."
This is not what she is saying. She is saying that Texas, particularly Houston, is better run and managed that Louisianna, specifically New Orleans. The victims left the horror of the Superdome, which is where their liberal governor told them to go and arrive to this:
and this:
Instead of going to rundown schools run by officials who can't even count how many employees they have, they will go to Houston public schools who are so well managed that they can absorb 10,000 new students.
And many of the children are underprivileged and will receive much better care living in the Astrodome than they did living in New Orleans projects.
Barbara Bush loves Texas. With Texans' charity during this crisis--who could blame her?
Posted by Aaron at 09:34 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
Is Slow-Mo Stupid or Lying?
Now she's trying to blame the drowning victims on Bush:
As the water recedes, more and more decaying bodies will testify to the callous and stumblebum administration response to Katrina's rout of 90,000 square miles of the South.
For starters, more and more decaying bodies do not show up as the water recedes. Dead bodies float, remember? There may be some dead bodies inside houses, but they would all have almost certainly died in the first day or so. I doubt very much if any significant number of people drowned in New Orleans after Wednesday, because the water rise was not sudden and it was steady. A frog may stay in a pot of boiling water, but a human will not.
But this time, the bodies of those who might have been saved between Monday and Friday, when the president failed to rush the necessary resources to a disaster that his own general describes as "biblical," or even send in the 82nd Airborne, are floating up in front of our eyes.
Oh for pete's sake! The New York Times had a headline on Tuesday that read "Katrina Misses New Orleans, Heavily Damages Mississippi. So President Bush is supposed to be reacting to a catastrophe that even the New York Times was unaware of?
These were the steely-eyed gunslingers we needed to protect us, they said, not those sissified girlie-men Democrats. But now it turns out that W. can't save the town, not even from hurricane damage that everyone has been predicting for years, much less from unpredictable terrorists.
W. can't save the town from hurricane damage predicted for years? Stop the presses! If there's an earthquake in LA tomorrow, will Dowdy Doody similarly chide Bush for failing to stop the earthquake damage that has been predicted for years? (Rhetorical question, obviously she will).
His campaigns presented the arc of his life story as that of a man who stumbled around until he was 40, then found himself and developed a laserlike focus.
But now that the people of New Orleans need an ark, we have to question the president's arc.
You see it's a pun. Arc and ark. Isn't Maureen clever for a schoolgirl?
Let's play the blame game: the man who benefited more than anyone in history from safety nets set up by family did not bother to provide one for those who lost their families.
Let's play the blame game. I blame this on Absolut before Wheaties.
Posted by pat at 02:50 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Captain of SS Spicoli Slams Bush Administration
Oscar-winningHollywood actor Sean Penn, who has been assisting rescue efforts in New Orleans, said the US government did not "seem to be inclined to help".
"We were pulling drowning people out of the water, it's the ultimate distress and human suffering ... dead bodies," he told GMTV.
Penn said he had spent nine hours on Monday searching the water for people and during all that time he saw just three boats carrying US officials.
"There are people that are dying right now and I mean babies and old people and everybody in between - they're dying. There are people dying and (the US government are) not putting the boats in the water, I think that's criminal negligence. I don't think anybody ever anticipated the criminal negligence of the Bush administration in this situation."
Oscar-winning is Suckup-ese for "expert in everything from foreign policy to national policy to which photographer to take on your rescue mission."
I'm pretty sure if I were stranded in New Orleans (or elsewhere) I'd wait for those non-existent government boats, rather than hitch a ride with Sean Penn! 
Click on the links below to see what the rest of Penn's trusty "crew" had to say about the Bush administration and the hurricane:
First Mate Pierce Brosnan
Bosun Celine Dion
Navigator Kanye West
Ship ahoy!!!
Posted by Pam at 07:39 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
Gilligan Is Dead - Waah!
FOX News is reporting that actor Bob Denver has died. Denver played Gilligan on the TV show Gilligan's Island. To read the FOX story, click here.
Posted by Dodo David at 07:22 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
INTERBLOGATORY BUS STOP
The infamous Ray Nagin Memorial Motor Pool, courtesy of Eric.
Here's a roundup of just a few of today's flood links.
* From The Prowler: "Let's put it this way," says an Appropriations staffer. "There is a fair degree of certainty up here that dollars that should have gone for projects and programs that might have been helpful in New Orleans' time of need was never used for those purposes. If I were a local politician or a state or local bureaucrat down there, I'd be nervous about now."
Further lost in the aftermath of Katrina's furor was the fact that neither New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin nor Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco had wanted to order a mandatory evacuation of New Orleans, a city of 485,000 people. Both politicians had been avoiding the issue until Saturday, August 27, when President Bush called both Democrats and, according to congressional and White House sources, essentially demanded that a mandatory evacuation be ordered. The order was made on the 28th.
...
By late Sunday, what had emerged was a picture less to do with Washington, and far more to do with incompetence on the state and local level. Federal emergency preparedness officials were poring over Louisiana's and New Orleans' emergency plans. "There is a very good reason everyone down there has clammed up about beating on the President," says the Homeland Security staffer. "The only people who continue to do it are the likes of [Tim] Russert and the New York Times, and they are just feeding off the tragedy for political gain, nothing more. In the end, it's the very people they have been listening to for the past week that they will have to put under a microscope."
* Pat Hynes in AnkleBitingPundits: Blame Katrina's devastation on God's wrath toward a city soaked in its own pride and you are a crackpot. Blame the French for constructing a city in a hole by the ocean and you are insensitive. Blame the city's own residents for not helping their neighbors evacuate, leaving many behind to suffer, and you just don't get it. Blame no one at all and you are out-of-touch. But blame George W. Bush and the New York Times will hold page one.
And in The American Spectator (linked on ABP): Yes, we lost a lot of Americans as a result of Hurricane Katrina. But Im not talking about her victims. I'm talking about the political Left who was singing in the rain and dancing on the corpses because they thought they could score political points.
* Mark Steyn: Unlike 9/11, when the cult of victimhood was temporarily suspended in honour of the many real, actual victims under the rubble, in New Orleans everyone claimed the mantle of victim, from the incompetent mayor to the "oppressed" guys wading through the water with new DVD players under each arm. Welfare culture is bad not just because, as in Europe, it's bankrupting the state, but because it enfeebles the citizenry, it erodes self-reliance and resourcefulness.
* Just when you think the left couldn't get any more vile, John Hawkins reports: [T]he comments you're about to read from denizens of Democratic Underground who participated in a mind-numbingly insensitive thread called "I Shall P*ss On The Grave Of William Rehnquist."
* Time for a bit of jocularity! Cindy Sheehan Files Suit Against God; President Bush, Israel Named as "Co-Conspirators": "We believe that this 'hurricane' came at an awfully convenient time for the President, and that fact, in and of itself, constitutes absolute proof of a conspiracy to knock coverage of Mrs. Sheehan's plight from the front page!" Does anyone know who Cindy is?
Posted by kitty at 10:45 AM | Comments (4)
Tierney: Use a Marker
This one anecdote is worth the whole column:
Instead of relying on a "Good Samaritan" policy - the fantasy in New Orleans that everyone would take care of the neighbors - the Virginia rescue workers go door to door. If people resist the plea to leave, Mr. Judkins told The Daily Press in Newport News, rescue workers give them Magic Markers and ask them to write their Social Security numbers on their body parts so they can be identified.
"It's cold, but it's effective," Mr. Judkins explained.
I'll bet it's effective.
Tierney highlights the one area in which President Bush deserves some criticism:
Yet Mr. Bush, with approval from conservatives who should have known better, reacted to Sept. 11 by centralizing disaster planning in Washington. He created the byzantine Homeland Security Department, with predictable results last week.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, often criticized for ineptitude, became even less efficient after it was swallowed by a bureaucracy consumed with terrorism. The department has spent billions on new federal airport screeners - with no discernible public benefit - while giving short shrift to natural disasters.
It is becoming apparent to anybody who reads with a critical eye that the governmental officials who bear the most blame for the miserable initial response are the local officials; the mayor and the governor. Some of the solutions that people offered early on, such as the mass airlifting of food and water into the city would make things worse now, when the city is supposed to be evacuated. This story, from yesterday, says that many of the people left behind are now saying they don't want to leave.
"They tell us, 'We're OK, just keep bringing us in food and water,' " said Jimmy Breen, an emergency response official from New Mexico. "But that obviously is not a solution to the problem."
More along the same lines at Uncorrelated.
Posted by pat at 10:29 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Bush Should Close Border
President Bush deserves extreme ridicule for his indifference to illegal immigration. Now with 1 million plus people displaced and in need of ANY work they can get--it's time to tell Mexico and Mexicans that enforcing our borders isn't racism. We cannot afford this recovery and continue to clog our emergency rooms will illegal immigrants and have illegal immigants receiving benefits from the Federal and local governments. We don't need to send anyone back right now, we just need to stop people coming in.
Then, if there is a boom and need of day laborers once serious rebuilding begins, that would be the perfect opportunity for Bush to ask for the guest worker program he desires; Americans will find it logical and needed. But the people who get first cracks at a track of legalization are peope already here.
Posted by Aaron at 04:52 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Is It All About Race?
I debated doing Krugman and Herbert's columns today, but they're so predictably screechy that it's not even worth the effort.
Here's a column from yesterday's paper purporting to examine the racial aspects of the disaster.
But the divides in the city were evident in things as simple as access to a car. The 35 percent of black households that didn't have one, compared with just 15 percent among whites.
Put another way, 65% of black households did have a car.
"The evacuation plan was really based on people driving out," said Craig E. Colten, a geologist at Louisiana State University and an expert on the city's vulnerable topography. "They didn't have buses. They didn't have trains."
Nope, no buses. Well, you never know, some people might buy it.
As if to punctuate the divide, the water especially devastated the Ninth Ward, among city's poorest and lowest lying.
"Out West, there is a saying that water flows to money," Mr. Colten said. "But in New Orleans, water flows away from money. Those with resources who control where the drainage goes have always chosen to live on the high ground. So the people in the low areas were hardest hit."
Mr Colten certainly has some interesting theories. "So people in the low areas were hardest hit." Isn't that sort of a tautology of floods? And he seems to think that a more equitable situation would have been to find some way to make water flow uphill.
Posted by pat at 03:32 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
The Rising Price of Gas: Having Our Cake and Eating It Too
As we all know, gas prices have literally jumped within the past week due to Katrina. In my town, the cheapest price for regular unleaded is currently at $3.29, up about 30 cents from last week.
A few days ago, I was forwarded a petition to President Bush to lower gas and diesel prices in the U.S. I won't sign it, and here are the reasons I passed on to the person who sent it to me:
-As they industrialize, China and India are using more gasoline, therefore putting more of a strain on the existing supply--the old supply and demand thing. OPEC isn't going to look a
gift horse in the mouth!
-More recently, the damage to oil rigs and refineries after the hurricane means reduced immediate supply in the U.S., again affecting supply and demand. I believe there is some gouging going on, but it's not pandemic. The more "reasonable" increases were inevitable in the aftermat of Katrina.
-We could be drilling up in ANWR country, but as you know, certain folks won't have any of it. Because we continue to depend so much on Middle Eastern oil while ignoring our own supplies, how can we complain about the prices? (Let's leave the "alternate fuel supply" argument aside for now.)
-Finally, many people continue to insist on driving gas-hogging SUVs, trucks and minivans. And I haven't seen much of a drop in the traffic in my area this past week. Yeah they're nice cars, but they are really hard on the wallet. It's a free country, drive what you want--but don't complain to me when you can't afford to fill up. As it is, my little Geo Prizm (10 years old and over 113,00 miles on it) is now costing me over $30 to fill, up about $10 from last week!
Frankly, all of the petitions in the world aren't going to stop gas prices from rising. I'm not an economist, and don't pretend to have all of the answers. If you want an expert opinion, I suggest you read this and this by economist Thomas Sowell.
In the meantime, I do have a few suggestions. Cut down on your drive time if at all possible by combining errands, carpooling with friends for your kids' activities, etc. How about purchasing a car that gets better gas milage? How much offroading do you do with your SUV anyway? Walk or ride your bike as much as you can--the exercise will do you good too. If you can't or don't want to do any of these things, then I suggest you make your budget cuts elsewhere and suck it up.
I don't usually like to compare us with Europe, but they've been dealing for high gas prices for a lot longer than we have, and they still seem to enjoy life. For once, we might consider following their example.
*Cross-posted on BlogMeister USA.
Posted by Pam at 01:24 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
PLUCKED FROM THE FLOOD OF NEWS
Photo dated August 29 shows hotel guests watching the effects of Hurricane Katrina in downtown New Orleans. Only the Johnny White's SPORTS BAR has lived up to to the New Orleans promise that bars in the Big Easy will be open during rain, shine or even a hurricane.(AFP/File/James Nielsen)
*This NY Times editorial is making the interblogatory rounds, which seems to have originated with Eurota. Eurota points out the delicious irony between the Times' current "hysteria" in their Bush-bashing concerning the flood and their previous hysteria concerning the very legislation proposed to avoid the damage we see now.
MSM: In Their Own Words, A Continuing Series
Anyone who cares about responsible budgeting and the health of America's rivers and wetlands should pay attention to a bill now before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. The bill would shovel $17 billion at the Army Corps of Engineers for flood control and other water-related projects -- this at a time when President Bush is asking for major cuts in Medicaid and other important domestic programs. Among these projects is a $2.7 billion boondoggle on theMississippi River that has twice flunked inspection by the National Academy of Sciences.
The Government Accountability Office and other watchdogs accuse the corps of routinely inflating the economic benefits of its projects. And environmentalists blame it for turning free-flowing rivers into lifeless canals and destroying millions of acres of wetlands -- usually in the name of flood control and navigation but mostly to satisfy Congress's appetite for pork.
This is a bad piece of legislation.
* Ben Stein in simple-to-understand English.
Get Off His Back (Updated)
George Bush had nothing to do with the hurricane contingency plans for New Orleans.
...
George Bush did not cause gangsters to shoot at rescue helicopters taking people from rooftops, did not make gang bangers rape young girls in the Superdome, did not make looters steal hundreds of weapons, in short make New Orleans into a living hell.
...
The entire episode is a dramatic lesson in the breathtaking callousness of government officials at the ground level. Imagine if Hillary Clinton had gotten her way and they were in charge of your health care.
* Linda Stasi reviews a show, which airs tonight on the History Channel (9:00 p.m.), about the endurance of Roman structures and gives the show 4 STARS.
Rome: Engineering an Empire
LAST week's total devastation in New Orleans makes this special about Rome's still-surviving structures some of which were built 20 centuries ago seem all the more extraordinary.
These buildings have survived earthquakes, natural disasters and such unnatural disasters as war. Sometimes they survived intact and sometimes only partially intact, although in all cases their beauty remains.
...
The special begins with Caesar's unprecedented feat of building a 1,000-foot bridge across the Rhine River in just 10 days which was so unbelievable it scared the Germanic tribes on the other side enough that they simply hid for his entire occupation.
Posted by kitty at 09:32 AM | Comments (0)
Photo of the Week(end)
Sean Penn launches his own rescue effort (God bless him for that), but demonstrates his high intellegence when the boat he's using springs a leak and he uses a red solo cup to save the vessel.
Thank God our military is there instead of Hollywood.
LGF has more.
Posted by Aaron at 09:59 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Hurricane Katrina: Another Excuse for Bush Bashing
Bush-haters didn’t hesitate to start accusing President Bush of mismanaging the hurricane disaster relief.
Such an accusation defies logic. There is only so much that any American President can do before and after a disaster. Most responsibility for disaster preparation and disaster relief lies at the local and state levels of government.
The Sunday before Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana, President Bush called Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco and personally appealed for a mandatory evacuation of New Orleans [Information Source]. When New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin gave a mandatory evacuation order for his city, the mayor stated that the local police had the authority to commandeer any vehicle needed to evacuate people. As seen in this now-famous photo of flooded buses, the police in New Orleans didn’t make much use of their authority. Is President Bush responsible for these buses not being used to evacuate people? No, of course not.
As for the federal government's resposibilities during a disaster, such responsibilities belong to FEMA, which is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security. No American President is supposed to micro-manage FEMA or any other agency within the Department of Homeland Security. (Side Note: Neither the Vice-President nor any other department secretary is supposed to manage disaster relief, either.)
It is reasonable to ask if the director of FEMA is performing his job properly. President Bush himself has stated that he is disappointed about FEMA's performance during the hurricane disaster relief.
Yet, blaming President Bush for errors during the disaster relief is blame being misplaced.
A commentary in Investor's Business Daily places the situation in a proper perspective:
Scapegoating the federal government misses the point. No president can stop a hurricane, or keep people from looting, rioting or shooting at government aircraft. Nor, for that matter, can a president know all that's needed, and how much, in an emergency. Indeed, the federal government's response is almost always elephantine, and inadequate to local needs. That's why we elect local officials and have local government.
Bush-haters don't need a hurricane as an excuse to bash President Bush. They will bash him no matter what happens. Such is the result of human hearts being filled with hatred. Such hatred is a spirtual disaster that God alone can provide a solution to.
Posted by Dodo David at 09:44 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Gas Prices: What Companies Can Do to Lower Prices
One thing I haven't heard mentioned on the news is telecommuting. Many companies already do it, but the amount of gas that could be saved (especially out west) if companies started liberalising their telecommuter programs.
Just a thought.
Posted by Aaron at 09:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Hurricane Refugee Relocation
Late last Saturday night, 34 buses carrying 2,000 hurricane refugees arrived at Camp Gruber, a military training facility operated by the Oklahoma Army National Guard. Camp Gruber is located a few miles outside of Muskogee, Oklahoma.
Upon their arrival, several refugees were taken to the Muskogee Regional Medical Center. Sadly, a 58-year-old woman died after being admitted to the hospital.
Meanwhile, 3,000 refugees are expected to arrive at Falls Creek, a camp owned by the Oklahoma Baptist Convention. The camp is located outside the southern Oklahoma town of Davis. The American Red Cross will oversee operations at Falls Creek.
[Information Sources: The Tulsa World newspaper; ABC television affiliate KTUL in Tulsa.]
Posted by Dodo David at 07:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Frank Rich: Political Looter
The New York Times could save a fair amount of time and money if they just removed Rich's column and pointed their readers over to Democratic Underground. All the trinkets of the Left are on display today. There's the obligatory reference to Bush's comment about "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees", and the comparison to Condoleezza Rice's comment about "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center." I don't know anybody other than the fever-swamp Lefties who think Dr Rice's image has been dented significantly by that comment, but they're trying to convince us that the levee comment will prove just as damaging. And anyway, isn't that a direct swipe from Eleanor Clift's Newsweek column?
A visibly exasperated Shepard Smith, covering the story on the ground in Louisiana, went further still, tossing hand grenades of harsh reality into Bill O'Reilly's usually spin-shellacked "No Spin Zone." Among other hard facts, Mr. Smith noted "that the haves of this city, the movers and shakers of this city, evacuated the city either immediately before or immediately after the storm." What he didn't have to say, since it was visible to the entire world, was that it was the poor who were left behind to drown.
Alright, let's take that apart piece by piece, shall we? First, who was responsible for getting the people out of the city? The city administration starting with the mayor. What happened? I think this will be the enduring image regarding his efforts:
Second, was it only the poor who were left behind? No, we have heard from many people that they decided to ride the storm out. And among the few who did not want to make that decision were the tourists staying at places like the Hyatt. It is abundantly clear that these folks are wealthier than the average New Orleans resident, and yet the city did nothing to get them out despite their apparently frantic efforts to evacuate. So it's unlikely that it amounts to some plot against the poor. It's just that as a class, the poor have fewer options, even when it comes to getting out of town.
Rich trots out the concept of "shared sacrifice", which seems to be becoming a trope of the left. With no apparent sense of irony, he says:
How about shared sacrifice, so that this time we might get the job done right? After Mr. Bush's visit on "Good Morning America" on Thursday, Diane Sawyer reported on a postinterview conversation in which he said, "There won't have to be tax increases."
So shared sacrifice = tax increases. Note the particularly repugnant tradeoff implied here. Shared sacrifice means that the poor drown while the rich have to pay a little more on April 15th. If conservatives were to suggest that, we'd be accused of being heartless.
Posted by pat at 11:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
FROM THE FLOOD OF NEWS
Gore did good.
*
Gore accompanies about 140 arrivals from New Orleans but declines to take credit
Former Vice President Al Gore arranged the flight and was on board, but he declined to take credit for the airlift, fearing it would be "politicized."
...
One of the doctors on board the flight was Dr. Anderson Spickard of Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, who said he had a "personal and professional" relationship with Gore. Spickard said Gore called him about 11 p.m. Friday to ask him to participate in the flight. "The jet was chartered," he said. "It was a private effort." Gore chartered the plane, but, Spickard said, "we'll decide who pays for it later."
*
Too bad that Nina didn't follow suit.
Totenberg Blames Tax Cuts for Flood Disaster in New Orleans
*
The answers to questions which the talking heads never bother to learn because they don't want to know.
Why The Katrina Coverage Made Me Switch To Fox News!
"Why did it take five days for Bush to help?" is the mantra constantly voiced by all the "Talking Heads" on TV. Here are the reasons:
(1)It is against the law f