People(bad)Soft

U.S. Sues to Stop Oracle Takeover of PeopleSoft Fri Feb 27, 6:44 AM ET Add Technology - washingtonpost.com to My Yahoo! By David A. Vise, Washington Post Staff Writer The Justice Department yesterday sued to block Oracle Corp.'s $9.4 billion hostile takeover bid for PeopleSoft Inc., alleging that such a deal would hurt competition in the market for software purchased by big companies to automate human resources and financial management.

I gotta tell you, as a frustrated user of PeopleSoft software on my job, I can't for the life of me figure out why Oracle continues to pursue the acquisition of a company that produces such god-awful software. I also use Oracle software and the difference between the two companies' software quality is like day and night, or Whopper and Beef Wellington, or Prius and Hummer. Well, you get the idea. If you own Oracle stock and their purchase of PeopleSoft becomes imminent, SELL!

Passion

This review of "The Passion of the Christ" by Ornicus is incredibly detailed and rich with references. It's making me think twice about seeing the film.

Bush Hates Planet Earth, Say Scientists

The Union of Concerned Scientists recently released a statement critical of the Bush Administration (excerpt from summary):

On February 18, 2004, more than 60 leading scientists—including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors, and university chairs and presidents—issued a statement charging that the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels. The statement calls for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity in federal policymaking.

The entire 46-page report, "Scientific Integrity in Policymaking: An Investigation into the Bush Administration's Misuse of Science" supports the above statement. You can also get the 3-page Executive Summary of the report.

Mark Morford has a few thoughts on this whole issue (snippets):

....Such is the national priority. After all, no one wants to hear how badly we've been duped by this administration, again. Given the nonexistent WMDs and the complete lack of Iraqi nukes and the bogus wars and manufactured fear and a galling budget deficit and nearly 3 million lost jobs and a raft of BushCo lies so thick you need a jackhammer to see some light, no one wants to know that even the world's top scientists are disgusted with our nation's leadership. We can, after all, take only so much abuse, can be only so karmically and ideologically hammered, before we become so utterly exhausted that we just stop caring. And, in fact, BushCo would love nothing more than to cripple our outrage and deflect attention away from all the dead U.S. soldiers in Iraq and his overall atrocious record on the war, jobs, the environment and foreign policy, and center it all on divisive issues of God-centric moral righteousness, like all those sicko gay people trying to dignify their sinful love. This is a president, after all, who truly believes he is doing God's will by turning this country into the most lawless, internationally loathed aggressor on the planet, something I'm sure is very reassuring to those countless thousands of dead Iraqi civilians. Does it really matter anymore? After all, as any child can tell you, politics has always been a wildly corrupt and slimy profession, valued somewhere between professional wrestler and professional baby-seal clubber on the moral and spiritual scale o' delicious karmic significance. And, yes, it must be noted that there isn't a U.S. president on record who hasn't somehow deliberately mangled scientific data and covered up important reports during his term in order to further favored policies. Goes almost without saying. But, as the Union of Concerned Scientists point out, never has the oppression of fact been so systematic, so widespread, so repulsive as that which Bush has wrought. Never has the abuse been so flagrant, the border marking what's morally acceptable so shamelessly crossed. Maybe you don't believe the hippie environmentalists who are always spouting off about saving the whales and protecting the forests. Maybe you like to hiss at and dismiss, say, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s outstanding, powerfully researched articles in the recent issue of Rolling Stone and the latest issue of The Nation that carefully delineate just how Bush's enviro record is the worst in history, and call Kennedy just another typical left-wing liberal. You wish to be that small and boorish? Fine. Not so easy, however, to dismiss a small army of nonpartisan, internationally respected scientists as just more agenda-thick political BS, as BushCo has done. To do so reeks of something far beyond mere name calling and dumb party maneuvering. It reeks of sheer heartlessness regarding the planet. It reeks of abuse. It reeks of hate. This, then, is the gist of the BushCo attack on the planet: a hate crime. An intentional, ferocious dismantling of protections and guidelines, a view that Mother Nature is nothing but a cheap resource to be exploited, a giant oil can to be suckled, a hunk of toilet paper for Dick Cheney to .... ....This is like the saturation level of BushCo. Something's gotta give, you say. Surely some sort of ugly orgiastic critical mass has been reached wherein Bush and his planet-reaming policies simply cannot go any further without some sort of meltdown, some sort of massive international cosmic recoil whereby we finally see the Bush admin for what it is, quite possibly the most self-serving, egomaniacal cluster of enviro thugs in modern history. But with the Union of Concerned Scientists report, this sentiment goes one step further -- this is not just hate for the planet, not merely a blatant right-wing revulsion for those much-loathed intangible New Age-y touchstones like earthly vibration, energy, true spiritual connection and a deep veneration and sense of profound awe for the raw divinity of nature. This is more sinister, and more disturbing. BushCo's ugly rejection of not merely the "liberal" environmental politicking but also of the factual science of the natural world is, ultimately, a form of self-loathing. It is a snide and self-destructive rejection of the human-nature connection, of the very real and very direct correlation between how we treat our world and how we view ourselves, between what we choose to celebrate/annihilate in nature and what we venerate/devastate in own spirits. After all, the less regard you have for one, the less you care about the other. Simple, really. Look. We reflect the planet. The planet reflects us. And 60 out of 60 scientists agree: BushCo's time of reflecting nothing but cruel blackness and abuse needs to come to an end, right now.

All I see is a long, drawn-out initiation of the apocalypse.

I'm Sure There's More Than 12

Check out 12 Reasons Same-Sex Marriage will Ruin Society. (Thanks to Rob for the lead.)

FRIDAY FUN

Bad Astronomy
Drum Solos
Mario Bros. Deviant Art: Part I, Part II, and Part III.
Mieskuoro Huutajat (Men's Choir Shouters)
Proofreaders' Hall of Shame
Spot the Fake Smiles
Stupid Egg Tricks

Wow, You Look Just Awful for Your Age!

HERE's something that fascinates and simultaneously infuriates me: a book currently on sale through the National Park Service, that claims the Grand Canyon is only 6,000 years old!

GRAND CANYON: A DIFFERENT VIEW - Tom Vail - $16.95 Laden with beautiful photographs coupled with Biblical quotes, this book is a "creationist" view of how the Grand Canyon came to be. Compiled by a Colorado River guide, its 104 pages include 23 essays by some of the leading modern-day theologians & creationists, the majority of whom have PhDs in such fields as geology, paleontolgy, geophysics, biology or biochemistry. In hardback.

NNCW Week

Mark your calendars, because next week, March 1-5, 2004, is No Name-Calling Week. Seriously.

Strike Resources

If you've been looking for more on the ongoing supermarket strike in California, go to this UFCW site and get the union's perspective, along with valuable info if you are a striker or a strike supporter.

Same-Sex Marriage FAQ

Continuing the same-sex-marriage theme running on Left is Right recently, HERE is a very informative site run by the NLCR that answers many questions for same-sex people seeking marriage in San Francisco. The information is also very interesting for those of us just trying to learn more about this fascinating and politically divisive issue. Check it out. Some of the questions that are answered include:

-If my partner and I marry in San Francisco, will our marriage be valid?
-Can a same-sex couple from another city marry in San Francisco?
-Are there any other countries that permit same-sex couples to marry?
-Can we get married in California if we have already gotten married in Canada?
-If my partner and I marry in San Francisco and later wish to separate, how do we obtain a legal divorce? (The answer to this one is particularly interesting.)
-If my employer refuses to honor my marriage, do I have any legal recourse?
-If my partner and I marry, will it affect my eligibility for continuing alimony from a prior marriage?

Yay, Prius!

Forget the limos!

Los Angeles (AP) 2.25.04, 9:10a -- Young Oscar nominee Keisha Castle-Hughes says she'll pass on taking a stretch limousine to her first Academy Awards to do her part in helping the environment. The 13-year-old "Whale Rider" star and best actress contender is one of a handful of celebrities who will be chauffeured to the gala in a Toyota Prius. It's part of an effort to help promote the use of hybrid cars powered by both gasoline and electricity. Charlize Theron, Sting, Robin Williams, Jack Black, Tim Robbins and Will Ferrell are among those committed to arriving at the red carpet in a hybrid car, courtesy of the environmental group Global Green USA. The group first provided hybrid vehicles for celebrities last year when splashy red-carpet arrivals were canceled because of the war in Iraq.

Mercury in Retro

MoveOn is putting together a petition to send to the EPA regarding the reduction of Mercury emissions and the attempt by the Bush Administration to delay it. Go HERE and take a couple of minutes of your time to sign the petition.

Mary on Dennis

Here's a nice letter from Mary Jacobs (published in Al-Jazeerah, of all places) regarding Dennis Kucinich:

Democrats, Wake Up Before It's Too Late, Kucinich Is More Electable Than Kerry - By Mary Jacobs Al-Jazeerah, Feb 23, 2004 In America we are free to worship as we wish, but never has there been a Jewish president. I never heard that Sen. John Kerry's grandmother and grandfather were Jewish until last week when Newsweek Magazine said that his grandparents, Mr. and Mrs. Kohn changed their religion to Catholic and their name to Kerry to make it look like they were Irish Catholics. People have changed their names to prosper in America because with a name like "Kerry" there would be less prejudice against them in Boston where many people are Irish Catholic. As a person who married a Jew and has a great grandmother in my history named "Katz", I understand the prejudice that Jews experience even now in America. I also have a nephew by marriage who comes from Palestine so I too understand that there are two sides to every story, something that Kerry may not. Kucinich is most open to peace negotiations as I see it. In my humble opinion, Dennis Kucinich is a man of peace and can bring sides together that might otherwise never meet. He is not in this for the ego or the money. If you look at his house, it is very modest. He does this for the love of mankind. Ironically, Dennis Kucinich's mother is Irish Catholic and no one makes a point of noticing it. He doesn't have to pretend to be Irish Catholic like Kerry. He has his own cross to bear-- he isn't tall. The presidency is a beauty contest, a role contest. The media ignores those with ideas to help change this world for the better and endorses the status quo. Those who should have a voice are silenced. The only thing that ever got on TV about Dennis Kucinich is his dating life and his eating habits. Hardly a word about the policies he suggests for nuclear disarmament, universal health care and peace. The Bush administrations stronghold on the media is keeping the regular people know that Kerry is half Jewish by blood because it is convenient to go against someone of Jewish decent. Kerry is basically unelectable because of this, but it won't be known until the stupid Democrats have been mesmerized and hypnotized by the media enough to believe that Kerry is the only hope. It's a trick by the Bush media to make sure it's an easy win for Bush in 2004. Even Edwards is better than Kerry, because he remembers what it was like to be poor, I feel that Edwards' best quality is that he listens to Dennis Kucinich and uses the great ideas to win. Thanks to Edwards saying that NAFTA should be repealed so that we have more jobs in the US, he was only 6 percentage points behind Kerry. This was Dennis Kucinich's idea at first, but the country is better for anyone using Congressman Kucinich's ideas. Edwards has the needed good looks in this beauty contest, Dennis has the ideas, but Kerry has the money, so it's scaryy, but Kerry might win despite the hush up of his being half Jewish by blood if not religion. I never heard of a Jewish person being electable, but maybe the Democrats are so anxious to get more of the same that they have that they will go for Kerry who is pretty much a lot of talk and criticism, but no fresh ideas. Let us pray that the Democrats will wisen up before it is too late and get real change in this country with Dennis Kucinch.

I'm not sure what's happening here. I've noticed that a large portion of my posts recently are regarding gay marriage and it's political and social ramifications. This site is supposed to espouse Dennis Kucinich, berate the Bush Administration for it's deadly and illegal invasion of Iraq, admonish the Christain Right for it's ungodly moral decay and divisive actions, and to brag about the greatest car ever made (the Toyota Prius). (Oh, and to find some fun sites to visit on Fridays.) So let's get back to the nuts and bolts and discuss issues that define the progressive movement. Oh wait, that would be things like.... gay marriage.

As Governor Groperzenegger might have said, "You don't see me squeezing the butts of gays, right? So let's keep things proper and Christian by outlawing homosexuality and abusing only straight women."

Walter C. on Gay M.

Walter Cronkite has some thoughts on the Christian Right's morality and tolerance of our diverse population, in a column in the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Posted on Mon, Feb. 23, 2004 - The most Christian of virtues The forthcoming presidential election will be decided on several issues of profound importance to the nation's future. It is unfortunate that the debates about them will be confounded by a religious issue that does not belong on the political agenda. The issue is same-sex marriage. A majority of our people identify themselves as Christian, and many of the faithful believe that they have a mission to pass on the word of God to those who do not believe with the same fervor as themselves. Their faith is admirable: Indeed, this might be a better world if we all obeyed our religious lessons with similar devotion. But that, of course, is not the case. And the zealots who follow the leadership of the so-called religious right are threatening us with religious war, fought on the battleground of the presidential election. The zealots are determined to make a political issue of their conviction that same-sex marriages are so immoral as to threaten the well-being of the nation, if not civilization itself. The more fanatical among them even claim that same-sex marriages would encourage homosexuality to the degree that the nation's birthrate would be endangered. They also fear that children adopted by same-sex couples will choose to follow the lifestyle of their adoptive parents and thus perpetuate, even exacerbate, what they see as the "problem" of homosexuality. Whatever the unlikelihood of its more drastic fears coming to pass - or of it ever successfully legislating moral behavior - the conservative Christian right is entitled to its beliefs and to its determined pursuit to criminalize same-sex marriage. Our constitutional guarantees freedom of speech, press and religion, after all. There are many of us Christians who recall our Sunday-school teachers and later our ministers dwelling upon the sympathy and respect - indeed, the tolerance - for others that, they taught, was basic to our Christian religion. As the prophet Isaiah summed up this need for tolerance: "Come, let us reason together." We who believe this are compelled to ask: Where is the tolerance, where is the Christian spirit in the effort to criminalize the personal choices of our fellow citizens, personal choices that do not physically threaten others? Where is the Christian tolerance in the conceit of those Christian leaders who dare suggest that they alone can be trusted to properly interpret the lessons of their Bible, and who would impose that belief on this nation's highly diverse peoples by threatening to throw them in jail if they don't agree with the Christian right's version of God's wishes? Besides wishing to criminalize individual behavior, the more radical members of the Christian right would like their proposed federal law to dictate what individual churches could do in regard to recognizing or performing same-sex marriages. This is another abomination. Shouldn't that decision be made by the individual church or denomination? What possible excuse is there for government intervention in this decision except an unreasonable, unchristian intolerance for freedom of worship? Where is the Christian tolerance in those right-wing Christian leaders who would impose their religious beliefs on the entire diverse population of the United States, even to the extent of a Constitutional amendment curtailing our rights of religious freedom? As the conservative Christian leadership presses this matter, which they depict as a moral issue, they threaten a religious war that will split our nation at a time when unity would be helpful in attacking far more critical problems - our foreign policy, the economy, education, medical care and the environment, to name a few. In the difficult days ahead, the tolerant among us - Republican, Democratic or Independent, Christian, Muslim, Jewish or nonbeliever - are going to have to try to preach another morality, and that is the morality of tolerance.

I know Mr. Cronkite, in spite of getting old, has a mind sharp as ever, but are we really headed for a religious war? That seems a bit over-the-top.

Huh?

"I have consistently stated that I'll support (a) law to protect marriage between a man and a woman. And, obviously, these events are influencing my decision." --- President G. Bush

Tell, me, exactly how is gay marriage a threat to marriage between a man and a woman, such that the latter needs protection via an ammendment to the U.S. Constitution? If Bruce and Bill, our next door neighbors, decide to tie the knot, how does that in any way whatsoever affect my marriage to my wife? Where's the threat? Do they gain special dangerous powers through gay marriage that I and my wife do not have the priviledge of getting? If my children see them outside holding hands and such, will the sight damage their brains, just like Janet Jackson's breast so mortally "injured" my 12-year-old so much that he couldn't stop laughing at the holier-than-thou outrage initiated by the religious Right?

Between WMD, Valerie Plame, TANG, the flight suit fiasco and this, I'm beginning to think that Bush will need something like $1 billion for his campaign if he's going to have a chance of winning his first Presidential election. Come on, Edwards, Kucinich and Kerry, jump on this one!

I Recall This Tactic Was Used Recently

Oh no, another California Recall attempt.

SACRAMENTO (AP) 2.24.04, 11:45a - Even as Attorney General Bill Lockyer prepared court papers to stop same-sex marriages, a pair of conservative Republicans who helped organize last year's recall of former Gov. Gray Davis announced plans to remove Lockyer from office for "neglecting" state marriage laws. U.S. Senate hopeful Howard Kaloogian and political consultant Ted Costa opened a petition drive to recall Lockyer, arguing that the two-term attorney general has been ignoring Proposition 22, a measure approved by voters in 2000 that requires the state to only recognize marriage between a man and a woman as valid. Lockyer, a potential rival to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2006, has been criticized in the last week for not moving more aggressively to enforce Proposition 22 and stop San Francisco city officials from issuing thousands of same-sex marriage licenses since Feb. 12. But Nathan Barankin, spokesman for Lockyer, said the attorney general has made his intentions well known in recent days. "The criticism of the attorney general is fueled by misinformation and falsehoods. It's been abundantly clear that Lockyer was going to defend state law."

This Week's Quote

"What was said before is not important." --- Ahmad Chalabi's response to American officials who now blame Mr Chalabi for providing intelligence that turned out to be false or wild exaggerations about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

I Didn't Even Know I Was Married to a Terrorist

Does THIS mean I have to report my wife to the FBI, since she's a school teacher?

WASHINGTON (AP) - Education Secretary Rod Paige called the nation's largest teachers union a "terrorist organization" during a private White House meeting with governors on Monday. Democratic and Republican governors confirmed Paige's remarks about the National Education Association. "These were the words, 'The NEA is a terrorist organization,'" said Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle of Wisconsin.

Update: Here's one person's response to this issue:

Name: Charles Pierce - Hometown: Newton, MA ...All right, in my time I have seen James Watt forced to resign a cabinet post because he made a tawdry joke about black people. I have seen Joycelyn Elders forced to resign because she talked sense about wanking. I have seen a number of people kept out of Cabinet-level positions because their nannies and gardeners worked off the books. Yesterday, Rod Paige was reported to have called the National Education Association a "terrorist organization" at a meeting of the nation's governors, and several governors confirmed that he had. I have one question: Why isn't this enough? Seriously, the congressional Democrats -- right now, today -- should begin a national campaign to force Paige's resignation. Not only is the guy a theocratic cluck, but he got his job by cooking the books in Houston, and now he's called every public school teacher in the country just about the worst name you can call anybody these days.

Groperzenegger Update: Promises Made for Breaking

From ArnoldWatch.org (snippet):

For Arnold's 100th day as Governor, Arnold Watch has assembled the following index of what is being given and gotten in California politics: Amount of total campaign contributions (in dollars) Schwarzenegger has received since taking office compared to what he said he would take: 11,007,144.25 : 0 Amount of contributions (in dollars) that Schwarzenegger has received on a daily basis during his first 100 days as Governor: 110,000 Ratio at which Schwarzenegger is outpacing recalled Gov. Gray Davis in fundraising: 2:1 Number of separate campaign committees controlled by Schwarzenegger into which the Governor has received contributions in 2004: 5 Amount of money Schwarzenegger has taken from Real-Estate, Developers and Construction companies compared with environmental groups: 3,732,084 : 0 Size (in dollars) of donation to Schwarzenegger from drug giant Pfizer: 100,000 High end asking price for ticket to 100th day fundraiser at residence of pharmaceutical heir Robert Wood Johnson IV: 500,000 Amount of money owed to California from the Pharmaceutical Industry based on a Bush Administration audit versus the amount targeted for collection: 1,300,000,000 : 0 Contributions (in dollars) to Schwarzenegger committees from major workers' compensation insurance companies: 409,858 Number of paragraphs devoted to workers compensation insurance rate regulation in Schwarzenegger's 100+ page proposal for workers compensation reform: 0 Campaign contributions to Schwarzenegger from the top eight industries that have donated since Schwarzenegger announced his candidacy: 13,018,166

Way to go, Arnie! You make the Republican Party proud!

Davis ain't looking so bad now, no? Hey, fellow Californian voters: Next time you vote for Governor, try voting with your brains rather than with your top-10-favorite-movies-of-all-time list (or, as with Reagan, who has the better hair).

Reason Why I'm no Longer a Catholic #85

Vatican Releases Report from Scientists Critical of "Zero-Tolerance" for Abusers

VATICAN CITY (AP) 2.23.04, 1:00p -- The Vatican issued a report by non-Catholic sex abuse experts who criticized the policy adopted by U.S. bishops of removing abusive priests from the ministry, saying it was overly harsh and would not protect the young. The report was released days before U.S. bishops issue their own national survey on sex abuse by clergy, which is expected to find more than 4,000 American priests have been accused of molesting minors since 1950 -- far more than previously estimated.... Monday's report, published by the Vatican's Pontifical Academy for Life, may fuel victims' concerns because it compiles assessments by independent, non-Catholic psychiatrists and psychologists, who say the U.S. "zero-tolerance" policy is mistaken. The 220-page report, "Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church: Scientific and Legal Prospectives," is a compendium of scientific papers and discussions presented by the experts during a Vatican conference convened last April to give the church hierarchy advice on how to handle the crisis. Neither the Vatican nor the experts drew final conclusions, but there were areas of agreement. As The Associated Press reported last week, one was in the widespread criticism by the experts of the 2002 U.S. zero-tolerance policy that says an offending priest can be permanently removed from ministry -- and possibly from the priesthood -- for a single act of abuse. Many American dioceses say they are aggressively pursuing zero-tolerance policies after being stung by charges the church hierarchy was trying to protect abusive priests, often by shuffling them from parish to parish. The experts said a zero-tolerance policy was mistaken and even dangerous. Most agreed that such a policy can actually increase the chances that offenders might strike again because it removes them from supervision and the only jobs they have known for decades. Zero-tolerance "does not function to prevent these crimes," Dr. Hans-Ludwig Kroeber, head of the Institute of Forensic Psychiatry in Berlin, told the conference. "It is better to domesticate the dragon; if all you do is cut off its head, it will grow another." Another conference participant, Dr. William Marshall of Canada, a former president of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, said such a policy sends the message the church doesn't care about the offender or believes he can't be rehabilitated -- "neither of which are good messages for the church to communicate." He cautioned such a severe penalty may even discourage victims from coming forward.

I know the Vatican is concerned about the severe shortage of parish priests throughout the world including the U.S., but to put parishioners at increased risk of abuse just to maintain higher staffing? Doesn't sound very christian-like. There are certain occupations that require zero-tolerance for serious crimes, and priesthood is definitely one of them. In fact, is there any job you know where an employee would not be fired if he/she sexually abused a child while on the job? If so, tell me in the comments.

Terrific article by Malcolm Gladwell concerning the public's misconception of the safety of SUV's. Snippet:

On August 9, 2000, the Bridgestone Firestone tire company announced one of the largest product recalls in American history. Because of mounting concerns about safety, the company said, it was replacing some fourteen million tires that had been used primarily on the Ford Explorer S.U.V. The cost of the recall--and of a follow-up replacement program initiated by Ford a year later--ran into billions of dollars. Millions more were spent by both companies on fighting and settling lawsuits from Explorer owners, who alleged that their tires had come apart and caused their S.U.V.s to roll over. In the fall of that year, senior executives from both companies were called to Capitol Hill, where they were publicly berated. It was the biggest scandal to hit the automobile industry in years. It was also one of the strangest. According to federal records, the number of fatalities resulting from the failure of a Firestone tire on a Ford Explorer S.U.V., as of September, 2001, was two hundred and seventy-one. That sounds like a lot, until you remember that the total number of tires supplied by Firestone to the Explorer from the moment the S.U.V. was introduced by Ford, in 1990, was fourteen million, and that the average life span of a tire is forty-five thousand miles. The allegation against Firestone amounts to the claim that its tires failed, with fatal results, two hundred and seventy-one times in the course of six hundred and thirty billion vehicle miles. Manufacturers usually win prizes for failure rates that low. It's also worth remembering that during that same ten-year span almost half a million Americans died in traffic accidents. In other words, during the nineteen-nineties hundreds of thousands of people were killed on the roads because they drove too fast or ran red lights or drank too much. And, of those, a fair proportion involved people in S.U.V.s who were lulled by their four-wheel drive into driving recklessly on slick roads, who drove aggressively because they felt invulnerable, who disproportionately killed those they hit because they chose to drive trucks with inflexible steel-frame architecture, and who crashed because they couldn't bring their five-thousand-pound vehicles to a halt in time. Yet, out of all those fatalities, regulators, the legal profession, Congress, and the media chose to highlight the .0005 per cent that could be linked to an alleged defect in the vehicle.

Check out THE CAMPAIGN DESK, a new journalism watchdog site by the Columbia Journalism Review.

The quality of debate in Campaign '04 is directly connected to the quality of its press coverage. In an effort to deepen and enrich that coverage, CJR has launched CampaignDesk.org, a new site that will use the power of the Web to monitor and critique political reporting in real time. It will be updated several times daily.

Hey Everybodeeeeee

Let's start digging up and re-posting this kind of stuff periodically to help all our pals with short-term (long-term?) memory loss:

...Ken Lay had helped George W. Bush every step of the way during his journey to the White House. Lay had been one of Bush's first "pioneers," each of whom pledged to raise $100,000 for Bush. Lay had made Enron's fleet of airplanes available to the Bush campaign. The Bush campaign used Enron's jets to fly to different events on eight different occasions -- that's more than any other corporation. During the 2000 election cycle, Lay contributed more than $275,000 to the Republican National Committee. Enron's total donations to the party exceeded $1.1 million. Enron gave $250,000 to help fund the Republican Party National Convention in Philadelphia. When the outcome of the election was in doubt after the polls closed in November 2000, Lay and his wife, Linda, gave $10,000 to help finance the Bush campaign's Florida operation during the recount after the election. After Bush prevailed in the election (thanks to an assist by the U.S. Supreme Court) Ken and Linda Lay gave another $100,000 to help finance Bush's inaugural gala. In all, Enron and its top execs kicked in $300,000 for the inauguration festivities. Naturally enough, the day after the inauguration, Lay went to a private lunch party at the White House, where he got to schmooze with the new president one-on-one. A few weeks later, Lay had dinner with the president. Beyond all that, Enron's connections in the White House went much further than George W. Bush. The new president's chief economic adviser, Larry Lindsey, was on Enron's payroll before going to the White House, earning $100,000 in consulting fees from the Houston company. Marc Racicot, the former governor of Montana, lobbied for Enron before Bush named him to lead the Republican National Committee. Robert Zoellick, Bush's choice for U.S. trade representative, served on an Enron advisory council. Thomas White, Bush's secretary of the army, was the vice-chairman at Enron Energy Services, a money-losing charade of a company. Nevertheless, when White left Enron, he owned more than $25 million in the company's stock. Bush's chief strategist and political guru, Karl Rove, owned more than $100,000 of Enron stock when Bush took office. With Bush in office and his pals in the White House, Lay was only too happy to provide them with guidance.

Keeping Liberal Heads Cool

I think Ornicus has some thoughts on the simmering verbal political violence that we should all ponder:

...I'm not advocating backing down in any fashion, of course; but it will be important, for the sake of winning, to beat them with a combination of coolness and steel. When they talk about "doing away with liberals," the right response is: "We don't wish to do away with you. But we will beat you at the ballot box. And if we have our way, you'll never be allowed near the reins of power again." When they smear our candidates, it will be important to respond with a rigorous critique of the conservative agenda that makes clear just how disastrous their reign has been for the nation. It will be important to make irrevocably clear this election the difference between liberals and conservatives. Where conservatives threaten violence and discord, liberals need to respond with firmness and healing. The mass of voters out there will not have to be told who the "real Americans" are. Talking tough may feel good, but it can be a two-edged sword. There are ways for liberals to make known their fierce determination without playing the right-wing's violent little game. That's their trap; let them thrash in it.

And Take A Tour of Santa Fe While You're There

If you're looking to marry your same-sex partner in S.F. and are worried about the pending legal status of the license (which the courts in California are currently reviewing), you might want to take a day or two off and get it done in New Mexico, where apparently it's completely legal:

County to issue same-sex marriage licenses Bernalillo, New Mexico-AP -- A county clerk in New Mexico says it has nothing to do with "politics or morals." Sandoval County Clerk Victoria Dunlap says the county plans to issue marriage licenses for same-sex couples. She made the decision after asking for an opinion from the county attorney, who said New Mexico law isn't clear on the issue. He also says refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples could open the county to legal action. State law defines marriage as a civil contract between contracting parties. It doesn't mention gender.

Auto/Oil industries Drunk Without Ethanol

Bush Greenwatch has details on the Bush Administration's latest gift to the oil and auto industries:

Auto Mileage Standards Up in Smoke, Again Sending a February Valentine to the auto industry, President Bush has extended for another four years a policy that enables carmakers to build less fuel-efficient vehicles while pretending to conserve oil. The auto manufacturers have been more than happy to exploit the loophole, much as they skirt CAFE standards (requiring a minimum number of miles per gallon) by pretending that gas-guzzling SUVs and minivans are light trucks. In effect since the late 1980s, the rule permits auto companies to manufacture cars that can run on either gasoline or ethanol. To burn ethanol, cars must be fitted with corrosion-resistant fuel lines and tanks, modified fuel injectors, special fuel sensors, and other features. The cost of the modifications per vehicle comes to about $300, an expense paid by the auto companies, not consumers. GM, Ford, and the other manufacturers are handsomely rewarded, however. By manufacturing these "dual-fueled vehicles" they get credits toward meeting CAFE standards for their entire fleet. In effect, the credits enable them reduce fuel economy for the millions of other cars they sell. If the policy worked as intended, this might possibly be a net plus for the environment, since the policy was designed to encourage the use of ethanol over oil (experts are divided on the relative merits of ethanol). But the dual-fueled vehicles, while capable of running on ethanol, rarely do. Less than one percent of the fuel burned by the three million dual-fueled vehicles on the road is ethanol. In most places, running a car on ethanol is simply impractical. There are only 180 ethanol refueling stations in the entire country, and 24 states have no refueling stations at all. The policy has become merely a device enabling the automakers to dodge laws designed to require them to build cars that get better mileage. The Bush Administration's extension of the dual fuel loophole, according to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE), means the U.S. will consume an extra 40-110 million barrels of oil from 2005-2008. "It's like putting an extra half-million new cars on the road each year," said Therese Langer, director of ACEEE's Transportation Program. "This move helps to ensure that our reliance on oil imports will continue to rise."

Go to the article for links to the supporting references and to sign the "petition urging the U.S. government to raise CAFE standards and lessen our dependence on foreign oil".

Yahoo vs. Google

As you probably heard, Yahoo has released their own search engine to compete at the level of Google. THIS SITE compares the two engines by allowing you to enter a search term and then compare the results side-by-side. Surprisingly, when entering the term "Left is Right", it ranked higher on Yahoo (#1) than Google (#3), even though Google owns Blogger (this blog's home). Now that Google has competition, I expect to see an acceleration in advances in search engine features. Good news for all of us!

Maher's Rule of Love

Boy, does Bill Maher ever have it right:

"...But when it comes to homosexuals, Republicans sing "I Love You Just the Way You Oughta Be." They oppose gay marriage because it threatens or mocks -- or does something -- to the "sanctity of marriage," as if anything you can do drunk out of your mind in front of an Elvis impersonator in Las Vegas could be considered sacred. Half the people who pledge eternal love are doing it because one of them is either knocked-up, rich or desperate, but in George Bush's mind, marriage is only a beautiful lifetime bond of love and sharing -- kind of like what his Dad has with the Saudis. But at least the right wing aren't hypocrites on this issue -- they really believe that homosexuality, because it says so in the Bible, is an "abomination" and a "dysfunction" that's "curable": they believe that if a gay man just devotes his life to Jesus, he'll stop being gay -- because the theory worked out so well with the Catholic priests. But the greater shame in this story goes to the Democrats, because they don't believe homosexuality is an "abomination," and therefore their refusal to endorse gay marriage is a hypocrisy. The right are true believers, but the Democrats are merely pretending that they believe gays are not entitled to the same state-sanctioned misery as the rest of us. The Democrats' position doesn't come from the Bible, it's ripped right from the latest poll, which says that most Americans are against gay marriage..."

FRIDAY FUN

Balls (game)
Dance Class (video)
Darth Vader's Injuries
Doggie Retirement Home (really!)
Hit the Penguin AND Hit the Penguin Farther (games)(careful, this one's addictive)
Neave Games (games)
Oragulator (mess up other web pages)
PMS Stories
Rural Racer
Squirrel (game)
Wordless Website

Most Ridiculous Headline of the 21st Century

Lefti on the News found this CBS News headline:

"5 Gitmo Guests Released To Brits"

Brand Loyalty

Matt Thompson has some observations of the supposedly Republican-oriented fans at the Daytona 500 (snippet):

"...Then Bush's motorcade drove by. One middle finger went up in the crowd, then another, and soon they were everywhere..."

If you live in (or are traveling to) Southern California, note the weather prediction from the National Weather Service:

WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE IMPULSE PER DAY MOVING THROUGH THE AREA FRIDAY THROUGH SUNDAY. THE FIRST TWO ARE VERY WEAK BUT THERE IS ENOUGH LOW LVL MOISTURE AND DYNAMICS ALOFT TO WARRANT SMALL CHANCES FOR RAIN EACH OF THE NEXT COUPLE DAYS. UNFORTUNATELY IT'S HARD TO BE MUCH MORE PRECISE THAN THAT AT THIS TIME BUT I THINK THE CENTRAL COAST WILL HAVE SLIGHTLY BETTER CHANCES FOR RAIN THAN SOUTHERN AREAS. SO I'M JUST GOING TO BROAD BRUSH THE FORECAST THROUGH SATURDAY WITH MOSTLY CLOUDY AND EITHER A CHANCE OR SLIGHT CHANCE OF RAIN. SHOWERS WILL LIKELY BE HIT AND MISS AND MOSTLY ON THE LIGHT SIDE SO FLOODING WILL NOT BE A CONCERN AT LEAST FOR THE NEXT 48 HOURS. A STRONGER SYSTEM IS EXPECTED TO MOVE INTO THE AREA SUNDAY. MODEL PW'S INCREASE TO NEAR AN INCH AND SOUTHERLY LOW LVL FLOW STRENTHENS CONSIDERABLY. SO OUT OF THE NEXT 3 DAYS, SUNDAY CLEARLY LOOKS THE WETTEST. SURPRISINGLY, THE ETA IS MUCH WETTER THAN THE GFS, BUT IT'S STILL WAY TOO EARLY TO START GETTING SPECIFIC WITH RAIN AMOUNTS AND TIMING. LONG TERM...ABOUT THE ONLY DAY OF THE NEXT 7 (EXCEPT TODAY) THAT LOOKS POTENTIALLY DRY IS MONDAY. AFTER THAT, IT LOOKS QUITE WET. AGAIN, IT'S TOO SOON TO BE REAL SPECIFIC WITH EXACTLY WHEN AND HOW MUCH, BUT I'M LEANING TOWARDS BROAD BRUSHING THE TUE-THU PERIOD WITH RAIN LIKELY, THOUGH IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT IT WON'T BE RAINING THAT ENTIRE TIME. BUT GIVEN THE MODEL FLUCTUATIONS FROM RUN TO RUN, INSTEAD OF FLIP-FLOPPING FROM FORECAST TO FORECAST, I'D RATHER JUST GO WITH RAIN LIKELY, THEN AS WE GET CLOSER WE CAN REFINE IT A LITTLE BETTER. IN ANY CASE, THE STORM DOOR IS **WIDE** OPEN AND THE POTENTIAL CETAINLY EXISTS FOR FLOODING RAINS NEXT WEEK.

From Dennis Kucinich:

I want to congratulate Gov. Dean on his campaign, his energy, his integrity, and his courage. I am proud that Gov. Dean stands with me on so many issues: the urgency of bringing our troops home from Iraq, the critical need to provide health care to all our citizens, jobs, education, and hope for a better future. Together, we stand beneath that progressive banner, and, whatever role he chooses to play in the continuing dialogue, I intend to keep those dreams alive in my campaign. To his supporters, I would say this: "If you love Howard Dean, you'll love Dennis Kucinich, too." If you are in touch with Dean supporters, please share this message with them. We embrace and echo Gov. Dean's challenge to continue working for change in the Democratic Party and to take back the government of this nation so that it works for the benefit of its citizens, not its self-serving special interests and entrenched political power structure. His grassroots supporters, like ours, represent a remarkable diversity of ages, races, and creeds - all united in the belief that government must change, and CAN change, if we commit ourselves, heart and soul, to that effort. We must not abandon that vision, but rather, take it to the streets, to the meeting places, to the ballot boxes, and then on to the convention this summer where our vision can become the rebirth and renewal of the Democratic Party. I look forward to talking with Gov. Dean about the future of our Party. Dennis Kucinich February 18, 2004

"Some of the lemmings in the Anybody But Bush camp may start to scurry over to Edwards. If they do so, Kerry is in real trouble. Wisconsin was at least a hiccup for Kerry, if not the beginning of whooping cough." ---- Matthew Rothschild

Betrayal Begets Helplessness

Howard Zinn speaks about our betrayal of our youth (snippet):

....As the government pours hundreds of billions into war, it has no money to take care of the Vietnam veterans who are homeless, who linger in VA hospitals, who suffer from mental disorders, and who commit suicide in shocking numbers. It is a bitter legacy. The United States government was proud that, although perhaps 100,000 Iraqis had died in the Gulf War of 1991, there were only 148 American battle casualties. What it has concealed from the public is that 206,000 veterans of that war filed claims with the Veterans Administration for injuries and illnesses. In the dozen or so years since that war, 8,300 veterans have died, and 160,000 claims for disability have been recognized by the VA. The betrayal of GIs and veterans continues in the so-called war on terrorism. The promises that the U.S. military would be greeted with flowers as liberators have disintegrated as soldiers die every day in a deadly guerrilla warfare that tells the GIs they are not wanted in Iraq. An article last July in The Christian Science Monitor quotes an officer in the 3rd Infantry Division in Iraq as saying: "Make no mistake, the level of morale for most soldiers that I've seen has hit rock bottom." And those who come back alive, but blind or without arms or legs, find that the Bush Administration is cutting funds for veterans. Bush's State of the Union address, while going through the usual motions of thanking those serving in Iraq, continued his policy of ignoring the fact that thousands have come back wounded, in a war that is becoming increasingly unpopular....

A moving essay. Read the entire contents HERE.

Blame the Parents

I have no problem with Bush trying to avoid going to Vietnam. God knows I was so grateful for my student deferment, as I thought the war was wrong and I didn't want to die for a bad cause. It was more than enough motivation for me to keep my GPA high enough so that I could enroll in graduate school and continue avoiding military service (which subsequently was unnecessary). If the situation turned bad enough, though, I would have still gone to war (although today I would have moved to New Zealand, knowing what I know now about the Johnson and Nixon administrations).

I do have a problem with this unelected President claiming to be the leader of our military, when he can't even punch his way out of an open duffle bag. He wasn't able, nor did he even attempt, to fulfill the minimum requirements for TANG duty. That's okay, because those people normally receive the appropriate consequences to their actions. Except of course for wealthy, well-connected ones, the ones who successfully cheat the system, the George Bushes of our nation. Those are the ones who will burn forever in hell, who will return in a karmic inferno of misery, who cannot go to sleep at night sober because they must numb their conscience. Except those consequences will not save the honest, gullible, trusting young Americans, who are taught starting in kindergarten to support their government and believe their President, from the injury and death in a war that has no business existing were it not for the pathologically lying and deceiving actions of Bush.

But, you say, it was the American electorate who (almost) voted him into office (and thus are (almost) to blame), and he's really an honest guy who deeply believes what he says and, aw shucks, give him a break because it's really his hand-picked staff who are screwing up. Right. Whenever I do something wrong, I just blame my parents and then everyone forgives me. Works like a charm.

Next They'll be Marrying Their Cars

Mark Morford's take on San Francisco's ongoing, California constitution-defying gay marriage ceremonies (snippet):

...The City's brave move was not merely a giant well-manicured middle finger to the Christian Right and indignant homophobic conservatives everywhere. Nor was it just an audacious act of civil disobedience, guaranteed to raise the ire of Bible thumpers and so-called pro-family groups hailing everywhere from Orange County to Colorado Springs. That's just a nice bonus. It was, more than anything, an incredible celebration of love. The more than 2,600 wedding ceremonies performed so far were the purest evidence, an irrefutable outpouring of the most wondrous and messy and baffling and orgasmic and desperately needed of human emotions, the air electric and warm, the ceremonies themselves radiant and poignant and genuinely tearful. And no question became so clear, so obvious, as the one being asked by same-sex-marriage advocates around the world: What, really, is so wrong about this? What is the horrible threat about two adults who love each other so intensely, so purely, that they're willing to commit to a lifetime of being together and sleeping together and arguing over who controls the remote? And what government body dares to claim a right to legislate against it? It is a question no group, no homophobic senator, no piece of antigay legislation, no BushCo stump speech, no Bible-humping pastor has been able to answer with any clarity or conviction. They can only mumble about immorality and quote some vague Scripture about sodomy that makes them all tingly, as wary biblical scholars all over the world roll their eyes and point to a thousand proofs that demonstrate, over and over again, how the Bible is basically a reinterpreted regurgitated piece of classic patriarchal misogynistic mythmaking that says exactly what the church rewrote it to say. But I might have part of an answer. From what I can glean from some of my hate mail and the general conservative outcry, here is what the homophobes fear about same-sex marriage: bestiality. That is, they are utterly terrified that same-sex marriage is a slippery slope of permissive debauchery that will lead to the utter breakdown of social rules and sexual mores, to people being allowed to marry their dogs, or their own dead grandmothers, or chairs, or three hairy men from Miami Beach. In short, to the neocon Right, a nation that allows gays to marry is a nation with no boundaries and no condoms and where all sorts of illicit disgusting behaviors will soon be legal and be forced upon them, a horrific tribal wasteland full of leeches and flying bugs and scary sex acts they only read about in chat rooms and their beloved "Left Behind" series of cute apocalypse-porn books. You know, just like how giving blacks the right to own their own land meant we had to give the same rights to house plants and power tools, or how granting women the right to vote meant it was a slippery slope until we gave suffrage to feral cats and sea slugs and rusty hubcaps....

If you haven't read Mark's columns, you are missing a slice of genuine Americana.

"...Bush may not have actually attended the National Guard, but he did attend National Guard related program activities." ---- Jay Leno

Major Sporting Event Elicits Potentially Damaging Advice

In the NBA all-star game Andre 3000 was advising his audience to "shake it like a Polaroid picture". This advice is INCORRECT, as reported here. This ends Left is Right's monthly public service announcement.

Bush Credibility: an Oxymoron

Ornicus nicely summarizes how Bush's AWOL issue, and his Administration's reactions to it, are starting to reveal his true credibility. Snippet:

This personal character of Bush's has been a cornerstone of his entire governing style. Should we go to war? Trust Bush -- he's a "good man." Economy's in the dumpster? "He's working hard to make things better." Wrecking the environment? "How can you impugn our motives?" Valerie Plame? "That's just politics." This style gives way to the kind of arrogance that can dress Bush up in a flight suit and send him jetting out to the deck of an aircraft carrier, in way specifically designed to emphasize his own phonied-up service record, for the sake of a photo op prematurely announcing "Mission Accomplished." It's what lets Bush get away with posing for all the world as a veteran "war president" with a real respect for the suffering of average soldiers. And it's what lets him and his minions get away with impugning the motives and patriotism of the people who question his leadership.

Remaking Photo History

You've GOT to check today's post on Doxagora (scroll down just a bit). It shows how two pictures of John Kerry and Jane Fonda were doctored and merged to make it appear that they were together at an anti-war rally. Fascinating and yet horrifying, just like the Bush Administration.

Happy Valentines Day to the World

I've never seen a photo of two people more in love. This photo was taken immediately after their marriage ceremony (oh by the way, they happen to be gay):

In a historic act of civil disobedience, San Francisco defied state law and issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples Thursday, a move expected to ignite a constitutional showdown as early as today.

This is damn exciting. This is going to create a firestorm of protest, and these marriages may be annulled by the state, but give it some time (months if not years) and same-sex marriages will ultimately become routine in California. The ball is now rolling, and there's no looking back.

Fear

Check out Mark Morford's column on fear (snippets):

Oh my God but we are one terrified nation. Fear is everywhere. Classrooms, water coolers, truck commercials. Fear is our government's raison d'etre, the calling card of the GOP. It will be the prime motivator in this year's presidential election, as Karl Rove will command that Dubya beat the drum of fear loud and hard and nonstop, smirking all the way. Fear of terrorists fear of gay marriage fear of women and foreigners and the poor and environmentalists and progressives and Janet Jackson and hippies and commies and gul-dang liberals who want to take away your guns and make you think for yourself. We cannot have that. Vote for us, the GOP will scream, and we will make sure to slaughter all those evil hippie demons, all while keeping your fear at a fever pitch via a never-ending parade of freshly minted evils that threaten your numbed McDonald's-gorged diabetic asthmatic children who can't breathe due to all the air-quality laws we've gouged. Shhh. Fear has served the GOP beautifully. It won them the election and let them launch two full-blown wars and has pumped billions into the coffers of crony corporations and there is no reason to stop now. Fear is bombing Afghanistan, right now. Fear is why we are decimating Iraq. A massive murderous budget-busting U.N.-hating war on a nonthreatening nation would have been unspeakable and intolerable had the GOP not deliberately engaged in truly world-class fearmongering beforehand, all about leveraging the sadness of 9/11 and tying it to nonexistent WMDs and biotoxins and nukes and scary bearded foreigners who are all hell bent on slaughtering American babies with rusty machetes. Basic truism of politics, worldwide: Get the populace scared enough, and you can get away with anything. Fear yanks away your basic civil liberties, your intuition, your sense of dignity and humane behavior. Fear means not blinking an eye as you remove your belt and your shoes as you allow your carry-on to be dumped out and rifled through and your toddler to be groped and her teddy bear strip searched by some snickering security personnel.... Fear is why we buy SUVs. Fear of horrible spine-mangling accidents, fear of smashing head-on into a Mack truck at 90 mph at any given moment, fear that just around the next corner is an enormous gorge full of anthrax and gangbangers and demonic vegans that we will have to traverse just so little Timmy can make it to therapy and Daddy can haul his load of dry cleaning back from the office. Never mind that SUVs have hideous road manners and are, in fact, far more deadly than smaller cars and suffer far more accidents than smaller cars, which are much better at avoiding accidents in the first place. Fear scoffs at this. Fear knows it's all about convincing you that horrible accidents and ungodly pain are inevitable, even if they're not. After all, fear drives a Hummer....

Read the entire column here. It's so, so true.

Unions Shmoonions

While totally denigrating Max Cleland's military service, among other things, Ann Coulter had this warm and fuzzy comment about unions:

Needless to say, no one ever challenged Cleland's "patriotism." His performance in the Senate was the issue, which should not have come as a bolt out of the blue inasmuch as he was running for re-election to the Senate. Sen. Cleland had refused to vote for the Homeland Security bill unless it was chock-full of pro-union perks that would have jeopardized national security. ("OH, MY GOD! A HIJACKED PLANE IS HEADED FOR THE WHITE HOUSE!" "Sorry, I'm on my break. Please call back in two hours.")

Thank god we have people like Ms. Coulter to inject reason and sanity into today's political dialogue. Where would we be without her? What she did forget to realize, however, was that the entire Bush Administration was on a two-hour break during 9-11, and I don't think any of them are "union".

Krugman on Chimps in Monkey Suits

The Real Man

By PAUL KRUGMAN - Published: February 13, 2004 To understand why questions about George Bush's time in the National Guard are legitimate, all you have to do is look at the federal budget published last week. No, not the lies, damned lies and statistics — the pictures. By my count, this year's budget contains 27 glossy photos of Mr. Bush. We see the president in front of a giant American flag, in front of the Washington Monument, comforting an elderly woman in a wheelchair, helping a small child with his reading assignment, building a trail through the wilderness and, of course, eating turkey with the troops in Iraq. Somehow the art director neglected to include a photo of the president swimming across the Yangtze River. It was not ever thus. Bill Clinton's budgets were illustrated with tables and charts, not with worshipful photos of the president being presidential. The issue here goes beyond using the Government Printing Office to publish campaign brochures. In this budget, as in almost everything it does, the Bush administration tries to blur the line between reverence for the office of president and reverence for the person who currently holds that office. Operation Flight Suit was only slightly more over the top than other Bush photo-ops, like the carefully staged picture that placed Mr. Bush's head in line with the stone faces on Mount Rushmore. The goal is to suggest that it's unpatriotic to criticize the president, and to use his heroic image to block any substantive discussion of his policies. In fact, those 27 photos grace one of the four most dishonest budgets in the nation's history — the other three are the budgets released in 2001, 2002 and 2003. Just to give you a taste: remember how last year's budget contained no money for postwar Iraq — and how administration officials waited until after the tax cut had been passed to mention the small matter of $87 billion in extra costs? Well, they've done it again: earlier this week the Army's chief of staff testified that the Iraq funds in the budget would cover expenses only through September. But when administration officials are challenged about the blatant deceptions in their budgets — or, for that matter, about the use of prewar intelligence — their response, almost always, is to fall back on the president's character. How dare you question Mr. Bush's honesty, they ask, when he is a man of such unimpeachable integrity? And that leaves critics with no choice: they must point out that the man inside the flight suit bears little resemblance to the official image....

And that's the ultimate challenge for the Democrats this fall. I just wonder if they can stop tripping over themselves long enough to do this. (emphasis added)

FRIDAY FUN

Atmosphere can be Fun
Classical Bicycle Horn Symphony
Drawing eyes, lips and nose
How To Wash a Hamster
Isaac Asimov
Popping a Water-Filled Balloon in Space
Hey Look, It's Cupid! (Be My Valentine)

Be sure to browse the FRIDAY FUN ARCHIVES if you want more.

Check out Atrios today. He's following several stories about Bush, including Valerie Plane, AWOL records and DWI records.

In case anyone complains that Democrats are getting petty in their drudging up information on Bush's past (AWOL, arrest record, drug use, etc.) just remember that these are the identical tactics used by Republicans on Clinton. Clinton survived (since nearly all the charges were bogus if not unimportant), so the Republicans shouldn't worry about charges against Bush, since he and his supporters say they're all bogus or unimportant, right?

Dennis on TV Tonight

Apparently Dennis Kucinich is scheduled to be a guest tonight (Feb. 12th) on both the Tonight Show with Jay Leno and The Late Late Show with Craig Kilborn (NBC).

Man in the Bubble

Great piece on the appearance of Dick Cheney at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Terminator of Sound Fiscal Policy

How's Groperzenegger been doing with California's fiscal problems? Read an examination of Ken Rosen's analysis. Professor Rosen of UC Berkeley is the Chair of the Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics.

Wizard of Oz Gets 1 Year for Doing Dorothy, 20 for Doing the Tin Man

Oh my. Kansas is in a state of homophobia.

Kansas appeals court backs harsher sentence for illegal gay sex, says difference justifiable JOHN HANNA, Associated Press Writer - Friday, January 30, 2004 (01-30) 12:14 PST TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) -- Kansas can punish illegal sex with children more harshly when it involves homosexual acts, the state Court of Appeals ruled Friday in a case being watched by national advocacy groups. Judge Henry W. Green Jr. wrote in the 2-1 decision that legislators could justify differing penalties for homosexual versus heterosexual sodomy in plenty of ways, including greater health risks or an attempt to "encourage and preserve the traditional sexual mores of society." The ruling by Kansas' second-highest court rejected an appeal by Matthew R. Limon, who was sentenced to more than 17 years in prison for having sex when he was 18 with a 14-year-old boy in 2000. He was convicted of sodomy. Had Limon's partner been an underage girl, he could have been convicted of unlawful sex under the state's "Romeo and Juliet" law and sentenced at most to one year and three months in prison....

When I was growing up in the 70's I thought for sure that, by the time I was middle-aged, these stupid, archaic ideals currently and avidly espoused by the Christian Right would be long gone. Boy was I ever wrong.

Bobble Heads

In case you haven't figured it out yet, Left is Right thinks Wal-Mart is just as evil as Halliburton. Case in Point:

Published on Monday, February 9, 2004 by Reuters Wal-Mart Accused Over Chinese Factory - by Grant McCool NEW YORK - Labor rights groups on Monday accused the world's biggest retailer, Wal-Mart Stores Inc., of turning a blind eye to abusive conditions at a factory in China that makes plastic toys for the company. The National Labor Committee and China Labor Watch said in a report that workers at the factory in Chang Ping Township in Guangdong province were paid less than the legal minimum and worked longer hours than legally allowed. A Wal-Mart spokesman said he was not aware of the specific allegations but that the company worked to ensure factories all over the world were run legally and inspected for abuses. The report said the Chinese factory management trained workers to answer prepared questions and paid them a bonus for remembering them correctly during visits by Wal-Mart inspectors. It said emergency fire exits and medical boxes were normally locked, but the Chinese managers unlocked them ahead of inspections. They also doctored time cards, the report said. The rights groups said Wal-Mart appeared to condone the Chinese management's methods. "No company could be that shallow or gullible, unless it were consciously acting out a role with the full intent of achieving the desired result -- a whitewash," the report said. Bill Wertz, a spokesman for Bentonville, Arkansas-based company, said Wal-Mart had experienced inspectors who adhered to its corporate standards. "It would be a complete violation of our policy for anyone to participate in any charade that would merely make a pretense of observing a thorough inspection," Wertz said. The rights groups said workers received an average 16.5 cents an hour when the legal minimum in China was 31 cents an hour. The workweek was seven days when five days was legal and people toiled for up to 20-1/2 hours per shift. The groups said the same He Yi Electronics and Plastics Products Factory produced "bobblehead" sports star dolls for America's major professional sports organizations through U.S. company Fotoball. Charles Kernaghan, head of the National Labor Committee, said the sports organizations -- including the National Basketball Association, Major League Baseball and the National Collegiate Athletic Association -- had not responded to his letters. "We're hitting a stone wall with these people, which is sort of amazing, given their profits and the salaries ... the players won't be happy that their images are being made by workers in China with zero rights," said Kernaghan, who revealed in October that a sweatshop in Honduras made the clothing line of hip-hop music and fashion entrepreneur Sean Combs. Kernaghan said on Monday that Combs' staff had worked with his group to greatly improve conditions in that factory.

You can actually do something about this abomination. Click here and sign the petition regarding your boycott of those stores locking out grocery workers. Remember, these stores claim that they're just trying to keep up with the cost-slashing policies of Wal-Mart.

Oh, and of course never purchase anything at Wal-Mart, no matter how enticing the price. I suggest: go in and use their bathroom facilities, fill up a cart from all over the store, and then just leave. Often. And bring your progressive friends along to do the same. Often. Let's make it a new American tradition. Just don't go overboard.

Daily News Online

Here's a new news site that has a definite liberal bent. It just started and I don't know if it will provide any new unique information that all the other "ususal" sites already offer, but check it out and see how it evolves over time.

1984 + 20

Wow. Now you can watch Big Brother while shopping for slave-wage-laborer-produced fashion accessories.

Fox News: Attention, Wal-Mart Shoppers - By Mike Reynolds -- Multichannel News, 1/26/2004 4:01:00 PM Premier Retail Networks has inked a deal with Fox News Channel for the service to become the exclusive "breaking-news" provider to Wal-Mart Television Network. Under the deal, terms of which were not disclosed, Fox News will supply live breaking-news segments and alerts for retailer Wal-Mart Stores Inc.’s in-store network, which has multiple monitors in some 2,450 stores nationwide and generates more than 150 million impressions monthly, according to Nielsen Media Research. A spokeswoman for PRN -- which also supplies programming to in-store networks found in Best Buy Co. Inc., Circuit City Stores Inc., Sears, Roebuck & Co. and other retail chains -- said Wal-Mart TV also includes content from FitTV and Oxygen, as well as promotional and product information. "As the No. 1 cable news channel in America, we are proud to partner with PRN to deliver our news to Wal-Mart customers nationwide," Fox News vice president of affiliate sales and marketing John Malkin said in a prepared statement. "This is a great opportunity for Fox News to provide breaking news to a significant audience."

See, Bush Can Work Things Out

Trapper John over at Daily Kos wrote such an eloquent analysis of Bush's comment on MTP on his AWOL National Guard duty, I am forced to copy it here:

There's no question that the idea that Bush may have been AWOL during part of his tenure in the Guard is intriguing. But it's not nearly the most offensive aspect of his military history, and it's mired in uncertainty. We need to avoid getting caught up in the legalistic AWOL/not-AWOL arguments, and focus on what Bush himself admits when asked how he got out of the Guard 8 months early: "I was going to Harvard Business School and worked it out with the military." Imagine with me a soldier named Joe Smith, from Southeast DC. Corporal Smith joined the DC Guard to pay for his undergrad degree at UDC -- he was the first member of his family to earn a four-year degree. Smith has been posted in Tikrit for the past six months, and despite the fact that his Guard commitment was due to end on Dec. 31, he isn't allowed to leave the service, due to Bush's stop-loss orders. But Smith applied to business schools before leaving for Iraq, and has just been accepted into Howard Business School. Will Corporal Smith, who has already served longer than the term for which he signed up -- and who has served in a war zone -- be able to "work it out with the military" so that he can go to the "other" HBS? Hell no. And that, folks, is a powerful testament to the arrogant sense of entitlement that permeates every cell of George Walker Bush. The fact that he can characterize his service as entirely honorable, and apparently believes that it was somehow normal to "work out" a deal with the military so that he could return to his Ivy League roots -- at the same time that he keeps Guard members in Iraq long past the time when they should have gone home -- is appalling and foreign to regular Americans. Bush got into the Texas Guard pilot program despite abysmal test scores, during a time that there was a draft on for an overseas war, and he was able to bail out early on that because he wanted to go to b-school. Today, Bush issues stop-loss orders that keep Guardsmen like Corporal Smith -- who unlike Bush, serve in an overseas war -- in the service indefinitely. And unlike George Walker Bush, son of a Representative/Ambassador/RNC chair and grandson of a Senator, the Smiths of today's Guard don't get to make it all stop just because they want to kill time at business school. That is an issue which will resonate with Americans. Bush has never played by the rules forced on the rest of us, and his b-school/Guard dealings highlight the imbalance of the playing field.

Problem is, most Americans want to be rich, understand that wealth has priviledge, and subconsciously feel that holding this against Bush is hypocritical. Thus the lack of public ire over this issue.

Appearance is Everything

Bush on Meet the Press today:

BUSH: I think, if I might remind you that, in my language, I called it a grave and gathering threat. But I don't want to get into a word contest. But what I do want to share with you is my sentiment at the time. There was no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was a danger to America. No doubt. RUSSERT: In what way? BUSH: Well, because he had the capacity to have a weapon, make a weapon -- we thought he had weapons. The international community thought he had weapons, but he had the capacity to make a weapon. And then let that weapon fall into the hands of a shadowy terrorist network. It's important for people to understand the context in which I made a decision here in the Oval Office. I'm dealing with a world in which we have gotten struck by terrorists with airplanes, and we get intelligence saying that there is, you know, we want to harm America. And the worst nightmare scenario for any president is to realize that these kind of terrorist networks had the capacity to arm up with some of these deadly weapons and then strike us. And the president of the United States' most solemn responsibility is to keep this country secure. And the man was a threat, and we dealt with him, and we dealt with him because we cannot hope for the best. We can't say, Let's don't deal with Saddam Hussein, let's hope he changes his stripes, or let's trust in the good will of Saddam Hussein. You know, let's let us, you know, kind of, try to contain him. Containment doesn't work with a man who is a madman. And remember, Tim, he had used weapons against his own people. RUSSERT: But can you launch a preemptive war without ironclad, absolute intelligence that he had weapons of mass destruction? BUSH: Let me take a step back for a second, and there is no such thing necessarily in a dictatorial regime of ironclad, absolutely solid evidence. The evidence I had was the best possible evidence that he had a weapon. RUSSERT: But it may have been wrong. BUSH: Well, but what wasn't wrong was the fact that he had the ability to make a weapon. That wasn't wrong.

Tying Saddam to 9-11, as usual. And Bush will keep doing it as long as enough Americans continue to believe it. Look out, Kerry, because a lot of Americans continue to allow themselves to be fooled by appearance rather than facts, so you'd better spend a lot of your energy on protecting your appearance or you'll end up like Dean following his scream. Although virtually nothing Bush said in the interview was true with regard to the facts, a lot of people are going to swoon over the fact that he was man enough to confront his "accusers", and that gives the appearance of a fighter, someone who cares, and thus someone who you can trust. Relying on the truth in the election just won't cut it in this day and age.

It will be interesting to see how Bush retains his job this November, because there is no way Democrats can mount a concerted effort to convince Americans that Bush no longer appears qualified to remain. After all, we are a forgiving and optimistic people, and we tend to give a second chance to those who fail. Why? Because each of us has, at one time or another, been given a second chance at something important and subsequently succeeded. So gee, maybe Bush will learn his lesson and right his ways. (And maybe all disease and poverty will disappear next week.)

By the way, did anyone notice how Bush talked about terrorists with WMD being a threat, at the same time talking about the terrorists who used our own planes for 9-11 (armed only with box cutters). This contradiction of course has been spoken by Bush et al. countless times, nevertheless the American media has yet to discuss it.

THIS is just weird.

"When it is not necessary to make a decision, it is necessary not to make a decision." Lord Falkland (1610 - 1643)

Dean???

Uh Oh. I just took the SelectSmart.com 2004 Presidential Candidate Selector and, according to the results, I'm backing the wrong guy!

1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%) 2. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (83%) 3. Socialist Candidate (82%) 4. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (82%) 5. Clark, Retired General Wesley K., AR - Democrat (81%) 6. Kucinich, Rep. Dennis, OH - Democrat (75%) 7. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (71%) 8. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (68%) 9. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (45%) 10. Libertarian Candidate (32%) 11. Phillips, Howard - Constitution (10%) 12. Bush, President George W. - Republican (2%)

Thanks to Rob at Conniptions for the lead.

Killing the Guinea Worm

February 3-5 : Ghana Greetings from Ghana. We departed en route to Accra Tuesday afternoon with a mixture of anticipation and trepidation. Ghana was the first country in which Rosalynn and I ever visited endemic villages, and we'll never forget seeing two-thirds of the total population incapacitated with the disease, many of them lying around under shade trees unable to walk. I described the scenes in my first message in this series. With our personal involvement and strong support from the national government, there were only 8,432 cases six years later, in 1994. There has been stagnation in Ghana's efforts since then, and in the last three years the number of cases reported has risen from 4,739 to 8,283. All nations except Ghana have made significant and steady progress in recent years, resulting in a total reduction from 3.5 million to less than 35,000 (2003 provisional figures)-more than 99 percent. There are several excuses put forward for Ghana's poor performance: some ethnic conflict in the northeast, migrant farm workers that transmit the disease, and a lack of central control from the national government. The most disturbing event occurred last year when a serious outbreak of Guinea worm in the central section, around Lake Volta, was deliberately concealed. Solemn promises by the government to dig wells have not been honored. The Carter Center has marshaled a series of exceptional efforts to overcome these problems, but all have been fruitless. There is no doubt that our visit is timely, but we have received word that top officials are very concerned about our potential criticisms. Some intense observation, incisive analysis, and political diplomacy will be necessary...

The above excerpt is from President Jimmy Carter's new blog which documents his current travels through Africa. Fascinating reading... check it out. (Thanks to Skippy for pointing to this site.)

"The President's budget is like a cheap suit – the closer you get, the worse it looks." --- Center for American Progress

Staying Abreast on a Breast

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. If it wasn't April Fool's Day, I would think that the following story was true:

Tenn. Woman Files Suit Over Super Bowl - Associated Press - Thursday, February 5, 2003 Terri Carlin wants to make Janet Jackson's bare breast into a federal case. Carlin filed a proposed class action lawsuit in U.S. District Court Wednesday against Jackson, singer Justin Timberlake, broadcasters MTV and CBS and their parent company, Viacom. Carlin alleges that she and others who watched the halftime show during Sunday's Super Bowl were injured by the performers' lewd actions when Timberlake ripped off part of Jackson's costume, exposing her breast. In the lawsuit, Carlin charges that the exposure and "sexually explicit conduct" by other performers during the show injured viewers. "As a direct and proximate result of the broadcast of the acts, (Carlin) and millions of others saw the acts and were caused to suffer outrage, anger, embarrassment and serious injury," the lawsuit says. But Carlin, who works in a bank, doesn't specify the type of injury allegedly suffered. "All of the defendants knew that the Super Bowl, the pre-eminent sports event in the United States, would be watched by millions of families and children," says the lawsuit filed by Knoxville attorney Wayne A. Ritchie II. "Nevertheless, (they) included in the halftime show sexually explicit acts solely designed to garner publicity and, ultimately, to increase profits for themselves." The lawsuit charges that the broadcast companies and the two singers violated an "implied" contract with viewers not to subject them to lewd actions. "Families have an expectation that they can trust companies and individuals such as the defendants not to expose families to sexually explicit conduct during broadcasts of prime time events such as the Super Bowl," the lawsuit says.... [emphasis added]

The recent and ongoing cancellations, uproars, parental group demonstrations, etc. have made this story probably the most ridiculous one of the past five years, ever since every christian conservative had an envy-filled foaming-at-the-mouth conniption upon hearing that Clinton got an office quickie. My god, what if J. J. had revealed BOTH breasts?

Again, would someone please tell me what is wrong with a woman's breast? People spend $billions each year just to look at them, so how can anyone complain when you can see one for free for a measly 1.7 seconds? Oh, right, we must protect the children, those same goddam little pr*cks who work us parents over like a hooker works a nerd, those same little snot-nosed, foot-stomping, lying, furniture-and-carpet-staining rugrats who can think only about their stomachs and toy chests, who sneak onto the internet to look at.... breasts!

(By the way, my three kids are all perfect angels. I was talking about everyone else's annoying little pr*cks.)

FRIDAY FUN

$11.84 for Nothing (eBay "item")
Are You a Monobrow?
Free Hearing Test (Huh?)
Liven Up Your Desktop Screen
Make a Face
Sell your body parts for big $ (earn up to $20,000 per year with your body)
What Color Are You?
Words of the Year for 2003