Tuesday, August 31, 2004

Q: Define the Bush Administration and its relationship with Iraq.

A: "[A] small group of neoconservative ideologues" who "shaped a war without any realistic understanding or plans for shaping a peace." - Anthony Cordesman, Center for Strategic and International Studies.


Tuesday, August 24, 2004

The New York Times, Opinion, Paul Krugman, "The Rambo Coalition"

A partisan tirade from Krugman?
Obviously, yes.

But nothing more than a pack of lies?
Just as obviously, no.


Saturday, August 21, 2004

Top reasons George W. Bush is unfit to serve and should have been impeached long ago - see below.

REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR BUSH

1. The Tax Cuts - He's a modern day robin hood, except... he robs from the poor to give to the rich.

2. He's willingly and knowingly trampled the Constitution - Before the Supreme Court stopped the over-reaching, the President argued that the Executive had the power to declare a citizen an enemy combatant and, by reason thereof, deny him/her access to counsel, information of the specific charges against him, access to the court (i.e. a citizen's constitutionally mandated/protected rights.) In effect, the President was arguing that the Executive is ABOVE and NOT BEHOLDEN to the Constitution. As any 1L will tell you, that a crock of bull.

3. Iraq - the granddaddy of them all. A war fought on false pretenses. A war where they never planned for the peace.



Wednesday, August 18, 2004

With Storm Gone, Floridians Are Hit With Price Gouging

Contrast what's happening in Florida after Charley with what happened during the August 2003 blackout in New York.

I wonder if the Florida in Carl Hiansen's books isn't all that off the mark?

But, hey, with the other Bush in charge over there, can't really say I'm suprised. (Ok, low blow, like brother - like brother, maybe, but not necessarily. Jeb might actually be a good guy for all I know.)


Monday, August 16, 2004

A STATEMENT OF BELIEFS:

1. Anti Abortion - only exception, when the life of the mother is at stake;
2. Pro Gun Control - if someone wants a gun, I'd make gun safety and use training mandatory. No iffs or buts.
3. Anti Death Penalty - but only because I believe too many innocent people get convicted. Otherwise, especially for the heinous crimes - fry the sucker!
4. Pro Small Government - let the people lead their lives. The less intervention the better. The trick is finding out where to regulate and where to stay out.
5. Pro Free Trade - but progressive and measured;
6. Pro Globalization - Yes, globalization brings its own inequalities, challenges and problems. But, at the end of the day, I firmly believe that it's a force for good when harnessed properly. (Read Alvin Toffler's Third Wave);
7. Pro Environment - let's face it, we're killing the earth and ourselves in the process. This has got to stop. And, no, I don't think being pro globalization means that you can't be pro environment also;
8. Pro Gay Marriages - why the heck not? But let's be clear, it's a civil thing. No one is telling the Catholic Church or any other organized religion for that matter that they have to allow it.

More later...

Wednesday, August 11, 2004

I love that Bush line:

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." - President George W. Bush, Washington D.C., August 05, 2004.


If there ever was a Freudian slip this is it.

Do you need any other reason NOT to vote for this guy in November?


Here's Rumsfeld, talking about the creation of a National Directorate for Intellignce (paraphrasing here) - "We better damn well know what we're going to replace it with before we tear something down."

Good advice, extremely good advice.

So, why the fuck didn't you follow your own advice before you invaded Iraq?


Friday, August 06, 2004

Well, here's another, uniquely, far right Republican proposal - re-privatize airport screening.
What the hell are they thinking?!?
It's like having private contractors do high level interrogations in Iraq, you can't help but scratch your head in wonderment.

Look, I'm all for smaller government. I heartily agree, the less bureaucracy we private citizens have to deal with, the better. But only up to a point, damn it! There are some functions that belong uniquely to government and, in my book, providing airport security is one of those functions, especially post-September 11.

But, in a way, I'm not surprised.

What are we going to have next? A privately run armed forces? Come to think of it - we already have that....

A new terror alert for New York.

You want to believe this administration, give it the benefit of the doubt but, at the same time, the cynical side of you wonders whether it's just politics or, at the very least, primarily driven by politics.

I don't think so, at least not this time.

But you never know.

Consider, if reports are credible, this Administration requested the Pakistani's to delay announcement of the capture of that Al Qaeda operative to coincide with Kerry's speech at the Democratic National Convention. (Note that the guy was captured before the Convention started but release of news concerning the capture was delayed until Kerry's speech.)

If anything, this Administration's proven quite adept at manipulating the media.

So it's really not a leap of faith to believe that the Buhie's are also using terror alerts for political gain.