From http://www.whitehouse.gov/stateoftheunion/2006/index.html:
Breakthroughs on this and other new technologies will help us reach another great goal: to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025. (Applause.)
From Newsday:
There’s only one problem: Even Bush’s own advisers admitted yesterday there’s no way to know if his plan would really cut off Middle East imports.
Bush’s chief economic adviser, Allan Hubbard, told reporters that Bush meant only that alternative fuels and hydrogen cars are expected to reduce the equivalent of Middle East oil imports in 2025.
But since private companies buy oil - and not the government - analysts believe the companies would keep buying from the oil-rich Persian Gulf even if they trimmed supplies from there and other places, such as Canada and Mexico, analysts said.
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said that Bush’s goal of cutting Middle Eastern oil “was merely meant to give an example” of his plan’s benefits.
Okay, before you longhaired Chardonnay-sipping bean-counters get your red diapers in a bunch over this, let’s get one thing straight: The President “pledged” some things on Tuesday, okay? He “promised” other things, and he “asserted” still more things. And he stands by those things.
But just in case you’re getting set to “hold” the President to these “things,” it’s important that you understand what he was “saying” when he “said” those “things” that were “said” in the “State of the Union,” some of which were “said” without the President’s knowledge.
————–
As we make progress on the ground, and Iraqi forces increasingly take the lead, we should be able to further decrease our troop levels — but those decisions will be made by our military commanders, not by politicians in Washington, D.C.
What the President meant here is that the military commanders are the ones who are going to make these decsions, so long as those decisions don’t take the form of 1) “We’re fucked! Please send more troops!” or 2) “We’re fucked! Let’s get out of here!”
It’s also important to note that when the President says “military commanders,” he means, primarily, “Commander in Chief of the military.”
————–
Dictatorships shelter terrorists, and feed resentment and radicalism, and seek weapons of mass destruction. Democracies replace resentment with hope, respect the rights of their citizens and their neighbors, and join the fight against terror.
The President meant that democracies that do not elect terrorists will join the fight against terror. Those other nations are actually “terrocracies,” and shouldn’t be confused with actual “democracies.” This is also true of so-called democracies who elect dictators, which are actually “dictocracies,” or so-called democracies who elect communists (”commocracies”), anti-American governments (”asshocracies”) and circus clowns (”clownocracies”).
What the President really meant here was to point out that the Dow is approaching 11,000 and that the new season of “American Idol” looks to be the best yet.
————-
At the start of 2006, more than half the people of our world live in democratic nations. And we do not forget the other half — in places like Syria and Burma, Zimbabwe, North Korea, and Iran — because the demands of justice, and the peace of this world, require their freedom, as well. (Applause.)
It’s important to understand that while the President did not include China in the count of world population that lived in democracies, China was also not on the above “hit list.” The United States recognizes China’s right to oppress its people, and not just because China is big and scary and a trading partner and not as easily liberated as Zimbabwe. And not because speaking the “truth” about “China” requires “balls.”
No. What the President meant was that if those gay people get married, they’re coming for your children next.
————-
By passing these reforms, we will save the American taxpayer another $14 billion next year, and stay on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009. (Applause.)
The President is here promising that the President must be held accountable for the gigantic budget deficits if they’re still gigantic in 2009, and that if he, personally, is “the President” in 2009, he’ll take full responsibility.
————
Our government has a responsibility to provide health care for the poor and the elderly, and we are meeting that responsibility. (Applause.)
What the President meant here is that it’s time to make your Super Bowl party plans now, and not wait until Sunday morning, and that Laura looks lovelier than ever, doesn’t she?
[Please feel free to offer further clarifications in the Comments below.]





80 comments
Jim
February 2, 2006 at 5:16 pm
1So does this mean that the U.S. is now a clownocracy rather than a democracy?
From the state of the Union Address:
“May God bless America.”
See here, what the clow…er commander in chief meant here was, “May I bless America with the unitary executive powers granted to me by being holder of the office of the Chief Executive.”
Murray
February 2, 2006 at 5:37 pm
2Given that Merica is an Idiotocracy (That would be idiots electing one of their own), it’s no wonder that he gets away with this crap. None of it survives the “2 second think about it test”, and that’s what Republicans count on.
Sharon
February 2, 2006 at 5:41 pm
3[It’s an overused acronym, I know, but….] LMAO! “clownocracies”!
I guess by now most of you have heard the news about Robert J. Stein Jr., a Pentagon contractor put in charge of at least $82 million in reconstruction money earmarked for the Iraqi city of Hilla. The NYTimes reports he is pleading guilty to conspiracy, bribery, money laundering and other crimes.
He was given the job by the Coalition Provisional Authority despite a prior conviction on felony fraud. Court papers say the corruption ring also involved U.S. businessman Philip H. Bloom and five Army reserve officers.
It’s too bad we don’t have some sort of agency or organization or committee to oversee this type of work. I guess it’s inevitable that a few bad apples will sneak in wherever there is government money to be had.
Raymond
February 2, 2006 at 6:13 pm
4Good to know we’re on track for providing health care for the poor and elderly. “[Budget cuts] will mainly affect welfare programmes, including medical cover for the poor and elderly…”
lovable liberal
February 2, 2006 at 6:37 pm
5So does this mean that the U.S. is now a clownocracy rather than a democracy?
Among other things, we’re living in a dicktocracy, for more than one meaning of ‘dick’.
dee
February 2, 2006 at 7:42 pm
6Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses of medical research: human cloning in all its forms, creating or implanting embryos for experiments, creating human-animal hybrids…
What the President meant here was…well…really I have no fucking clue.
Scooby
February 2, 2006 at 8:45 pm
7I thought the human-animal hybrids were part of his new energy policy.
Sharon
February 2, 2006 at 8:57 pm
8I like this explanation:
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2006/02/01/bush-makes-science-policy-base d-on-sci-fi/
Or, alternatively, he’s been watching a movie version of “The Island of Dr. Moreau” while stoned.
ginny
February 2, 2006 at 9:09 pm
9Anyone else going to go buy the shirt?
By the way, if Congress gets around to appointing a committee specifically to determine whether America as we know it no longer exists, would we be in an ad hocracy?
cooper
February 2, 2006 at 10:04 pm
10Sharon, at $82,000,000, Mr. Stein is but a mere piker. “I guess it’s inevitable that a few bad apples will sneak in wherever there is government money to be had.” Think - Halliburton, which recently announced the highest annual profit in its 86 year history. Well, I wonder how that happened.
Jim
February 2, 2006 at 10:16 pm
11Human/Animal hybrids,
Perhaps the presnit was horrified by the picture in this article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3096623.stm
(third picture halfway down page)
If so, we can be reasonably sure that he did not read it.
cooper
February 2, 2006 at 10:29 pm
12W: “We are the nation that saved liberty in Europe (singlehandedly? Check your history books, Mr. President.), and liberated death camps (I think the Russians & Brits may have helped out here. )…”
W: “Our coalition has learned from our experience in Iraq. We’ve adjusted our military tactics and changed our approach to reconstruction (Yeah, like deciding not to do anymore reconstruction).” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/02/AR2006 010200370.html
W: “Ultimately, the only way to defeat the terrorists is to defeat their dark vision of hatred and fear by offering the hopeful alternative of political freedom and peaceful change. (That, and blast the living fuck outta them, like we have in Iraq).”
Well, this is fun and I could go on all evening, but I shouldn’t eat up all the bandwidth. You guys have at it, too. Peace. http://www.whitehouse.gov/stateoftheunion/2006/
Siobhan
February 2, 2006 at 10:37 pm
13Maybe he’s trying to prevent further human-animal hybrids because he’s seen the damage that can be done by a half-assed administration.
Julia
February 2, 2006 at 10:45 pm
14And I was starting to really hope for centaurs, fauns, and mermaids….
nigel
February 2, 2006 at 11:40 pm
15Hiphopracy–guv’t of the hood, by the hood and fo’ the hood.
McOcracy–government that promotes the spread of hamburger joints. A great legacy of the Reagan years.
Hypocrisy–’nuff said.
NPR had an interesting piece the other night about how “switchgrass” made it into the speach, besides the fact that W sounds great saying “switchgrass”.
(Rhymes with gonna switch yo’ ass, boy).
As it turns out, switchgrass was once a dominant herbiage of the prairies, and thrives (profitably) even in soils beaten down and sucked dry by a couple generations of subsidized cotton farming.
At least once you take away the subsidies, which the WTO is working on.
More important from an energy standpoint is that unlike corn, fermenting switchgrass yields 5x as much energy as is input (because it is perennial and has deep roots, it doesn’t need much fertilizer or water). This energy is extracted in the form of much loved ETHANOL (cheers from the gallery) aka EVERCLEAR(tm). With 15% gasoline, you’ve got FLEXFUEL or 65% soybean oil BIODIESEL.
So if the good ag researchers at Auburn (and elsewhere) are right, we can trade off the benefits of buffalo steak and fuel. At least after we burn up all the oil and methane and tar sands and coal and whatever else flammable we can find to continue America’s ongoing experiment in global warming.
waterfowler
February 3, 2006 at 12:21 am
16What did y’all do w/ sea skunk?
Buffalo steak…I’ll take some out of the freezer.
David
February 3, 2006 at 1:17 am
17“some of which were ’said’ without the President’s knowledge.”
Says it all. On a coherent day, it’s touch and go whether he knows what the fuck he’s talking about, let alone what the fuck he’s doing, besides his usual fucking things up and fucking America over.
Julia,
We have all those things down here in the Green Swamp - well, the mermaids were over at Weeki Watchee (does anyone else remember the short-lived Maximun Bob tv series?)
becca rbd
February 3, 2006 at 1:27 am
18Off topic, but thought you’d be interested. Last time i emerged from lurking i was typing surrounded by monks in Laos. We’re now in Siem Reap, Cambodia and just spent the last few days through some random serendipity with Lynn Bradach. You can read about her at these two sites ( http://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?id=28400 and http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=23114).
Lynn is a Portland, Or woman who lost her son in Iraq to a landmine. She now has two main goals: to get the soldiers home from Iraq (she has worked with Cindy Sheehan a little, but also maintains indepedence from her message and the circus around her) and to fight the scourge of land mines. As a tribute to her son Travis, she raised money to clear landmines from a field around a school in a small village a few hours from Angkor Wat. Previously the children had to weave their way carefully around a mined field to get from the road to their school, which consisted of beat-up wooden shacks. Inevitably, at least one child had lost limbs and an eye from the mines.
My husband and I had the priviledge of going back out there with her and two of her siblings for the dedication of the clean new concrete school (the Japanese had pledged to build one if someone cleared the landmines), the now safe field that children can play in, and a memorial for Travis. It was incredibly moving to see 300 school kids clapping for and thanking this woman who had made such a difference in their daily lives and it was a fantastic reminder to us that though things seem hopeless sometimes when you see the mess bush & co have made and the inability of the democrats to do anything about it, that it just takes each of us to do our own small (or not so small) things and we can start making things better.
becca
We also highly recommend Aki Ra’s landmine museum her in Siem Reap as a profoundly moving and disturbing experience
dee
February 3, 2006 at 9:59 am
19becca, I’ve been following your journeys on the website, and I wish you could get to felberpalooza and bring your slides. I especially liked the two versions of riding an elephant.
(Get your minds OUT of the gutters, ya buncha pervs)
Mary
February 3, 2006 at 10:31 am
20[It is really hard to be snaky after reading Baca’s great comments. But, I will do my best to overcome my sentimentality
]
The President is here promising that the President must be held accountable for the gigantic budget deficits if they’re still gigantic in 2009, and that if he, personally, is “the President” in 2009, he’ll take full responsibility.
Gosh, I feel so much better about his spending $4.5 billion a day in Iraq. I thought he had lost all perspective on this debt. This is a man who has his fingers on the pulse of his corpse-like deficit reduction.
Scooby
February 3, 2006 at 3:27 pm
21Ok, here it is in plain language. How much clearer can he get, for Lobster’s sake.
I wish you all would just listen to the guy.
Bush Explains Medicare Drug Bill
WOMAN IN AUDIENCE: ‘I don’t really understand. How is it the new plan going to fix the problem?’
Verbatim response:
PRESIDENT BUSH: ‘Because the — all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculated, for example, is on the table. Whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There’s a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those — changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be — or closer delivered to that has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It’s kind of muddled. Look, there’s a series of things that cause the — like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate — the benefits will rise based upon inflation, supposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those — if that growth is affected, it will help on the red.’
Pete IVDL
February 3, 2006 at 4:06 pm
22Ironic, wasn’t it - I caught the comment on the withdrawal of troops “not by pollaticians in Washington” - then all the pollaticians clapped. What is this, a get out of gaol card for Republicans? No wonder they clapped.
Mmmmmm. Mermaid steak…
Harold
February 3, 2006 at 4:11 pm
23Scooby, according to snopes.com this comment was actually made in reference to Social Security.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/muddled.asp
But whatever he’s talking about, at least it gives us some real insight into how he thinks…or not.
David
February 3, 2006 at 4:31 pm
24Harold,
My favorite from the link is the moniker of the poster: “misspokes in the weal”
Pete IVDL,
Mermaid steak is a true delicacy, if eaten but not consumed.
Anybody,
I see Rumsflaw has likened Hugo Chavez to Hitler, never mind that there is absolutely nothing analagous in either the rise, the behavior, or the goals of the two men. The ruthlessly disingenuous psyops utterances of these people never ceases to amaze.
Professor Higgins
February 3, 2006 at 4:34 pm
25Pete, tsk, tsk. tsk. It’s a “get out of Jail” card on this side of the big pond. Come on; speak English, will ya? Jeez.
Harold
February 3, 2006 at 5:03 pm
26The Right Fringe has now declared that FREE SPEECH is its new rallying cry, aftter the whole cartoons-of-Mohammed foofraw. Apparently Rumsfeld is just stretching his legs, getting used to this newfound freedom.
So let me be the first to declare this in this new era of free speech: Karl Rove is George Bush’s Joseph Goebbels.
Thank you.
Pete IVDL
February 3, 2006 at 5:44 pm
27Just you wait, ‘Enry ‘Iggins, just you wait…
I love typing ‘gaol’ and ‘draught’ and stuff like that. Maybe if only because the Resident couldn’t even read it, let alone say it.
I know nearly any verbatim transcription of any person’s normal, everyday speech looks… well, strange; but jeez (see? I c’n speek ingglish) Bush is the Resident, for Lobster’s sake: he should be able to put his thoughts together better than he does, knowing he’s in the spotlight, so to speak. It’s like he’s thinking out loud, all the time. Scary.
David
February 3, 2006 at 5:47 pm
28So now the Bush administration has ordered the Venezuelan ambassador out of the US. Man, are they upset about the embarrassment of the home heating oil discounts that have been embraced in the northeast.
When does the shock and awe commence in Caracas?
David
February 3, 2006 at 6:00 pm
29RRRRyan,
I can’t remember on which post you suggested humanists believe in themselves as gods, but here is a link to a New York Times opinion piece that explains quite eloquently how I think, and why I left the Southern Baptist Church during my intellectual adolescence, in part because I embraced the idea of humility.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/03/opinion/03dacey.html?_r=1&oref=slogi n
Ann
February 3, 2006 at 7:04 pm
30I do think that Cindy Sheehan is making a terrible political mistake in aligning herself with Hugo Chavez.
Dug Steen
February 3, 2006 at 7:39 pm
31What he said: Congress did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security – (thunderous applause from the wrong side of the aisle)
What he meant to say: Doh!
Siobhan
February 3, 2006 at 8:00 pm
32Ann, Jon Carroll of the San Francisco Chronicle wrote a column on that very subject (Cindy Sheehan) today that really nails it.
Sharon
February 3, 2006 at 8:11 pm
33Scooby, Pete, kinda makes you wonder about the real worth of a Yale education, doesn’t it? It’s astonishing to me that Yale can still charge the big bucks when this is their Spokesman in Chief.
Apropos of nothing much, I ran across the web site of author James Morrow today. He points out that the full name of “Intelligent Design” is actually “Intelligent Design Implicit Onto-Theology.”
Sharon
February 3, 2006 at 8:14 pm
34David, I read that article this morning, too. I thought this was the best line:
“True, secular values can turn a civilization inside out. In post-Christian Europe, entire nations have been plunged into endemic health, skyrocketing education and hopelessly low rates of violent crime.”
nigel
February 3, 2006 at 8:49 pm
35“No. What the President meant was that if those gay people get married, they’re coming for your children next.”
This reminds me of one of the ways the whacko right (I won’t bless them with adjective “Christian”) is chasing its own tail like a hyperkinetic bunny.
Because they don’t believe in evolution, they encourage (demand?) homosexuals to get married and have children in the normal fashion. This is probably counterproductive, since there appears to be a significant genetic predisposition to gayness (out of respect to the president–and his mother who donated the X chromosome–I should not raise the issue of his cheerleading career…).
On an entirely separate note, it is my rare pleasure to recomment Michelle Malkin’s blog for her part in distributing the infamous Prophet cartoons. Truly in demonstrating violently against the Sunday Funnies those other Fundies are thoroughly lampooning themselves. The West should not cower on this one.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/2006_02.htm
nigel
February 3, 2006 at 8:56 pm
36Discover Magazine has an excellent cover article (March) entitled “Unintelligent Design: Are Viruses the Mother of All Life?” Exposes god(s) tinker toys in all their moral relativism.
nigel
February 3, 2006 at 9:57 pm
37“Donny, have I ever told you how much I admire your strong jaw?”
“Why, thanks Dick. It’s nothing next to your staying power.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060204/ap_on_go_pr_wh/ford_era_spying
nigel
February 3, 2006 at 10:01 pm
38Oh man, the accompanying figure was too suggestive, I guess–those yahoos at yahoo changed it.
Try this:
http://news.yahoo.com/photo/060204/480/wx11002040032;_ylt=AtG5vIoc3wA0 rT_TKC_GliAGw_IE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3bGk2OHYzBHNlYwN0bXA-
David
February 3, 2006 at 10:04 pm
39Sharon,
Almost makes you wonder if Adam collaborated on this article. The acronym in the previous post almost slipped by me. Good one.
Nigel,
Thanks for the heads up on those jokester viri.
Ann,
I think the thing to remember is that Cindy Sheehan is not really a strategist or part of any strategy group. She went to Crawford of her own accord. And she is fairly new to the realities of US foreign policy. By her own admission, she did not really understand before Casey was killed, although she knew enough not to want him to go.
But the US is clearly in an unbridled imperialistic mode toward Venezuela, having already overthrown Chavez once, only to have the coup fail. Cindy went down there with Harry Belafonte, among other notables, and acted on a personal impulse in the face of what could be a murderous move against Chavez, especially now that Rumsfeld has linked Chavez to Hitler, which would be laughable if it weren’t a portent of something so ruthless and so deadly in this case.
Negroponte, hero of the butchery in Central America in the 80s, connected Chavez to Iran and North Korea. These are disgusting, but all too often effective, ploys on the part of a government which has proven time and time again how militaristically imperialist it can be, especially if the CIA coup fails.
Chavez’s shortcomings are pretty minor, relatively speaking, and he is a saint compared to the strongmen we have supported, and even now support, or at least tolerate.
I think we are asking too much of Cindy Sheehan and not enough of ourselves or our government. The ones deserving of disparagement are in the administration. What is so distressing, of course, is that simply showing Cindy Sheehan embracing Hugo Chavez is such a negative in this country. It says much about how far Americans in general have their heads up their asses, so while I recognize the fodder she has provided the right, the fact that she can be turned into fodder from which we want to draw back is the major problem.
I doubt that embrace is a negative in Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, or any number of other South or Cental American countries. Unless it is a negative in either Mexico or Canada, the US is the only country in the Americas in which it is reason for concern. Of course, given our power, our ruthlessness, and our indifference to the deaths of innocent civilians, that might be all that matters. Certainly Jon Stewart agrees, and he apparently rejects the notion that our behavior toward Chavez is imperialistic, suggesting instead that we are concerned about the rights of journalists.
David
February 3, 2006 at 10:33 pm
40I meant to say only country in North America, although Canada has drifted pro-Bush. I really doubt Mexicans in general are hostile to Chavez. The argument in the SF Chronicle that we should stay out of South American affairs would be fine if it included our government. I suspect Cindy Sheehan might be willing to put her body in the way of the war machine at this point, and the war machine is most definitely training its guns on Venezuela. So we should just stand aside? I don’t see it. I’m with Harry Belafonte on this one.
Mo Moskowitz
February 3, 2006 at 11:49 pm
41Adam, heh-heh, you’re not going to believe this but Two Dot, Montana has an internet cafe now. That’s where I’m Googling you from and where I’ve been for the last week and half, freezing my ass off, but it’s been worth it, I tell you. Wait ’til you hear what I found! I bought out the entire supply from the J.H. Wilson General Store - Pope-on-a-Rope-Soap - The Pope John Paul II Edition - 16 gross he had. He was storing it down in the basement, had about 6″ of dust on it. Claimed it wasn’t moving, so he put it down there and forgot about it. He also had, get this, 627 of the John Paul II “Let Us Spray” lawn sprinklers from the 1984 tour. Seems all of the faithful either died or moved out. The Blackfoot tribe - not particularly into lawn maintainence, if you get my drift. Well, their loss is our gain. Work these items into the first episode. You never know when Fox will get out the hook. You could be back doing improv so fast it’ll make your head swim! Ciao, baby! I’m off to BC. I heard rumors of a Sasquatch sighting on Vancouver Island and I’ve got a trunk full of Yeti Spaghetti to hawk. Keep writing, funny guy!
hedera
February 4, 2006 at 2:00 am
42Having been following the Economist’s coverage of Venezuelan events, I have serious reservations about Hugo Chavez, based first on his steady drive to aggregate all power in the presidency while ensuring he will continue to occupy it, second on his increasing tendency to intimidate or jail people (including journalists) who disagree with him, and third on his regular use of populist mobs to intimidate his opponents. I think he’s a populist demagogue, manipulating Venezuela’s poor to make himself president-for-life.
That said: he was elected president, I think twice. I don’t remember a lot of complaint about election rigging (I’m sure, if there was, someone will remind me…). He’s what the majority of the Venezuelans seem to want, and it’s their country. Also, he at least tries to do things to improve the lot of the very poor. What he’ll do the next time the price of oil drops and his income goes away is another question; he’s riding the tide there.
The current U.S. administration continues the nasty attitude (which goes back decades, to be truthful - remember “he’s an S.O.B., but he’s our S.O.B.”? I think that referred to Anastasio Somoza, but I’ve also heard it was Trujillo.) that foreign elections are only valid if they elect people the Bushies approve of. (Hamas, anyone?) I keep remembering the foreign press (not to mention remarks from Our Pete) on the subject of the 2000 and 2004 elections here: I guarantee that if foreign governments could control U.S. elections, Dubya would be chopping brush permanently.
I also thought it was poor judgment on Cindy Sheehan’s part to be photographed hugging Hugo (at least it wasn’t Evo Morales!); but she’s a private citizen and she has the right to make a fool of herself in public if she chooses. Stupidity is not a crime.
SeattleDan
February 4, 2006 at 2:38 am
43Chavez was subjected to a recall in the past year which he won.He seems to be the favorite of the Venzualian people.Rumsfield’s attempts to equate him with Hitler leaves me completely cold.
cooper
February 4, 2006 at 9:54 am
44Boy talk about getting out the hook for someone, isn’t it time that Dumbya finally lets Donald Rumsfeld resign? He’s been running the country now for a long, long time; he’s obviously overworked. For those needing a refresher course on D.R. (famously referred to by Henry Kissinger as being the most ruthless human being he has ever known) - http://www.nndb.com/people/634/000023565/
ice weasel
February 4, 2006 at 9:54 am
45First, thank the goddess for wifi in hotels. Whilst the lovely and talented Mrs. Weasel sleeps the sleep of the innecent, I can do more than watch bad television broadcast in a language which I do not understand (though the ad french dubbing is funny).
First, run, don’t walk to The Nation to Alterman’s latest piece. There is a nugget of pure genius in there from ex-Clinton flack, Jake Siewart.
As usual Adam, a great breakdown. Maybe you should consider selling your servcies to king george? He really could use a new flack to “explain” things and scotty looks so tired these days.
And speaking of tired, it’s always nice to duckhead in here. Wassup fouler? Just up here with this hemisphere’s version of cheese eating surrender monkeys, they’re really nice people overall.
Much love to all the nauts!
See you on Tuesday.
Siobhan
February 4, 2006 at 11:43 am
46Cooper - If Rumsfeld resigns, it will be obvious to everyone pretty quickly that things are still fucked up. That would mean that the person really responsible for all this mess is… nah, can’t be. Better to keep Rumsfeld in place for as long as he’s willing to catch the flak.
Siobhan
February 4, 2006 at 11:45 am
47ps - what I meant to say was “it will be obvious to everyone who hasn’t already figured it out years ago”…
Sharon
February 4, 2006 at 2:04 pm
48Tomorrow’s NYTimes Book Review has a review, written by Anthony Lewis, of the book ‘AT CANAAN’S EDGE: AMERICA IN THE KING YEARS, 1965-68,’ by Taylor Branch. The reason I mention it in this context is that the depiction of Lyndon Johnson, warts and all, stands in such sharp contrast to today’s “leadership.” Lyndon Johnson most certainly lied to us, too, but no one could ever doubt that he was in charge.
By the way, about this new “Times Select” policy, whereby certain parts of the paper are “pay only”, check your local or state library’s website. Many states and localities pay for access to magazine and newspaper databases. It’s not like browsing the paper’s website, because you have to know what it is you’re looking for (author, title, etc.) but it’s still free.
Sharon, the Future Librarian and Defender of the First Amendment
cooper
February 4, 2006 at 5:18 pm
49A heads-up for anyone interested, the current issue of RollingStone (with the inexplicable picture of Kanye West as Jesus Christ) has a good article about Sam Brownback - “God’s Senator, Inside the War Room of the Religious Right”. It’s good to know the enemy.
David
February 4, 2006 at 9:01 pm
50hedera,
Points worth contemplating. I’m trying to imagine how an elected leader dealing with the presence of agents of a superpower which has already attempted one coup and which has a press essentially owned by the rich right who were part of the attempted coup might be able to be less heavy-handed than he is. Wish I had a more complete picture. I personally don’t like strongmen anywhere, anytime, but as I said before, Harry Belafonte also has to be taken into account.
I wish Cindy hadn’t hugged Chavez precisely because of the impact of the picture, and because the jury is still out on Chavez. But as you said he clearly is the choice of the Venezuelans, and as far as I know constitutes no military threat to his neighbors or any other nations, unlike the United States. To the extent that he imitates Castro, we are again much to blame.
I think it was FDR who first said …but he’s our bastard. It’s the one serious problem I have with FDR’s legacy. He did nothing I am aware of to change our ruthless attitude toward the Americas south of the Rio Grande.
Oh, yeah, all you Committee on the Present Danger and/or Ann Coulter types out there, I don’t blame America first. I blame America when America is guilty, and I do it because it’s my responsibility as a citizen who loves my native land and what it is supposed to stand for. Take your “America hater” horseshit and shove it.
David
February 4, 2006 at 9:27 pm
51hedera,
I also meant to say thanks. When I read your comments or click on to your links, I invariably learn something, and as a friend said to me, that’s why we’re here: to have fun and learn things.
cooper
February 4, 2006 at 10:12 pm
52hedera/David, seems it didn’t stop with hugging - http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2006/01/29/kissing-a-commie/ I apologize in advance for sending anyone to this dark side site.
I don’t have a real problem with Cindy Sheehan going to visit Hugo Chavez. She is one person and not the leader of pack. I also don’t see much threat to the US coming from South America (if you don’t count millions of illegal aliens). Let Hugo get in a sucker punch against W every once in a while. You have to see the fun in that, right?
hedera
February 5, 2006 at 2:32 am
53David, you’re welcome, and the same to you. It was definitely FDR who originated the “he’s our S.O.B.” remark, I regret to say. If you’ll Google the phrase “he’s our S.O.B.” (put it in double quotes), the second (I think) link you’ll see explains the references to Somoza and Trujillo; an interesting piece of historical research.
cooper, don’t worry about the “dark side site” - it won’t let me connect to it. Do you suppose it can detect ACLU members? Is it something about my IP address? Or does it just reject links from Adam’s site?
becca rbd
February 5, 2006 at 10:36 am
54Dee (and all the ‘naughts)-
Felberpalooza would be a blast. The more I read everybody’s comments, the more I want to meet you all. I’ll never say never (after all, who would ever have thought we’d be doing something like this??), but it’s likely that upon our return to the States we may be fairly immediately consumed by prosaic matters such as finding new jobs, and if we decide to return to the homeland (Oregon), selling our house and buying a new one.
Hopefully we’ll post some new pics soon (the connection speed in Cambodia has been much slower than in Laos) as the next best thing.
Thanks for the invite, though!
becca
and you haven’t lived until you have thought you were about to be drowned by an Asian elephant….
People Paula
February 5, 2006 at 1:35 pm
55When are you & your sis going to write The Felber Views: A Funny Look at Serious Issues?
David
February 5, 2006 at 2:22 pm
56Love the link, Cooper. Hedera, I’m ACLU as well, so either the filter goofed or it is possible for ACLUers (we do have a clue) to click on.
The C as a commie sickle, the tee shirt Liberal, Stuck on Stupid, and the mindless blather of people who would likely become confused when asked to distinguish between their asses and holes in the ground - what a How shall I put it?
Jeeze, the only thing I like about being old enough to have experienced McCarthyism is that it makes who and what these people are crystal clear, and it motivates me to try to never let that shit take center stage again.
Eclectic capitalist socialism, constrained by unremitting global environmentalism and a genuine universal declaration of human rights as part of every nation’s defining document, is the only thing that has a prayer in hell of saving our currently misguided asses.
What the community (yeah, right) of nations is now doing ain’t working, and the current model, especially as represented by the United States, won’t work because it can’t work.
Never mind the cure for global bird flu, we’d better find the cure for global cephalo-rectal thrustitis.
waterfowler
February 5, 2006 at 5:14 pm
57I take it that David doesn’t love Ann. Yes, Hedera, we can detect ACLUeless members. Funny sea skunk, enjoy your trip. …votre ennemi rapprocher…
David
February 5, 2006 at 5:32 pm
58becca rbd,
Yeah, elephants are dangerous, both zoological and political.
Continuing the assessment of Cindy Sheehan embracing Hugo Chavez, I just came across this in the AARP magazine for January/February.
Cover story is People of the Year. One of the marquee three is Harry Belafonte. The list is:
Michael J. Fox - Parkinson’s advocate; Marylen Mann - education advocate; Naomi Judd - poverty fighter; Norman McSwain - hurricane hero; Jane Kaczmarek - philanthropist; Alan Reich - disability activist; Margie E. Richard - pollution fighter; Nancy Barry - lender to female entreneurs; Mike Huckabee - health crusader; and Harry Belafonte - humanitarian.
Harry Belafonte embraced Hugo Chavez quite clearly and quite publicly. So what are we treated to? The visual villification of Cindy Sheehan. In her shoes, with the opportunity to accompany and possibly reinforce the efforts of Harry Belafonte (UNICEF’s traveling ambassador of good will), I suspect I would have done the same thing. What we are witnessing is one more example of the profound dysfunction of the fourth estate as its dominant players dance to the tune called by domestic power centers.
Anybody seen any mainstream coverage of anything besides the trashing of Cindy and the salting of public opinion against Chavez, reaching its nauseating apogee with Rummie’s He’s Hitler and Negroponte’s He’s replaced Saddam in the Axis of Evil? What we have, as I see it, is leader making some mistakes from our perspective vs. leader on a ruthless crusade who will likely stop at nothing, including killing innocent people who happen to be in the path of his policies (forgive me - I meant collateral damage).
Waterfowler,
Surely you are above that moronic website. I’ve always thought of you as seeing things quite differently, but I’ve honestly never thought of you as idiotic. And that website is idiotic.
Sharon
February 5, 2006 at 9:46 pm
59First they came for the geologists, but I didn’t care, because I wasn’t a geologist.
Then they came for the biologists, but I didn’t care, because I wasn’t a biologist.
[…]
Then they came for the astronomers, but there was no one left to speak up.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/02/04/outrage-at-attacks-on-na sa-science/
David
February 5, 2006 at 10:08 pm
60Sharon,
Well put. I saw a short reference to this. Gonna click on to the link you provided to get a better picture. They are genuinely nucking futs, and they have a 50-50 chance of just rolling on election after election.
David
February 5, 2006 at 10:24 pm
61Sharon,
Thank you, thank you, thank you for that link.
My favorite sentence:
So I’ll be very, very clear here. What we’re talking about here is scientific McCarthyism; the pressuring of scientists to toe the party line.
I’m starting to have trouble distinguishing these bastards from the glory days of the Kremlin, with the exception that the Kremlin seemed to be a little more respectful of science.
Sharon
February 5, 2006 at 10:30 pm
62David,
My only comfort–and it really is only cold comfort–is that these poltical hacks don’t have a clue as to how real scientists use the word “theory.”
hedera
February 6, 2006 at 12:56 am
63I’ll disagree, David. I don’t think this is scientific McCarthyism at all; McCarthy didn’t care what you believed as long as you weren’t a Commie. This is worse. It’s Lysenkoism, where you have to believe the party line. Remember Trofim Lysenko? The George Deutsch cited in the NYT article referred to on the Bad Astronomy Blog is his spiritual descendant.
I read a writeup on this in the S.F. Chron a few days ago but I don’t recall the detail given in the blog link; they must have edited it some for space. I certainly don’t recall that this yo-yo was 24 years old and graduated in 2003 from Texas A&M in journalism… I mean, he’s barely old enough to drink. And he has the brass bound, diamond studded gall to censor a senior NASA scientist, a man with a doctorate; and to insist that a NASA web site conform to the ID party line on religious grounds.
I hope the web designer told him to put it where the sun don’t shine. Actually, I just searched the NASA site for the phrase “big bang” and I don’t see any particular effort to conform to the ID party line.
The worst part of it is that our 24-year-old press officer probably never even heard of Trofim Lysenko.
The best part of it is that Mike Griffin, the NASA administrator, has already fired a warning shot across this idiot’s bow; follow the link to the official post on the NASA web site.
David
February 6, 2006 at 11:47 am
64Warning shot was more like the launch of the first cruise missile. Mike Griffin clearly does not suffer fools lightly (tactfully forcefully, yes - lightly, no). Can’t wait to see what happens when it detonates in this 24-year-old mental munchkin’s office (or up his righteous anal orifice).
You are right, hedera. No wonder I can no longer clearly distinguish between these people and my recollections of the Kremlin.
Gonna have to brush up on my Trofim. Those clowns are a bit of a blur at this point.
David
February 6, 2006 at 11:54 am
65Oh, yeah, him. How could I forget. God love Google, the foggy brain’s information salvation.
waterfowler
February 6, 2006 at 12:11 pm
66David,
you’re the only person I know of that’s ever been to that site, but if it’s anti-ACLU, it can’t be that bad.
Murray
February 6, 2006 at 2:30 pm
67Why is it that right wingers are always willing to kill for the 2nd Amendment and kill the 4th.
They usually don’t care that much for the 1st either.
hedera
February 6, 2006 at 2:32 pm
68Actually, waterfowler, I finally did get through to the site, and it’s just silly.
I’ll undoubtedly regret saying this, but I really don’t understand what you object to about the ACLU - the civil liberties they defend belong to you, too. If civil liberties are only available to the people we agree with, then they aren’t really liberties at all; same with free speech. I don’t necessarily agree with every action the ACLU chooses to defend, but overall, I feel they’re a necessary counterweight to the tyranny of the majority (which is only so by about 3% at the last election; which means, statistically, for every person who agrees with you, there’s a person who agrees with me).
The whole point about civil liberties is that they’re available to people who take unpopular minority positions. People who make statements that “the majority” agrees with, don’t need defending - at least until “the majority” changes its mind. Civil liberties are even available to sites like stoptheaclu.com (and no, I won’t dignify it with another link).
Sharon
February 6, 2006 at 2:49 pm
69Over the years I’ve received uncounted chain emails that threatened that the USPS was going to start charging us for email. This isn’t one of those. This is the real deal.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/chester
waterfowler
February 6, 2006 at 4:57 pm
70Murray,
It’s the 2nd that protects all of the others.
Hedera, The ACLU is a left wingnut haven that tries to force a leftist agenda on the rest of us nuts through the courts. I can’t argue any of your points on civil liberties, because I agree w/ you. However, that is usually not what the ACLU is up to.
David
February 6, 2006 at 6:31 pm
71Watefowler,
Not even close, my man, not even close, if you’re trying to offer some meaningful description of the ACLU. As a member, I’ve had to weather our defense of the civil liberties of some genuinely despicable people, especially the right of neofascist hatemongers to march and to have their say, but that’s what civil liberties means. The ACLU’s only agenda is the Constitution, including the core amendments, the Bill of Rights, and the protection of the basic civil liberties of all people, even fools.
I’ll let it go at that, because at this point your perspective is clear enough to me.
David
February 6, 2006 at 6:37 pm
72Rounding out my thoughts on the attempt at the Trofimization of NASA, a quote:
“Every great advance in natural knowledge has involved the absolute rejection of authority.” –TH Huxley.
Lobster love ya, TH, wherever you be.
waterfowler
February 7, 2006 at 10:07 am
73David,
Where do they stand on the civil liberties of Americans that haven’t quite breached the womb?
David
February 7, 2006 at 11:11 am
74Waterfowler,
With Roe v. Wade, namely whether or not the fetus is viable apart from the womb. In my case, I support the idea of the state offering the option of premature delivery of the viable fetus of a woman who, for whatever reason, especially reasons of health, chooses not to continue the pregnancy. It would then be the state’s obligation to ensure the health, if such is medically possible, and adoption of the child.
Within the constraints set out by Roe v. Wade, which the majority of Americans continue to support, I support a woman’s right to choose, because the alternative is state-imposed mandatory continuation of a pregnancy.
I respect all efforts at moral persuasion on the anti-abortion side of the debate. I oppose the heavy hand of the state regarding pregnancy, either here or in China, and I truly cannot accept the idea of decreeing to a woman that she must continue a pregnancy.
David
February 8, 2006 at 8:34 am
75NASA pros 1, Bush pinheads 0
George C. Deutsch, the young Bush campaign flack who was telling NASA personnel that they shouldn’t discuss the Big Bang without considering the topic from its religious perspective, has been forced to resign. As reported first earlier today by the Scientific Activist blog, Deutsch claimed on his resume on file at NASA that he was a graduate of Texas A&M.
Only he never graduated.
So he lied on his resume, and presumably his job application too. Always a bad move if you’re planning to become embroiled in a major media firestorm.
Murray
February 8, 2006 at 2:15 pm
76Sharon
What is surprising is that it took this long for big business to hijack the internet. I mean what are politicians for if not to provide contributors with what ever they want even as it screws the rest of us? This administration excels at just that type of thing.
The only restriction that I want to see is a 0.1 cent fee for emails. So if I send 1000 emails a month it costs me $1.00. I can handle this. If on the other hand I’m an email spammer and send 50,000,000 emails a day, (now at no charge), it will then cost $50,000 a day. This would change how I do business. I often send mass emailing to my customer base and I’m willing to pay the $0.35 for the ability.
This would cure spam overnight. I would gladly pay an extra dollar or so a month to not have to bother with the spam filters that protect me from garbage and letters from my friends (and not such friends).
Pete IVDL
February 9, 2006 at 4:42 am
77Unfortunately, sadly, I read the whole kerfuffle about what that stupid reality-deficient Republican liar (sorry, that’s a bit generic, I mean in particular Mr Deutsch) tried to do.
The good news : he’s tipped their hand, hopefully much too soon for them.
The bad news: it’s the tip of the iceberg. Remember, that melodramatic moron, George Bush, and his Republican fundamentalist hatemongers have been busy burrowing around beneath the skin of the scientific and humanist communities (like the pus-filled mentally deficient maggots that they are) for years now. So there must be more, much more, that even free-thinking humanists (like most of youse) can’t even begin to imagine in our worst nightmare.
Ooops, that was a bit strong, even for me… They probably aren’t pus-filled.
What I’m worried about is that as long as free thinking (notice how I did not say or imply “right thinking”) folks keep making themselves heard, we’ll keep these religious fundamentalists under cover. And Lobster knows, they’ll use any cover they can.
Pity there isn’t a way for these fundies to be forced to admit their stance on evolution (note again, I did not say “evolutionary theory“), the Big Bang (ditto on the “theory”), the right to choose, etc, etc, etc.
David
February 10, 2006 at 6:20 pm
78Pete IVDL,
LOVED your description, and there is nothing over the top about it. This is exactly who these people are and what they are doing. They are the political manifestation of what I was subjected to twenty years ago by even decent folks bemoaning the evil effects of secular humanists on the community college at which I taught. When you add in the unmatched corruption and indifference to competence in governance, these are pus-filled mentally deficient maggots - you just left out how utterly greed driven they are. Pat Robertson might as well be President. They are indistinguishable politically, theologically, or fiscally. Self-righteous Olympic venality is their only setting. Every contrary pronouncement they issue is bullshit.
Debt Relief Programs
February 24, 2006 at 12:07 am
79How can I get an RSS feed on this blog? I am new to this and really like the content being discussed here
Debt Management Programs
April 3, 2006 at 8:49 am
80Interesting thought on that one. I think I heard something similar the other day on another board. I can’t remember where though.