Saturday, December 31, 2011

A Question Pertaining to the Palestinians 1

If Western Palestine (i.e., what we presently consider to be Israel) had such a long-standing population of indigenous "Palestinians" residing there for centuries, then why did the United Nations Relief and Work Agency feel the need to alter their definition of "refugees" to include all of those who had lived in Palestine for only a minimum of TWO YEARS prior to the 1948 conflict? Hm, could it possibly be due to the fact that they wanted to hide the reality that a great number of these so-called refugees had originally come from Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Tunisia, Albania, Transjordan, Cyprus, and dozens of other countries? That's kind of what I'm thinking that it was.

Despicable Alan

Former Florida Congressman, Alan Grayson, in one of the most despicable campaign ads in U.S. history, referred to his opponent, Daniel Webster, as "Taliban Dan". I mean, I know that it was hyperbole and all and that, yes, Mr. Webster evidently IS a Bible-thumper of sorts, but to compare him to the Taliban was not only vile but abjectly stupid.............................................................................................For instance, Mr. Webster has never advocated that women wear burqas. He's never said that they shouldn't be able to work. He's never said that they shouldn't be allowed an education after the age of eight. He's never said that they shouldn't be allowed to be treated by male doctors (not that there ARE any female doctors) unless accompanied by a male chaperon. He's never said that they should face public floggings and executions for breaking religious laws. He's never advocated for forced marriages or the marriages of girls under 16. He's never advocated that women not speak loudly in public. He's never advocated for a severe restriction of movement for women. And he's never advocated that women not be allowed on radio, television, or at public gatherings. For Mr. Grayson to have even intimated that the admittedly doltish Mr. Webster (I'm afraid that you're going to have to call him Congressman Webster now) is analogous to these vile creatures was completely/totally over the line, IMO............................................................................................P.S. And, yes, Mr. Grayson absolutely DID splice tape. He took some isolated words from what was an essentially benign speech by Mr. Webster and made it sound as if he was saying something far more sinister. Mr. Grayson tried to justify it by pointing to other speeches by Mr. Webster and his voting record. But even if in fact that's true, you still don't splice and dice and engage in sleaziness. Nope, you take the ACTUAL words from the ACTUAL speeches and laws and attempt to make your point from those. You do it the old-fashioned honest way, in other words.

Friday, December 30, 2011

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=588619

An interesting article on the new Rhode Island voter ID bill. You just might want to check it out.

Thursday, December 29, 2011

Miscellaneous 103

1) Ed Schultz is insane. The man actually thinks that CNN's Anderson Cooper ( a person whose pencil Mr. Schultz couldn't even carry) and GQ Magazine are conspiring against him. And he doesn't just think it, folks, he says it (on the frigging air, no less)! HE SAYS IT!! How anybody could give even an ounce of credence to this Hannityesque lunatic is astonishing.............2) And, no, splicing tape in order to make a person who you happen not to like look bad (as Mr. Schultz and his staff absolutely did to Governor Perry) isn't an "error" or a "mistake". It's a willful act of character assassination and Schultz should have apologized (not to his audience, I'm saying, but to Mr. Perry) IMMEDIATELY.............3) Hm, let's see here, who do I pick; the Thomas Edisons, Steve Jobses, Henry Fords, Walt Disneys, Eli Whitneys, Oprah Winfreys, Dorothy Gerbers, Alexander Graham Bells, Clarance Birdseyes, Samuel McIntires, Robert Fultons, William Randolph Hearsts, Charles Goodyears, and John D. Rockefellers of the world, or the idiots who gave us the Alien and Sedition Act, the Missouri Compromise, the Fugitive Slave Act, the Enlarged Homestead Act, Strategic Hamlet (not to mention the Vietnam War in general), Prohibition, Watergate, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, ethanol subsidies, the Shah of Iran, Amtrak, nation-building in Iraq and Afghanistan, Cash for Clunkers, Fast and Furious, Solyndra, etc., etc., etc.?....Ah, yeah, that's a really tough one. NOT!............4) Look, folks, I'm not saying that there isn't a role for government in the economy. There definitely IS a role, a significant role. But it has to be more along the lines of a facilitator and collaborator, not along the lines of a dictator....At least that's the way that I see it anyway.............5) As I was watching Sean Hannity lob one softball after another at Rick Perry and Ed Schultz doing something very similar to one of his guests, I couldn't help but lament out loud, "Man, do I ever miss Tim Russert." Yeah, huh?

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

My New Favorite Dennis Miller Joke

On Barnie Frank - he's Nancy Pelosi with a spittle problem.

Monday, December 26, 2011

The Skeptics 1

1) Ivar Giaever - Nobel Prize winner for physics.............2) Dr. Joanne Simpson - atmospheric scientist, first woman in the world to ever earn a PhD in meteorology.............3) Dr. Kiminon Itoh - environmental physical chemist.............4) Dr. Jarl Ahlbeck - chemical engineer Abo Akademi University of Finland.............5) Dr. Pal Brekke - solar physicist and senior adviser to the Norwegian Space Center in Oslo.............6) Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera - researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.............7) Geoffrey Duffy - professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering University of Aukland.............8) Dr. William Briggs - climate statistician at the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee.............9) Andrei Kapista - Russian geographer and Antarctic ice-core researcher.............10) Dr. Will Happer - physicist Princeton.............11) Dr. Miklos Zagoni - Hungarian physicist.............12) Dr. David Gee - geologist Uppsala University Sweden.............13) Dr. Philip Lloyd - nuclear physicist and chemical engineer.............14) James Peden - atmospheric physicist and formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.............15) Dr. Phil Chapman - astronautical engineer and former NASA astronaut/M.I.T. physics professor.............16) Delgado Domingos - environmental scientist and founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast Group.............17) Dr. Takeda Kunihiko - vice chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research Chuba University Japan.............18) Dr. Eduardo Tonni - paleontologist at the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires.............19) Dr. Art Douglas - atmospheric scientist Creighton University.............20) D. Patrick Frank - more than 50 peer reviewed articles.............21) Jack Schmitt - astronaut (Apollo 17)/geologist and formerly of the Norwegian and U.S. geological surveys.............22) Dr. Richard Keen - climatologist University of Colorado.............23) Dr. G. LeBlanc Smith - Principal research scientist with Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization.............24) Dr. Arun Ahluwalia - geologist Purijab University India.............25) Dr. Roy Spencer - climatologist University of Alabama (formerly of NASA).............26) Dr. Richard Lindzen atmospheric physicist M.I.T. 27) Hundreds and hundreds and hundreds more..............................................................................................Look, folks, I'm not saying that there isn't global-warming, or even that man hasn't played a role in it. I'm just saying that MAYBE we need to show a little bit of prudence, for Christ (the fact that Boone Pickens couldn't make a go of it with windmills, the fact that even with an $8,000 tax credit nobody really wanted those crappy electric cars, Solyndra, etc.).

Michael Crichton on "Scientific Consensus"

"Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science, consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with consensus."............This, to all of the people out there who think that the global-warming debate is settled.

Saturday, December 24, 2011

Angelina JoWHO?


Faye Dunaway, circa late 60s - early 70s.

College Football Tidbits 1

1) Finally some decent news for beleaguered Maryland football coach, Randy Edsall. The fellow actually struck it rich on the recruiting trail this week. Abner Logan (the 24th best outside linebacking prospect in the country/3rd best prospect overall from the state of Massachusetts), in a move that fully surprised everybody, said NO to N.C. State and verbally committed to Maryland. It was a humongous get for Mr. Edsall and it apparently gave him some major mojo, too....Yeah, you got, it later in the week, he landed yet another bell-wringer. Dallas Griffiths (an awesome name for a baller, no?), a heat-seeking missile of a linebacker out of Tallahassee Florida, also committed to Maryland. Two major gets in one week. Maybe Randy Edsall CAN recruit after all.............2) Looking for a sleeper for next year's Heisman Trophy race? You just might want to take a look at T.C.U. quarterback, Casey Pachall (pronounced Paul-Hall)? The dude (who'll only be a junior next season), in what was only his first year as a starter, was absolutely sensational this year. He ended up passing for 2,921 yards (a 66.5 completion percentage), 25 touchdowns, and only 7 interceptions. He also led the Horned Frogs to an 11-2 record, a Mountain West Conference championship, and, YES SIR, even a victory over Boise State, AT BOISE (the frigging Broncos hardly ever lose at home). If Mr. Pachall can duplicate these accomplishments next year, don't be surprised to see him in New York City next January.

"Alan Keyes Is Foaming at the Mouth" (With Apologies to "Alan Keyes's Head Is Exploding")

What would be my answer to the question, "So, would do you think that Mr. Keyes's program SHOULD have been called?"

Friday, December 23, 2011

On Me and My Preoccupation With All Things Alan Keyes 1

Let's just refer to it as a cottage industry of sorts.

On Rachel Maddow 1

Her uncritical acceptance of anything that Paul Krugman and other stoogely Keynesians say is borderline frightening.

On Sean Hannity 1

He makes Gomer Pyle sound like a cross between Alfred North Whitehead and Karl Popper.

Thursday, December 22, 2011

"Alan Keyes Is Making Sense"

What would be my answer to the question, "So, what, in your opinion, is the most inappropriately titled program in television history?"

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

On the Job Straining

Let me start off by saying that I like President Obama. I think that he's both a good and decent family man and a patriotic American (he's especially proven effective at smoking terrorists). And, no, I don't think that he's been nearly as bad a President as some of my conservative colleagues have alleged. But I do think that he's been hampered by at least a couple of factors this term. a) The fellow had zero experience as an administrator (he's never, for example, been a governor, a mayor, or an executive of any kind) and b) he had perilously little experience in the private sector. In my opinion, had he had these experiences in his background, he probably would have been far better capable of marshaling a significantly better health-care plan, stimulus package, etc.......................................................................................................Now, is this to say that John McCain, or even Hillary Clinton, would have done a better job had they been elected? No, not at all (Mr. McCain especially seemed erratic back then). It just means that maybe, just maybe, a little more seasoning (I mean, really, what in the heck was he; a college professor, a community organizer, a state senator, a victor over the idiot, Alan Keyes?) wouldn't have hurt.

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

On Ron Paul 1

I just wish that there was a "Ron Paul Lite" out there (i.e., a person who shared Mr. Paul's positions on foreign policy and civil liberties but one who wasn't quite as draconian in terms of scaling back the social safety-net and regulations).

Now THIS Was a "Power Trio"

I mean, I don't know about you folks, but I'll take Montgomery Clift, Burt Lancaster, and Frank Sinatra over George Clooney, Brad Pitt, and Matt Damon ANY DAY.

Monday, December 19, 2011

Sunday, December 18, 2011

The Fact That He Claims to Have Made Eleven Holes in One at His Very First Attempt at Golf

What would be my answer to the question, "So, what's your all-time favorite Kim Jong Il exaggeration?"

I'd Say Probably Around Six Seconds/As Long as it Takes For the Ink to Dry

What would be my answer to the question, "So, how long do you think that it will take for the Progressives in Washington and on the blogs to totally eviscerate the Ryan-Wyden Medicare Reform Proposal?"

Saturday, December 17, 2011

Inimitable (With Apologies to Iconoclastic)

What would be my answer to the question, "So, what's the first word that comes to mind when you hear the name, Christopher Hitchens?"............R.I.P. (providing, that is, he's capable)

......AND Widens

"The consequences of the Hawley-Smoot Bill have been tremendous (as in, terrible), both directly and indirectly."............Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1932.............Wow, I guess that FDR thought that Smoot-Hawley was contributing to the economic downturn, too. How inconvenient. Oh well, I guess that FDR was just being one of those "useful idiots" for right-wing propaganda (not that this is necessarily surprising, mind you, in that the Republican Party was the true party of Progressives back then; T.R., LaFollette, Hoover, Charles Evans Hughes, etc.).

Friday, December 16, 2011

......And Widens

"The Smoot-Hawley Tariff was more a consequence of the onset of the Great Depression than an initial cause. But while the tariff might not have caused the Depression, it certainly did not make it any better. It provoked a storm of foreign retaliatory measures and came to stand as a symbol of the "beggar-thy-neighbor" policies (policies designed to improve one's own lot at the expense of that of others) of the 1930s. Such policies contributed to a drastic decline in international trade. For example, U.S. imports from Europe declined from a 1929 high of $1,334 million to just $390 million in 1932, while U.S. exports to Europe fell from $2,341 million in 1929 to $784 million in 1932. Overall, world trade declined by some 66% between 1929 and 1934. More generally, Smoot-Hawley did nothing to foster trust and cooperation among nations in either the political or economic realm during a perilous era in international relations.............U.S Department of State...............http://future.state.gov/when/timeline/1921_timeline/smoot_tariff.html...............So, yet another perspective; it didn't cause the Great Depression but it may in fact have exacerbated it.

The Conspiracy Widens

"The bill really satisfied no one and raised a storm of protest when President Hoover signed it in June, 1930. With Tariffs at an all-time record high, there came an unexpected wave of retaliatory actions from America's customers abroad, with the result that U.S. foreign trade took a sharp turn downward and the depression worsened worldwide."............"The Reader's Digest Family Encyclopedia of American History" (enter theme tune from the "Twilight Zone" LOL)

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Republican Candidates and Whether or Not I Trust Them With the Nuclear Button

Huntsman - yes. Romney - yes. Gingrich - no. Perry - no. Bachmann - no. Paul - yes. Santorum - probably. Johnson - yes. Karger - yes. Roemer - yes. Cain (had he stayed in) - no. Pawlenty (had he stayed in) - yes. Christie (had he gotten in) - yes. Palin (had she gotten in) - no. Trump (had he gotten in) - HELL NO!

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Debunking Yet Another Myth

In May of 1930, 1028 economists (from across the political spectrum, from Irving Fisher to Rex Tugwell) penned an open letter to President Hoover pleading with him to veto the Smoot-Hawley tariff legislation. They subsequently had the letter published in the "New York Times" editorial section. Here, folks, is a sample of the language............."We are convinced that increased restrictive duties would be a mistake. They would operate, in general, to increase the prices which domestic consumers would have to pay. By raising prices they would encourage concerns with higher costs to undertake production, thus compelling the consumer to subsidize waste and inefficiency in industry. At the same time they would force him to pay higher rates of profits to established firms. Few people could hope to gain from such a change."............These same economists went on to predict that "many countries would pay us back in kind" and that we simply "cannot increase employment by restricting trade.".................................................................................................And it wasn't simply those in America who were attempting to warn old Hoover. "Le Quotidien" in Paris published an editorial entitled, "Can Mr. Hoover Limit the Catastrophe Which American Protectionists Are Preparing?" Amongst the meatier elements of this missive was an admonition which stated that, "There will be nothing for us to do but to resort to reprisals, and that would mean war." Another predictive warning came from GM's European director, Graeme K. Howard. In a telegram sent directly to the White House, Mr. Graeme sternly predicted that the passage of Smoot-Hawley "would spell economic isolation for the United States and the most severe depression ever experienced."...............................................................................................And on and on it went. Now, is there an argument to the contrary here? Yeah, I suppose so. But to say that the belief that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act contributed to the Depression is nothing bit a right-wing myth is absolutely and categorically incorrect. Paranoiac is essentially what it is.

Lost Comments

I had 10 comments that I thought I published. They disappeared. I may have hit delete instead of publish and, if so, I apologize.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Donna Reed Circa 1953



The most underrated sex-symbol ever, IMHO.

Monday, December 12, 2011

On How Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (More than Likely) Contributed to the Financial Collapse

1) Fannie and Freddie purchased billions of risky loans (nearly 3/4 of new mortgages were going through F & F by 2008) and bundled them to investors. The money that went to these banks allowed them to make even more risky loans. The end-result was that a lot more mortgage lending than would have otherwise taken place DID take place (the bubble argument, in other words).............2) Being that Fannie and Freddie were at least quasi governmental entities, most investors and lenders (justifiably, as it turned out) took for granted that the lines of credit would more than likely be unlimited....AND that they (Fannie and Freddie) would probably be bailed out if necessary.............3) Fannie was deeply involved in the highly political move of lowering lending requirements in an attempt to more adequately meet the needs of disadvantaged groups. They specifically eased the credit requirements on the mortgages that it was purchasing from banks - the end-point being (this, according to the New York Times, September 1999) to encourage banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit hadn't been good enough to qualify for conventional homes......So, no, me-buckos, nobody was "holding a gun to these bankers' heads" (and, yes, there were in fact some very questionable practices - no doubt), but if the government is a) enabling you and b) encouraging you AND you're more than likely going to get bailed out in a worst case scenario, wouldn't you also (in the words of Congressman Frank) be willing to "roll the dice a little"?

Prime Vulgar

According to a 1996 study by the Congressional Budget Office, it was found that mortgage behemoth Fannie Mae had pocketed about a third of the subsidy which the government was providing (this, as opposed to them passing it on to the homeowners). This same study also goes on to say that James Johnson, the initial executive at Fannie Mae, personally took home nearly $100 million (his successor, Franklin Raines, didn't do too badly, either). For individuals to still say that Fannie and Freddie didn't play a roll in the financial collapse is astonishing.............http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/29/books/review/book-review-reckless-endangerment-by-gretchen-morgenson-and-joshua-rosner.html?pagewanted=all

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Caught Off Guard

I'm normally not a big fan of smack-talking in sports (it is significantly better to do your talking on the court/field, I'm thinking), but when Jason Terry proclaimed in the middle of this year's NBA finals that Lebron James couldn't guard him, and then proceeded to prove it over the rest of the series, that, my friends, was impressive - VERY IMPRESSIVE. Not that I necessarily should have been surprised, mind you. Jason Terry has been a difficult "guard" for 13 years now. The dude isn't just one of the most underrated players currently. He's one of the most underrated players in history. And, yes, folks, he in fact DOES have the stats to prove it. During his 12 year career with the Hawks/the Mavericks, Jason Terry has scored close to 16,000 points and dished out over 4,500 assists. And, not only that, the dude is a flat-out warrior (he's only failed to suit up 23 times in his entire career). With all of the prima donnas in sports these days, damned if it wasn't good to finally see one of the good guys hoisting the trophy.

Top 15 Athletes to Never Win a Title (Basketball, Baseball, Football)

15) Tony Gwynn............. 14) Jim Kelly............. 13) Carl Yastrzemski............. 12) Ken Griffey Jr.............. 11) Fran Tarkenton............. 10) Charles Barkley............. 9) Earl Campbell............. 8) John Stockton............. 7) Dick Butkus............. 6) Karl "the mailman" Malone............. 5) Elgin Baylor............. 4) Barry Sanders............. 3) Ty Cobb............. 2) Dan Marino............. 1) Ted Williams........................................................................................P.S. I've been told that Napolean Lajoie was bangin', but I'm afraid that I'm probably going to have to pass on him. Patrick Ewing, Harmon Killebrew, and Ernie Banks would instead be my honorable-mentions.

Busted

Ralph Nader is another of those liberal firebrands whose always shouting his mouth off about union rights and THEN doing the exact opposite in his personal life. Get a load of this one, folks - "Ralph talks big about democracy and even unions. But when his own workers at one of his magazines, Multinational Monitor, got fed up with cruel working conditions and started agitating for a union of their own, Nader busted the union with all of the hardball techniques used by corporate owners across America. Workers at Public Citizen, another Nader group, also tried to form a union because of 60 to 80 hour work weeks, salaries that ranged from $13,000 down, and other difficult working conditions and were blocked by Nader, who remains unapologetic to this day.......Nader says "I don't think there is a role for unions in small nonprofit 'cause' organizations any more than ... within a monastery or within a union."......When ringleader Tim Shorrock filed the union recognition papers, Nader immediately transferred ownership in the Multinational Monitor to close friends who ran an organization ("Essential Information") that Nader had set up. When Shorrock showed up for work the next day, he had been fired, the locks were changed, and management called the police to charge him with theft (of his own work papers.) That charge was thrown out of court, but management fired the two supportive editors and sued the three of them for $1.2 million, agreeing to drop the intimidation suit only when they dropped their NLRB complaint. All of these action are straight from the hardball anti-union playbook, and Nader makes no apology.......According to Nader, "Public interest groups are like crusades�you can�t have work rules, or 9 to 5." Shorrock, with his "union ploy," became an "adversary" according to Nader. "Anything that is commercial, is unionizable," but small public interest organizations "would go broke in a month," Nader says, if they paid union wages, offered union benefits and operated according to standard work rules, such as the eight-hour day. Remember that Nader's well-funded organizations were amassing tons of extra money that Ralph has been playing the stock market with during all these events."......Nice, huh? realchange.org/nader.htm

Friday, December 9, 2011

Gene Hackman's Turn as the Sadistic Sheriff in "Unforgiven"

What would be my answer to the question, "So, what, in your opinion, is the SECOND (this, after having already selected Anne Baxter as number one) most under-appreciated Oscar-winning performance in U.S. movie history?"

Malevolence

What would be my answer to the question, "So, what's the first word that comes to mind when you hear the name, Newt Gingrich?"

Thursday, December 8, 2011

The Priviliged Spew

To anybody out there who still doesn't see the importance of a free and independent press, you obviously didn't see that recent "60 Minutes" piece on insider trading and Congress/the aftermath. For those of you who didn't witness it, Steve Croft did an amazing segment on how it's apparently still legal for elected officials in Washington to capitalize on knowledge derived from pending legislation to trade on various stock opportunities (I.P.O.s especially). He specifically focused in on those who've presided in leadership positions; former Speakers Dennis Hastert and Nancy Pelosi and current Speaker John Boehner. It was a totally eye-opening expose' and, I'm telling you, folks, if you weren't exceedingly jaded before it, you sure as hell would have been after it..........................................................................................................Thankfully (and, yes, precisely because of this segment), Congress has responded quickly. Congressman Tim Walz (one of the good guys), who, when he previously put forth legislation to stop this lunacy, couldn't himself get arrested, this time got over a hundred co-sponsors and it appears that Congresspersons will eventually be subject to the same laws that ended up putting Martha Stewart in prison. In the words of the inimitable Howard Cosell, "It's been long overdue!"

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

Some Serious Takes on Gary Sick, Etc.

For those of you who haven't kept up, Gary Sick is one of those sickos who's been most responsible for that October Surprise conspiracy theory; the one which alleges that Reagan cut some sort of deal with Iran to delay the release of the hostages until after the election. It's a patently absurd allegation and here are what some of the more serious people are saying............. 1) "The New Republic" - According to "Wikipedia", Steven Emerson and Jesse Furman of The New Republic, also looked into the allegations and found “the conspiracy as currently postulated is a total fabrication”. They were unable to verify any of the evidence presented by Sick and supporters, finding them to be inconsistent and contradictory in nature. They also pointed out that nearly every witness of Sick had either been indicted or was under investigation by the Department of Justice. Like the Newsweek investigation they had also debunked the claims of Reagan election campaign officials being in Paris during the time-frame Sick claimed they had been, contradicting Sick’s sources.............2) "The Village Voice" - Again, according to "Wikipedia", "Retired CIA analyst and counter-intelligence officer Frank Snepp of The Village Voice compiled several investigations of Sick’s allegations in 1992. Snepp alleged that Sick had only interviewed half of the sources used in his book, and supposedly relied on hearsay from unreliable sources for large amounts of critical material. Snepp also discovered that in 1989, Sick had sold the rights to his book to Oliver Stone. After going through evidence presented by Richard Brenneke, Snepp asserted that Brenneke’s credit card receipts showed him to be in Portland, Oregon, during the time he claimed to be in Paris observing the secret meeting.............3) The U.S. House of Representatives - Also from "Wikipedia", " The House of Representatives’ 1993 report concluded “there is no credible evidence supporting any attempt by the Reagan presidential campaign—or persons associated with the campaign—to delay the release of the American hostages in Iran”. The task force Chairman Lee H. Hamilton also added that the vast majority of the sources and material reviewed by the committee were "wholesale fabricators or were impeached by documentary evidence". The report also expressed the belief that several witnesses had committed perjury during their sworn statements to the committee, among them Richard Brenneke,[18] who claimed to be a CIA agent."............4) The United States Senate - Also from "Wikipedia", The US Senate’s 1992 report concluded that "by any standard, the credible evidence now known falls far short of supporting the allegation of an agreement between the Reagan campaign and Iran to delay the release of the hostages".............5) The "Washington Post" (direct), In an interesting footnote to the October Surprise myth, Jamshid Hashami, who first came to public attention 1i 1991 by "claiming to have helped Ronald Reagan's 1980 Presidential campaign negotiate to delay the release of U.S. hostages in Iran after the election,...pleaded guilty (in London in December 1998) to swindling (Reston, VA corporation) Octogon and other businesses In Europe, Asia, and the United States out of millions of dollars through a series of elaborate scams".............6) Strong (I&NS 8.2 direct), a classic example of ... the paranoid political conspiracy exposé.... Unsubstantiated hints of exotic government sponsored assassinations are part of a larger pattern involving a double standard in evidence evaluation. Honegger makes "extensive use of Richard Brenneke" and, in general, the book can be dismissed as the work of a common conspiracy theorist gone off the deep end of history.............7) Newsweek (direct), NEWSWEEK has found, after a long investigation including interviews with government officials and other knowledgeable sources around the world, that the key claims of the purported eyewitnesses and accusers simply do not hold up. What the evidence does show is the murky history of a conspiracy theory run wild.......What has kept the October Surprise conspiracy theory alive is a chain of "super-sources." Self-proclaimed eyewitnesses, many with suspect credibility, have spun a tangled--and often contradictory--tale about an arms-for-hostages deal that seemed to foreshadow the later Iran-contra scandal.............So, just how damned ridiculous IS this theory (gee, let's see, Gary Sick and these other lunatics versus Lee Hamiliton, The "Village Voice", "Newsweek", "The New Republic", and the "Washington Post", that's a really tough one - NOT!!)? This theory is so damned ridiculous that even Oliver Stone won't make a movie about it. Youza, huh?

Addendum to kaboom 2

Here are the latest figures on the drone attacks in Pakistan. During the final 6 years of the Bush administration, there were a total of 43 drone attacks and 426 casualties. During the first three years of the Obama administration, these numbers have swelled to 241 and 2,254 respectively (so, yes, "thousands", in fact WAS an accurate designate). It doesn't, folks, take a skilled statistician to see that this is a statistically significant difference, and a cutting one - spin it however you want.............source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan

Monday, December 5, 2011

No More Trolls/Childlike Idiots Who Think That They're Always Right

If you don't have a blog of your own, please, do not post here. I have been more than patient and these multi-handled slugs/lunatics do not appreciate it. In fact, folks, it's actually gotten to the point where I'm not even sure WHAT I'm debating anymore. So, yes, me-buckos, sayonara, 1138.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Note to the OWS Movement (And, No, This Isn't a Play on Words About the Protester Crapping on the Cop Car)

We all have rights, people. But once those rights impinge upon the rights of others (in this particular instance, the rights of local businesses, the rights of others to use the facilities, etc.), they cease. In regards to your little New York City situation, Mr. Bloomberg was MORE than patient and when he acted he acted decisively. I have zero problem with it.............Oh, and a note to any OWS people out there who plan on impeding my movement/preventing me from enjoying a facility, three little words of caution to 'em; wear a cup..................................................................................................P.S. I also have a suggestion. You want to make a difference in the country? Start by lobbying your representative and pushing for a law that in the future will ban ALL insider trading (i.e., one that will even apply to such miserable cretins as John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi). No, it isn't the entire answer, but it's a start.

Saturday, December 3, 2011

An Infinite Number, Apparently

What would be my answer to the question, "So, how many different ways can the hard left articulate, 'Palin is an idiot'?".................................................................................................P.S. Look, I'll admit it, the lady brings a fair amount of the criticism on herself. But when I read how some of these leftist bloggers just go on and on and on ("a worthless piece of excrement", that's probably my all-time favorite), I always want to point out to them, "Oh, and your guys are soooooooooooo much better."...I mean, seriously, have you seen that Ed Schultz character? The guy is insane. He was recently featured in a G.Q. tongue-in-cheek piece entitled, "The Top 25 Least Influential People in America". They put him at number 3 (Tim Pawlenty was number 1) and, boy, oh boy, did that ever piss the fellow off. And crazy, you want to talk about crazy? He actually hypothesized that this was some sort of conspiratorial thing between G.Q. and Anderson Cooper, his time-slot competitor over at CNN. I mean, this is some really scary shit here, folks - characters like that walking around amongst us.....................................................................................................Just for the record, this was the hilarious write-up that G.Q. provided regarding Mr. Schultz - "Then there are pundits like Ed Schultz. Do you watch “The Ed Show” on MSNBC? Of course you don’t. No one does. The only reason that people watch “The Ed Show” is that they’re working out in a hotel gym and they can’t find a staff member to change the channel to ESPN."......Huh? Is that good or what? LOL

On George W. Bush and War Criminality 3

According to the proponents of this "George W. Bush is a war criminal" argument, for any military action to be a legal one, it has to have the approval of the United Nations Security Council. Mr. Obama's massive number of drone attacks (which have resulted in literally thousands of civilian casualties) into Pakistan have never received this U.N. authorization. He has thus engaged in an illegal action and must be considered a war criminal. He has to be (this, according to the exceedingly hooplaed criteria)................................................................................................And, no, the fact that Pakistan has apparently given us the OK (though, yes, they, too, seem to be getting weary of the carnage) isn't at all material. In Fact, people, the fact that we're paying them money to cooperate in such a ruthless policy might even make it more odious...............................................................................................P.S. I personally do NOT think that Mr. Obama is a war criminal. This post is purely an act of devil's advocacy.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

On George W. Bush and War Criminality 2

1) There was no territorial gain.............2) There was no subjugation. Deposing the worst mass-murder since Pol Pot, dismantling his Republican Guard, and allowing for free and fair elections is subjugation only in the minds of people who hate George W. Bush (and who evidently don't know the difference between interference and subjugation).............3) A case could be made for self-defense. Is it a case that I personally would have made? No. I was against the toppling Hussein because I feared a possible civil war and the fact that we still needed him as a counterbalance to Iran. But I wasn't President.............4) I'm still waiting to hear the precise U.N. resolution which has approved of the sextupling of drone attacks in Northern Pakistan by President Obama and why, if in fact there isn't one, HE isn't a war criminal, too (the fact that there have been thousands of civilian casualties, etc.).............5) The U.N. is a rump organization comprised of, in no small measure, miscreant nations/dictatorships. To cite them as the sole determinant of what constitutes war criminality is something that I reject. I mean, really, where were they when Saddam was gassing the Kurds, and where are they now with all of the atrocities happening in Syria (Assad is making Gadaffi look like a damn piker)?............6) I'm assuming that, if in fact Mr. Bush ever WAS indicted for war crimes, the fellow would also get a fair trial (I mean, they gave one to Adolph Eichmann, right?). OR, is he already considered guilty by a bevy of marginal bloggers and a spate of ivory tower intellectuals? I'm curious.............7) Referencing what Bush did in 2003 (even assuming the most cynical of motivations) with what Hitler did in 1939 is an extremely discomforting comparison and I....Well, I'll just leave it at that.............8) And let's just assume that what Mr. Bush did WAS a war crime, is there not in this area of law a continuum, too? Just as you wouldn't compare a person convicted of vehicular homicide to John Wayne Gacy, you probably wouldn't compare Bush to Hitler, Pol Pot, Hussein, D'Aubuisson, Amin, the Hamids, etc., either. I mean, I certainly wouldn't.............9) Regime change in Iraq, as one of the stated objectives of American foreign policy, didn't originate with George Bush. It originated with Bill Clinton in 1998 and was also affirmed in Congress via the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 (this, in response to Saddam having kicked out the weapons inspectors). Clinton, not Bush.............10) The Authorization for the Use of Force Bill that passed both houses of Congress in 2002 had 23 whereas clauses justifying the war. Only TWO of them in any way dealt with WMD. Two.............11) The yellow cake and aluminum tubes arguments were never mentioned in either the U.S. Use of Force Bill OR the U.N. Council ultimatum 1441. And they weren't even part of the intelligence report that the Congress saw. They were only used to persuade the U.N. (yes, that in fact WAS a bad thing).............12) Every major intelligence agency in the world; the British, the French, the Russians, the Germans, the Israelis, the Jordanians, etc., thought that Iraq had WMD. Yes, they were wrong but they were ALL wrong.............13) If Bush was so gung-ho about going to war in Iraq, then why did he a) wait a full three months after the ultimatum (U.N. resolution 1441) expired before engaging and b) give Mr. Hussein an 11th hour ultimatum to "leave the country or face war". Hussein could have readily left for Russia and Aziz taken over and war would have been avoided.............14) Yes, the first Gulf War had a U.N. resolution authorizing force. But the only reason that it did was because China abstained, and the only reason that China abstained (as opposed to vetoing the measure, which is what they really wanted to do) was because they were feeling isolated after the Tiananmen Square massacre and didn't want to become even more isolated. Ergo, the first gulf war was almost a "war crime", too.............15) Congress was privy to the same intelligence that the White House was. This, via the N.I.E...............16) No evidence has ever been found of White Hose manipulation of the evidence. This from the 2004 Senate Intelligence Committee (unanimous); " The Committee did not find any evidence that intelligence analysts changed their judgments as a result of political pressure, altered or produced intelligence products to conform with Administration policy, or that anyone even attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to do so. When asked whether analysts were pressured in any way to alter their assessments or make their judgments conform with Administration policies on Iraq’s WMD programs, not a single analyst answered “yes.”............17) And, this, from the bipartisan Silberman-Robb report of 2005; These (intelligence) errors stem from poor tradecraft and poor management. The Commission found no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. As we discuss in detail in the body of our report, analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments. We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments. 18) In spite of all this, I still think that the Iraq War was a stupid and shortsighted enterprise that could have and should have been avoided.............19) P.S. Just to be fair here, while it's clear that there wasn't any manipulation of the evidence/Congress, a case COULD in fact be made that the administration manipulated the public. There was a lot of doubt in that N.I.E. and none of it was forwarded to the public or the media. Now, whether this fact constitutes a war crime or not, that I might be willing to concede (though, yes, it would also incriminate the Congress).