I was going to add this as an update to the previous post about my appearance on the John Carlson Show opposite the Discovery Institute’s Bruce Chapman, but I think it raises an entirely different subject, so it deserves a thread of its own.
Last week I wrote a short post (“Thinking about ‘think tanks’“) in which I called on WA progressives to create the kind of think tank that can rival those on the right:
No, I don’t mean some lofty institute where pointy-headed intellectuals earnestly work to develop effective public policy…. What we need are some of those fake think tanks… you know, like the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, or the Washington Policy Center, or the driving force behind “intelligent design”, Seattle’s very own Discovery Institute, which apparently takes the name “Discovery” from its concerted efforts to squash it.
The other side has these shamelessly partisan propaganda mills, and so should we. They’re very effective.
Well, my appearance today on John’s show — regardless of how well you think I held up my end of the debate — is just another example of why we need this weapon in our arsenal. I mean, really… what the fuck was I doing debating Bruce Chapman? What we should have had was some impressively credentialed fellow from some fake progressive think tank whose full-time job it is to track the Discovery Institute and refute their faith-based-media-campaign-masquerading-as-science bullshit. Instead, we had what…? The “horse’s ass” guy! Sheesh!
Now I don’t mean to be too self-deprecating; I think I did a fine job considering the circumstances. (And on other issues on which I have more expertise, I think I usually kick ass.) But I ask all of you out there in the local progressive blogosphere… all you liberal activists and media junkies… and especially you civic leaders, labor officials, party regulars and elected representatives and staffers for whom HA has become a secret, dirty pleasure… are you really comfortable with leaving it to me to be the liberal voice representing you on any issue John or Kirby or some other talk-jock throws my way? I sure as hell hope not.
And when it’s not me, the alternative is often worse. How many times have we tuned in to some serious discussion on KUOW about some serious issue, only to hear some fake-think-tank talking head like Paul Guppy taking on a respectable journalist like George Howland Jr.? Paul trots out his fake-nonpartisan, fake-academic credentials, and then proceeds to spread the propaganda as thick as shit in feeding lot. Meanwhile, George, whatever his political leanings, attempts to behave like the responsible, objective journalist he is. The result is what might sound like a reasonable discussion, but really is little more than a right-wing media op.
It just isn’t a fair fight, because George and Paul have entirely different objectives. George is trying to be truthful and informative, whereas Paul is simply trying to win.
We need to try to win too, and the only way to do this is to fight fake-think-tank with fake-think-tank. We need our own fake-fellows producing gobs of fake-research on our own syllabus of fake-issues, as well that of our fake-opponents. And we need to train these fake-experts in the ways of the media, so that the next time Bruce Chapman whips out his pseudo-science-based bullshit, we have a partisan pseudo-academic adequately prepared to publicly undress him, fake-talking-point by fake-talking-point.
Oh of course, we’ll never refer to our institute as “fake.” No… we’ll use the other guys’ euphemism: “nonpartisan.” But honestly, when like Discovery, you start with an agenda and then produce the “scholarship” to support it, instead of the other way around, it isn’t much of a real think tank, now is it?
No, but that’s what it takes for progressives to win in the real world, where we can no longer rely on the Democratic Party or organized labor to do our dirty work for us. We need to create and fund new institutions that are just as partisan, just as relentless, and just as calculating and manipulative as those on right, not because we want the rest of the nation to think exactly like us — God no… that would be boring — but because that is the only way we have a snowball’s chance in hell of fighting on an equal footing!
What will it take? Well, I’ll throw out a number… how about $750,000 over the first two years to fund start-up costs, initiate fundraising, and make a couple quick strikes to prove that we can be just as smart, just as manipulative, and just as fake as the other guys? It’s time for a few visionary progressive institutions, businesses and individuals with money to make this culture war a fair fight.
Wait til Richard Scaife croaks — then approach his heirs. By then they’ll be more than ready to use this mean old drunk’s money to get even with him.
Speaking of being on the radio, I just heard Cindy Sheehan on the radio. WHAT A DOLT!
Among other lunacies, she thought we should have gone after al Qeada but we had no reason to invade AFGHANISTAN.
I guess the lady does not understand that al Qeada was being hosted by the Afghan government. With that logic, what can one say. I wonder what her opinion of Clinton lobbing a few cruise missles into Afghanistan is?
Gee, I would love to see her on with Tim Russert. Of course, the hate Bush crowd would never let that happen to their DOLT.
Hey, RR.
When are you going to start obsessing over George Soros? What in the world did Scaife do to make you lefties go berserk? All I know he did was provide some money for investigations that lead to a former Arkansas Governor going to jail and BJ Clinton losing his law license for lying to an Arkansas jury.
and while your thinking over the be like them Neo-cons plan…..why does the left feel obligated to the gun grabbers, I never got that. You know that splits the Union vote and the South as well….whats up with that. Is it just anything the NRA is for were again em…?
Somebody told me GBS is looking for me. Well I’s here GBS. How U B? I’s fine bwana!
Take care.
I thought “AIR AMERICA” was the liberals think tank? BTW, how are things going at the liberal “AA”? [hehe]
Bad idea, Goldy. We have to stay with the truth. Putting up fake experts, like they do, is not the right answer.
I have some advice. Be careful when you accept the offer to put your butt in the hot seat. If it is an unfair fight, like you against the Discovery bullshitter, don’t take the fight. There are really good truth tellers out there (Brent Rasmussen, http://www.brentrasmussen.com and others) who can destroy the Discovery Institute crap based on the science. Call the expert truth teller in or let the John Carlson’s say that “all the opposing people were not willing to be on the program.” This is better than being in a fight where the rules force you to fight from your knees.
bring the in the wabbit!
Gordon @6,
I never said anything about lying. But the truth will not set you free… it’s how you use it.
The issue here is not organization. It is legitimacy. Because there is a Discovery Institute which has turned itself into a major player in the debate over science education, there’s a guy from the Discovery Institute on the radio.
Why is DI ‘legitimate’ whereas other flat-earther organizations are not? If I set up a non-profit research institute, how does that institute gain legitimacy? Does it get legitimacy because George Soros funds it? Does it get legitimacy through media connections? By being available to be on TV and radio at the drop of a hat?
That’s the issue here. Ironically, being ‘the horse’s ass guy’ gives Goldy legitimacy, although not the kind of legitimacy he’d get if he were, say, Pat Robertson, who can call for the assassination of foreign leaders he doesn’t like but his followers will forgive him.
This goes back to how the right has won. For thirty years they’ve been building their infrastructure while the sane people have been snoozing on the job. The sane people will have to spend a bunch of time and money and effort to accomplish what the right has done. More irony: The good news is that the success of the right provides a roadmap, and gives hope that such a strategy can work.
We live in a world where Eugene Volokh has legitimacy. That means the bar is set pretty low, and shouldn’t be hard to achieve.
Goldy,
But the truth will not set you free… it’s how you use it.
So, truth is dangerous?
Oh, honesty sucks…C’mon Goldy…what is it?
Cindy being interviewed by CBS News’ Mark Knoller, upon her arrival in Crawford on August 6, 2005:
Mark Knoller: You know that the President says Iraq is the central front in the war on terrorism, don’t you believe that?
Cindy Sheehan: No, because it’s not true. Iraq was no threat to the United States of America until we invaded. Iraq was not involved in 9/11. Iraq was not a terrorist state.
But now that we have decimated the country, the borders are open. Freedom Fighters from other countries are going in. And they have created more terrorism by going into an Islamic country, devastating the country and killing innocent people in that country.
Terrorism is growing. And people who never thought of being car bombers, suicide bombers are now doing it because they want the United States of America out of their country.
Logic check: They are “freedom fighters” from other countries who have come to Iraq because they want the US out of their country? WTF?
And excuse me, but wasn’t Saddam Hussein a major sponsor of terrorists? Didn’t he give large rewards to families of suicide bombers?
I think the PR firm for Moron.org better keep her away from the press for her remaining few moments in the limelight. The “grieving mom” part has worn off and the only thing that is left is a poorly educated, ignorant, absurd and dellusional woman surrounded by PETA, The socialist workers party and democracy now supporters in Crawford. Not to mention the 4, that’s right 4 other military mothers who are there.
Why anyone would associate the truth with the left is beyond me. I mean after Newsweek, memogate and all the other lies the MSM have been caught in you would think people would see a pattern. Well at least 51-52% saw in 2004.
Goldy,
Seattle already has an established liberal-progressive think tank. It is called the Rainier Institute:
http://www.rainierinstitute.org/
Their home page proclaims: “Welcome to the Rainier Institute. The Rainier Institute is Washington State’s only non-partisan progressive think tank. The Rainier Institute is a public policy research organization that is committed to moving beyond endless discussions by generating real solutions to tough problems affecting Washington residents.”
The Rainier Institute also has a very congenial Executive Director — Cindi Azevedo Laws. Ms. Laws also serves on the Seattle Monorail Board and has progressive ideas on ethnic and religious matters which are shared by many other liberals, including Cindy Sheehan.
Not to mention the fact that the King County Democrats endorsed Cindi Laws for re-election yesterday, presumably with full knowledge of her progressive ideas on ethnic and religious matters.
And if the ideas of Cindi Laws and Cindy Sheehan on ethnic and religious matters really aren’t that progressive, then there is always “sensitivity training”.
Goldy here is more truths, but progressives got pissed.
abcnews.go.com/GMA/Health/story?id=1063448&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312 – doctor tells patient they are fat.
Reply to 3
“why does the left feel obligated to the gun grabbers, I never got that”
Getting the facts straight might improve your understanding of many things.
For example, Washington voters defeated a gun control initiative by over 70% a few years back. If you have half a fucking brain, you will realize there had to be a lot of Democrats, liberals, and “lefties” voting against gun control to rack up numbers like that.
Clue for the clueless: 99% of right-wing talking points are based on outright lies or are factually inaccurate.
Reply to 2
The Arkansas troopers are liars, and so are you.
@5
Last I heard Air America’s ratings are going straight up and they’re adding more stations and programming every month.
@9
The right wingers packaged their message well, and made their snake oil sound good. But now that right wingers are running their country and the good citizens are finding out the snake oil is pure poison, the right wing agenda will self-destruct without any intervention from liberals or progressive think tanks. The right wing has built its ideological edifice on sand, and all we have to do is pull up a lawn chair and wait for it to collapse.
15
Yep, they were all liars up to Monica. Then the spew became “it’s the presidents private business”.
Well, sone of the spew stuck on Monica’s dress but that is another story.
I appreciate the fact that Goldy, unlike so many progressives, is “thinking institutionally.” Some of the greatest accomplishments in this state were made possible only because folks banded together and created powerful organizations like the once radical Grange.
That said, I don’t think that blindly copying the right is the answer. For one thing, during a quickly changing time, it may be possible to gain an advantage by developing new institutional forms that the right, in its smug complacency, hasn’t thought of yet.
At any rate, we tend to not have anywhere near the deep pockets, and so need to come up with more cost-effective approaches. This can already be seen at the local level, where environmentalists have no hope of beating the Master Builders if they try to compete dollar for dollar.
Goldy says we need scientifically credible and media savvy opponents of the Discovery Institute. Agreed, but I suspect that there are already a handful of folks out there – they just need to be organized. It might take something as simple as an issue-by-issue phone list of potential radio interviewees to equalize the playing field.
I’d argue that the left’s biggest problem is that – unlike the right – it has fractured into dozens and dozens of single-issue groups that don’t do a very good job of working together. Our dirty little secret is that we don’t have a good, general-purpose think tank in this state is because too many individual activist groups are too busy protecting their own turf.
@18
Not exactly, Rufus. Clinton has had a loose zipper all his adult life. We all know that. He doesn’t deny it. But the “Arkansas Project” is something different. It was a Scaife-funded smear campaign that produced stories about Clinton that weren’t true — Troopergate, the Mexican drug connection, and so on — all were fictions, lies, fabrications from whole cloth. The Arkansas troopers are dishonorable men who took money to tell lies. This is typical of how Scaife operates. He is a slimeball, period. It’s one thing to fund a think tank to study issues and promote a political point of view. It’s another to use your money to slander people and lie to the public — that’s what Scaife does. And that’s why right-thinking people consider him a liar and a cancer on American public life.
The funny thing about all of this is they didn’t have to make up stories about Bill Clinton, because Clinton is his own worst enemy, and all they had to do was tell the truth about him!
That’s what makes Scaife’s expenditure of millions to fabricate Clinton stories so strange and inexplicable. You wonder why he did it. It’s irrational.
Marks @10,
The truth is useless on its own. It must be wielded correctly.
That’s what I try to do… wield the truth effectively. Sometimes I’m wrong, sometimes I make mistakes, but I never lie.
Carlson was protecting his own. If he wanted a real debate on ID, he could have gotten anyone from the Biology Department of SU, UW or any other university in the Puget Sound Region. It says something that he felt so protective of his old boss that he got a layman to discuss the issues against Chapman. Just shows how weak he knows the ID argument is.
That being said, you did fine Goldy. Check out some of the links I posted and you will be more than prepared to take on his lies next time.
You guys want some truth? View this site.
http://www.homelandsecurityus.com
Navigate to this location and view the almost attack at TAB –
http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/sosborne.asp
Green Thumb @21,
What we need is that general purpose progressive think tank you mentioned, independent from the direct control of the groups that finance it. We need a think tank that understands that the main purpose of PR is to make reporters’ lives easier, and that the main goal of politics is winning.
I’m not saying we duplicate the right’s model, but we certainly need to study their success and learn from it. And not shy away from using their tactics.
In other words, we need to be more pragmatic.
RR @ 16
“Last I heard Air America’s ratings are going straight up and they’re adding more stations and programming every month.”
http://www.philly.com/mld/inqu.....240137.htm
“Liberal Air America Radio stuck in cellar”
“Air America’s overall ratings, which rose initially after all the free publicity, faded before the November election and haven’t recovered.”
“Franken, best-selling author of such anti-conservative tomes as Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them and Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot, chose to go head-to-head with gabber Limbaugh in many markets. This, it turns out, was not such a good idea.
Limbaugh, still the giant among talkers, with 14.75 million listeners on 600 stations, has squashed Franken like a bug.
Franken’s ratings have dropped 50 percent in Boston since spring 2004, and he is down 14 percent in New York, where his listeners now number fewer than 188,000.”
Hardly straight up, and now they have Jerry Springer! Now that’s something to be proud of if you are a “progressive”.
Reply to 11
Cindy’s statement is Mark Knoller is 90% accurate.
1. “Iraq was no threat to the U.S.” This statement would be true even if Saddam had WMDs. That’s because Saddam’s aim was to intimidate his Arab neighbors, not threaten or attack the U.S.
2. “Iraq was not involved in 9/11.” The claim that Iraq was involved in 9/11 has been so thoroughly debunked that even Bush doesn’t say this anymore.
3. “Iraq was not a terrorist state.” This statement also is true. Saddam was a thug, and repressed his own people, but did not allow foreign groups to operate in Iraq nor did he export terrorism.
4. “The borders are open.” This point is inarguably true, and it’s a direct result of the civilian leadership’s refusal to provide the number of troops the generals said they needed.
5. “Freedom Fighters from other countries are going in.” The xenophobic element of the American polity undoubtedly will find fault with Ms. Sheehan’s choice of terms — what we have here is opponents of political correctness complaining about her lack of political correctness — but from the point of view of the Islamists flocking to Iraq to evict the American invaders, they are indeed fighting to free their Islamist brethren from foreign rule. I guess it all depends on your point of view. To put this in more politically neutral terms, Ms. Sheehan is correct that “fighters from other countries are going in” to Iraq across the open borders.
6. “And they have created more terrorism by going into an Islamic country.” Well, it certainly appears to me that the U.S. invasion has opened up Iraq to Al Qaida and other terrorists, and has enraged people throughout the Islamic world, which is helping Al Qaida’s recruiting.
7. “Devastating the country and killing innocent people in that country.” It’s inarguable that the U.S. invasion and the war now raging there has caused widespread damage and killed innocent Iraqis.
8. “Terrorism is growing. And people who never thought of being car bombers, suicide bombers are now doing it because they want the United States of America out of their country.” I somewhat disagree with this statement because I wouldn’t characterize the people fighting our troops in Iraq as “terrorists” or even “insurgents.” Most of them are Iraqis trying to kick a foreign invader out of their country. No surprise there. As for the suicide bombers, I don’t know how willing all of them are, it’s possible some of them are coerced.
In reply to your questions:
9. “And excuse me, but wasn’t Saddam Hussein a major sponsor of terrorists?” No.
10. “Didn’t he give large rewards to families of suicide bombers?” Saddam offered $25,000 rewards to families of Palestinian suicide bombers who attacked Israelis, and in at least some cases, paid these rewards. Like other Arab leaders, he was hostile to Israel. But this support was limited to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and represented allying himself with one of the combatants in that conflict. There is no evidence that he supported international terrorism in general. In fact, compared to countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Yemen, Saddam’s Iraq was remarkably free of terrorist recruiting, training, and operational activity. Saddam maintained such tight control over his country that groups like Al Qaida couldn’t operate there. Saddam was antagonistic to Osama, and Iraq probably had no Al Qaida presence at all. At most, Saddam provided retirement refuge to a handful of notorious terrorists after they went out of circulation.
Pudbud:
You need to sober up before posting a stupid rumor from the web. Right, Air force security ran off three guys with a shoulder mounted missle, but couldn’t catch them. If you believe that, I have a shoulder fired missle to sell you.
ConservativeFirst:
What you are saying is pure Novak. Consider this:
http://www.startribune.com/sto.....69938.html
“Locally, conservative-talk icon Rush Limbaugh’s show has lost 43 percent of its audience among 25- to 54-year-olds in the past year. Sean Hannity’s show is down a whopping 63 percent. The shift is serious enough that “we’re weighing where these shows fit for us in the future,” according to Todd Fisher, general manager at KSTP (1500 AM), which carries both syndicated programs.”
Or this:
http://blatherwatch.blogs.com/......html#more
“But York cited only New York ratings where AA’s share held firm at 1.2 in the previous quarter.–the same that it had in the fourth quarter of 2004. Holding firm was no small achievement– since virtually all political talk in New York (and indeed the whole country) showed a decline in the first quarter of 2005. (Don Imus declined by 25% in the first quarter of 2005 as did Rush Limbaugh.)
York: “Between 10a and 3p, the day-part that includes (emphasis added) Al Franken’s program, Air America dew a 1.4 share of the New York audience aged 25-54 in Winter 2005. That number is the latest in a nearly year-long decline.”
But if you measure Franken’s show (12-3:00p) on its own, it went UP from a 1.8 in Fall 2004 to 1.9 in the first quarter of 2005.
In the same time slot, Rush Limbaugh went DOWN from 4.1 in the fourth quarter of 2004 to a 3.2 in the first quarter of 2005. In the fourth quarter, 2004 Franken’s ratings were 44% of Limbaugh’s. In the first quarter of 2005 that ratio rose to 60%.”
Limbaughs ratings, as with Hannity’s, have been down big time since November 2004. AA has held steady. Not bad considering they are the start up. Lets see in 15 years what the comparision is.
Hay Goldy,
How’s this for a “vision statement” for your “fake-fellows producing gobs of fake-research on our own syllabus of fake-issues”:
“To aid voters and alert taxpayers by providing them with information about the consequences of cutting taxes, promoting the understanding of public services, and highlighting the need for a balanced tax system.”
That is the vision statement of your partisan sidekick at Permanent Defense. You already have your wished-for fake institute.
Roger @ 28
Your post reminded me of a brochure I received from a vendor back when drug testing was first becoming mainstream. It stated: “We’re proud to announce that we have instituted company-wdie drug testing and we are 90 percent drug free!”
WTF does 90% accurate have to do with anything when you are spouting total unadulterated BS like “But this support was limited to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and represented allying himself with one of the combatants in that conflict. There is no evidence that he supported international terrorism in general”? Give us all a break Roger and read some of the ridiculous things you post before we have to. Palestinian suicide bombers were COMBATANTS IN THE CONFLICT?
Roger, who were the opposing combatants in the conflict, the babies they killed or the innocent bystanders?
Man..ALL the right-wing fuckwads are out tonight. And the full moon’s over. What happened I wonder?
you guy’s just received a new batch of BC Bud today. You are all over the place with you statements. FOCUS on the subject matter and get a new web site for your info.
Reply to all:
IDGAF posted horseshit, and I responded to it. It’s that simple. If you trolls think I support Palestinian suicide bombers, all I can say is that doesn’t surprise me, considering how fucked up the rest of your thinking is. I don’t, and there’s damned little else you’ve ever been right about, either.
David,
I agree with you, by the way, that “Intelligent Design” is not good science. But your insistence that there’s a need for a fake think tank pumping out left-wing pseudo-academic research is just too much. It’s such a gaping unmet need, why don’t we get the taxpayers to pay for it and call it, say, the “Evans School for Public Affairs”
The new Arbitron ratings for Winter 2005, which covers January, February, and March, show that WLIB, the station which carries Air America in New York, won a 1.2-percent share of all listeners 12 years and older. That is down one tenth of one point from the station’s 1.3 percent share in Winter 2004, the last period when it aired its old format of Caribbean music
– Air America’s Boston station, WKOX-AM, got a tiny 0.6 share in the latest quarter, compared to a 4.3 share at WTKK-FM and a 4.0 share at WRKO-AM, both of which are conservative.
Boston…think Ted Kennedy, John Kerry.
Cincinnati, WCKY:
Spring ’04 — 2.0
Summer ’04 — 1.5
Fall ’04 — 1.0
Winter ’05 — 1.0
Spring ’05 — 0.8
Honolulu, KUMU:
Spring ’04 — 1.3
Summer ’04 — 0.8
Fall ’04 — 0.4
Winter ’05 — 0.6
Spring ’05 — 0.4
Philadelphia, WHAT:
Too small to appear on the list; has sunk below 0.4.
The fact is, in every city where the two compete, Rush Limbaugh has more listeners than all the AA shows combined.
“In the same New York Winter 2005 ratings, AA’s Randi Rhodes on in the crucial afternoon drive-time, went UP 33%, while the conservative talk shows in same time slot on WABC and WOR each went DOWN 33%.
Air America’s evening show, “The Majority Report” starring Janeane Garofalo and Sam Seder went UP 100%; while the WOR show in that time slot was FLAT and the WABC show went DOWN 33%.
In total audience, “The Majority Report” was the number one talk show in New York City in its time slot.
AA beat Bill O’Reilly, Laura Ingraham, and Bob Grant on New York city radio. ”
http://blatherwatch.blogs.com/......html#more
So Goldy is whining about being a reactionary; “…are you really comfortable with leaving it to me to be the liberal voice representing you on any issue John or Kirby or some other talk-jock throws my way? I sure as hell hope not.” Don’t forget Tim Eyman and Mr. Sharkansky.
Well, admission is a key step to recovery. We can now classify Goldy as a recovering reactionary. As the recovery proceeds, perhaps he will have an original idea. If he does, the potty-mouth disease here and on other progressive blogs will infect and kill it. Progressive argument is just so devoid of passion and emotionalism.
Besides, Goldy has earlier declared the Universities as the think-tank system for progressives, and I believe he is probably correct. They just haven’t produced much.
As an aside, if the $750,000 is raised, try to keep it in a sock or a mattress or a bank rather than investing it in radio.
@36
How did the poll worker training go, Stefan? Did they teach you about alternative ID?
36 (continued)
Now that I’m Dean Logan, I need to check up on you, because you’re working for me now.
Terry J @ 39
“Well, admission is a key step to recovery. We can now classify Goldy as a recovering reactionary.”
What the fuck? Do you have any idea of the bullshit coming out of you fingers? You are a fucking moron.
From Stefan at (un)Sound Politics: “I suggested to the trainer after they session that they include more materials on why and how to challenge a voter. He seemed surprised when I told him that the RCW (the oath) affirmatively obligates poll judges to prevent illegal voting. He seemed to take his duties as a trainer quite seriously so I suspect the people who designed the training program believe that poll judges aren’t supposed to be trained to know about such things and that they didn’t even train the trainers on the subject. That would be consistent with King County’s apparent policy to ‘count every vote’ while looking the other way at illegal votes whenever they can get away with it.”
That’s quite a leap of logic there, Steffie! Well, you’re in celebrated company; Evel Knievel’s leap over the Snake River didn’t quite make it to the other side, either.
dj:
Thank you for proving the case on potty mouth.
I’m visualizing in my mind a trail of smoke twisting behind Stefan’s path down into a deep gorge … funny!
Terry J @ 44
Take your opinion on the language and shove it up your ass. Goldy’s blog is edgy, and if you don’t like it, take your freeloading ass out of here (or, if you decide to stay, at least buy Goldy a beer).
The charater of this blog was established long before your sorry ass showed up. Puritan dipshits like you are not going to change it!
@44
What’s the matter with YOU?? Are you have a “sensitivity moment” on HorsesAss? Weird …
Rep. gold star mom’s are DOLTS, COWS, TRAITORS, UNPATRIOTIC, and are being used by the right for political purposes. Some of them are so stupid that they think the president stopped looking bin Laden after three mo. and attacked Iraq because of non-existent WMD’s. Maybe they found the WMD’s but it’s a secret and they are SECRETLY looking for Osama. SHHHHHHH! It’s a secret!
Speaking of Reactionary; from the NY Times: “It is not every day that a Supreme Court justice calls his own decisions unwise. But with unusual candor, Justice John Paul Stevens did that last week in a speech in which he explored the gap that sometimes lies between a judge’s desire and duty. Justice John Paul Stevens at an American Bar Association meeting this month in Chicago, where he was critical of the death penalty.
Addressing a bar association meeting in Las Vegas, Justice Stevens dissected several of the recent term’s decisions, including his own majority opinions in two of the term’s most prominent cases. The outcomes were “unwise,” he said, but “in each I was convinced that the law compelled a result that I would have opposed if I were a legislator.”
In one, the eminent domain case that became the term’s most controversial decision, he said that his majority opinion that upheld the government’s “taking” of private homes for a commercial development in New London, Conn., brought about a result “entirely divorced from my judgment concerning the wisdom of the program” that was under constitutional attack.
His own view, Justice Stevens told the Clark County Bar Association, was that “the free play of market forces is more likely to produce acceptable results in the long run than the best-intentioned plans of public officials.” But he said that the planned development fit the definition of “public use” that, in his view, the Constitution permitted for the exercise of eminent domain.
Justice Stevens said he also regretted having to rule in favor of the federal government’s ability to enforce its narcotics laws and thus trump California’s medical marijuana initiative. “I have no hesitation in telling you that I agree with the policy choice made by the millions of California voters,” he said. But given the broader stakes for the power of Congress to regulate commerce, he added, “our duty to uphold the application of the federal statute was pellucidly clear.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08.....fMPwNVCOmA
Wacked out old lefty judge admitting he is schisophrenic.
Ahhh yes, AA got a rating uptick in liberal cities? Wow. We on the right call that fly over country. Why? You fly over and see the pollution, filth, waste, largesse, etc. Why stop, just keep flying over it and go to your destination. When you are almost insignificant, a 100 – 200 – 300% increase is not a large number.
“Air America Radio’s number of online listeners grew by 50% from January to May 2005 with the average daily number going from 18,710 in January to 28,091 in May.” Wow dems good numbers!!!
I like this response below the blog: “Dude: can’t put lipstick on a pig…AAR ratings are what they are…maybe we could all listen with both ears and double the ratings…still wouldn’t come close to conservative talk…” That’s funny!!!
Puddybud: How can you call yourself a strict constuctionist when it comes to the Constitution, but have no objection to the Supreme Court’s APPOINTMENT of a president even though they clearly have no constitutional ability to do so?
You’ll just twist the truth until you come up with a halfass reason. But everyone–even the justices themselves– know that GWB is a bogus president.
You have CBS, ABC, NBC, The Seattle Slime, The Seattle Post (Un)intelligencer, KING, KIRO, CNN, MSNBC, and a host of others as propaganda outlets, and you try to come off as the underdog. You truly are a JackAss.
Mr Poon: Do I need to prove you wrong through the Internet? Well let me resurrect an item from 2000 about Al Gore.
Fighting for Life – An Inside View of the Presidential Contest
by Mathew D. Staver – You determine the URL PoonTang.
“The Electoral College has voted. The voting machines have been stored in anticipation of the next election. The lawyers have gone home. The most historic politico-legal battle our country has faced in the past one hundred fourteen years has ended. The struggle was sometimes vicious. This was one time that justice was not slow. One legal development after another made new news old news in a matter of minutes. What was really behind this historic struggle?
Although never directly addressed during the thirty-six day ordeal, the real struggle behind the presidency was about life, family values, and two competing world views.
The presidential contest literally placed life in the balance. A few weeks before November 7, the Republican-controlled Congress approved a budgetary measure that would provide international funding for abortion. The funding was to begin in February 2001. The apparent, misguided, Republican strategy was to take the abortion issue out of the debate prior to November 7 in hopes that George W. Bush would be elected President. If that occurred, the Republican Congress could revisit the issue and stop the funding. The strategy almost backfired. If Mr. Gore had won the presidency, we would soon be funding abortions worldwide. This blood money would be coming from America for at least four years, and possibly indefinitely. Once the measure took effect, it would be difficult to revoke.
The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) and Planned Parenthood web sites pulled no punches about the election. Both organizations stated up front that the election was about the appointment of Supreme Court Justices who would eventually cast their votes for or against abortion. Gore promised he would appoint activist judges who would read into the Constitution a right to abortion. Mr. Bush stated he would appoint judges who would strictly follow the Constitution. These appointments would be judges, not legislators wearing black robes. Within the next four years it is likely that Mr. Bush will appoint one or more justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. For now, partial birth abortion survives only by one vote in the Supreme Court.
I was fortunate enough to view the battle from the inside looking outward. Liberty Counsel was involved in four separate election lawsuits. In the first case, Liberty Counsel served as local counsel in a federal lawsuit filed in Orlando. The suit claimed that the manual recounts violated the constitutional guarantee of equal protection. We argued that it is inappropriate to selectively target counties for a manual recount in a statewide election. If a manual recount were to proceed in a statewide election, the recount should be statewide. We also argued that the recount was unconstitutional because there were no standards and therefore the manual recounts violated equal protection. Indeed, the standards were made up from moment to moment and changed from person to person. Eventually in a separate suit, the United States Supreme Court agreed with this theory.
In three other suits Liberty Counsel defended the rights of absentee voters in Seminole and Martin Counties. In both counties, two Democratic Operatives filed suit seeking to disqualify fifteen thousand legally cast absentee ballots in Seminole County and ten thousand absentee ballots in Martin County. In Seminole County, approximately ten thousand voted for Bush and five thousand for Gore. In Martin County, about seven thousand voted for Bush and the rest for Gore. We represented the interests of all absentee voters. Even Democrats were outraged at their party for attempting to disqualify their votes.
We represented the interests of young college students who voted for the first time, and terminally ill people who voted for the last time. We represented the interests of disabled people who could not leave the confines of their home, poll workers who volunteered for fifteen or more hours to perform their civic duty, and military personnel. One of our clients was a sixty-six year old lady named Olga Powell. She was born in Nuremberg, Germany, during World War II and raised as a Hitler youth. She was taught to never protest against the government. She eventually married a U.S. military man and moved to this country by choice. She understands the right to vote and takes that right very seriously. When she joined our lawsuit, she said that this was the first time she had ever protested in her life, but she said the right to vote is so precious to her, she could not remain silent.
We received a call from a one hundred-year-old lady who lives in Seminole County. Her health is frail, but she wanted to make the trip to Tallahassee to testify in open court. Her doctor ultimately vetoed her request. She told her son that she didn’t care if the trip to Tallahassee killed her. She said to her son that her trip to Tallahassee is no different than someone fighting in a war for this country. She felt this was her war and she was willing to make the trip to Tallahassee even if the trip killed her.
The people I have met through this process have literally impacted my life forever. Fortunately we won both of our lawsuits at the trial level and both suits were unanimously affirmed on appeal before the Florida Supreme Court. In response to our win at the trial level, Senator Joseph Lieberman began writing his concession speech for the second time. He stopped when the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the manual recounts could continue. Four days later, the Florida Supreme Court ruled in our favor on the Seminole and Martin County cases. The twenty-five thousand absentee votes would not be disqualified. Several hours later the United States Supreme Court stopped the recount. The election was over.
I do not believe that Mr. Bush or anyone on the Bush campaign realized the depths to which Mr. Gore and his legal team would stoop in an attempt to steal the election. Mr. Gore and his legal team spouted one misstatement after another. During our trial on the Seminole County case, Gore addressed the American public and erroneously stated that the Seminole County Republican Supervisor of Elections had locked the doors to the Democrats and allowed the Republicans to alter ballots. He knew this was not correct and yet he propounded a lie anyway in an attempt to grab power. Although the votes in South Florida were counted and recounted, the continual misstatement of the Gore team was that the votes had not been counted. Yet in Seminole and Martin Counties where there was no question about the legally cast ballots, there was an attempt to disqualify twenty-five thousand votes. Gore also tried to disqualify the military absentee votes.
The strategy was nasty because the stakes were so high. The battle that we saw was physical but the real battle was spiritual. As I look back at the four week ordeal, this time in my life seems surreal. It was easy to lose track of time since we frequently worked from one day to the next with little or no sleep. Our files grew from nothing to thousands of pages in just a matter of days. The battle was long and tiring, but worth the effort. We ultimately defended the right to vote, but most importantly, the right to life.
Hope this helps you and your sister/brother Headless Loocy.
@51 ohh yeah! because all real news outlets are prejudiced against the right, and have a pinko agenda! How I forget…
Harry Poon. It’s a long post. When Goldy releases it you’ll see how your Glorious Gore lied and the press didn’t cover it.
49
A judge following the law instead of his personal beliefs is not schizophrenic, it’s his duty.
Of course, by the time Dubya gets done appointing judges, we won’t have to worry about judges following the law instead of their personal beliefs, because that ain’t gonna happen anymore.
Reply to 51
Sometimes the underdog is an underdog because he has an inferior product, and never has that been more true than in the case of U.S. conservatives.
Comment on 53
Putty For Brains, there is no correlation between the length of your posts and the validity of their content. Just thought I’d let you know.
Amazing how Dean Logan can sit and type answer after answer, non stop all day long. Do you let people have conversations, or do you just yap all day long?
PacMan @ 4
Jambo! Habari, Bwana PacMan.
Hey, I didn’t realize you knew Kiswahili. I picked up a few words when I was in Mombassa, Kenya back in the early 80’s.
Yep, I’m looking for you. Apparently, you’re avoiding the tough issues lately or you’re just being a voyeur. In the past you were very adamant that the Liberal antiwar protestors of the Viet Nam era disrespected our soldiers. Now, we have people like Larry Northerens who are running down Crosses with American flags and names of fallen US soldiers and nary a peep out of you.
Talking heads like Rush, O’Rielly and others are calling Cindy Sheehan everything but a white woman. Knowing how you felt about the way Viet Nam veterans were treated, would you speak that way to the mother of a fallen US soldier?
It looks like all that was sacrificed in Iraq is so that they can build an Islamic state where the “laws of Islam” cannot be contradicted? Is that the Noble Cause? Did 41 women soldiers die in Iraq so that women in Iraq can only be guaranteed an elementary school education? Where Shia Laws will allow women to be stoned to death for adultery, even if they are raped?
Is that why you’re supporting Bush’s policies? Is that what you want created in the middle east?
You’ve got retards on the blog like Michael who thinks it’s OK that the US military acquiesce to the interim Iraqi government telling us we cannot use tracked, armored vehicles in Baghdad because they screw up the roads. And yet, that’s exactly how Casey Sheehan died, coming to the aid of fellow soldier in a firefight in what amounts to a flat bed truck instead of a Bradley Fighting Vehicle. In fact, that day, 7 soldiers on that truck died because of that policy. Is that what you’re supporting? Our son’s and daughters dying because we don’t want to use armor in streets of Baghdad, is that what you want Bush to do because the interim Iraqi government said so?
All of this is what’s happening in Iraq. The rights Bullshit view that the MSM isn’t reporting all the “good” things that is being accomplished and so much progress is being made in Iraq is just a lie PacMan. You’re continued support of Bush supports policy that is killing our troops.
And those who support Bush, are not supporting our troops.
It is morally and politically wrong to continue supporting failed policy that is putting our troops in harms way without the proper troop strength, armor, vision, planning, purpose, or exit strategy. And, Bush is reducing veterans benefits. Do you support that too, PacMan.
Lots for you to answer. Lots of demons for you to confront.
Pudybud,
What’s the Pentagon’s spin on Able Danger today?
What has the Pentagon turned up with official records, dates, times?
Anything new?
Apparently Larry DiRita is backtracking on his words. Apparently there are at least four boxes found being delivered. I heard this on the radio.
Senate to investigate – http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,166800,00.html – “The congressman said he spoke to DiRita on Wednesday and that “he was backpedaling left and right,” claiming he was misquoted about the status of the search.
Weldon added that at least five people on the federal payroll will testify under oath about the validity of the Able Danger intelligence.”
But Clueless will call Senator Spector a freeper – Clueless – WAA – What an ass.
Navigate to Fox News Video from the same article and view the interview with Rep Weldon.
@52
Just what the world needs — more people. Yes, I personally oppose abortion on moral grounds. I’d be satisfied if we just promoted birth control in the Third World, which is eminently more philosophically acceptable to me than abortion. Buuuut … let’s not forget that in many societies the life support system can’t feed more mouths, and birth means death.
Also GBS: in the NY Times, the Spanish Investigators looking into the Madrid Train Bombing determined that Algerians Khaled Madani and Moussa Laouar provided false passports to Mohamed Atta and Ramzi bin al-Shibh.
“Spanish police last February arrested Algerians Khaled Madani, 33, and Moussa Laour, 36, on suspicion of furnishing phony passports to, among others, al Qaeda operatives Ramzi Binalshibh and Mohamed Atta. According to a February 29 Associated Press dispatch, Binalshibh revealed Madani’s identity to interrogators at the American military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Additional records further illuminate Iraqi complicity in the September 11 massacre. As a May 27 Wall Street Journal editorial reported, Ahmed Hikmat Shakir’s name appears on three different rosters of the late Uday Hussein’s prestigious paramilitary group, the Saddam Fedayeen. A government source told the Journal that the papers identify Shakir as a lieutenant colonel in the Saddam Fedayeen.
Shakir worked as a VIP airport greeter and facilitator for Malaysian Airlines at the airport in Kuala Lumpur, a position reputedly arranged by intelligence officers at Iraq’s Malaysian embassy. On January 5, 2000, Shakir allegedly welcomed Khalid al Midhar and Nawaz al Hamzi to Kuala Lampur and escorted them through immigration and on to the Kuala Lumpur Hotel. That’s where these September 11 hijackers met with 9/11 conspirators Ramzi bin al Shibh and Tawfiz al Atash. Five days later, according to The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes (he is also author of the new book The Connection), Shakir vanished.
On January 15, al Midhar and al Hamzi quietly flew from Hong Kong to Los Angeles. Nearly eight months later, they very loudly smashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon.
Saddam Fedayeen Lieutenant Colonel Shakir resurfaced on September 17, 2001, in Qatari handcuffs. His pockets and apartment yielded, among other things, phone numbers for the contacts and safe houses of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers. Shakir also possessed information on “Operation Bojinka,” al Qaeda’s 1995 conspiracy to explode 12 passenger jets simultaneously over the Pacific. Shakir passed from Qatari to Jordanian custody before being released after three months of Iraqi pressure. He reportedly returned to Saddam Hussein’s Baghdad.
Papers pulled from the Mukhabarat’s Baghdad headquarters indicate that Saddam Hussein’s intelligence operatives have known Mohamed Atta’s former boss for years.”
More “freepers per Clueless: http://www.defenddemocracy.org....._id=228666 – Also tells the money trail. Tying the Spanish connection, the money connection ring leaders and where Atta was, the 9/11 Commission is looking more stoopid each day. What if the 9/11 Commission alreay had an agenda? Now we see evidence being uncovered making their report look like bullshit. And yet don*****don still sticks to Conclusions 96 and 99? How did we have the pictures of these guys the same night of 9/11 within 24 hours of the attack? Able Danger information had to be more widely known than people are fessing up to. Now everyone is getting pantsed.
Remember the 9/11 Commission is trying to discredit him and these average American sources. If there are more people ready to come forth, wow!!!
GBS: The Goldy filter has struck so I will post paragraphs:
Also GBS: in the NY Times, the Spanish Investigators looking into the Madrid Train Bombing determined that Algerians Khaled Madani and Moussa Laouar provided false passports to Mohamed Atta and Ramzi bin al-Shibh. I think it was March 28, 2004. The pdf file locked up my computer.
GBS:”Spanish police last February arrested Algerians Khaled Madani, 33, and Moussa Laour, 36, on suspicion of furnishing phony passports to, among others, al Qaeda operatives Ramzi Binalshibh and Mohamed Atta. According to a February 29 Associated Press dispatch, Binalshibh revealed Madani’s identity to interrogators at the American military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
GBS: Where was this in the MSM? Additional records further illuminate Iraqi complicity in the September 11 massacre. As a May 27 Wall Street Journal editorial reported, Ahmed Hikmat Shakir’s name appears on three different rosters of the late Uday Hussein’s prestigious paramilitary group, the Saddam Fedayeen. A government source told the Journal that the papers identify Shakir as a lieutenant colonel in the Saddam Fedayeen.
GBS: Shakir worked as a VIP airport greeter and facilitator for Malaysian Airlines at the airport in Kuala Lumpur, a position reputedly arranged by intelligence officers at Iraq’s Malaysian embassy. On January 5, 2000, Shakir allegedly welcomed Khalid al Midhar and Nawaz al Hamzi to Kuala Lampur and escorted them through immigration and on to the Kuala Lumpur Hotel. That’s where these September 11 hijackers met with 9/11 conspirators Ramzi bin al Shibh and Tawfiz al Atash. Five days later, according to The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes (he is also author of the new book The Connection), Shakir vanished.
Goldy:
there is a “anti-discovery-institute” think tank. It can’t be exactly what you want, ’cause the opposite of “discovery” is real discovery, and that means the folks who run it are fundamentally incapable of the kind of start with the result and reason backwards kind of thinking that so frustrates us about the right-wing think tanks.
The institute is the National Center for Science Education, based in the Bay Area, run by Eugenie Scott.
http://www.ncseweb.org/
They do come out to places like Seattle to engage in evolution debates like the one you took on.
I know you also asked another question, which is why we can’t fight the way they do. But, the problem is, that I really don’t think we can, because the premise of my “left-wing” is inherently antithetical to the idea that you start with an idea and justify it.
bj
GBS:On January 15, al Midhar and al Hamzi quietly flew from Hong Kong to Los Angeles. Nearly eight months later, they very loudly smashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon.
GBS:Saddam Fedayeen Lieutenant Colonel Shakir resurfaced on September 17, 2001, in Qatari handcuffs. His pockets and apartment yielded, among other things, phone numbers for the contacts and safe houses of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers. Shakir also possessed information on “Operation Bojinka,” al Qaeda’s 1995 conspiracy to explode 12 passenger jets simultaneously over the Pacific. Shakir passed from Qatari to Jordanian custody before being released after three months of Iraqi pressure. He reportedly returned to Saddam Hussein’s Baghdad.
GBS:Papers pulled from the Mukhabarat’s Baghdad headquarters indicate that Saddam Hussein’s intelligence operatives have known Mohamed Atta’s former boss for years.”
More “freepers per Clueless: www. defenddemocracy . org/ in_the_media / in_the_media_show.htm?doc_id=228666 – Also tells the money trail. Tying the Spanish connection, the money connection ring leaders and where Atta was, the 9/11 Commission is looking more stoopid each day. What if the 9/11 Commission alreay had an agenda? Now we see evidence being uncovered making their report look like bullshit. And yet don*****don still sticks to Conclusions 96 and 99? How did we have the pictures of these guys the same night of 9/11 within 24 hours of the attack? Able Danger information had to be more widely known than people are fessing up to. Now everyone is getting pantsed.
Remember the 9/11 Commission is trying to discredit him and these average American sources. If there are more people ready to come forth, wow!!!
GBS: Ahhh the last paragraph the filter hates.
Papers pulled from the Mukhabarat’s Baghdad headquarters indicate that Saddam Hussein’s intelligence operatives have known Mohamed Atta’s former boss for years.”
GBS: More freepers per Clueless:
www. defend demo cracy . org / in _ the _ media / in _ the _ media _ show . htm ? doc _ id = 228666 – Also tells the money trail. Tying the Spanish connection, the money connection ring leaders and where Atta was, the 9/11 Commission is looking more stoopid each day. What if the 9/11 Commission alreay had an agenda? Now we see evidence being uncovered making their report look like bullshit. And yet don*****don still sticks to Conclusions 96 and 99? How did we have the pictures of these guys the same night of 9/11 within 24 hours of the attack? Able Danger information had to be more widely known than people are fessing up to. Now everyone is getting pantsed.
Remember the 9/11 Commission is trying to discredit him and these average American sources. If there are more people ready to come forth, wow!!!
What is it with the filter? More freepers per Clueless: There is another web site that tells the money trail. Tying the Spanish connection, the money connection ring leaders and where Atta was, the 9/11 Commission is looking more stoopid each day. What if the 9/11 Commission alreay had an agenda? Now we see evidence being uncovered making their report look like bullshit. And yet don*****don still sticks to Conclusions 96 and 99? How did we have the pictures of these guys the same night of 9/11 within 24 hours of the attack? Able Danger information had to be more widely known than people are fessing up to. Now everyone is getting pantsed.
Remember the 9/11 Commission is trying to discredit him and these average American sources. If there are more people ready to come forth, wow!!!
More freepers per Clueless: www . d e f e n d d e m o c r a c y . o r g / i n _ t h e _ m e d i a / i n _ t h e _ m e d i a _ s h o w . h t m ? d o c _ i d = 2 2 8 6 6 6 – A l s o t e l l s t h e m o n e y t r a i l . T y i n g t h e S p a n i s h c o n n e c t i o n , t h e m o n e y c o n n e c t i o n r i n g l e a d e r s a n d w h e r e A t t a w a s , t h e 9 / 1 1 C o m m i s s i o n i s l o o k i n g m o r e s t o o p i d e a c h d a y . W h a t i f t h e 9 / 1 1 C o m m i s s i o n a l r e a d y h a d a n a g e n d a ? N o w w e s e e e v i d e n c e b e i n g u n c o v e r e d m a k i n g t h e i r r e p o r t l o o k l i k e b u l l s h i t . A n d y e t d o n * * * * * d o n s t i l l s t i c k s t o C o n c l u s i o n s 9 6 a n d 9 9 ? H o w d i d w e h a v e t h e p i c t u r e s o f t h e s e g u y s t h e s a m e n i g h t o f 9 / 1 1 w i t h i n 2 4 h o u r s o f t h e a t t a c k ? A b l e D a n g e r i n f o r m a t i o n h a d t o b e m o r e w i d e l y k n o w n t h a n p e o p l e a r e f e s s i n g u p t o . N o w e v e r y o n e o n t h e C o m m i s s i o n i s g e t t i n g p a n t s e d .
R e m e m b e r t h e 9 / 1 1 C o m m i s s i o n i s t r y i n g t o d i s c r e d i t R e p . W e l d o n a n d t h e s e a v e r a g e A m e r i c a n s o u r c e s . I f t h e r e a r e m o r e p e o p l e r e a d y t o c o m e f o r t h , w o w ! ! !
S o r r y b u t t h e c o n c l u s i o n i s t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t p a r t !
Wow, Pud, you are on a tear.
So, a Justice of the Supreme Court should decide a case based upon his feelings, not the law. That is a new form of original intent, I have to give you that.
Second, a screed from a writer of the Chritian Times (interesting that you refused to cite to it or give the URL) without any cites proves what? Here, I’ll give you a much more respected source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08.....ugman.html
And, note, Mr. Krugman actually cites to evidence. And have you forgotten the sliming of John McCain that Bush did in South Carolina? Why is it that Bush can only win when he slimes War heros. Why do people like you and Bush hate our soldiers so much?
And since you are insisting on riding the Able Danger ride to hell, let’s turn to that well known socialist and Clintonista, Sen. Slade Gorton (R-WA):
GORTON: There was a policy established by Congress and by judges that you couldn’t use intelligence information gotten through one kind of — you know — of subpoena or wiretap in criminal prosecutions. It had nothing to do with sharing among agencies. And as you’ve rightly said, when it was finally taken down, you know, not by Ashcroft who just — who went along completely with what Jamie Gorelick said, but by The Patriot Act —
O’REILLY: Right.
GORTON: — that the court still tried to interfere with it until an appeals court finally ended that wall.
O’REILLY: OK.
GORTON: And today, we aren’t getting the kind of cooperation we ought to have.
O’REILLY: I think you and I agree on 90 percent of this issue, but there’s one thing we disagree on. And if you think about it overnight, I think you might see my point of view here. I’ll put forth where I think you’re making your mistake. And then I’ll give you the last word. There was a culture created when Janet Reno was attorney general. And we know this. She refused to investigate the Chinese contributions to our political campaigns; the Riyadi family; she refused to get involved with any kind of overseas intelligence, vis-a-vis people on U.S. soil. She flat-out wouldn’t do it.
Jamie Gorelick was one of her top deputies who bought into this entirely. The message was sent: If you have stuff overseas, intelligence overseas, don’t bother us with it. And I believe that firmly. Senator, I’ll give you the last word, sir.
GORTON: We agree on a number of things. I’m no defender of Janet Reno as an attorney general. But what I’m telling you is that the wall was created by laws sponsored by the Church Committee back in the 1970s. And they went all the way through until after 9-11 was over. And that nothing Jamie Gorelick wrote had the slightest impact on the Department of Defense or its willingness or ability to share intelligence information with other intelligence agencies.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200508230008
Yep a paranoid freak trying to sell books is much more reliable than him. Read the whole interview, it is very illuminating. And Media Matters is nice enough to have the video up.
And, if like Rush Limbaugh, you believe that all this shows is that the 9/11 commission is at fault…, who set up the commission? Oh, right, George W. Bush. Not that he would want to hide anything, eh?
JDB: I am going to use my dj writing skills.
Krugman as a respected source? Ha ha ha ha ha. Since you read NRO, do you compare their responses to the “great krugman”? They destroy him every day. He is so full of bullshit that it ooses from his pores. I stated evidence. You missed it? Your side will not acknowledge that Gore tried to fuck the process up in Florida with lies, lawsuits, and misstatements that old Democrats were pissed off. Who started the lawsuit process? Who wanted a partial recound in Democratic counties? Who tried to stack the deck? Where were the voting problems – Democratic precincts and counties! Your people caused Gore to lose. But that being said – Why didn’t Gore win his own home fucking state – Tennessee? Because they saw he was a jerk, spineless, and a schmuck! And you just gloss that off?
Regarding the commission? No your side has been trying to say the intell failure is Condi’s Fault. Shall I dig up the NY Times articles? You know I’ll sling it and it will stick. Well if the intell was so fucked up b4 Condi got there, and there were walls to stop the information flow, I want to know about it and stop the fucking coverup by these commission members who are so worried about their place in history vs. the truth. I still ask why was Ben Veniste and Gorelick there? To stop the information flow by your side!!!! Remember Bush said okay a commisssion but each side chose the members. Regarding the 1970’s, who chaired the Church Commission – YOUR SIDE. Who controlled congress – your side. Who was President then – Jimi Cahhrter.
Please lefties, please keep trying to ignore the truth about Atta and YR 2000. I await the final stuff but as these leaks get more prevalent, it looks worse for your side. Did you view the videos on the Fox News site? No, well why not? It may show your thin ice argument is getting waterlogged?
It sure is amazing when you swear the post goes through without problems.
Puddybud @ 79.
Oh? Did you swear? I hadn’t noticed.
Thanks Puddybud, interesting read on what may have transpired back in the 90’s. You’re very passionate about getting to the bottom of this story. I appreciate that.
I haven’t heard or read anything yet, maybe you have, that would indicate how actionable this information was at the time. In other words, were there hundreds if not thousands of other identities mined through Able Danger and this is a case of hindsight being 20/20, or was this so narrowly defined that someone could have, easily apprehended Atta?
Also, how does that square up with Porter Goss’ statement earlier this year, saying he was reasonably sure he knew where to find OSL?
Isn’t that a little more relevant to the situation today, then say what data was mined in the 90’s?
In 2000 we didn’t really know that Atta was going to smash planes into the WTC. But, we are in Afghanistan today because we know for certain that OSL ordered the attack on the United States. I may be overreaching here, but I’d think you’d be a little more interested in why Bush hasn’t acted on Porter Goss’ information pertaining to the location of the most wanted man by American forces.
You are more keenly interested in Porter Goss’ intel on OSL whereabouts today, than a memo Jamie Gorelick wrote way back when, aren’t you?
Good question GBS: You are a level headed political adversary. What Porter Goss said was dumb, but not stoopid. But that being said, I think of the four Seals who recently died. If they were going after him on actionable evidence, and the helicopter went down with 16 more Special Forces troops, I think they were on the OBL trail.
Regarding the Atta question, why not bring him in and question him? Because of the wall? They were not citizens. Ask what he was doing? Put pressure on him? Try and find out why he was taking flying lessons? If we were going after Al Qaeda why were we not going after Al Qaeda? See my differentiation?
At least you are honest to look at it honestly. WHy do you think I defer to you. I watched the PacMan/GBS exchanges and I reevaluated you. BUt that being said, JDB and Clueless are truly clueless.
DJ: Sometimes you shed being Charmin and you be funny!!!
GBS Wrote: Jambo! Habari, Bwana PacMan.
Hey, I didn’t realize you knew Kiswahili. I picked up a few words when I was in Mombassa, Kenya back in the early 80’s.
PacMan answers: Yes I know more than I let on!
GBS Wrote: Yep, I’m looking for you. Apparently, you’re avoiding the tough issues lately or you’re just being a voyeur. In the past you were very adamant that the Liberal antiwar protestors of the Viet Nam era disrespected our soldiers. Now, we have people like Larry Northerens who are running down Crosses with American flags and names of fallen US soldiers and nary a peep out of you.
PacMan answers: Not totally in voyeur mode, but I had some jobs to do and I did call Black & Decker! Larry is an ass. Is that plain enough for you? But the crosses are disrespectful to other parents. They said so.
GBS Wrote: Talking heads like Rush, O’Rielly and others are calling Cindy Sheehan everything but a white woman. Knowing how you felt about the way Viet Nam veterans were treated, would you speak that way to the mother of a fallen US soldier?
PacMan answers: No I watched O’Reilly. He didn’t say that. The MSM made some assumptions. Bill is smarter than that. Look at his transcripts. Rush, well I haven’t listened to him all the time so I can’t say. But she is using her son for her own gain. He volunteered to go. How many people know that?
GBS Wrote: It looks like all that was sacrificed in Iraq is so that they can build an Islamic state where the “laws of Islam” cannot be contradicted? Is that the Noble Cause? Did 41 women soldiers die in Iraq so that women in Iraq can only be guaranteed an elementary school education? Where Shia Laws will allow women to be stoned to death for adultery, even if they are raped?
PacMan answers: I agree about Sharia law sucks. I think their view of humans is backward. I just saw on Reuters that the constitution is done. I wasit to see it.
GBS Wrote: Is that why you’re supporting Bush’s policies? Is that what you want created in the middle east?
PacMan answers: No. I support killing terrorists off of US soil. Most lefties want them here so they say pull out of Iraq.
GBS Wrote: You’ve got retards on the blog like Michael who thinks it’s OK that the US military acquiesce to the interim Iraqi government telling us we cannot use tracked, armored vehicles in Baghdad because they screw up the roads. And yet, that’s exactly how Casey Sheehan died, coming to the aid of fellow soldier in a firefight in what amounts to a flat bed truck instead of a Bradley Fighting Vehicle. In fact, that day, 7 soldiers on that truck died because of that policy. Is that what you’re supporting? Our son’s and daughters dying because we don’t want to use armor in streets of Baghdad, is that what you want Bush to do because the interim Iraqi government said so?
Not being a military man, if you say that’s what happened then I agree with you in your assessment. We go where we want and say WTF to everything else. Protect our troops.
GBS Wrote: All of this is what’s happening in Iraq. The rights Bullshit view that the MSM isn’t reporting all the “good” things that is being accomplished and so much progress is being made in Iraq is just a lie PacMan. You’re continued support of Bush supports policy that is killing our troops.
PacMan answers: Did you see the interview between Matt Lauer and the Army Captain last week. He said he would be demoralized if he read the news printed by the MSM.
GBS Wrote: And those who support Bush, are not supporting our troops.
PacMan answers: Now GBS that’s utter bullshit.
GBS Wrote: It is morally and politically wrong to continue supporting failed policy that is putting our troops in harms way without the proper troop strength, armor, vision, planning, purpose, or exit strategy. And, Bush is reducing veterans benefits. Do you support that too, PacMan.
PacMan answers: What do you suggest? We leave let the terrorists say they won? Let them amass and come over here? Please tell me and don’t spout the three points of rujax206.
GBS Wrote: Lots for you to answer. Lots of demons for you to confront.
PacMan answers: I did. Vidi vini vici. I came, I saw, and I conquered.
Lets just say I’m happy with Krugman as a source compared to yours, that you had to hide. I will also note again that Krugman’s article is sourced, and not even a great wingnut like you can argue with his conclusions.
But, if we wish to discuss thuggery in Florida, have you forgotten the mob of Republian Staffers that were sent down to close down the recount? I doubt it, but here’s there wonderful picture and identities:
http://politicalhumor.about.co.....gopmob.htm
How embarrasing to be you. However, it is nice to see you stumble into the truth: Yep, but for democratic errors, Gore did win the election.
As for intel failures, it wasn’t Condi’s fault (although, lets face it, it wasn’t something she cared much about), she did after all put the memo in front of Bush that told him that Bin Laden was planning an attack on the US. It was Bush who blew that.
Why were Veniste and Gorelick on the commission? Because, as you have pointed out, they had the experience. And if they were there to protect the Dems, why did Gorton et al allow them to do it? You, Limbaugh and O’Reily must be the first to ever consider him a non-partisan dupe. We know Limbaugh is a druggy, and O’Reily is a perv, what’s your problem? Or is it just stupidity?
Again, as Gorton said, the wall just prevented the use of intel in prosecutions, nothing else. It did not prevent the sharing of intel. As Gorton pointed out, there is no evidence that the Able Danger people brought Atta to their attention. And as I have posted serveral times, if there was an Atta in the Able Danger material, it more likely was a different Atta (which would explain a lot).
And, isn’t it interesting that so far, every time someone tries to pin down this story, the people who have come forward say, well, no I didn’t see it, but I was told that it was there. Come on, Pud, you are smarter than this. That or you better check your pipes, you must be getting a ton of lead or mecury to explain your problems.
Damn Goldy, modify your stupid filter. What did I say that the system puked on? Please identify the words. Tell us what words your system keys on. Put the link on the side of the master web page. Some of us write cohesive paragraphs while others barely say worthwhile things.
GBS: It’s under review. Now you see why I have slowed down on my writings.
Puddybud,
The question I’m trying to put forward regarding Atta is this: was the information so broad that you’d litterally have to question hundreds, perhaps thousands of foreginers that it would be akin to finding a needle in a haystack, or, was the informaiton generated by Able Danger so precise as to warrant bringing in just a hanful of people?
If the former vs. the latter is true, briging in so many Arabs / muslims, it would have triggered all the warning flags with those terrorist cells. Greatly reducing the probability of an effective interception.
Have you heard of any information out there as to how narrowly defined Able Danger identified terrorists?
JDB: Did you read the National Geographic documentary? They stated they could not pass the info. WHat Gorton says is bullshit also. Everyone in those days said they could not pass on information. Mary White complained about the wall in 1995? Sharing of intell! Did you miss that too? So what don’t you get? So you want links? Well here you go.
FYI the link is: http://www.lc.org/radiotv/nlj/nlj0201.htm. Fully there.
And you can see this: archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/12/06/absentee.lawsuit.civ/
Here too:
http://www.overlawyered.com/ar.....ml#001215c
Here too a nice chronology:
http://www.workablepeace.org/voting/covenant.htm
These should keep you busy.
“Air America Radio’s number of online listeners grew by 50% from January to May 2005 with the average daily number going from 18,710 in January to 28,091 in May.”
Just about anyone besides Prell beats those numbers.
PacMan,
Don’t blame Goldy’s filters. Didn’t you hear about the provision mandated by the federal government that all emails, blogs, posting etc have to pass through the federal governments filter due to the Patriot Act?
Check out this link:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/p.....ilter.html
Yep, that one is 100%, take it to the bank, no doubt about it, true. Just as sure as I’m part black, from belt line to mid thigh!
PacMan,
I gotta leave the office for a while. I’ll check back in towards the end of the day for your rebuttal.
In the mean time, I’ll talk to ‘da man, and see if I can pull some strings to have you upgraded to, you know, “club level” seats.
Thanks for the link. Wow that’s new. Amazing. I remember you saying that you have black-like equpment. I bet Mrs. GBS is a happy person. No Enzyte? Your middle name isn’t Bob from the Enzyte commercial?
@17
You need to fill your bong again.
C’mon PacMan,
You didn’t really think that was a real link did you? That was just a gag. Federal government filter and the Patriot Act and all.
Remember, I also confessed that I wasn’t quite hangin’ wang east coast style either. It’s just funny to tell that to people for their expressions. Especially black guys (I never pull that one around women). When you say “Oh yeah, I’m part black.” And, they say, “Really? You don’t look like you’re part black.” Then gesture with your hands form belt to thigh and say “Only from here to here though.”
Crack’s ’em up every time. I think when people know you recognize that we’re all different, and you’re willing to break the barriers with the stupidty of sterotypes, they can’t help to open up to you.
See, you can do the same joke in reverse PacMan. You say “Yeah, I’m part white, too.” Except here you’re going to have bust right into the punch line because no white person is going to say you don’t look part white. After you do the hand gesture then you just say “I can’t jump either.”
Yeah, after 19 years with the same man I guess the Mrs is happy. Like I said, if I were standing naked in the forest nobody would mistake me for an elephant, but they wouldn’t think it was morrell mushroom season either. You know, too hot, too cold, ahhhh just right.
OK, this cagy sob will check back later.
P.S. No my middle name isn’t Bob, either. The “B” is for behemoth.
Later.
Goldy~
You must be following what’s going on at uSP and Stefan’s article on Intelligent Design. I haven’t had this much fun in a comments section in a long time. It’s not that these people aren’t thoughtful (well, some of them are). It’s fascinating to watch their twists and turns in an attempt to be logical and consistent. One guy literally told me that William Dembski was wrong about ID. Dembski created ID, but to keep from being inconsistent, this guy had to tell me that Dembski was wrong. Really, this is way too much fun.
PacMan,
Did you really post????
Or are you just buying time and trying to blame our good friend, Goldy?
Did you use the word d-u-m-m-o-c-r-a-p? That’s no, no in the blog-o-filter.
Check ya later,
I will call you Behemoth now. So Behemoth that was funny. No I didn’t realize that was a crappy link.
Yes I posted.
Dembski created ID, but to keep from being inconsistent, this guy had to tell me that Dembski was wrong.
You realize that the Evolution of today bears little resemblance to Darwin’s Evolution. Darwin was just plain wrong about a whole lot of things. The theory evolves, pardon the pun, to fit the new evidence.
PacMan’s released post is 84 GBS. Interesting answers.
Hey JDB: Looks like Krugman has to make corrections to his economic and voting columns. Didn’t think I’d find them, huh. He is a stupid joke of an economist. And he’s a real ass. Well he does write for the NYT
You keep using him JDB> I’ll continue to commisserate with GBS, a smarter lefty.
PacMan, PacMan, PacMan,
Vidi vini vici. I see this one is going to be like our debate on racism, which by the way I clearly won.
Here’s a real link to a USA Today story:
http://www.usatoday.com/printe.....15.art.htm
Below is a passage that in one paragraph reinforces everything I stated in our exchanges as fact, but this time the words are flowing out of the RNC Chairs mouth, Ken Mehlman.
“Mehlman’s apology to the NAACP at the group’s convention in Milwaukee marked the first time a top Republican Party leader has denounced the so-called Southern Strategy employed by Richard Nixon and other Republicans to peel away white voters in what was then the heavily Democratic South. Beginning in the mid-1960s, Republicans encouraged disaffected Southern white voters to vote Republican by blaming pro-civil rights Democrats for racial unrest and other racial problems.”
The point of this is not to rub your nose in the proverbial dog shit, but rather to serve as a reminder that you should temper your victory dance until after I’m counted out. Know what I mean, Apollo? (OK, honestly there is a side benefit to rubbing your nose in it too.)
OK, now that I know, that you know, that I know that I’m inside your head, where should I begin? By putting up some sound dampening material on these walls in here to stop the echoes.
Actually, I’m going to start with this. How’s you’re summer been going? Busy obviously, traveling to Texas and all, I’ve missed our lively debates. You’re one tough cookie, but chocolate chip is my favorite. That sounds creepy doesn’t it?
Ding, ding.
PacMan wrote: Not totally in voyeur mode, but I had some jobs to do and I did call Black & Decker! Larry is an ass. Is that plain enough for you? But the crosses are disrespectful to other parents. They said so.
GBS replies: I didn’t realize the other parents said the crosses were disrespectful. How many are making that statement? And, is it because they are not siding with Cindy Sheehan or do they object to Christian symbols? Perhaps some of the names on the Crosses were Jewish? I honestly don’t know about this. Thanks for being honest about Larry’s despicable acts.
PacMan wrote: No I watched O’Reilly. He didn’t say that. The MSM made some assumptions. Bill is smarter than that. Look at his transcripts. Rush, well I haven’t listened to him all the time so I can’t say. But she is using her son for her own gain. He volunteered to go. How many people know that?
GBS replies: OK, I’m going to give on this one slightly and restate my position. Bill doesn’t say it directly, but after reading the transcripts, he says that trough 3rd parties, implications, or inferring she’s unstable, ill, and being “used.” And, Maulkin on Bill’s show did say her son wouldn’t want her doing this. Neither knew her son, his politics, or his view on Bush’s policies. I think a mother would know best what her son would approve of. Rush is all over the board and plenty of conservative writers, bloggers, have said treason and traitor in their comments referring to Cindy Sheehan. Now, since you made the comment “But she is using her son for her own gain.” I’d like you to expound on it; specifically, how is Cindy Sheehan “using her son,” and what is she “gaining?”
PacMan wrote: I agree about Sharia law sucks. I think their view of humans is backward. I just saw on Reuters that the constitution is done. I wasit to see it.
GBS replies: A) The constitution isn’t done. B) If they don’t get one submitted by Oct. 15 then the entire parliament is set aside and a new election for the seats are voted on again in December. Putting us back to square 1 from this year’s Jan 30 elections – no leaders, no parliament and no constitution. C.) If they manage to submit a constitution to parliament by the Oct 15th deadline and there is a national referendum on it in December, it can be entirely rejected if 3 out of the 18 provinces reject it by 2/3 votes in each of the dissenting provinces. D) Sunni’s control 4 provinces. E) “Sharia Law sucks.” PacMan, I’ve got to say as an ex-military man, you’re comment is extremely offensive. I’m not being off the cuff here either. IF, Sharia Law comes the law of the land in Iraq, then the deaths of our soldiers will be for Islam. And when our soldiers die to promote Islam, particularly a “backward” view of humanity in Islam, then George Bush is the only person in the US who is responsible for our soldiers dying to create such a society. Now I ask again: “Is that why you’re supporting Bush’s policies? Is that what you want created in the middle east?”
PacMan wrote: No. I support killing terrorists off of US soil. Most lefties want them here so they say pull out of Iraq.
GBS replies: This contradicts your opening statement “Yes I know more than I let on!” enough said.
PacMan wrote: Not being a military man, if you say that’s what happened then I agree with you in your assessment. We go where we want and say WTF to everything else. Protect our troops.
GBS replies: Please contact your congressman, senators and the president. This is happening PacMan. It is exactly how Casey Sheehan and 6 others died. Now, I’m not saying they would have survived that day with armor, NO ONE can make that claim. When you’re fully engaged in a firefight anything can happen, and usually does. For me personally, announcing to everyone “here I come” by rambling into a firefight with armor isn’t my style: carpo noctanter!
GBS Wrote: And those who support Bush, are not supporting our troops.
PacMan answers: Now GBS that’s utter bullshit.
GBS replies: If Iraq becomes an Islamic state and our soldiers died creating a government that Osama Bin Laden would approve of, then, no PacMan, it won’t be utter bullshit, it will be the simple truth. At this very moment one of us is clearly on the absolute wrong side of history. An Islamic state, or a non-functioning government, or civil war in Iraq is going put you on the wrong side of history, unqualified democracy, freedom and security as W explained it in Iraq will make me wrong. We’re going to find out sooner, rather than later.
I also noticed you opted not to address this one , PacMan: “And, Bush is reducing veterans benefits. Do you support that too, PacMan?”
PacMan answers: I did. Vidi vini vici. I came, I saw, and I conquered.
GBS replies: You came, You saw, and You were countered, not conquered. Typo on your part I’m sure.
Damn, I’m in filter hold. My reply should be out soon, hopefully.
Pudbud, let’s post the correction:
“Also, the public editor says, rightly, that I should acknowledge initially misstating the results of the 2000 Florida election study by a media consortium led by The Miami Herald. Unlike a more definitive study by a larger consortium that included The New York Times, an analysis that showed Al Gore winning all statewide manual recounts, the earlier study showed him winning two out of three. ”
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08.....038;emc=th
Yep, So of the big studies, Gore wins in all three recount senarios by the large consortium, but under the Miami Herald recount, he just wins in two out of three scenarios. Major correction there. Still looks like my point is a hundred times more solid than yours, which still has not cites to back it up.
Still waiting for a follow up on how the Air Force chased away a three arabs with shoulder fired missles in the US, but couldn’t arrest them. You would think that someone other than a far right kook would have posted something on it by now, don’t you think?
Goldy,
Can I get a witness? When do you think you can release my post?
Thank you,
PacMan,
Was that it? One round and you don’t answer the bell? C’mon I’m just getting warmed up.
So why didn’t Gore ask for a statewide recount?
I have a substantually large rod in my genital area.