Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
So Much For Kerry's Iraq 'Plan'
Even if he wins, France and Germany aren't gonna send troops. So I said, and so they say:
(Hat tip: Dan Drezner)
Even if he wins, France and Germany aren't gonna send troops. So I said, and so they say:
"I cannot imagine that there will be any change in our decision not to send troops, whoever becomes president," Gert Weisskirchen, member of parliament and foreign policy expert for Germany's ruling Social Democratic Party, said in an interview...There goes one quarter of that plan.
Michel Barnier, the French foreign minister, said last week that France, which has tense relations with interim prime minister Iyad Allawi, had no plans to send troops "either now or later".
(Hat tip: Dan Drezner)
Mmmm, Earthquake
I barely felt it, but I could tell it was decent sized from the length of the shaking. Turns out it was a 6.0. Nice.
I barely felt it, but I could tell it was decent sized from the length of the shaking. Turns out it was a 6.0. Nice.
Monday, September 27, 2004
More From Our 'Allies'
France is putting conditions on its attendance at an international conference on Iraq:
France is putting conditions on its attendance at an international conference on Iraq:
France said Monday that it would take part in a proposed international conference on Iraq only if the agenda included a possible U.S. troop withdrawal, thus complicating the planning for a meeting that has drawn mixed reactions.So France demands we put a possible civil war on the table in order to discuss things, and wants to bring Zarqawi to the bargaining table too. Unsurprising.
Paris also wants representatives of Iraq's insurgent groups to be invited to a conference in October or November, a call that would seem difficult for the Bush administration to accept.
I Think Kerry's Awful
But the people on the Iowa Electronic Markets seem to think even less of him...Zoinks.
But the people on the Iowa Electronic Markets seem to think even less of him...Zoinks.
A Little Rumbly
Mt. St. Helens is showing signs of waking up. Better than Rainier, I suppose. I thought Shasta was about due too...
Mt. St. Helens is showing signs of waking up. Better than Rainier, I suppose. I thought Shasta was about due too...
Add This to The List
Among a slew of others, John Kerry has now accused Bush of a 'secret plan' to hurt dairy farmers.
Among a slew of others, John Kerry has now accused Bush of a 'secret plan' to hurt dairy farmers.
Kerry said Bush is opposing an effort to extend the Milk Income Loss Contract that helps dairy farmers when milk prices drop and is set to expire in October 2005. He said the Bush administration would wait until after the election to act so voters in swing dairy states wouldn't turn against him.Add it to the list, which is getting pretty ridiculously long. That's a bunch of 'secret plans' there, John.
Sunday, September 26, 2004
Yup, These Are Our Allies
Pussies.
Pussies.
The German military has pulled out of the U.S. Army’s annual Land Combat Expo, protesting an opinion piece written by a controversial retired U.S. officer slated to be a guest speaker at next week’s event.Yeah, it's not like your Chancellor got elected by running purely on anti-Americanism...
Saturday, September 25, 2004
David Brooks
I love this guy, one of the few NYTimes columnists I can say that about. And he sticks it to the UN today:
I love this guy, one of the few NYTimes columnists I can say that about. And he sticks it to the UN today:
The resolution passed, and it was a good day for alliance-nurturing and burden-sharing - for the burden of doing nothing was shared equally by all. And we are by now used to the pattern. Every time there is an ongoing atrocity, we watch the world community go through the same series of stages: (1) shock and concern (2) gathering resolve (3) fruitless negotiation (4) pathetic inaction (5) shame and humiliation (6) steadfast vows to never let this happen again.What's the point of the UN again?
The "never again" always comes. But still, we have all agreed, this sad cycle is better than having some impromptu coalition of nations actually go in "unilaterally" and do something. That would lack legitimacy! Strain alliances! Menace international law! Threaten the multilateral ideal!
It's a pity about the poor dead people in Darfur. Their numbers are still rising, at 6,000 to 10,000 a month.
Friday, September 24, 2004
Kerry the Diplomat
Blogger lost this post before, but here we go again.
One of the claims John Kerry repeatedly makes in this campaign is that he would perform far better in the diplomatic arena than Bush. Let’s review some of his ‘moments’ during this campaign.
First, in Rolling Stone, he claimed our coalition of over forty nations was”fraudulent.” I’m sure those nations appreciated that.
Next, he began calling our allies in Iraq a ”trumped-up, so-called coalition of the bribed, the coerced, the bought and the extorted...” Not very diplomatic, Senator. I’m sure the UK, Poland, and Australia might disagree.
Later, Kerry’s sister, while campaigning in Australia, said “we are endangering the Australians now by this wanton disregard for international law and multilateral channels.” Huh. I could have sworn that bombing in Bali happened long before the invasion of Iraq. Nice fear-mongering directed at the Australians, though.
Finally, Joe Lockhart sounded remarkably like Moqtada al-Sadr yesterday, saying that the UN-endorsed Prime Minister of Iraq was a ”puppet of the United States.”
Some spectacular displays of diplomacy, Senator Kerry. Makes me skeptical of your talent in that area, though.
Blogger lost this post before, but here we go again.
One of the claims John Kerry repeatedly makes in this campaign is that he would perform far better in the diplomatic arena than Bush. Let’s review some of his ‘moments’ during this campaign.
First, in Rolling Stone, he claimed our coalition of over forty nations was”fraudulent.” I’m sure those nations appreciated that.
Next, he began calling our allies in Iraq a ”trumped-up, so-called coalition of the bribed, the coerced, the bought and the extorted...” Not very diplomatic, Senator. I’m sure the UK, Poland, and Australia might disagree.
Later, Kerry’s sister, while campaigning in Australia, said “we are endangering the Australians now by this wanton disregard for international law and multilateral channels.” Huh. I could have sworn that bombing in Bali happened long before the invasion of Iraq. Nice fear-mongering directed at the Australians, though.
Finally, Joe Lockhart sounded remarkably like Moqtada al-Sadr yesterday, saying that the UN-endorsed Prime Minister of Iraq was a ”puppet of the United States.”
"The last thing you want to be seen as is a puppet of the United States, and you can almost see the hand underneath the shirt today moving the lips," said Joe Lockhart, a senior Kerry adviser.
Some spectacular displays of diplomacy, Senator Kerry. Makes me skeptical of your talent in that area, though.
Thursday, September 23, 2004
If This Theory Pans Out...
...this will have huge repercussions, scientific, environmentally, and economically.
Cool stuff...
...this will have huge repercussions, scientific, environmentally, and economically.
Cool stuff...
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Realign the UN
In the comments, Dale points to this article, about an attempted shakeup at the UN:
However, I actually agree with three of those four, excepting Germany. And I see no reason that France needs or deserves its seat on the council. The US, Britain, Russia, China, India, Brazil, and Japan suits me just fine, and reflects a better regional and economic makeup than the current one. Though the goobers at the UN would probably throw Egypt or Zimbabwe in the mix, just to be able to fawn over another dictator.
In the comments, Dale points to this article, about an attempted shakeup at the UN:
Brazil, Germany, Japan and India have launched a joint bid for permanent seats on the UN Security Council.Dale rightly points out that the veto system would need some reforming if this were to occur, though I don't see how the UN could actually accomplish less than it already does.
However, I actually agree with three of those four, excepting Germany. And I see no reason that France needs or deserves its seat on the council. The US, Britain, Russia, China, India, Brazil, and Japan suits me just fine, and reflects a better regional and economic makeup than the current one. Though the goobers at the UN would probably throw Egypt or Zimbabwe in the mix, just to be able to fawn over another dictator.
Kerry Drops the 'D'-Word
Yup, John Kerry thinks we're all chumps:
Really, John, we're not all as dumb as you look. Many of us know that there are currently bills in both the House (HR163) and the Senate (S89) that, if passed, would bring back the draft. Many of us also know that those bills were proposed by Democrats with the intent of discouraging support for the Iraq war, and are not backed by the Pentagon or the President. So shove your "the President might bring back the draft" insinuations, and go talk to the members of your own damn party.
Yup, John Kerry thinks we're all chumps:
Answering a question about the draft at a forum with voters in West Palm Beach, Fla., Kerry said, "If George Bush were to be re-elected, given the way he has gone about this war and given his avoidance of responsibility in North Korea and Iran and other places, is it possible? I can't tell you."
Really, John, we're not all as dumb as you look. Many of us know that there are currently bills in both the House (HR163) and the Senate (S89) that, if passed, would bring back the draft. Many of us also know that those bills were proposed by Democrats with the intent of discouraging support for the Iraq war, and are not backed by the Pentagon or the President. So shove your "the President might bring back the draft" insinuations, and go talk to the members of your own damn party.
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
You've GOT To Be Kidding Me!
Dan Rather has lost it. That's all I can think when reading this.
He STILL doesn't think they're forged? BLARGH!! And CBS allows you to cover news, and broadcast it to millions every night?
Another movie scene brought to mind by this example of complete congnitive dissonance:
Dan Rather's standing there bleeding on all of us, still thinking he's invincible.
I did find this quote telling, though:
Update: At least somebody else agrees:
Dan Rather has lost it. That's all I can think when reading this.
In an interview Monday evening, a repentant Rather conceded it had been a mistake to broadcast the documents. But even though he could not vouch for their authenticity, he said he still did not believe that they were fakes.
"Do I think they're forged? No," Rather said. "But it's not good enough to use the documents on the air if we can't vouch for them, and we can't vouch for them."
He STILL doesn't think they're forged? BLARGH!! And CBS allows you to cover news, and broadcast it to millions every night?
Another movie scene brought to mind by this example of complete congnitive dissonance:
ARTHUR: I command you as King of the Britons to stand aside!
BLACK KNIGHT: I move for no man.
ARTHUR: So be it!
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's left arm off]
ARTHUR: Now stand aside, worthy adversary.
BLACK KNIGHT: 'Tis but a scratch.
ARTHUR: A scratch? Your arm's off!
BLACK KNIGHT: No, it isn't.
ARTHUR: Well, what's that then?
BLACK KNIGHT: I've had worse.
ARTHUR: You liar!
BLACK KNIGHT: Come on you pansy!
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's right arm off]
ARTHUR: Victory is mine! We thank thee Lord, that in thy merc-
[Black Knight kicks Arthur in the head while he is praying]
BLACK KNIGHT: Come on then.
ARTHUR: What?
BLACK KNIGHT: Have at you!
ARTHUR: You are indeed brave, Sir knight, but the fight is mine.
BLACK KNIGHT: Oh, had enough, eh?
ARTHUR: Look, you stupid bastard, you've got no arms left.
BLACK KNIGHT: Yes I have.
ARTHUR: Look!
BLACK KNIGHT: Just a flesh wound.
[Headbutts Arthur in the chest]
ARTHUR: Look, stop that.
BLACK KNIGHT: Chicken! Chicken!
ARTHUR: Look, I'll have your leg. Right!
ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's leg off]
BLACK KNIGHT: Right, I'll do you for that!
ARTHUR: You'll what?
BLACK KNIGHT: Come 'ere!
ARTHUR: What are you going to do, bleed on me?
BLACK KNIGHT: I'm invincible!
ARTHUR: You're a loony.
BLACK KNIGHT: The Black Knight always triumphs! Have at you! Come on then.
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's other leg off]
BLACK KNIGHT: All right; we'll call it a draw.
Dan Rather's standing there bleeding on all of us, still thinking he's invincible.
I did find this quote telling, though:
"I believed in it," he said. "I wouldn't have put it on the air if I hadn't of believed in it."You believed it because you WANTED it to be true, Dan. It fit your worldview, and so you ran with it, against expert advice. Whatever happens to you, you deserve it. And I'm not gonna call it a draw.
Update: At least somebody else agrees:
In reponse to these brouhahas and the National Guard story, conservative media critics have demanded blood. They charge that Rather's careless muckraking belies a liberal bias, but it's actually much worse than that. Rather isn't a liberal hack. He's bonkers.
Nazis, Commies, and Facists
Oh my!
I'm a third-party guy, so I understand the frustration the two-party system brings with it. However, I don't think the two party system is inherently bad. Rather, I think we're just stuck with the two wrong parties. I'd rather we be stuck with a fiscally-conservative/socially-liberal party and either of the two major parties. But we're not.
However, things like this are why I'm highly supportive of our first-past-the-post/winner-take-all election system.
Now, far be it from me to cry over Mr. Schroeder getting his butt handed to him. But when it comes with the price tag of facists and communists returning to legitimacy in Germany, I get a bit worried. Germany is intimately familiar with both, and the re-acceptance of both is a little scary.
Our system marginalizes extremists on both sides. Some could call the Libertarian Party extremist, and I'd actually agree. I'd encourage a much slower transition to the Libertarian ideal of gov't than upheaval the party currently espouses. Unfortunately, that's not how they style themselves. Oh well. But I'd much rather live in a system where the center has significantly more power than those on the fringes, which seems to happen quite often in parliamentiary/proportional systems.
Oh my!
I'm a third-party guy, so I understand the frustration the two-party system brings with it. However, I don't think the two party system is inherently bad. Rather, I think we're just stuck with the two wrong parties. I'd rather we be stuck with a fiscally-conservative/socially-liberal party and either of the two major parties. But we're not.
However, things like this are why I'm highly supportive of our first-past-the-post/winner-take-all election system.
On Sunday September 19th, the National Democratic Party (NPD), which the German government has compared with the Nazis, attracted 9.2% of the vote in Saxony’s regional elections—the first time the party has won seats in any state assembly since 1968.
In the neighbouring state of Brandenburg, another far-right party, the German People's Union (DVU), also won seats in the regional parliament. But in Brandenburg, the show was stolen by throwbacks to the communist era, not the fascists who came before them. The Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), composed mostly of former communists, won 28% of the vote, establishing itself in second place behind Chancellor Gerhard Schröder’s party, the Social Democrats (SPD). Only a pact between the SPD and the Christian Democrats (CDU) will deny the ex-communists a share of power in this region that turned its back on state socialism 15 years ago.
Now, far be it from me to cry over Mr. Schroeder getting his butt handed to him. But when it comes with the price tag of facists and communists returning to legitimacy in Germany, I get a bit worried. Germany is intimately familiar with both, and the re-acceptance of both is a little scary.
Our system marginalizes extremists on both sides. Some could call the Libertarian Party extremist, and I'd actually agree. I'd encourage a much slower transition to the Libertarian ideal of gov't than upheaval the party currently espouses. Unfortunately, that's not how they style themselves. Oh well. But I'd much rather live in a system where the center has significantly more power than those on the fringes, which seems to happen quite often in parliamentiary/proportional systems.
Monday, September 20, 2004
The Hole Just Gets Deeper
USA Today reports that the source of the forgeries turned them over on the condition that CBS provided him contacts within the Kerry campaign. CBS apparently obliged.
Wow. This seems wholly unacceptable to me.
USA Today reports that the source of the forgeries turned them over on the condition that CBS provided him contacts within the Kerry campaign. CBS apparently obliged.
Burkett told USA TODAY that he had agreed to turn over the documents to CBS if the network would help arrange a conversation with the Kerry campaign.
The network's effort to place Burkett in contact with a top Democratic official raises ethical questions about CBS' handling of material potentially damaging to the Republican president in the midst of an election. This "poses a real danger to the potential credibility of a news organization," said Aly Colón, a news ethicist at the Poynter Institute for Media Studies.
Wow. This seems wholly unacceptable to me.
Not! Good! Enough!
Reading Dan Rather's weak attempt at an apology, I'm reminded of a scene from Pulp Fiction:
You deliberately tried to fuck me and the rest of your viewers like a bitch, Dan. And your "it was an error that was made...in good faith" claim rings quite hollow for those of us who've followed it closely.
"The path of the righteous man..." and all that jazz. I don't think this is gonna satisfy anyone, Dan, nor close the book on this story.
I apologize for the profanity, but Dan Rather is really pissing me off lately.
Reading Dan Rather's weak attempt at an apology, I'm reminded of a scene from Pulp Fiction:
Jules : What does Marcellus Wallace look like?
Brett : What?
Jules : What country you from?
Brett : What?
Jules : "What" ain't no country I ever heard of! They speak English in What?
Brett : What?
Jules : ENGLISH, MOTHERFUCKER! DO-YOU-SPEAK-IT?
Brett : Yes!
Jules : Then you know what I'm saying!
Brett : Yes!
Jules : Describe what Marcellus Wallace looks like!
Brett : What, I-?
Jules : [pointing his gun] Say "what" again. SAY "WHAT" AGAIN. I dare you, I double dare you, motherfucker. Say "what" one more goddamn time.
Brett : He's b-b-black...
Jules : Go on.
Brett : He's bald...
Jules : Does he look like a bitch?
Brett : What?
[Jules shoots Brett in shoulder]
Jules : DOES HE LOOK LIKE A BITCH?
Brett : No!
Jules : Then why you try to fuck him like a bitch, Brett?
Brett : I didn't.
Jules : Yes you did. Yes you did, Brett. You tried to fuck him. And Marcellus Wallace don't like to be fucked by anybody, except Mrs. Wallace.
You deliberately tried to fuck me and the rest of your viewers like a bitch, Dan. And your "it was an error that was made...in good faith" claim rings quite hollow for those of us who've followed it closely.
"The path of the righteous man..." and all that jazz. I don't think this is gonna satisfy anyone, Dan, nor close the book on this story.
I apologize for the profanity, but Dan Rather is really pissing me off lately.
France Can Bite Me
Grr. Every time I read another article like this one, I remind myself to never go to France again. Which is a shame; Paris is a gorgeous city.
Via Roger L. Simon.
Grr. Every time I read another article like this one, I remind myself to never go to France again. Which is a shame; Paris is a gorgeous city.
The Italian businessman at the centre of a furious row between France and Italy over whose intelligence service was to blame for bogus documents suggesting Saddam Hussein was seeking to buy material for nuclear bombs has admitted that he was in the pay of France.
The man, identified by an Italian news agency as Rocco Martino, was the subject of a Telegraph article earlier this month in which he was referred to by his intelligence codename, "Giacomo".
His admission to investigating magistrates in Rome on Friday apparently confirms suggestions that - by commissioning "Giacomo" to procure and circulate documents - France was responsible for some of the information later used by Britain and the United States to promote the case for war with Iraq.
Italian diplomats have claimed that, by disseminating bogus documents stating that Iraq was trying to buy low-grade "yellowcake" uranium from Niger, France was trying to "set up" Britain and America in the hope that when the mistake was revealed it would undermine the case for war, which it wanted to prevent.
Via Roger L. Simon.
Sunday, September 19, 2004
Better Than Costco
Went down to San Diego with the girl yesterday. She had to pick up her dress blue's, and they don't carry them at Port Hueneme. The Navy Exchange and Commissary there are enormous, and everything is ridiculously cheap. Meat, bread, cereal, fruit, whatever; it was all 20-30% cheaper than normal prices at Ralph's or Alberson's, and still better than the sale prices. Add to that the fact that there's no 6.5% sales tax, but a 2% surcharge, and you can't beat it with a stick.
I picked up 2 pairs of Levi's for $25 a piece, and a pair of nice Skechers for $35. Too bad it's so damn far. But I may do my Christmas shopping there (and pick up a digital camera).
Went down to San Diego with the girl yesterday. She had to pick up her dress blue's, and they don't carry them at Port Hueneme. The Navy Exchange and Commissary there are enormous, and everything is ridiculously cheap. Meat, bread, cereal, fruit, whatever; it was all 20-30% cheaper than normal prices at Ralph's or Alberson's, and still better than the sale prices. Add to that the fact that there's no 6.5% sales tax, but a 2% surcharge, and you can't beat it with a stick.
I picked up 2 pairs of Levi's for $25 a piece, and a pair of nice Skechers for $35. Too bad it's so damn far. But I may do my Christmas shopping there (and pick up a digital camera).
Friday, September 17, 2004
You Call This Journalism
First, you run a story using 'authentic documents' as a central theme. People raise some interesting and compelling critiques of those documents.
Then 2 of the 4 experts you consulted say they didn't authenticate anything, and had significant questions about their authenticity.
A third says he's not finished with his analysis yet. (The 9/17, 8:58AM post.)
The fourth only authenticated a photocopy of a signature, which is easily fungible.
The son and widow of the purported author (the son having been the Air Wing Commander at the base) both say they're fake.
Your producer, who's been investigating this story since 1999, finally decides to interview the woman who (assuming they were real) would have typed them. That woman says they're fake too.
Finally, the person who was supposedly influencing the memo's author says "Not so much."
And you continue to stand by your story, and demand the subject address your accusations. Unbelievable. Is it any wonder reporters are held in about the same esteem as lawyers?
Not that I watched CBS News...but can I give up Sunday football?
"I Demand Satisfaction!"
First, you run a story using 'authentic documents' as a central theme. People raise some interesting and compelling critiques of those documents.
Then 2 of the 4 experts you consulted say they didn't authenticate anything, and had significant questions about their authenticity.
A third says he's not finished with his analysis yet. (The 9/17, 8:58AM post.)
The fourth only authenticated a photocopy of a signature, which is easily fungible.
The son and widow of the purported author (the son having been the Air Wing Commander at the base) both say they're fake.
Your producer, who's been investigating this story since 1999, finally decides to interview the woman who (assuming they were real) would have typed them. That woman says they're fake too.
Finally, the person who was supposedly influencing the memo's author says "Not so much."
And you continue to stand by your story, and demand the subject address your accusations. Unbelievable. Is it any wonder reporters are held in about the same esteem as lawyers?
Not that I watched CBS News...but can I give up Sunday football?
"I Demand Satisfaction!"
Another One Down
I was hoping that Mr. Den Beste was simply taking a short break. Looks like it's actually an extended one. That's too bad, as he's one of my favorite bloggers, and he's written some really insightful things, IMO. But with a readership as large as his was combined with many people's incessant need to prove how smart they are by pointing out the most niggling, inconsequentially incorrect detail, I guess I'm not surprised.
Though I doubt he'll see this: Thanks for everything, Mr. Den Beste. I hope you return after this poisonous election season is over, but if not, I completely understand.
I was hoping that Mr. Den Beste was simply taking a short break. Looks like it's actually an extended one. That's too bad, as he's one of my favorite bloggers, and he's written some really insightful things, IMO. But with a readership as large as his was combined with many people's incessant need to prove how smart they are by pointing out the most niggling, inconsequentially incorrect detail, I guess I'm not surprised.
Though I doubt he'll see this: Thanks for everything, Mr. Den Beste. I hope you return after this poisonous election season is over, but if not, I completely understand.
One of the Major Reasons I Can't Vote For Kerry
Watch the evolution of his stance on Iraq, using words from his own mouth. Much dissembling and twisting of positions depending on the political winds.
10 Minutes Long
His plan in Iraq is to 'internationalize' the effort (i.e. get France and Germany on board), like Afghanistan. How many troops does France have in Afghanistan? 1470. Germany? 2000. Numbers like that will make a huge difference in Iraq, Senator.
The man is decidedly unserious.
Watch the evolution of his stance on Iraq, using words from his own mouth. Much dissembling and twisting of positions depending on the political winds.
10 Minutes Long
His plan in Iraq is to 'internationalize' the effort (i.e. get France and Germany on board), like Afghanistan. How many troops does France have in Afghanistan? 1470. Germany? 2000. Numbers like that will make a huge difference in Iraq, Senator.
The man is decidedly unserious.
Thursday, September 16, 2004
Interesting
The Iowa Electonic Markets have shown a definite trend since the convention.
Graph here.
The Iowa Electonic Markets have shown a definite trend since the convention.
Graph here.
C BS Has A New Slogan
"Fake, but Accurate."
Forthwith, all on-site reporting will be replaced with news filmed on a soundstage, as long as it reflects accurately the 'truth' of the situation (e.g. hurricane coverage will require heavy duty fans to recreate winds, and misters to recreate rain). Stock footage will be passed off as pre-recorded shots of the events. Viewers shall not be informed.
All interviews with experts or eyewitnesses shall be replaced with interviews of paid actors, as long as their responses reflect what the anchor believes the interviewee would have said. Viewers shall not be informed.
Viewers complaining of inconsistencies resulting from said arrangement will be disparaged, and the network should respond that C BS News has accurately reflected the truth of the story, though not the facts.
"Fake, but Accurate."
Forthwith, all on-site reporting will be replaced with news filmed on a soundstage, as long as it reflects accurately the 'truth' of the situation (e.g. hurricane coverage will require heavy duty fans to recreate winds, and misters to recreate rain). Stock footage will be passed off as pre-recorded shots of the events. Viewers shall not be informed.
All interviews with experts or eyewitnesses shall be replaced with interviews of paid actors, as long as their responses reflect what the anchor believes the interviewee would have said. Viewers shall not be informed.
Viewers complaining of inconsistencies resulting from said arrangement will be disparaged, and the network should respond that C BS News has accurately reflected the truth of the story, though not the facts.
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
Hurling Update
Unfortunately, Cork beat Kilkenny in the All-Ireland final, by a score of 0-17 to 0-9. Domination. Damn.
Unfortunately, Cork beat Kilkenny in the All-Ireland final, by a score of 0-17 to 0-9. Domination. Damn.
I Love Coming Home to an Amazon Box
Picked up some music today:
Bjork - Medulla
Jill Scott - Beautifully Human
The Roots - The Tipping Point
The Black Eyed Peas - Elephunk
Hiromi - Brain
Various - Soundtrack to Garden State
I noticed after the shipment that Flogging Molly has a new album out, otherwise I would have picked that up too.
It's been a long while since I bought a grip of music, and it felt really good. I've been out of the scene for a while, having been sucked in to political and news reading way too heavily. But I can listen and read at the same time....
Picked up some music today:
Bjork - Medulla
Jill Scott - Beautifully Human
The Roots - The Tipping Point
The Black Eyed Peas - Elephunk
Hiromi - Brain
Various - Soundtrack to Garden State
I noticed after the shipment that Flogging Molly has a new album out, otherwise I would have picked that up too.
It's been a long while since I bought a grip of music, and it felt really good. I've been out of the scene for a while, having been sucked in to political and news reading way too heavily. But I can listen and read at the same time....
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
The Sharks Are Circling
They smell blood.
Duh-nuh.......Duh-nuh......
They smell blood.
ABC's Brian Ross interviewed the two experts who CBS hired to validate the National Guard documents and reports they ignored concerns they raised prior to the CBS News broadcast. "I did not feel that they wanted to investigate it very deeply," Emily Will told Ross. "I did not authenticate anything and I don't want it to be misunderstood that I did," Linda James told Ross. Ross reports 2 experts told ABC News today that even the most advanced typewriter available in 1972 could not have produced the documents.
Duh-nuh.......Duh-nuh......
Lame Explanation Indeed
In the comments, Dale points out the completely ridiculous claim that the memos in question are authentic because they supposedly use the letter 'l' instead of the numeral '1' in 111th.
Here's a trick: Open MS Word. Type several one's, separated by spaces. Hit enter. Type several lowercase l's, separated by spaces. Select everything you've typed, and increase the font size to 48 point. Do you think you'd be able to tell the difference after several dozen copies and faxes? Me neither.
CBS, still stonewalling. They should know: it's not the crime, it's the coverup.
In the comments, Dale points out the completely ridiculous claim that the memos in question are authentic because they supposedly use the letter 'l' instead of the numeral '1' in 111th.
Here's a trick: Open MS Word. Type several one's, separated by spaces. Hit enter. Type several lowercase l's, separated by spaces. Select everything you've typed, and increase the font size to 48 point. Do you think you'd be able to tell the difference after several dozen copies and faxes? Me neither.
CBS, still stonewalling. They should know: it's not the crime, it's the coverup.
It's a Game of Inches
Or yards, in my case. Lost my first week fantasy football matchup by 3 freakin' yards.
Bah.
Or yards, in my case. Lost my first week fantasy football matchup by 3 freakin' yards.
Bah.
Monday, September 13, 2004
Penn Goes Off
Yup, Penn from Penn & Teller, in today's LA Times. Some choice parts:
Yup, Penn from Penn & Teller, in today's LA Times. Some choice parts:
Where is the god**** "freedom of speech" candidate?
Our choice is anyone but Bush or anyone but Kerry. It's game theory — keep voting for the lesser of two evils and watch things get more evil...
Anti-freedom of speech is on a roll. You got your bipartisan campaign finance reform, which limited what people could say and do and spend in elections, and now we have bipartisan support to get rid of all the 527s, the independent organizations that are set up to influence elections. Of course it's bipartisan — all the incumbents want to keep private citizens out of the marketplace of ideas. A two-party system is way too good for those two parties.
How come freedom of speech doesn't include the freedom to spend as much money as you want, on as many ads as you want, saying whatever you want? How did everyone get sucked into wanting the government to control what the people can say about the people who are the government? And I thought bottled water was a scam...
I don't care if Disney doesn't want to put out a movie by a fat white guy who hates fat white guys. Disney hasn't put out a lot of stuff by me and I'm a fat white guy. I'm sure they have a lot of reasons for not putting my stuff out — in addition to me not having asked them....
We need a president who realizes that there's no government business in show business.
OK, I Call BS
From The American Spectator:
Um, you're done. Admit it. You blew this story, and your credibility right along with it. You can't produce the originals, you won't reveal your source, and you still stand by your story. You're done. Retire, Dan.
From The American Spectator:
"We're having a hard time tracking how we got the documents," says the CBS News producer. "There are at least two people in this building who have insisted we got copies of these memos from the Kerry campaign by way of an additional source. We do not have the originals, and our sources have indicated to us that we will not be getting the originals. How that is possible I don't know."
Um, you're done. Admit it. You blew this story, and your credibility right along with it. You can't produce the originals, you won't reveal your source, and you still stand by your story. You're done. Retire, Dan.
Friday, September 10, 2004
Oh, Just Trust Us Already!
We're the Media, we could never be fooled.
I'm not taking your word for it that your source is "unimpeachable." I do not trust that your "experts" have verified any damn thing. I've seen some pretty damning critiques by "experts" over the past day.
Produce the originals, let them be vetted by THE EXPERTS in the field, answer the questions raised by the other experts who say they're fakes, and produce your source. Because I DON'T TRUST YOU!
Primary sources, identified experts. That's all that's good enough for me. Period.
We're the Media, we could never be fooled.
"This report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources, interviews with former Texas National Guard officials and individuals who worked closely back in the early 1970s with Colonel Jerry Killian and were well acquainted with his procedures, his character and his thinking," the statement read.
"In addition, the documents are backed up not only by independent handwriting and forensic document experts but by sources familiar with their content," the statement continued. "Contrary to some rumors, no internal investigation is underway at CBS News nor is one planned."
I'm not taking your word for it that your source is "unimpeachable." I do not trust that your "experts" have verified any damn thing. I've seen some pretty damning critiques by "experts" over the past day.
Produce the originals, let them be vetted by THE EXPERTS in the field, answer the questions raised by the other experts who say they're fakes, and produce your source. Because I DON'T TRUST YOU!
Primary sources, identified experts. That's all that's good enough for me. Period.
Wednesday, September 08, 2004
I'll Make Everyone A Deal
I'll stop talking about Vietnam, as long as you do too. I don't give a rat's ass about Vietnam. Vietnam was THIRTY FRICKIN' YEARS AGO! I'm willing to forgive EVERYONE for what they did when they were young and stupid. So can we shut up about it already, and focus on, y'know, TODAY?!?!
(Just to clarify: this isn't directed at my readers, so much as it's directed at the entire USA.)
I'll stop talking about Vietnam, as long as you do too. I don't give a rat's ass about Vietnam. Vietnam was THIRTY FRICKIN' YEARS AGO! I'm willing to forgive EVERYONE for what they did when they were young and stupid. So can we shut up about it already, and focus on, y'know, TODAY?!?!
(Just to clarify: this isn't directed at my readers, so much as it's directed at the entire USA.)
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
More Moore
So Mikey wants to get F911 on TV before the election.
Good luck. There's that nasty "Campaign Finance Reform" law to deal with:
Now, I'm no expert, but I'm not sure the networks can pay to air this (as they are for-profit corporations), and I doubt they can air it for free. I'm also not sure Mikey can get a sham 501(c) set up in time, though I have no doubt that he could fund it himself (or get help from George Soros). However, I have no idea how much buying a 2 hour chunk of primetime network airtime would cost. Methinks a lot.
Of course, he's also considerign submitting it for "Best Picture." Good luck with that too. It's a mediocre film at best, and if it wins (or is even nominated), I will boycott Hollywood, and begin downloading all my movies.
Ugh. Just read this crapload of self-congratulatory, self-indulgent, self-important, self-serving hubris at Mikey's site. Nauseating.
So Mikey wants to get F911 on TV before the election.
Good luck. There's that nasty "Campaign Finance Reform" law to deal with:
"Electioneering communications" are defined as radio or TV ads that refer to a clearly identified candidate or candidates and appear within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. This definition does not include any printed communication, direct mail, voter guides, or the Internet. It would also not cover issue advertising that does not identify a specific candidate or appears outside of the 30/60 day pre-election window.
The Snowe-Jeffords amendment permits 501(c)(4) non-profit corporations to make electioneering communications as long as they use only individual contributions (not corporate or union funds) and make certain disclosures. The amendment thus prevents unions or corporations from laundering funds through non-profits to make electioneering communications.
The amendment also provides that a group making electioneering communications that total $10,000 or more in an election cycle must disclose its identity, the cost of the communication, and the names and addresses of all contributors of $1,000 or more to the sponsor of the communication within the cycle. If the group makes expenditures on electioneering communications from a separate bank account to which only individuals can contribute, it need only disclose the large donors to that account.
Now, I'm no expert, but I'm not sure the networks can pay to air this (as they are for-profit corporations), and I doubt they can air it for free. I'm also not sure Mikey can get a sham 501(c) set up in time, though I have no doubt that he could fund it himself (or get help from George Soros). However, I have no idea how much buying a 2 hour chunk of primetime network airtime would cost. Methinks a lot.
Of course, he's also considerign submitting it for "Best Picture." Good luck with that too. It's a mediocre film at best, and if it wins (or is even nominated), I will boycott Hollywood, and begin downloading all my movies.
Ugh. Just read this crapload of self-congratulatory, self-indulgent, self-important, self-serving hubris at Mikey's site. Nauseating.
Monday, September 06, 2004
I Shouldn't Smuggle Heroin
Because, every time I do (in my recurring dream), I get caught. And that's bad.
Because, every time I do (in my recurring dream), I get caught. And that's bad.
Sunday, September 05, 2004
Wow, If True...
...this (Via Roger L. Simon is shocking, contemptible behavior by one of our 'allies.'
Had the last couple of years not made me so cynical with respect to the French, I'd dismiss this out of hand. Now, I'm not so sure.
...this (Via Roger L. Simon is shocking, contemptible behavior by one of our 'allies.'
Italian diplomats say that France was behind forged documents which at first appeared to prove that Iraq was seeking "yellow-cake" uranium in Niger - evidence used by Britain and America to promote the case for last year's Gulf war.
They say that France's intelligence services used an Italian-born middle-man to circulate a mixture of genuine and bogus documents to "trap" the two leading proponents of war with Saddam into making unsupportable claims.
They have passed to The Sunday Telegraph a photograph which they claim shows the Italian go-between, sometimes known as "Giacomo" - who cannot be identified for legal reasons - meeting a senior French intelligence officer based in Brussels. "The French hoped that the bulk of the documents would be exposed as false, since many of them obviously were," an Italian official said.
"Their aim was to make the allies look ridiculous in order to undermine their case for war."
According to an account given to The Sunday Telegraph, France was driven by "a cold desire to protect their privileged, dominant trading relationship with Saddam, which in the case of war would have been at risk".
Had the last couple of years not made me so cynical with respect to the French, I'd dismiss this out of hand. Now, I'm not so sure.
Saturday, September 04, 2004
Boing!!
Wow, the numbers here are staggering. Yeah, the Newsweek and Time polls show a much smaller bounce, but this will hit the left in the area they need most: voter turnout.
Shocking, really. The conventional wisdom was that there was only a small number of swing voters, but these polls show differently.
Wow, the numbers here are staggering. Yeah, the Newsweek and Time polls show a much smaller bounce, but this will hit the left in the area they need most: voter turnout.
Shocking, really. The conventional wisdom was that there was only a small number of swing voters, but these polls show differently.
Friday, September 03, 2004
The Speech
Watched and listened on the radio on the way up to Jamie's. Delivery was good, humor was good, content was OK, I guess. Still more federal programs, yet he's going to 'restrain spending.' On what, I wonder? Fiscally, it seems the choice comes down to: big gov't + low taxes + big deficits vs. bigger gov't + high taxes + smaller deficits. Not much of a choice there.
At least he mentioned SS reform, as well as Private Medical Spending Accounts. That's at least a small bone thrown my way.
Watched and listened on the radio on the way up to Jamie's. Delivery was good, humor was good, content was OK, I guess. Still more federal programs, yet he's going to 'restrain spending.' On what, I wonder? Fiscally, it seems the choice comes down to: big gov't + low taxes + big deficits vs. bigger gov't + high taxes + smaller deficits. Not much of a choice there.
At least he mentioned SS reform, as well as Private Medical Spending Accounts. That's at least a small bone thrown my way.
Thursday, September 02, 2004
Dilemma
Angels down one in the 9th, or the convention acceptance speech?
Gonna watch the Angels, most likely.
Update: Well, that didn't go well.
Angels down one in the 9th, or the convention acceptance speech?
Gonna watch the Angels, most likely.
Update: Well, that didn't go well.
Investigating the Rhetoric
So I was bored this morning at work, and decided to investigate the '2 million jobs lost' claim being bandied about.
There has long been a discrepancy between the Bureau of Labor Statistics 2 surveys. The Current Population Survey (sometimes called the Household Survey) contacts people in their homes (60,000 a month) and asks them if they are employed or not, and calculates the national unemployment rate from their responses. The Current Employment Survey (sometimes called the Payroll Survey) takes input from companies on their payrolls each month. Both surveys have their flaws: the CPS has a much smaller sample size, and the CES does not count contactors, consultants, or the
self-employed.
Using a couple of BLS sites, I looked at the employment numbers from 1970 onward. The household survey has, always and everywhere, shown a larger number employed than the payroll. However, how much has varied over the years.
I took the difference between the CPS and the CES, and then adjusted it for the size of the labor force. Between 1970 and 1992, the CPS employment was between 7 and 10% higher than the CES. However, once the 90s boom kicked in, this ratio dropped precipitously,bottoming out in 1999 at an annual average of ONLY 3.2%!! That's hugely out of bed with historic numbers. Upon the bubble bursting, this trend reversed itself, and it now stands at a 5.6% difference.
So what happened? Here's my wild-assed theory. During the boom, those who would typically not be counted in the CES (consultants & contractors) actually joined the firms they were working for, enticed by things like stock options producing silly returns. These showed up as part of the huge payroll gains of the 90s. Now that the bubble has burst, those people have returned to their consulting jobs, which is why the payroll survey shows the '2 million jobs lost' but the household survey shows 2 million jobs gained.
So the '2 million jobs lost' is, IMO, a myth. It was just a statistcal anomaly caused by the stock market boom of the 90s coupled with a shift in employment demographics, and shows up only because of the shortcomings inherent in the surveys.
I've got a handy dandy Excel file if anyone wants to take a look.
Update:Similar thoughts here.
So I was bored this morning at work, and decided to investigate the '2 million jobs lost' claim being bandied about.
There has long been a discrepancy between the Bureau of Labor Statistics 2 surveys. The Current Population Survey (sometimes called the Household Survey) contacts people in their homes (60,000 a month) and asks them if they are employed or not, and calculates the national unemployment rate from their responses. The Current Employment Survey (sometimes called the Payroll Survey) takes input from companies on their payrolls each month. Both surveys have their flaws: the CPS has a much smaller sample size, and the CES does not count contactors, consultants, or the
self-employed.
Using a couple of BLS sites, I looked at the employment numbers from 1970 onward. The household survey has, always and everywhere, shown a larger number employed than the payroll. However, how much has varied over the years.
I took the difference between the CPS and the CES, and then adjusted it for the size of the labor force. Between 1970 and 1992, the CPS employment was between 7 and 10% higher than the CES. However, once the 90s boom kicked in, this ratio dropped precipitously,bottoming out in 1999 at an annual average of ONLY 3.2%!! That's hugely out of bed with historic numbers. Upon the bubble bursting, this trend reversed itself, and it now stands at a 5.6% difference.
So what happened? Here's my wild-assed theory. During the boom, those who would typically not be counted in the CES (consultants & contractors) actually joined the firms they were working for, enticed by things like stock options producing silly returns. These showed up as part of the huge payroll gains of the 90s. Now that the bubble has burst, those people have returned to their consulting jobs, which is why the payroll survey shows the '2 million jobs lost' but the household survey shows 2 million jobs gained.
So the '2 million jobs lost' is, IMO, a myth. It was just a statistcal anomaly caused by the stock market boom of the 90s coupled with a shift in employment demographics, and shows up only because of the shortcomings inherent in the surveys.
I've got a handy dandy Excel file if anyone wants to take a look.
Update:Similar thoughts here.
Diggity links to a New Republic article on Zell Miller's speech at the convention last night. The key bit that launches John Cohn into the broadside is this:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the left been doing this to the administration too for years now?
Teddy Kennedy suggesting the Iraq war was 'a fraud made up in Texas.'
'No blood for oil!'
'Cheney and Halliburton!'
Howard Dean suggesting on NPR that Bush was warned of 9/11 by the Saudis and did nothing about it.
Kerry and his statement that the administration is 'the most crooked, you know, lying group I've ever seen.'
Now, I'm not a big fan of the 'Well they did it first' defense. I think it's weak and spineless. But for TNR to act as if the left hasn't been questioning the administration's motives for the past year and a half, and brand one Senator's speech 'one of the most vile in recent American history' for giving just a little bit of that back is frankly, IMO, dishonest.
I never understood the fervent need of the right to get Clinton out of office, which crossed any rational boundaries. And when Zell Miller points out that he thinks the left is doing quite nearly the same thing, he may have a point. I don't have a horse (with a chance) in this race. But when I read the lefty sites, and read my lefty board, I honestly wonder if we live in the same world, because we see completely different things.
But Miller went well beyond questioning Kerry's leadership ability or philosophy. Miller questioned his motives.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the left been doing this to the administration too for years now?
Teddy Kennedy suggesting the Iraq war was 'a fraud made up in Texas.'
'No blood for oil!'
'Cheney and Halliburton!'
Howard Dean suggesting on NPR that Bush was warned of 9/11 by the Saudis and did nothing about it.
Kerry and his statement that the administration is 'the most crooked, you know, lying group I've ever seen.'
Now, I'm not a big fan of the 'Well they did it first' defense. I think it's weak and spineless. But for TNR to act as if the left hasn't been questioning the administration's motives for the past year and a half, and brand one Senator's speech 'one of the most vile in recent American history' for giving just a little bit of that back is frankly, IMO, dishonest.
I never understood the fervent need of the right to get Clinton out of office, which crossed any rational boundaries. And when Zell Miller points out that he thinks the left is doing quite nearly the same thing, he may have a point. I don't have a horse (with a chance) in this race. But when I read the lefty sites, and read my lefty board, I honestly wonder if we live in the same world, because we see completely different things.
