Friday, September 30, 2005

Rush Limbaugh sums up Liberal Partisanship

Those of you with strong stomachs, consider these words from yesterday's program.
Now they [Democrats] are a walking laughingstock. And they become more so each and every day. And I firmly believe this, folks. I know a lot of you people are just scared to death of them, and I guess that's somewhat healthy. They're never going to go away and they're never going to be totally vanquished but this is a bunch of people that ought to be more scared of themselves than we need a to be afraid of them. You corner a lion, what's it going to do? You take a king of the jungle, king of whatever, corner it, a rat, whatever, it's got one chance to get away and that's kill you. That's destroy you. That's where they are. They are a bunch of cornered vermin, cornered rats, and their only way out of this is to destroy their enemies.
Cornered Vermin. That's how Rush Limbaugh sums up the Democratic Party. That's how his followers look at liberals.

Of course other people in history have demonized their enemies as vermin.
Nature is cruel; therefore we are also entitled to be cruel. When I send the flower of German youth into the steel hail of the war without feeling the slightest regret over the precious German blood that is being spilled, should I also not have the right to eliminate millions of an inferior race that multiply like vermin.
Not that Rush Limbaugh's hatred of Liberals is anything like Adolf Hitler's hatred of Jews.

Round the Horn. An Irwin J. McIckleson Production



Well good morning readers of the Make Me a Commentator!!! site. This is 1910's Fictional Plutocrat Irwin J. McIckleson checking in and taking you on another voyage around the liberal coalition.

A lot of people have written in and asking me if it hurts me to be fictional. I don't know, dunderhead. Does it hurt being non-fictional?

And Then . . . has
some history on a new fangled sport called water skiing. Apparently it's like snow skiing only on water and with more human pyramids.

blogAmy has a story about
some comments made buy a gentleman called Bill Bennett. Something about how if every Black child were eliminated there would be less crime. I can see the natural feelings of the South continue apace. The truth is that any distinctions on race are meaningless; all of God's children are equal and should be equally exploited by the Plutocrat class.

LeftyBrown's Corner has
an article on a celebration of Banned Books in a religious library. I have never banned a book in McIcklesonville. I make sure to hire mostly illiterates so the problem doesn't come up very much, however.

Continuing the theme, Pen-Elayne on the Web has
a piece on Censorship - what it is and what it is not. In truth I don't pay attention to what my workers say or do. I just flog them intermittently, and their guilty conscious fill in the blanks of why I must be flogging them. It's a lot less work than trying to actually shut down ways of thinking I don't like.

Collective Sigh has
the news that President Bush is conspicuously driving around in his car wasting gasoline. Apparently Collective Sigh sees this as hypocritical. It's not. It's a simple reflection of the fact that as a successful Plutocrat, Mr. Bush is entitled to ask other people to make sacrifices while he continues to live large.

You see America has certain goals. The protection of the commenwealth. The maintenance of the infrastructure. The enjoyment of the Plutocrat class. Just as the poor might be asked to make sacrifices in a time of war, so also they should make sacrifices so that those in the Plutocrat class can continue to enjoy themselves.

Echidne of the Snakes
writes about party loyalty among the Republicans and the lack thereof among the Democrats. I must say I find the whole concept of Party Loyalty useful for those who would control others. I assume Republican party leaders feel the same way.

Dohiyi Mir
writes about being confused for a toddler of some kind. I find that baffling, but perhaps children of the future are much more accomplished than my own grand-children, who, although I love them dearly, are wont to sticking their whole heads in beehives.

Mercury X23 has
a piece on a student of his that has been convinced to join the military on some sketchy promises. This is somewhat despicable, although I understand the need of the Plutocrat class to protect itself by inducing others to join the military. On the other hand, since that military does not seem to be being used in a rational way, I do find myself less than comfortable with this deception.

Continuing on to how we are fighting this war, Happy Furry Puppy Story Time has
a piece on the atrocities of war and the argument that we must cover up such atrocities so as not to incite our enemies. It strikes me as perfectly sensible senselessness.

Rook's Rant has
some commentary on how the term "religious right" is being used as a prejorative. You future people have some odd political designations. Whatever happened to the Free Silverers or Know Nothings?

T. Rex's Guide to Life has
some thoughts on Ethics and how politicians used to have them. I don't think he's talking about my day. I once paid a Senator to bark like a dog at one of the progressives until he backed down and allowed an amendment to his bill.

And that's us for another week. Hope you all have an enjoyable weekend.

Thursday, September 29, 2005

Thank Goodness the Adults are In Charge Pt. 2

Of course you all know that Tom Delay has had to step down from his position of power because of questions of whether or not he solicited corporate moneys to support Texas campaigns. And of course Bill Frist is in trouble because he may have pulled a Martha Stewart and set up his own reality show ripping off Donald Trump. No I'm just kidding (but I would watch that show), he's actually possibly guilty of insider trading.

But another name high up in this little scandal you may not be ware of is a dude named Jack Abramoff. Actually you probably have heard of him, but if you haven't now you have. He's the subject of a recent article by Robert Sheer, and apparently a real piece of work.
It was reported last week that Timothy Flanigan, Tyco International Ltd. general counsel and Bush's nominee for deputy attorney general, stated that Abramoff's lobbying firm had boasted that his access to the highest levels of Congress could help Tyco fight tax liability legislation and that Abramoff later said he "had contact with Mr. Karl Rove" about the issue.
Comforting isn't it?

Republicans read that, throw up their hands and say "That sort of thing happens all the time. It's no big deal." And it isn't to them. If you expect government to fail, it's no big deal when it fails. But since I expect government to work, I do get annoyed when I read this kind of story.

This story takes on greater weight given the rebuilding of New Orleans.
The hurricane season is proving to be a windfall for GOP-connected companies such as Halliburton, which are being rewarded with lucrative contracts despite their shoddy performance in Iraq. In the vocabulary of crony capitalism, the word "shame" does not exist.
Indeed.

Bush Lovers? Not Hardly!






I read Bryant's defense of Bush Hatred, earlier this week, with some interest. Of course the obvious counterpoint is that if he and his allies on the Democratic side of the fence had any RATIONAL arguments against President Bush they'd present them. But they don't seem to. So we, on the right, are forced to conclude that our friends on the left are opposing President Bush irrationally.

But you should take that to mean that we on the right are irrational Bush-Lovers, driven to praise and laud him at all times. Rather we can be quite critical of where he and his fellow congressional Republicans are taking this country. Congressman Mike Pence recently summed up my dissatisfaction with the President and Congress's plans perfectly.
But there is work to be done, with the national debt at nearly $8 trillion, over 26,000 for every American. In light of two consecutive sessions of Congress that saw a 52 percent increase in the Department of Education and the first new entitlement in 40 years, with record increases in federal spending in every branch of government.

Two years ago, I likened the conservative movement to a tall ship plying the open seas of a simpler time with a proud captain and a strong and accomplished crew, veering off course into the dangerous and uncharted waters of big government Republicanism.

For despite the enormous conservative achievements of the past four years, I saw troubling signs that the ship of conservative governance was off course.

. . . Our party and you, its rising generation of new leaders, face an age-old choice: A choice between the belief in limited government and tradition and the siren song of the central planner who says that "Big government is good government if it's our government."
This analysis is spot on. It is frustrating that a President that has shown such leadership in the war on Terror is unwilling to use the same energy to revitalize the tax code (to make it fair to the people who actually pay taxes) or to reign in out-of-control government spending. Where is the leadership on these issues?

It's not in Washington. At least not right now. And those who are in Washington had better consider carefully or they might be replaced by people who more closely follow the Conservative ideal.

Wednesday, September 28, 2005

I Want You to Trip Like I Do

This is from the leadoff track from the Crystal Method's album Vegas. Why am I referencing the Crystal Method? Read on.

A couple of months ago, a black guy escaped from prison and took a white woman (Ashley Smith) prisoner. She, being a Christian and all, fed him and helped him realize he needed to go back to prison. This was a little parable for all us faithless blue-staters who doubted the power of God. Those of us who snicker at Touched by an Angel sure learned a valuable lesson. Women with pie and faith can sooth the savage criminal.

Now it turns out she gave him a bit more than pie. She gave him methamphetamine. Or, to use one of it's street names, Crystal Meth.
In her book, "Unlikely Angel," released Tuesday, Smith says Nichols had her bound on her bed with masking tape and an extension cord. She says he asked for marijuana, but she did not have any, and she dug into her illegal stash of crystal meth instead.
Praise the Lord, hallelujah.

The police have no intention of charging her for possession of illegal drugs. Presumably all that pie and faith works on them too.

If you haven't heard Trip Like I Do, it's a great little tune for getting the blood pumping.

Got this from The News Blog.

Do You Know What the Words "Fort Marcy Park" Mean?

They mean that, in the delusional right wing world of the Limbaugh, Hillary Clinton has murdered to further her political ambitions and she will kill again. Fort Marcy Park is where Vince Foster was found dead after he committed suicide.

Excuse me, that should have read where he was found dead; his death was later ruled a suicide. Because of course in the delusional world of the Clinton-Hater, Foster's death was clearly the act of the Clintons in an attempt to . . . well it's not clear. Sometimes it's because he and Clinton were having an affair. Sometimes it's because Foster knew too much and "dead men tell no tales."

Of course Foster's Death was investigated numerous times (once by Kenneth Star) and ruled a suicide each time. Which just shows the enormous power of the Clintons to control the government.

Of course if they had such power and the will to kill, it's kind of odd how they let the whole Lewinsky mess happen, but I suppose it's best not to question that.

You might be thinking that this is old news and I shouldn't be wasting your time with it. I agree, but Rush Limbaugh felt the urge to recently bring it up. And he is America's Anchorman. So I felt I needed to bring it up too.

If you want a more thorough examination of the many deaths the Clinton's are supposed to have committed, check out this article by Snopes.

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Business acumen






Hi everybody!!! : )

It seems like taking potshots at President Bush is in vogue right now, which is sad given the troubles facing our nation. I didn't vote for President, and would certainly rather have a Democrat, but while President Bush is our President I think we all need to get behind him. So it's a little depressing to see
an article like this one written by David Olive for the Toronto Star.
The legacy of the Bush administration may well be that government can no longer be entrusted to business people.

That would be a shame, given that business savants as varied as Kennedy treasury secretary Douglas Dillon and Silicon Valley legend Dave Packard served ably in Washington.

Many of the most prominent CEOs in the current administration aren't real business people at all, but faux CEOs who after a lifetime in politics cashed in on brief stints as trophy CEOs at Fortune 500 firms before returning to public life in George W. Bush's White House.

With few exceptions, those CEO stints — at Halliburton Co. (Dick Cheney), rail operator CSX Corp. (John Snow), and George "dry hole" Bush's string of oil-exploration flops in Texas — were not models of exemplary corporate stewardship.

Just the same, future historians will make the connection between the most CEO-heavy administration in memory, headed by the first MBA president (Harvard, no less), and a White House of unsurpassed fiscal recklessness, flawed strategic thinking, failure to execute even on its best ideas (its unrealized goals of education reform and energy self-sufficiency, for instance), and a stubborn unwillingness to change course when conditions dictate.
Is it really worth mentioning, at this late date, President Bush's business failings? I mean he's been running the United States of America for the last five years; I'd say that qualifies him as a successful leader. ; )

Some of the criticisms in that last paragraph, on the other hand, are pretty spot on, I'd say. I'm not sure this is the best time to be focused on Bush's failures, but when the time comes to analyze this presidency, some of those statements may be very relevant.

Return of the Haters

I hate President Bush, apparently. I think he's been a bad President, and after 5 years, I don't think I'm going to see anything that's going to change my mind. The problem is, if you are a Bush supporter, I've got plenty of ammo at this time. Even if we leave aside the recent embarrassment of "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job," there's plenty of other things to bring up. So if you are a supporter of President Bush like, say, David Limbaugh or Dennis Prager, what do you do?

Well, it's preferable to shift the discussion away from the President's actual performance and onto some other aspect of this discussion. Let's see what they've come up with.
"Ever since President Bush took office, liberals have been rooting from one thing to another in a frenzied quest to find that one issue, one tragedy, one scandal that would bring him down. The list is too long to recite here.

"Bush's critics treat each of these issues, in turn, as the final straw that will break the back of this abominable presidency. Everything is blown out of proportion, every possible ambiguity is resolved in President Bush's disfavor, and every possible malevolent motive is attributed to him. The most innocuous of events is treated as scandalous. Hyperbole rules. Panic prevails. Fantastic conspiracy theories triumph. Sober, balanced analysis is absent."
- David Limbaugh

"If you want to understand the Left, the best place to start is with an understanding of hysteria. Leading leftists either use hysteria as a political tactic or are actually hysterics." - Dennis Prager
Ah. So rather than focus on President Bush's failure to succeed, they'd rather talk about how my Bush-hatred distorts my views. This is probably smart politics. You should only sell your man when you've got something to sell, but it's never a bad idea to trash your opponents. And this form of attack makes it less likely that anybody in the middle will listen to the arguments of such unhinged people.

Very smart; but I'm not sure it's going to work. It does seem like the American people are making up their minds about President Bush, and it doesn't seem like their assessment is going the way Prager and Limbaugh would like.

Monday, September 26, 2005

Monday Mail Bag



Hello everybody. I'm feeling a little better this week, thanks for asking. I've realized that there is more to life than getting the right role. Instead I'm taking more of an interest in cooking. I made Hunter's Chicken yesterday and it turned out pretty good; although I think I could improve upon the recipe. Possibly using lentils rather than chickpeas for example.

Anyway lets get to this weeks comments and e-mails. Our first is from perennial favorite Random Goblin, in response to some rather
cryptic comments made by Governor Jeb Bush of Florida.
I didn't vote for Jeb back in '02. I voted for Chang.

Hee hee hee!

Hey, name some other valiant, admirable "conservative warriors" in history. In other words, people who bravely fought to resist change, for things to stay the same, or even "to go back to the good old days."

Robin Hood? Nope. George washington and the patriots of the war for Independence? Heck no, they were radical revolutionaries!

Come on, name some!
Well Captain Starfaller would be a good representative of a "conservative warrior." All the time me and my buddies were trying to revolutionize the Earth by making into a dictatorship or possibly a theocracy (well only when I teamed up with Grizzela, the Goddess of Gamma 4, which was a big mistake. Talk about a person who is full of herself. It turned out she wasn't really a Goddess either. Just talked a good game.), that "conservative" Captain Starfaller kept trying to stop us. So I would describe Captain Starfaller as a "conservative warrior."

Now I hate him more than ever.

Anyway we got a comment from some person named Jeff Rients who responded to
a post Grumbly Muffin posted that was pretty vengeful. I think there was a Nick Rients who worked lighting back on the show; probably no relation.
Referring to the entirety of the left half of the political spectrum as traitors isn't a comment on the stakes in play, but rather seems indicative of paranoia.

Furthermore, you say the liberals would leave America weaker economically, yet I know many Americans who remember the Clinton era as the times of prosperity.
Well, paranoia can sometimes be useful. I remember in Episode 3F19, "To Save a Sundragon," I was left guarding Xerxes, one of the mystic Sun Dragons, who we had wounded and trussed up like an animal. Good times. Anyway then somebody showed up claiming to be a veterinarian, and I let him come in and inspect Xerxes. It was really Kid Sunshine, an ally of Captain Starfaller at the time. That hipster goon pulled the wool over my eyes and if I had been a little more paranoid it wouldn't have happened.

So now when I don't recognize someone at my door I just automatically crush them with my mighty pincers. This keeps me safe, but I can't get any of the local pizza places to deliver anymore.

Turning to the mail, we received a letter from John Martin who begins promisingly.
The inspiration to contact you is simply divine providence,I am making this proposition because I have to seek the partnership of a resource person to help me realise this project.
Simply divine providence, eh? Have you ever met the Goddess of Gamma 4? Seems like the two of you would hit it off.

Anyway that's it for another week. Remember I will crush Captain Starfaller with my Mighty Pincers!

Transparent Lies






With a title like that you'd expect that I'd be talking about the Liberals or the Democrats. Well, just this once, you'd be wrong. Instead I'm talking about some BONEHEADS on my side of the fence.

Apparently some bloggers including
Little Green Footballs and Confederate Yankee as well as the centrist blog Centerline, are propounding the story this weekend's protest against the war was attended by 29 people.

Yeah, it's not like this collection of LEFT-WING LUNATICS didn't provide any other fodder for criticism. I mean you could read their speeches and point out their insanity. But instead you choose to claim that 29 people attended the rally. There were problem more than 29 people on the program, given how Liberals so love to hear themselves speak. But even besides that there are aerial shots that show thousands attending.



Looks like a lot more than 29 people, I'd say.

This is an opportunity to expose the anti-American views of the anti-war crowd and instead we promote transparent lies. Sometimes I don't think we even want to win.

Ideology vs. Practicality

Robert Novak's latest column deals with a divide in the Republican Party. You might call it a divide between ideology and practicality. Conservatism stresses cutting government programs and shrinking the government. Practical politics dictates bringing back federal money to improve your district and employ your constituents. How does a Republican negotiate this divide?

Well one method is to argue for cutting the programs benefiting some other state. I mean if you are the Republican Senator of Kentucky, why not try to cut the programs benefiting those people in New York who can't vote for you anyway. I'm reminded of a bit Michael Moore did back on TV Nation when good ol' Newt Gingrich was on his way up the ladder. He simply went around and pointed out all the federal money pouring into Newt's district and called on Newt and the citizens to eliminate such spending. Naturally nobody there was in favor of this idea.

But this method of cutting spending for other states while continuing to spend in your own only goes so far. Plus, if you squint your eyes, it seems a little hypocritical. So some of the younger members of Congress (as described by Novak) are coming into conflict with their seniors over cutting government spending. Because, see, they actually want to cut government spending and not just pretend to cut government spending.

In case you are wondering I'm in favor of smart government spending. That may involve some cuts and some increases.

Anyway Novak concludes with strong support for these younger "cut-government-spending-firsters."
The beleaguered conservatives see all this spending leading inexorably to a tax increase, which would redistribute the tax burden to the disadvantage of the successful and threaten an economic recession. Barry Goldwater long ago assailed Dwight D. Eisenhower for presiding over a "Dime Store New Deal." That stinging rebuke no longer would be appropriate for today's Republicans. They outdo Democrats on pork and are in the same ballpark on entitlements. Even Katrina and now Rita do not restrain them.
A bit of a scare tactic there isn't there? Redistributing the tax burden to the disadvantage of the successful? That's going to keep me up at night - thinking about people who have plenty still having plenty.

Under normal circumstances one would assume acclimitizing to Washington would smooth the ideological edges off of these younger Republicans. But right now the Republican base is ideologically charged. It's possible a congressperson could trade the benefits of bringing government spending back to his or her district for the benefits of being ideologically pure and trading on that with the national base. So perhaps this struggle between ideology and practicality may not take the expected route.

Sunday, September 25, 2005

New Format, new Quote






Hi all!!!

New format and a new quote. This week the monster selected the quote. I read him a few choices when he called in and this is the one he selected.

Anyway hope you are all having nice weekends.

Friday, September 23, 2005

An Attempt at Humor

Boxey: Can I ride in your ship sir?
Apollo: Fighter planes are no places for little boys.
Watching the original Battlestar Galactaca. I enjoyed it a lot as a kid, but I was a kid and so my standards weren't that high. I am really enjoying the new series on the Sci Fi Channel. It's really about as good as any thing on television. Anyway this little exchange takes place just after Cylon's have wiped out pretty much everything, and Lorne Green/Commander Adama and Apollo have landed on earth to visit Adama's old home and get photo albums. A crowd of survivors gathers around (armed with futuristic torches and pitchforks), seeking confirmation that the world has ended. Commander Adama confirms that, yes, the world has ended. Suddenly bolting out of the crowd runs little space-kid Boxey who has this heart-warming exchange.

Yeah one advantage the new version has over the older one is no annoying space kid.

In a more serious vein, the Wall Street Journal has a story with this title and sub-title.
Why German Nudists
Are Wearing Frowns
As Others Disrobe

Baring It All in Public Is
Nothing Special Anymore;
Joining Camps is Passe
My first thought was slow news day. And then I thought, hey, isn't there some kind of hurricane bearing down on Texas? Isn't that, you know, news?

Round the Horn. An Irwin J. McIckleson Production



Rejoice! I'm back. This is Irwin J. McIckleson. I couldn't be here last week due to a court day. One of my workers stole three spoons and a fork from the company dining hall, and so I turned him into the police. Big mistake. I should have just flogged him and sent him back to work. Instead I had to attend a boring trial in which the Lawyer from the other side, one of those two fisted style lawyers from New York, suggested that I might be a cruel man. It was terrible.

I am having my pinkertons investigate that lawyer. We'll soon see if he has any dirt in his background.

Anyway I'm back this week to provide a report on the other members of the Liberal Coalition.

First up is Natalie Davis' All Facts & Opinion, in which Miss Davis
writes about the recent hurricane, and offers up much that strikes me as wisdom. For one thing she critiques the desire to snipe back and forth for political gain. She also critiques the tendency of some of the presses to demonize the victims.

Bloggg
reports that moi is back. Moi being the person who writes the blog apparently.

corrente has
the news that some of the leaders of the Bush Administration believe that the most important thing one can do in a time of war is cut taxes. I would have thought defeating the enemy might take precedence, but I understand mores have changed significantly since I was alive.

Dodecahedron
writes about the strain of maintaining a blog on regular basis. It is very stressful; it has apparently driven Bryant completely mad; which is why I am handling the Round the Horn duties despite being completely fictional. I suspect Bryant will eventually see an alienist and get cured and I will disappear. But, so far, so good.

Musing's musings has
a report on experiment he did with a computo-mo-tronic translaterphonic system. Apparently it is not working completely as advertised.

Liberty Street has
some thoughts on a recent plutocrat's comments (gentleman by the name of Rich Lowery) on the rebuilding of New Orleans. Apparently Mr. Lowery wants to blame the difficult lives of those who live in New Orleans on themselves and on government programs.

Perhaps it's because I'm getting old and soft, but I tire of the soft hypocrisy of men like Lowery. The reason people are in poverty is because people like you and me want them to be in poverty. A wealthy happy populace would be much more difficult to control or intimidate. We want poverty, Lowery, and if you are not the sort of person willing to admit it, I am.

Science and Politics has
a section on the phenomenon of blogging. I must admit I find it puzzling myself; it's a little like those pamphleters that hand out pamphlets in McIcklsonville at times. I usually have them flogged if I catch them; nothing good ever came of reading. But with a blog it seems like it would be a lot harder for the plutocrats of the future to find the bloggers.

Anyway that's it for another week. Hope you have a productive weekend.

Thursday, September 22, 2005

Waiting for Leadership






Another difference between Liberals and Conservatives is that Conservatives are willing to critique their leaders when they make mistakes. I don't see liberals doing that as much.

Take the latest article by Matt Towery. He has some very direct words for the President and other Republicans.
A day of reckoning is coming for Republicans and conservatives, and it is approaching rapidly.

Thanks to a series of natural disasters, unspeakable acts of terrorism and the responses to them, this country is headed beyond a mere budget crisis. We're drifting toward to a five-alarm financial fiasco.
Of course the liberals have a solution to this problem - raise taxes! The more money the government has and the less money you have, the better off we will all be. Fortunately Towery is a bit smarter than that; his solution involves cutting government programs, pork, and foreign aid.

Cutting government programs is hard and many of the voters won't like it. But it is the right thing to do. Now is the time to see whether or leaders are, in fact, leaders.

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Why I Am So Hard on Liberals






Screw 'em, that's why.

Well there's more than that.

Liberals plans for America would leave it weaker. They would leave it weaker military, economically, and spiritually. Liberals may have good intentions - some, like Cherry, I am willing to concede are acting out of the goodness of their hearts. That doesn't change the fact that if their programs are followed the end result will be bad for America.

Many of them know this deep in their hearts - that's why they get so defensive. But they are obstinate prideful jerks who are willing to put personal feelings and ambitions over what is good for the country.

Others are just clueless dolts. Useful idiots, as the terminology goes.

But I don't care if a liberal is Mother Theresa; I will still heap my abuse on him or her and do whatever it takes to ensure that the liberal opinion is held in derision and mockery. I'll call liberals traitors. I'll call them idiots. I'll call them whatever works, because that's how high the stakes are.

Liberal ideas are political cyanide for the United States, and I love my country too much to allow them to fester or grow. The ideal situation would be an America in which liberal ideas are not expressed. Not through any sort of free-speech crackdown, but just because they are held in such low esteem that anybody speaking them would be laughed at or worse.

But until then, expect me to continue to be hard on Liberals!

A Theory






Robert Reich has a theory. In his latest article, Robert Reich suggests that the political discipline of the Bush White House hampers it's ability to effectively govern. Staff members won't provide the President negative information because such negative information could leak out and hurt the President.
Politics first, competence last: That's the Bush administration all over. Karl Rove, Bush's brain and deputy chief of staff, is in charge of the political juggernaut that's substituted for effective governance. Presumably, he's now at work on a plan to burnish the image of Republicans as managers of the public's business so they don't the hell beaten out of them in the mid-terms a year from now. But the harder Rove works at spinning what this White House has accomplished, the more likely it is that Americans will see that what it's accomplished is basically spin.
Interesting.

I have a theory too. My theory is that Democrats have already tried and convicted President Bush long before the information about Katrina has really come out. They aren't interested in looking at the mass of evidence, but simply in condemning President Bush for political points.

The key difference between my theory and Reich's theory is that there is evidence to support my theory.

Can we Rebuild New Orleans?






Good morning all!!! : )

The answer to the above question is a surprising no, according to Walter Williams. In his reading of the Constitution, he doesn't find anything that allows federal spending to help rebuild New Orleans. Rather he presents example after example of Presidents who denied requests for help.

Mr. Williams does make it clear he's not attacking President Bush for wanting to use federal funds to help New Orleans.
Don't get me wrong about this. I'm not being too critical of President Bush or any other politician. There's such a broad ignorance or contempt for constitutional principles among the American people that any politician who bore truth faith and allegiance to the Constitution would commit political suicide.
I don't know about this; but it strikes me that if everybody, Democrat and Republican alike, believes that the Constitution permits this help, and you believe it doesn't, Mr. Williams, well I guess I'll have to go with the majority. ; )

Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Spiritual Warrior






Hi everybody! : - )

The people over at
Think Progress do good work generally. That's why it is disturbing to see them making light of Governor Jeb Bush's spiritual side. Apparently Governor Bush made the following comments before a group of lawmakers and politicians.
Chang is a mystical warrior. Chang is somebody who believes in conservative principles, believes in entrepreneurial capitalism, believes in moral values that underpin a free society.

I rely on Chang with great regularity in my public life. He has been by my side and sometimes I let him down. But Chang, this mystical warrior, has never let me down.


If you read the whole article, it's clear that Governor Bush was using Chang as a metaphor for the need to compromise and accomplish rather than let partisan bickering. And if President Bush chooses to personalize this spirit as Chang, who are too mock his spirituality? Rather we should be accepting of beliefs that seem a little strange to us. Or at least that is what I think. : )

Solution? Who Needs a Solution?






If you want to have a little fun with your favorite bleeding-heart liberal, I have a suggestion. Get them on the subject of President Bush and Hurricaine Katrina. Then simply and directly ask them what they think President Bush should have done. Watch as their mouth hangs open for a moment before they mumble some sort of excuse.

You see liberals are a lot like children asking "Mommy, why can't candy be free?" They don't understand how complex and difficult responding to a disaster on the level of Katrina can be. And when they are presented with a question that forces them to face that complexity, they, in a childlike way, retreat into a PATHETIC silence, upset that you have upset their little apple cart.

It's a lot easier to produces snarky questions about why the President was continuing with his social engagements than it is to actually say what the President should have been doing. And Liberals do so love the easy path, the gentle slope.

Surplus Politics






Let me say that although I disagree with Cheery on many points, her actions the last couple of days have shown her to be a patriot who is willing to put her country ahead of politics. This is not a time to be accusing one another or pointing fingers; but a time to come together behind our Commander in Chief. Sadly many Democrats, including Democratic Leaders, lack Cheery's patriotism.

Take John Kerry, for example. Thank goodness this UNPATRIOTIC JERK didn't become President. He clearly doesn't care for his country at all. If he did he would be looking for ways to help rather than taking
mean-spirited snips at the President.
Katrina stripped away any image of competence and exposed to all the true heart and nature of this administration. The truth is that for four and a half years, real life choices have been replaced by ideological agenda, substance replaced by spin, governance second place always to politics. Yes, they can run a good campaign -- I can attest to that -- but America needs more than a campaign. If 12 year-old Boy Scouts can be prepared, Americans have a right to expect the same from their 59 year-old President of the United States.
Maybe, just maybe, Kerry, the problems facing the President of the United States are just a bit more complicated than the problems facing your average boy scout? You ever consider that? Obviously not. Once again, thank goodness you didn't become President.

The truth is that Democrats don't want to see the reconstruction in New Orleans go well. The suffering there means nothing more to them than a chance to take CHEAP SHOTS at the President. I know that this seems fantastic. A couple of years ago I might have found such commentary over the top myself. But that is where we are. Hatred of President Bush has so corrupted the Democratic Party that they really have nothing to offer America.

Geov Parrish, one of those liberal columnists who like to pontificate on how dumb conservatives are, writes in
his latest article about how President Bush's failure to preserve a fictional surplus has hurt recovery efforts in New Orleans.
This president, you'll recall, inherited a budget surplus from the previous administration -- a cushion that could have been used to soften the budgetary blow of exactly this sort of monetary emergency. He made his bed, by recklessly wasting that surplus on bloated government spending, reckless tax cuts for his wealthy pals, and an even more reckless war in Iraq.
First of all the Bush tax cuts are the engine that is driving our economy. Our economy is going gang-busters contrary to what those nay-sayers would tell you. Secondly, it is never reckless to protect the American people from it's enemies. Rather it would have been reckless to sit back and let Saddam Hussein develop nuclear weapons and then hand them over to al-Qaida.

Anyway, like I say, I wish that Democrats could follow Cheery's advice and become more moderate in their tone and more willing to work with Republicans and Conservatives.

Fair Criticism






Good morning all!!! : )

In the disaster of Katrina, many of us are beset upon by desires to blame someone for this failure. This is natural. We all want to see justice done. But we shouldn't let our desires run away with us. We should launch fair criticisms against President Bush and other officials; but we shouldn't launch unfair criticisms.

For example, some have criticized President Bush for staying on vacation for a day or so after Katrina hit. Is this really fair? The destructive power of the levee's breaking was not apparent immediately, and President Bush had no way of knowing how unprepared the Democratic Mayor and governor would turn out to be. Certainly it would have been better if he had engaged; but it's not fair to blame him for not realizing he needed to engage.

Others have criticized President Bush for failing to fund needed repairs on the levees. This criticism doesn't show much of an understanding of the budget process, I'm afraid. The Congress sets the budget, not the President. More to the point, this is an example of hindsight being 20/20. If asked two months ago, how many of us might have diverted money away from the levees to what seemed like more necessary projects?

Other's have criticized President Bush for his "flip" attitude while dealing with this storm. How sad. We all have coping mechanisms to deal with troubling difficulties. President Bush used humor to cope with the tragedy of New Orleans. His jokes weren't funny, but they might not have been meant to be. They were therapy, not humor.

Others might criticize President Bush for placing Michael Brown in charge of FEMA given his lack of experience. This, in retrospect, may have been a mistake. But we don't know what President Bush saw in Brown. President Bush believed in him; Mr. Brown let him down. Is that President Bush's fault or Mr. Brown's?

On the other hand, I think Republicans have a point when they suggest that Mayor Nagin should have done more to get people out of New Orleans. He is responsible for his city; why wasn't more done to get the people of New Orleans to safety?

Why didn't Governor Blanco accept President Bush's request to assume federal control over the National Guard?

Those, I think are valid criticisms.

I just think we Democrats need to be careful in our accusations against President Bush that such accusations are reasonable and sensible. I know we can do this, and if we show the American people we can be trusted to be reasonable and sensible, they will trust us enough to return us to power! : )

Monday, September 19, 2005

Monday Mail Bag



Yeah I didn't get that Hamlet part I wanted. I went pretty well around the bend for a little while. I'd like to thank all the people at Make Me a Commentator!!! for tactfully not mentioning my troubles but it wasn't really necessary. I'm a mess. I mean I had like one big part and it was a long time ago.

That's what life is like you see. You never know when your moment in the sun is. Back when I was battling Captain Starfaller, well I hated it. Losing every week. I mean it was fun in the middle of the episodes sometimes; but at the end that jerk Starfaller would come bursting in and he'd punch me right in the carapace. He always made a big deal of hitting me in my "weak spot."

Hey Brainiac! Here's a clue, Humans are nothing but weak spots. But the jerks who ran the show always put clear rubber bands (some synthetic crap) on my pincers so I couldn't get them around him.

Anyway back to my main point - you never know when your bright moments are happening. You could be sitting in the best part of your whole life right now. It might be all downhill from here. Isn't that upbeat?

For more upbeat news here's some comments people left. First from Pen-Elayne on the Web who is a fellow member of the Liberal Coalition, under this post by Cheery.
Thank you for the lovely plug, Cheery!
Pen-Elayne seems like a really together person, and you should go check out her blog.

Maybe I should start a coalition of has-been children's actors who don't get to play Polonius.

That might be too narrow a focus.

Anyway our second comment comes from Jinx, in response to a post from the suspended Bryant about Cindy Sheehan.
Cindy who?
To answer your question, Jinx, Cindy Sheehan.

Thank you for playing.

Jinx runs a blog called Shock and Blog. Looks like crap to me, but some of you might find it interesting.

Yes Cheery I do need to use the word crap. I'm in a bad mood.

Anyway there was some sort of brouhaha with a guy named Spoomonger, but I'm not going to get into it because it's boring as hell. Apparently this guy Spoomonger thinks patriots are nicer to President Bush, an opinion shared by Cheery. I don't know what to say to that. Spoomonger's writing is hard to read. He favors long run on sentences that sound smart but are really confusing and not smart. Oh well.

Finally another nice comment by Random Goblin, in which he took Grumbly Muffin to task for comments she had made. His comment is long, but it reads in part.
Democrats see the government (because of democracy) as an extension from the American people. Democracy and policy are internal, as people choose their leadership from among them, and the leadership regulates the entire body.

In the Republican view, the government and the people canbe at odds and it can still be a natural state of affairs.
I will say this confusion is why I favor Lobstrocacy, where Lobsters basically run everything and humans do what they are told or risk being crushed by might pincers. Random Goblin also has a blog - not a bad one either.

Anyway that's it for another week. Have a nice week all. Hopefully I'll be able to hold it together until next week, but I'm not making any promises.

On Respecting Our President



Hello all!

Sad news I'm afraid. :( The Monster is in Senegal this week, so I am acting head of Make Me a Commentator!!! It's a very heavy responsibility and I try to act in a light manner. In reviewing Bryant's recent articles, however, and one that he just submitted I felt I had to disagree with him.

President Bush is our President and he deserves a certain amount of respect. I'm not a fan of President Bush's, but I'm an American first and a Democrat second. Bryant's commentaries, in the pursuit of scoring political points, regularly crossed this line in regard to President Bush.

The situation on the ground is chaotic; we all know this. So to hold President Bush personally responsible for the lives lost and the mistakes made is to show him a lack of respect. Part of respect involves giving the President the room he needs to operate and not nick-picking every little thing he does wrong, or, even worse, making up accusations on spotty evidence.

I'm sure that a reasoned and sensible review of the Bush Administration's performance will reveal some errors; but now is not the time to make it.

Needless to say Bryant does not agree with this standard, so I have been forced to give him a two day suspension. He will be back on Thursday. : (

We'll miss Bryant but we hope he returns with a more respectful attitude towards our President.

Thank Goodness the Adults are In Charge

Joe Klein has written an article for Time this week. It's a recit of the Bush Administration's failures in persuing the Iraq war as well as the difficulties they face and would not be remarkable save for the lucid writing style of Mr. Klein.

At any rate, for those of you who want to believe the Bush Adminsitration, being Republican, will automatically wage war more effectively than the hated Democrats, you might want to skip it. Frankly, it's filled with passages like this.
It is no secret that General Tommy Franks didn't want to hang around Iraq very long. As Franks led the U.S. assault on Baghdad in April 2003, his goal--and that of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld--was to get to the capital as quickly as possible with a minimal number of troops. Franks succeeded brilliantly at that task. But military-intelligence officers contend that he did not seem interested in what would come next. "He never once asked us for a briefing about what happened once we got to Baghdad," says a former Army intelligence officer attached to the invasion force. "He said, 'It's not my job.' We figured all he wanted to do was get in, get out and write his book." (Franks, through a spokesman, declined to comment for this article.)

The rush to Baghdad, critics say, laid the groundwork for trouble to come. In one prewar briefing, for example, Lieut. General David McKiernan--who commanded the land component of the coalition forces--asked Franks what should be done if his troops found Iraqi arms caches on the way to Baghdad. "Just put a lock on 'em and go, Dave," Franks replied, according to a former U.S. Central Command (Centcom) officer. Of course, you couldn't simply put a lock on ammunition dumps that stretched for several square miles--dumps that would soon be stripped and provide a steady source of weaponry for the insurgency.
Something to think about. Still it's lucky we don't have Kerry in there; he might have really messed things up.

Seeking Justice is un-American.

Seeking the Truth is un-American.

Standing up for people who are suffering is un-American.

Trying to make this Country better is un-American.

or, to put it another way, Whining is un-American. That's the title of a column at Townhall by Jennifer Roback Morse. Whining is un-American. I haven't read the article yet; frankly I'm not sure I want to. Just reading the title makes me want to put my fist through the window of my car. Well, that and the fact that it's covered in dead bugs.

OK I read it - basically it's crap. Childish crap.
When I heard Mayor Nagin whining, I thought to myself, this sounds positively French. Maybe this lame attitude is part of the French heritage of Louisiana and New Orleans and all that. And then I’m chiding myself for tasteless ethnic stereotyping.
I just have one thing to say to that crap.

Cheery here. We're sorry but the remainder of Bryant's commentary has been deleted; once again he has lapsed into fairly salty language, and we want this website to be safe for children.

Sunday, September 18, 2005

New Format, new Quote



Hi Everybody!!!

New Format and new Quote. This weeks quote comes to us from ol' Space Lobster who promises he we do a Monday Mail Bag tomorrow.

Hope you are all having a nice weekend.

Saturday, September 17, 2005

Everybody Likes to Pitch In

The right wing Heritage foundation has some suggestions on how to best rebuild New Orleans. They'd like to see us drill in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and institute a school voucher program. Don't believe me? Check out this memo.

There's some comfort in knowing that no matter what the tragedy, the Right Wing always has the same damn answer.

Got this from Salon's War Room.

Questions






Good Morning all!!! Hope you are having a nice Saturday

Kathleen Parker, a right wing commentator, is a little frustrated with her side right now.
We can have a contest for a pithy title, but meanwhile, ignoring legitimate questions about national security at a time of cataclysmic disaster is playing some other kind of game.

Defenders of the Bush administration, some of whom seem pathologically unable to see mistakes no matter what the evidence, have winced at the notion that the federal government should have done more in Katrina's aftermath.
I have to say I think she's right. I don't know that the left wing needs to be as negative about President Bush as we have been, but certainly, in the wake of this tragedy in New Orleans, we need to ask a few questions.

Friday, September 16, 2005

The Mentality of Bush

Well we are going to rebuild New Orleans. President Bush said so. Hooray. But wait, maybe we should consider the words of Paul Krugman.
President Bush subscribes to a political philosophy that opposes government activism - that's why he has tried to downsize and privatize programs wherever he can. (He still hopes to privatize Social Security, F.D.R.'s biggest legacy.) So even his policy failures don't bother his strongest supporters: many conservatives view the inept response to Katrina as a vindication of their lack of faith in government, rather than as a reason to reconsider their faith in Mr. Bush.

And to date the Bush administration, which has no stake in showing that good government is possible, has been averse to investigating itself. On the contrary, it has consistently stonewalled corruption investigations and punished its own investigators if they try to do their jobs.
Interesting. But it does seem to follow a pattern.

Back on the Road

Well we are on our way back to Tallahassee - in the same care we came down here with. How did I know this was going to happen? We did get some nice pictures out of it - which I will be posting later.

I did catch some bits of the speech last night - I have to say I agree with the analysis in this New York Times Editorial.
Last night, the president was particularly strong when discussing the nation's shocking lack of preparedness for disaster, and the stark fact - obvious to every television viewer around the globe - that the people left homeless and endangered by Katrina were in the main poor and black.

The entire nation, he said, saw the poverty that "has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America." Polls show that black Americans are far angrier and more skeptical than whites about the administration's actions since the storm. Mr. Bush's words could begin a much-needed healing process. But that will happen only if they are followed by deeds that are as principled, disciplined and ambitious as Mr. Bush's speech.
A lot of people will say that this President does what he says. I say, well, not necessarily. Take the aid to Africa to fight AIDS. Only a fraction has gone through because of stringent rules on how the money is to be spent; not to prevent waste but to prevent even an acknowledgement of the existence of abortion.

On the other hand, it's safe to say nobody was watching Bush at that time - and now plenty of people are watching him. So maybe he will fill compelled to live up to his promises.

Thursday, September 15, 2005

How Hard Is It?






Parenthetically I want to say most of what Bryant says is TOTAL CRAP, but you already know that. I will agree that one major difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats favor making government the power and Republicans doubt the power of the government to help people.

The people of New Orleans had government largesse for a few generations and it failed to prepare them to face Hurricane Katrina. Bryant's solution is to try for another few generations. Conservatives on the other hand want to see a New Orleans where every individual is strong enough, prepared enough to face Hurricane Katrina. This is a THREAT to Democratic Power so naturally they oppose it.

But that is a handy summary of what the parties want. The Democratic Party wants Government to be Strong; the Republican Party wants YOU to be strong.

Sidney Blumenthal's latest article is a typical liberal castigation of President Bush. Blumenthal goes so far as to suggest that the last few weeks have doomed the Bush administration.
The deepest wound is not that he was incapable of defending the country but that he has shown he lacks the will to do so. In Bush's own evangelical language, he revealed his heart.

Overnight, the press disclosed a petulant, vacillating president it had not noticed before. It was as if there were a new man in the White House. Time magazine described a "rigid and top-down" White House where aides are petrified to deliver bad news to a "yelling" president. Newsweek reported that two days after the hurricane, top White House aides, who "cringe" before the "cold and snappish" president, met to decide which of them would be assigned the miserable task of telling Bush he would have to cut short his summer vacation.
By the way, does anybody else find that Newsweek story a bit unbelievable? My guess is they talked to a few malcontents, but nobody of significance. So of course they want to remain anonymous. Who would want to reveal their key source in the study of Bush's character to be window washer number three?

At any rate the President I have seen has proven to be masterful. Rather than a death toll in the tens of thousands as Democrats predicted, we are having a death toll that might not break 100. And President Bush has admitted his errors. "To the extent that the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility." Those of us who know President Bush, who have watched his performance with eyes unclouded with PARTISAN HATRED, know that he has little enough to apologize for!

There are some in America who should consider apologizing though. But one doubts they will.

Wednesday, September 14, 2005

The Legend of Spoomonger the One Noble Soul in the Blog-O-Sphere

Gather real children and listen to the tale of Spoomonger.

It was in the wake of Hurricane Katrina that he revealed himself. Those were dark days for those virtuous souls who loved America. For President Bush's response to Katrina had been seen as base and ignoble, and Spoomonger's mighty heart was troubled. And he stepped to the Blog-O-Sphere and asked these immortal questions.
Am I the only one not buying all the mud slung at President Bush over Katrina? Am I the only one who is fed up with all the petty garbage the media seeks out in the midst of a serious catastrophe?
Yes poor noble Spoomonger was all alone in asking these questions. For behold an amazing thing - the Republican National Committee, the various Conservative Pundits in Print, on Radio, or on the Television, and his fellow conservative bloggers had all ignored these questions. They had all unquestioningly accepted the mud slung at President Bush. Only Spoomonger, the only noble soul in the internet, had stepped forward to ask these questions and to defend President Bush.

And if you believest that, you would also have no trouble believing the rest of his statement. But do not read such documents as this timeline, for this may cast doubts in your mind as to the truthfulness of the mighty Spoomonger, the one noble soul of the internet. Simply remember that not that many people died and the Mayor and the Governor are responsible for those dead.

Remember this question - are you going to be a citizen or a critic? A citizen of the United States would never question his president - particularly not in the middle of a tragedy like this.

In Sarasota

Hey all. We are in Sarasota now. The Monster got us into a pretty nice place. The Lido Beach Resort. Anyway it's pretty nice. All the shampoo and bath products have marine themes. We have Kelp Shampoo and Conditioner, Algea Body Wash, and Sea Cucumber Soap. I'm not sure what the properties of these various products are - but will be using them later on.

For now I'm going to catch some shut-eye while the monster goes down and hangs around the pool.

Tuesday, September 13, 2005

A Clarification

The Monster wanted me to reassure you all that we were swamped with animal impalas and not Chevy impalas.

He also wants to say that he has nothing against Chevrolets. In fact he really likes that Taj Mahal song "Chevrolet." I like it too.

Now he is saying that he likes that song so much that we need to drive to Sarasota and purchase a Chevrolet for the office. I don't know why we can't buy a Chevrolet here, but apparently Sarasota is the place to buy a Chevrolet.

So, uh, I guess we are going to Sarasota. The Monster does not always think in the same way you and I might think. Well I, at any rate. Anyway we'll have to see how this goes.

Oh, and I know President Bush took full responsibility for the screw-ups around New Orleans - I am not yet sure what to think of that, so don't have much to say. Part of it I think is very nice to see for a change and part of it reads like "I'm sorry those other guys screwed up; I guess I should have stopped them." Anyway I'll probably have more thoughts someday soon - but for the moment, I have to go pack so we can leave for Sarasota. In the middle of the night.

Yeah, I have a great gig here.

Low Posting today

Hey the office is being fumigated, due to an unexpected visit from a herd of impalas. Don't ask. Anyway these weren't particularly clean impalas, so we are getting fumigated - we might have posts this evening.

Monday, September 12, 2005

Yet Another Piece of the Puzzle

Conservatives like to believe they are the only virtuous people in America. Us liberals? We are scum sucking jerks who don't give a shit about anybody but ourselves. And don't get them started on anybody who isn't from the United States. Nope, Conservatives are pretty much the sum total of all virtuous people around.

Consider, for example, the comments of Ann Coulter on a recent episode of Hannity and Colmes.
Moveon.com is down protesting outside the White House today. How about putting together some evacuee bags? How about actually helping out? And you know, speaking of that, I think, you know, I'd like to see a breakdown at the end of this -- how much churches are contributing versus, say, Barry Lynn's church.
Of course Moveon.org did participate in hurricane relief - arranging for temporary residences for some 250,000 people. But that doesn't fit the pattern, so it's convienently edited out of Ann Coulter and other Conservative's realities. Instead, in their little mythology, we have the President valiantly trying to save people (instead of, you know, attending birthday parties and goofing around with Country Music stars) while pathetic liberals carp on what a jerk he is and do nothing of value.

Ann Coulter is, by the way, the id of the modern Republican / Conservative movement. If you want to know what your Conservative Friends think but are embarrassed to say outloud, just give her a listen.

Incidently for those of you who don't know who Barry Lynn is, he's the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and an ordained minister of the United Church of Christ, another fact Ann was blissfully unaware of as evidenced by this exchange.
COULTER: I'd like to see a breakdown at the end of this -- how much churches are contributing versus, say, Barry Lynn's church.

HANNITY: What church?

COULTER: Right, that was a joke.

HANNITY: Did he actually have one?
After all you can't admit that some liberals go to church can you? That would fly in the face of the self evident conservative truth that they are the only virtuous people in America.

Another Piece of the Puzzle

One of the issues I've been grappling with is how, given the massive incompetence of the Bush Administration in the face of Hurricane Katrina, people still continue to support him. One piece I already discussed; the fact that they are more focused on how much they dislike Liberals than they are on the President. According to Jinx, I am full of crap.

Another piece of the puzzle I've alluded to is this; Conservatives expect government to fail. They don't believe in the power of government to accomplish anything; so when the government fails in the face of Hurricane Katrina, they shrug their shoulders and say "It's tragic, but what do you expect?"

I don't know what they think about such events as the Normandy Invasion or the Apollo Program or the G.I. Bill.

I, on the other hand, believe that government can accomplish great things. So when the government fails so spectacularly; well, I'm upset. I want to see those leaders responsible held accountable. I'm not willing to just shrug and say, "Well that's the way the cookie crumbles."

All This Time

I strongly urge you to all read Joe Conason's latest article, even though doing so requires you to watch a short ad at Salon (unless you are a member).

It's strong indictment of the Bush Administration for it's failures and it's betrayal of the American people.
And we can have no doubt now, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, that critical agencies of the United States government are staffed by patronage hacks unable to fulfill the most basic responsibilities of the modern state. The outstanding example, of course, is Michael D. Brown -- apparently known as "Brownie" to the admiring president -- the FEMA chief whose résumé contains nothing to recommend him to one of the most critical positions in government, although he had amply padded it with unearned honors and bogus titles. He claimed, for instance, to have worked as an assistant city manager, when he was actually a glorified intern. (The holder of a degree from an unaccredited law school, Brown's most significant lifetime work experience was as a "commissioner" for a horse show association, a position he departed involuntarily and left off his official biography.)
For four years, since the tragedy of September 11th, President Bush and his followers have been resolute in telling us how lucky we are to have him in charge, in these dangerous and trying times.

I don't know about anybody else, but I don't feel all that lucky.

Incidentally you might also check out Paul Krugman's latest, in which he suggests that "Brownie" may not be an exception but an example of President Bush's hiring standards. It's always been clear that this president values loyalty and doesn't give a damn about any other qualities a person might have. So if you like how Michael Brown performed in the face of Hurricane Katrina just imagine how President Bush's other office holders are performing. Or instead of imagining, here's a quote.
Unfortunately, it's easy to find other agencies suffering from some version of the FEMA syndrome.

The first example won't surprise you: the Environmental Protection Agency, which has a key role to play in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath, but which has seen a major exodus of experienced officials over the past few years. In particular, senior officials have left in protest over what they say is the Bush administration's unwillingness to enforce environmental law.
Maybe this is just me, but isn't there likely to be a lot of gunk floating around New Orleans? Isn't that sort of the Environmental Protection Agency's mandate, to clean up gunk? Hmmmmmm.

Still when you elect a President who doesn't believe in the power of Government to help people, I suppose it's no surprise that he appoints lunkheads to positions of power which, to him, are totally useless.

Charges of Racism






Good Morning all! : )

I am starting to wonder if Democrats and Liberals have been a little to free with the 'R' word in response to Hurricane Katrina. I mean it's obvious that the response to Katrina was not everything it should be. Star Parker acknowledges as such in her
latest article.
The fact that the handling of the disaster caused by Hurricane Katrina was a massive botch job at all levels of government is beyond the doubt of any sober observer. Such operations demand precise cooperation and coordination among local, state and federal authorities. It appears evident that the performance at and between each of these levels of government was abysmal.

However, government incompetence isn't news. And, unfortunately, it's also not news when black politicians call it racism when the unfortunate victims of this incompetence, because they are poor and unprepared, are largely black.

It is inconceivable that there could have been some all-knowing racist guiding hand orchestrating the chaos and disorganization that characterized what occurred.
That's a good question. Do we have a department of racism in charge of making sure black people don't get the same services as the rest of us? Does that even make sense?

Ms. Parker's point that black America, and by extension all poor America, needs to get out of poverty in order to properly respond to such disasters. She doesn't offer many concrete suggestions, but I'd guess her methods don't involve using the Federal government in any way. So I'm not sure they would be adequate to the task at hand.

Sunday, September 11, 2005

New Format






Hey You Guys!!! : )

Sorry electric company flashback there. Anyway just letting you know we have a new format and a new quote - as should be obvious. Hopefully we can have an updated quotes page later on today.

Friday, September 09, 2005

A Question Presents Itself

One might reasonably wonder how far Bush supporters are willing to go to stand by their man. The answer, as evidenced by their performance (and his) in the wake of Hurricane Katrina presents itself.

How far are they willing to go? All the way.

Rebuilding New Orleans

A lot of people have pointed to an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that commented on how the wealthy of New Orleans are doing. Apparently they are doing fine. People like Jimmy Reiss, descendent of an old line New Orleans family, are well able to take care of themselves.

Mr. Reiss commented to the Wall Street Journal, "Those who want to see this city rebuilt want to see it done in a completely different way: demographically, geographically, and politically. I'm not just peaking for myself here. The way we've been living is not going to happen again or we're out."

I wonder how they want to change the city demographically? I mean that, to me, has a bit of an ominous ring to it. But maybe I'm reading too much into it.

I can't link to the article, but it was a front page article that continued on page A12.

Round the Horn. An Irwin J. McIckleson Production



Hello all. This is Irwin J. McIckleson, 1910's fictional plutocrat. Today, like every Friday, I will be guiding you through a discussion of various posts by members of the Liberal Coalition.

firedoglake has
some news about one of the principles in that bounder Karl Rove's case. Apparently Judith Miller is considering testifying after all, after getting somewhat better legal advice than she had been getting.

Respectful of Otters has
a piece discussing how the Federal Government might have approached the tragedy in New Orleans a bit more forcefully.

rubber hose has
an interesting map of Louisiana. I see there are far more parishes than there were in my day. There is some question about which parishes are getting hurricane relief; but it appears to have been settled.

Rick's Cafe Americaine has
some news about playing poker for charity to help out victims of the recent hurricane.

Speedkill has
a discussion of what the limits of governmental power should be and the morality of taxation. It is a complicated issue; obviously you don't want a strong government that could interfere in the workings of a plutocrats empire. On the other hand having to provide individualized police forces and military units would be a vast drain on a plutocrats funds (although I understand some are willing to pay that price). This may be a bit naive but I would stipulate this is why we have a democracy - to allow the people to express how best to protect plutocratic wealth without interfering in a negative way.

Scrutiny Hooligans
has reports from those who are escaping New Orleans. It is very sad, as you might expect.

The Invisible Library
points out that President Bush apparently ended his vacation early once previously on behalf of one person, but was unable to end his vacation early on behalf of an entire city.

THE NEWS BLOG has a
comments on the person President Bush has put in charge of emergency relief. Apparently he's something of a lay-about.

Steve Bates, the Yellow Doggeral Democrat,
has information about a Bush Administration trick that I have to admire. Apparently they are delaying delivery of individual funds to various victims of the hurricane in hopes that they won't have to distribute all the monies. Apparently they've done this before; promised lots of money and then failed to deliver. It is a smart policy; more people will remember the announcement of charity than the charity itself. Still in this case the main priority should probably be providing help to the people in New Orleans and surrounding areas who need it.

At any rate, I hope you all enjoy a productive weekend, and I will see you next week.

Thursday, September 08, 2005

A Clarification

Some of you may find some of what Rush Limbaugh and others of his ilk says about New Orleans hard to understand, particularly as he pontificates about the terrible damage welfare has caused to New Orleans. This may be particularly confusing if you realize that the majority of New Orleans was not on welfare. Poor, yes, but on welfare? No.

What you need to understand is that to Rush Limbaugh and those who follow his philosophy there is absolutely no difference between a poor black person who has a job and a poor black person who is on welfare. In both cases they are parasites, and in both cases they pretty much deserve what they get.

If they wanted to qualify for our sympathy they would be middle class white people, or, at worst, middle class black people.

Hope that helps you follow along.

Making Hay






After my brief dismissal two weeks ago; I had not thought I would return to this blog. My brief misstatement was blown out of proportion by my enemies and my coworkers piled on without provocation. And the recent tragedy in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama have somewhat dampened my eagerness to engage in partisan bickering.

But I note, with much sadness but little surprise, that our friends on the left side of the aisle have felt NO SUCH RESTRAINT. Rather they seem to see this TRAGEDY as an opportunity to trash the president. Have they no shame?

If they had shame they would no longer be liberals but, rather, Americans.

Take this mean-spirited ugly article published at the Nation and
reprinted by Commondreams.
On Friday, when even Republican lawmakers were giving the federal government an "F" for its response to the crisis, President Bush heaped praise on embattled Federal Emergency Management Agency chief Michael Brown. As thousands of victims of the hurricane continued to plead for food, water, shelter, medical care and a way out of the nightmare to which federal neglect had consigned them, Brown cheerily announced that "people are getting the help they need."

Barbara Bush's son put his arm around the addled FEMA functionary and declared, "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job."

Like mother, like son.
Of course the Democratic ATTACK MONGERS wasted no time attacking Ms. Bush for expressing pleasure that some of those who's lives were shattered in New Orleans were being well taken care of in Houston. It probably infuriates liberals that one of the reddest cities in America has shown such generosity as it puts the lie to the old "heartless Conservative" myth.

And they wasted no time attacking President Bush for failing to completely fix the problems of New Orleans. This is because government is the GOD OF THE DEMOCRATS. Rather than having a healthy respect for the limitations of Government, Democrats expect government to fix all problems. And since Government apparently failed the people of New Orleans, they must blame President Bush rather than understanding and accepting the limitations of Government.

Because it's a lot easier to attack Bush than it is to accept the moral failings inherent in your own philosophy, isn't it?

Katrina Timeline

I'm not interested in pillorying President Bush for things he didn't do, nor am I interested in shielding the Democratic Mayor of New Orleans or the Governor of Louisiana from legitimate criticism.

Of course, the Bush Administration reporting that the Governor of New Orleans failed to declare a state of emergency when she had (on August 26) is an example of illegitimate criticism. And you have to wonder how Bush Supporters feel about their guys telling such transparent lies.

But that's where it's helpful to have a timeline of the events surrounding Hurricane Katrina. Think Progress has done a pretty nice one, and it seems easily verifiable. In particular it's nice to see how little Hurricane Katrina impacted President Bush's vacation. After all, a rested President is an effective President. That's why things have gone so smoothly - think about how cranky and unpleasant President Bush would be if he hadn't been able to celebrate Senator McCain's Birthday or goof around with Country Singer Mark Willis.

One might ask, well what could President Bush have done? He could have engaged. He could have gotten involved and treated this like a national disaster that has killed thousands instead of as an inconvenience to his personal life. I'll be blunt, President Bush is an idiot, so maybe we're all better off with him goofing around with Mark Willis. But those of you who support President Bush or who voted for him, well, don't you have a higher opinion of him than I do?

Being President of the United States is difficult. Ask Abraham Lincoln. Ask Franklin Roosevelt. Ask John F. Kennedy. You either rise to the occasion or you don't. And if you don't, well, I'd think you'd want a stronger defense than "well I couldn't think of anything that the president could do to help."