For those of you who think I make to many typos.

Allow me to point you to this story from MSNBC.COM

"In his book and agaun this week before the commission, Clarke accused the Bush administration of cutting off his access to senior officials, who he said did not consider terrorism to be an “urgent problem.” In contrast, he said, the Clinton administration gave the terrorist threat its “highest priority.”

Ha! And those MSNBC Pooftahs have a bunch of editors and what not to check up on what they do.

Incidently, the story refers to an attempt by Congressional Republicans to release private testimony from last year that they claim contradicts his current testimony and would therefore make him guilty of perjury. So they aren't going to call him a liar for what he said, but for a failure to be completely consistant. Whatever works, I guess.

Five Albums from the 1980s that are worth a new listen

Here they are, with one line from one song.

Alcohol is your yoga baby. - Love and Rockets, "Express," 1986

She doesn't have anything you want to steal / well, nothing you can touch. - Psychedelic Furs, "Talk Talk Talk," 1981

Brothers and sisters play chinese whispers. - Depeche Mode, "Construction Time Again," 1983

Your father's father's father tried / erased the parts he didn't like. - R.E.M., "Life's Rich Pageant," 1986

It's a red sky tonight. - New Order, "Power, Corruption & Lies," 1983

And here are the five songs in no particular order--as a bonus quiz see if you can match the song to the line.

We All Stand
Pretty in Pink
Cuyohoga
Yin and Yang and the Flower Pot Man
Told You So

Did you get them all right? Turn your monitor over to see the correct answer. Or don't. I'll post the answers in the comments section.

Another Telling Truth from David Limbaugh

"President Bush's remarkable record in the War on Terror speaks for itself -- no matter how brazenly Democrats are trying to suppress it."

Yep. President Bush's record is clear. Since September 11th, he squandered the national good will we had built up, failed to capture Osama Bin Ladin, invaded Iraq on false premises, and stretched our military almost to the point of breaking. He's made so little progress at fighting Terrorism that Spain suffered a tragic loss recently and his loyal pundits have to remind us almost daily that we will suffer another attack, and that when we do we had better not blame President Bush for it (one presumes they will continue to blame it on Clinton). I guess success is in the eye of the beholder; since President Bush did successfully lower taxes, he's a success regardless of how well the war on terror is going.

Anyway if you want to read the rest of Limbaugh's column and all his slams on Richard Clarke, here it is.

Round the Horn Part XVI The Maddening Confusion

Fortunately to combat the maddening confusion we have a passle of links to great articles by other members of the Liberal Coalition.

Steve Gilliard over at Steve Gilliard's News Blog has asked the question men dare not ask. Namely, did impeachment have something to do with Bill Clinton's inability to crush al-Queada. Judging by the quality of pinheaded commentators slamming into him, the answer may be yes.

Rook's Rant has a bit on how Maureen Dowd's latest column and a local clear channel radio personality might spell doom for President Bush.

Respectful of Otters has an interesting story on The Center for American Progress's research on President Bush's supporters claim that Kerry is a big denier of money to the military and law enforcement.

H.L. Victoria over at New World Blogger has a nice rundown on recent events in Latin America. You'd think being so close to us geographically that Latin America would affect us more and we'd pay more attention to it.

It's Craptastic! has a tidbit on Bill O'Rielly's opinion of himself (for those of you who are unaware, Mr. O'Rielly has a very high opinion of himself.

blogAmy has a poem; a take off on the 23rd Psalm, for our current reality. It's Good.

The Gotham City 13 has a discussion of a recent interview with that old tapdancer, Donald Rumsfeld.

Mustang Bobby, over at Bark Bark Woof Woof has reminiscences on the car of Champions, the Mustang and his love for it.

A Letter to the President

In response to a story earlier this week about Vice President Cheney's visit to the Rush Limbaugh Program, my Brother wrote a letter to the President (at the White House website), which he has graciously allowed me to reprint (which is nice because it allows me to take the afternoon off).

Well, since my comment did not fall directly into one of the categories available, I chose "taxes" because I am questioning the government's use of my tax money.

I noticed today that the White House's tax-funded website was used to display Rush Limbaugh's interview with the Vice President. To my knowledge (and I may be wrong in this) media sources which are governmentally sponsered are required to give equal time/space to opposing viewpoints as well. I'm simply wondering weather or not any space has been made available for opposing commentary.

My problem with this is the same problem I have with Rush in general. The general public wants something to trust in, and when they log on to the White House's website, or listen to Mr. Limbaugh, many tend to believe every word they see or hear. It's unfortunate, but many americans can hardly be bothered to do a bit of basic research to find out weather or not they've just been fed only a few selected words out of a larger, more revealing quote, or if the source that was just cited was even remotely reliable. By presenting only one rather distorted viewpoint you betray the most basic ethical standards of journalism. It may not be lying, but it's hardly telling the truth.

Mr. President, I have served in this country's military, and I respect the office you hold. If you want me to respect you as a person, please treat me, and all americans, with the respect we deserve. It just seems like lately one thing after another has piled up and made my government look shameful. Please just clear this up one way or another. Putting spin on things and covering mistakes up only makes the nation look worse when the truth eventually comes out.

I sincerely hope that you know what you are doing. I want to trust that democracy works and that our leaders, while not necessarily perfect, have the whole nation's best interest in mind. I want to believe that you are a good person, and will not sacrifice my well being in favor of corporate and political power. Please do not let me down.

Enjoy.

The Sudan

Echidne of the Snakes has a great story on the current inhumanity to man that is going on in the Sudan. Enjoy.

Scientists Say : Ann Coulter is the Center of the Universe

Scientists at the Advanced Intellectual Mechanics lab have recently made a startling discovery; Ann Coulter is the center of the universe. More surprisingly, this world is but a figment of her imagination, a sort of game she is playing with herself.

What implications does this theory have in the field of political commentary? Well take this statement in her latest column, which concerns Richard Clarke. "As long as we're investigating everything, how about investigating why some loser no one has ever heard of is getting so much press coverage for yet another "tell-all" book attacking the Bush administration?"

Prior to this scientific discovery, I might have commented that it doesn't make Coulter look very good to assume that because she hadn't heard of Richard Clarke, he must be a "loser." But now I know that in fact he might very well not have existed before last week or the week before when he started appearing in the news. He might just be another delusionel villain that Ms. Coulter has imagined up to face her chosen champion, President Bush.

Thank you Science, for once again improving our lives.

Sometimes I Don't Know What To Think

I know this is not the sort of thing an internet commentator is ever supposed to admit. I much prefer my normal stance of furious sarcasticty, but sometimes the world is a bit too confusing even for me. I'm speaking of the recent assassination of Sheik Ahmed Yassin by the Israeli Government.

On the one hand, it's hard to imagine that this will have positive reprecussions. As Dennis Ross at the New York Times suggests, "For the short term, Sheik Yassin's killing on Monday in Gaza is almost certain to foster retaliation by those eager to have Israelis suffer pain as well. Already yesterday, the Israeli military said it foiled a rocket attack on Israel by militants in southern Lebanon, killing two of the militants in an air strike."

On the other hand I'm not immune to the argument that Yassin was a bad man and needed to go. It's a bit inconsistant to argue that Israel should be willing to negotiate with a man who's basic position is that Israel should not exist. Hammas is a terrorist organization; if we reserve the right to kill Usama Bin Ladin, can we deny Isreal the right to kill terrorists that pick on them?

The Utilitarian argument is perhaps the most persuasive. Yes, Israel had a right to do what it did; but assuming Israels goal is peace (and I believe it is), was it the smart thing to do?

Your Tax Dollars at Work

For those interested in reading Rush Limbaugh's interview with Dick Cheney, you can view it at the White House Web Site that you helped pay for. Yep, at a website paid for with your tax dollars you can read an interview conducted by Rush Limbaugh (who is a skilled broadcaster but a terrible interviewer (basically for the same reason; he loves the sound of his own voice)).

Here's a good bit from El Rushbo, "No, I understand -- I understand. I just -- we see things in the paper, and it irritates supporters of the President who may not understand in a time like this where the administration is involved in a struggle for the future of the country to see some Republicans not totally on board that struggle puzzles people."

Read that outloud and see if it makes sense.

Anyway if you, like me, are frusterated at this misuse of government money, please send an e-mail to the white house and request your $0.000000004312 back.

David Limbaugh, Master Pervericator

But perhaps I'm giving him too much credit. In his latest article, Mr. Limbaugh suggests that the election may turn on the perceptions of the voters as much as on the reality of the situation. For example, the economy is doing great according to some. A glance at today's NY Times Business Page tells the story. The first story is entitled "For Wall Street Chiefs, Big Paydays Continue" and the second story is entitled "Stock Indexes Fall to Lows for the Year." So maybe a strong economy is in the eyes of the beholder, as Limbaugh suggests. If we were to accept his perception of the world, instead of the data relayed to us by our own eyes, then we'd vote for President Bush.

He then comments on Democrat opposition to the war.

"But the major weapon Democrats used to discredit Bush's performance on Iraq, prior to their orgy over the WMD issue, was the misrepresentation that we had attacked Iraq "unilaterally." Though we didn't succeed in persuading every recalcitrant nation to join the coalition, we did have scores of nations participating, making the charge of "unilateralism" objectively untrue."

This again reflects how David Limbaugh's perceptions may be at odds with reality. While he sees a unified coalition happily moving to fight Saddam Hussein, the real world notes that the United States, Great Britain, Poland and Australia provided all of the initial troops, with American troops making up the vast majority. We note that, unlike the first Gulf War, the United States is footing the bill almost completely. We note that many of the nations in the Coalition of the Willing are nations who owe us a considerable amount of money, and presumably would like to avoid having us send around the equivalent of a guy called Guido to collect.

More to the point, it is clear to any body who spends even a moment studying the Bush Administration that no nation has or had anything but a support role in formulating this policy. It isn't like the "Coalition" got together and decided what to do; Secretary Rumsfeld, Vice President Cheney, and President Bush told the other members of the Coalition what we were going to do; their only choice was to serve as our lap dogs or to act as independent nations and do what they felt was best (as stated above, that was not a viable strategy for some of these nations. I also don't want to insinuate that all nations disagreed with our policies; some, like Australia, may have supported our plans whole heartedly).

Anyway getting back to Mr. Limbaugh, I guess the moral to this story is just believe what he tells you to believe and everything will be ok. Sort of.

Round the Horn

I am not doing complete Blogarounds the way some of my colleagues in the Liberal Coalition do; I'm very lazy. Instead I am doing seven to ten cool links, usually on Monday or Friday for your perusal, and keeping track of how many times I hit each of my collegues.

You know there is not an activity on earth that isn't improved with the addition of an Excel spreadsheet.

Ok, well, maybe one.

Anyway here we go! Kick the Leftist has coverage of the strange case of Ms. Sandra Tsing Loh, latest frontline in the war against free speech.

Rick's Cafe Americaine has some comments on the Possibility of John McCain joining the Democratic Ticket as Vice President.

Rubber Hose has a really solid analysis of the Spanish Elections and our own misconceptions on them; wish I had come across this (and linked to it) earlier.

Speedkill has a thought on the old idea of Tort Reform.

Steve Gillard (Of Steve Gilliard's New Blog) has a scathing but well deserved attack on the Bush Administrations reaction to 9/11.

T.Rex (T.Rex's Guide to Life) considers the so-called Coalition of the Willing and finds it somewhat wanting.

The Fulcrum examines President Bush's laser like focus on . . . I can't even finish that sentance. He actually examines President Bush's lack of focus on Usama Bin Ladin.

That's all for now, but tune in next time when Mr. Peabody says "Woof."

Hmmmmmm.

Dennis Miller's performance (or lack thereof) reminded me of an old Dilbert.

OK

If ever there was an argument for why I should be on TV instead of some of these dimwits who are on TV, this is it.

The Dennis Miller Show, guest Eric Alterman.

Miller barely engages Alterman, and acts like a jerk. I don't know how even Conservatives can watch that interview and be proud (unless of course they think that liberal view points don't need to even have the occasional mention they currently get, as some do).

Via This Modern World.

Spanish Fly to be rename Freedom Fly

Yes, in a stunning move, the Congress of the United States, following the slap they gave to France a couple of years when they renamed French Fries, they have decided to give a similar blow to Spain, after the Spanish peoples decision to vote out the Pro-Bush Government.

As we all know, Congress keeps extensive supplies of Freedom Fly, the well renowned aphrodisiac; this has to come as a blow to the Spanish people.

Other things to be renamed include that great song "Freedom Flea" by Herb Albert and the Tijuana Brass and the Freedom Omelet (one medium Potato, two eggs, quarter cup salsa, quarter cup cheese, salt and other spices).

Paul Krugman

I haven't checked up on Paul Krugman in a while; but last week he wrote a brilliant dissection of President Bush's handling of the War of Terror.

"The truth is that Mr. Bush, while eager to invoke 9/11 on behalf of an unrelated war, has shown consistent reluctance to focus on the terrorists who actually attacked America, or their backers in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

This reluctance dates back to Mr. Bush's first months in office. Why, after all, has his inner circle tried so hard to prevent a serious investigation of what happened on 9/11? There has been much speculation about whether officials ignored specific intelligence warnings, but what we know for sure is that the administration disregarded urgent pleas by departing Clinton officials to focus on the threat from Al Qaeda.

After 9/11, terrorism could no longer be ignored, and the military conducted a successful campaign against Al Qaeda's Taliban hosts. But the failure to commit sufficient U.S. forces allowed Osama bin Laden to escape. After that, the administration appeared to lose interest in Al Qaeda; by the summer of 2002, bin Laden's name had disappeared from Mr. Bush's speeches. It was all Saddam, all the time.

This wasn't just a rhetorical switch; crucial resources were pulled off the hunt for Al Qaeda, which had attacked America, to prepare for the overthrow of Saddam, who hadn't. If you want confirmation that this seriously impeded the fight against terror, just look at reports about the all-out effort to capture Osama that started, finally, just a few days ago. Why didn't this happen last year, or the year before? According to The New York Times, last year many of the needed forces were tied up in Iraq.

It's now clear that by shifting his focus to Iraq, Mr. Bush did Al Qaeda a huge favor. The terrorists and their Taliban allies were given time to regroup; the resurgent Taliban once again control almost a third of Afghanistan, and Al Qaeda has regained the ability to carry out large-scale atrocities."

So maybe the fact that many liberals think we need a new leader in the war on terror isn't a sign of cultural suicide some of our hysterical friends on the right make it out to be.

Protests

As you know there were protests yesterday, around the world and right here in Tallahassee. To quote Salon's report on the protests. "Asked how many people were expected, Bill Dobbs, spokesman for United for Peace and Justice, one of the protest's organizers, said, "not anything like the huge numbers when we all believed we could stop the war."

Well the protest numbers were smaller her in FL, but what also struck me was the demographics. It was a much much older crowd it seemed to me. But we did have a number of protesters and speakers. Anyway see for yourself.

A Quick Pan Across the Protest.

New Quote

And A New Quotes Page.

Enjoy.