The Liberal Coalition

Also revising some things on the Liberal Coalition. I should have the cool owl picture there over my list. Here, check it out.



Of course something like this I can't help photoshopping a little, even if it is just to mess with the colors.



Or I could mess with the colors and make it a water color.



OK that's enough.

Continued Improvements

Making some changes to the website. In particular I am consolidating the Candidate Reviews. There will be a new webpage dedicated to John Kerry's statements, which will have links to the complete Candidate Reviews. Enjoy.

Your Weekly Rush

Rush chose to respond to a comment by Teresa Heinz Kerry on Friday. Rush began with this unusual statement. "Well, we haven't talked about Teresa Heinz Kerry recently. I've been trying to deal with this in a kid-glove, hands-off kind of way, you know? Because you're not supposed to "hit" the girl. You're not supposed to "attack" the girl, still no matter what the girl does, you can't."

I'm sure that will come as some comfort to Hillary Clinton. Rush goes on to use the old Conservative technique of making words mean whatever you want them to mean.

"Her most direct attack came on the subject of patriotism. 'One of the saddest things about this administration is its cynical attempt to equate patriotism with singing in the president's amen chorus,' she said. 'The Americans I have met are tired of being told it is unpatriotic to question this president and his administration's policies.'"

Teresa, nobody is saying that about them. It's their own guilt. It's their own guilt giving voice to that. Nobody is accusing them of that. You guys are trying to redefine "patriotism" so that's what it means. Let's be honest here. The left is trying to redefine "patriotism" as criticizing the president."

See? It's my own guilty conscience that's causing me to remember Rush saying that the goals of the Democratic Party and the goals of al-Qaeda are the same in the November Election. It's my own guilty conscience that's causing me to remember Rush suggesting that if I were a terrorist supporter I'd be doing exactly what I am doing.

But see that's the game we are playing, because pretty often Rush will preface one of these clear attacks on Democrats / Liberals patriotism by saying "Now I'm not questioning anybody's patriotism." See how that works?

"Now I'm not questioning President Bush's Patriotism, but I think he puts the needs of big business over the needs of the country."

"Now I'm not questioning Rush Limbaugh's Patriotism, but I think he doesn't give a damn about the damage he's inflicting on this country and only cares about having his nice townhouse in New York City and his mansion in Palm Beach, FL."

See? But of course for grown-ups I have, in fact, questioned their patriotism. What is patriotism? According to Websters, some definitions might be "Love of country; devotion to the welfare of one's country" Have I questioned Mr. Limbuaghs and President Bush's love of their country, or devotion to the welfare of the country? Clearly I have.

Reminds me of a Simpsons bit.

Lawyer: Will you tell the court your whereabouts at the time of the
carjacking?
Willie: I was alone in me Unabomber-style shack; I had nothing to do with
that carjacking.
Lawyer: Carjacking?! Who said anything about a carjacking?
[galley and jury murmurs]
Willie: But, didn't you just say--?
Lawyer: *I'll* ask the questions here, Carjacker Willie!

At any rate, Mr. Limbaugh, I know when my patriotism is being questioned. You can say black is white all day long if that's what you and your fans want, but I, and many others, know that it's black.

The sun's not yellow it's chicken.

Nader's Flirtation

Apparently Ralph Nader is not seeking to be the Green Party's presidential candidate in 2004. If, however, the party chooses to "endorse" him, he wouldn't say no.

Norman Solomon, a gentleman which with I don't entirely agree (although this article was perhaps a bit over the top), has the scoop.

Enjoy.

Scenes from the Fall

Our response to the Tenet resignation was, in a word, a relief. At last, someone who should have been removed from office at the very outset of the George W. Bush administration will be departing. By so doing, we can not only hope to avoid perpetuating the sorts of intelligence mistakes for which this DCI bears ultimate responsibility.

. . . Going back to the early 1990s, the CIA's view was like that of its clients elsewhere in the Arab world: Democratizing Iraq was to be resisted at every turn. The Agency favored simply replacing Saddam Hussein with another tyrannical dictator, in the interest of promoting local and regional "stability." The virulent and ongoing effort to discredit Ahmed Chalabi springs forth from the systematic hostility George Tenet fostered, or at least tolerated, towards Free Iraq. Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., It's About Time.

It's true that Mr. Tenet has always demonstrated intense dedication to the nation and his job, but he presided over some of the most astonishing and costly failures of American espionage in recent history.

On Mr. Tenet's watch, the American intelligence community failed to comprehend the domestic threat from Al Qaeda before Sept. 11, 2001. It either bungled or hyped its analysis of Iraq to spin fanciful threats from chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, threats that President Bush used to justify the invasion. The C.I.A. itself apparently did not sign on to the more ludicrous visions offered by Mr. Rumsfeld's team, like the one of grateful Iraqis showering American soldiers with flowers. But it utterly missed the dismal state Iraq was in and the strength of the insurgency that Americans would face after the fall of Baghdad. - New York Times Editorial.

"CIA Director George Tenet has resigned. Good. Can Congress and the media resign next?

Tenet stacked up an impressive number of failures during his tenure, but pinning America's atrophied intelligence capabilities on him is a little like blaming Danish Defense Minister Soeren Gade for Denmark's weak defense. The problem is the national material with which both have had to work. Led by Congress and the media, the United States has hobbled its ability to conduct intelligence operations throughout the past three decades with its squeamishness and its gotcha political culture." - Rich Lowry, "Tenet and Us."

George Tenet's resignation as director of Central Intelligence has taken the political world of Washington by storm. And yet, it was an act that had been foreseen for some time.

Consider what made Tenet's tenure at the CIA untenable: the combined weight of the 9/11 intelligence failures, the absence of Iraqi WMD and the post-occupation fiasco, as well as the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information, whether it be the leaking of the identity and the affiliation of Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife (a CIA covert operative) to the press, of Ahmed Chalabi's allegedly informing the Iranians (courtesy of a leak from the Pentagon) that the United States had broken Iran's diplomatic code.

But, in reflecting on his passing, one should never forget that his troubles were, for the most part, of his own making." - Scott Ritter, "Tenet leaves CIA's Reputation in Tatters."

"In Tenet’s defense, he inherited a weak organization seriously hampered by a shortage of spies, Justice Department rules which prohibited the CIA and U.S. law enforcement from sharing important information, and funding constraints. These issues developed primarily during the Carter and Clinton administrations – who mistakenly believed technology could replace human beings as the primary source of intelligence and protecting individual civil liberties was more important than preventing terror attacks. - Freedom Alliance, "Tenets Hard Work Should Not Be Lost in Speculation of Reasons Behind Resignation."

"There has certainly been loud rumbling about tension between the CIA on the one hand, and the Pentagon and White House on the other, over the Iraq intelligence mess. Tenet had already fallen on his sword over the controversy about Bush's mistaken claim in his 2003 State of the Union address that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium for nuclear weapons in the African nation of Niger. Although the CIA had in fact warned Bush's national security council deputy, Stephen Hadley, that the information was false, in the end it was Tenet who accepted responsibility.

With the White House having thrown Tenet overboard once, there is little doubt it would do so again. But there is some question about whether he would take the fall a second time. And there are two possible sources of friction between Tenet and the White House that are heating up: the inquiry into who revealed the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame, and the unfolding scandal over allegations that Pentagon-favorite Ahmed Chalabi passed sensitive U.S. intelligence to Iran." - Mary Jacoby, "Tenet's Choice."

No real commentary. Nice that both the right wing and the left wing are applauding his resignation.

Round the Horn Part 3.1223, This Ain't Really Life

Incidentally for those who are wondering, last weeks title for this feature ("Round the Horn Issue 15 - Lobsters Ate My Femur" was sort of a reference to the classic Frank Zappa album "Weasels Ripped my Flesh." This weeks title is a line from a song by Gil-Scott Heron ("B-Movie").

Let's start out with T-Rex's Guide to Life, which has a nice little review of some of the more interesting comments he's received.

Words on a Page has an exploration of some of the differences between President Bush and Former President Clinton.

The Gotham City 13 has the 411 on the person selected by America to run Iraq, Iyad Allawi.

Rubber Hose has an interesting anecdote about how reporters want to deal with environmental issues.

Good post over at archy on the contrast between Republican Rhetoric of a year ago and the realities today, in this instance referring to their dominance over the American Political system.

Congratulations are in order to Pen Elayne for becoming one of the top 100 most influential bloggers. Or should that be congratulations to the blogging community for realizing and recognizing that Pen Elayne is or should be one of the top 100 most influential bloggers.

The Invisible Library chronicles the existence of a giant mushroom in the Congo.

Dohiyi Mir has a really fascinating discussion on the use of the world imperial to describe our current President. He also quotes Lewis Carroll. Be sure to read the comments section down below as there is an interesting further discussion.

Corrente has a post on how the Bush administration is acknowledging the contributions of our soldiers (after being pushed into it).

New World Blogger has a provocative question on what poverty means. It is definitely something to think about.

And that's it for this session. Join us next time when we will have more obscure song lyrics and links to the brilliant writers of the Liberal Coalition. But, if you just can't wait for next week, you can go to the Liberal Coalition's blog roll along the left there and enjoy.

Party Out of Bounds

Apparently if you want to you can Party for the President. Organize a party in support of President Bush. Why President Bush and his cronies even have a suggestion on what to serve.

"Let them eat cake."

Analyzing Ann II

Yep, continuing our new feature (now that the lamps seem to have run their course) is our ongoing attempt to, in a more scientific way, analyze Ann Coulters Columns.

As you recall, last week Ms. Coulters article was 43 sentences long. 20 of those sentences were attacks, 13 were positive statements of her argument, and 10 were neutral (making percentages of 47%, 30%, and 23%, respectively).

Well, Ann's latest column, "This is History calling - quick, get me Rewrite!" has 37 statements. 23 of them are attacks (making a whopping 62% of the total), 9 are positive (making 24%) and 5 are neutral (making 14%). One thing to note, her last paragraph contained a lot of short sentences slamming into Al Gore. Had she left that off, her negative/positive balance would have been a lot closer to last weeks.

A further note on the title. Ann presumably doesn't believe that she is asking for a rewrite of history (although she is).

Ann's central thesis (beyond the standard "Liberals are Hateful Morons") is that a story from New York Times Magazine, in which Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz laid out the case for the invasion of Iraq, was the Rosetta stone to understanding what would happen when we invaded. Incidently it remains the Rosetta stone despite having been penned by Bill Keller, now editor in chief at the "Seditionist Rag," by which Ann means the New York Times. If only the New York Times were as unbiased as Coulter herself, but apparently we can trust it in this instance.

Among other things, Wolfowitz apparently stated to Keller that Saddam probably hadn't rebuilt his nuclear program. So you see that proves what hypocrites we Liberals are. Here was the Secretary of Defense patiently explaining to us liberals that Saddam probably didn't even have a nuclear program running, certainly not one that was near completion, and we just weren't listening.

I guess these other guys were talking so much it was hard to pay attention to Wolfowitz.

"Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof - the smoking gun - that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." - President George W. Bush, October 7, 2002

"QUESTION: So Saddam's more dangerous than North Korea or Iran?

VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: I think so because of his past practice and because we believe that he is a danger, a fundamental danger, not only for the region but potentially the United States, as well. And I say, a lot of that is based on the evidence that's now available, that he is working actively to improve his . . . nuclear weapons program." - Vice President Richard Cheney, Meet the Press, September 8, 2002

"The problem with that is the way one gains absolutely certainty as to whether a dictator like Saddam Hussein has nuclear weapons is if he uses it, and that's a little late." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, September 8, 2002

Got these quotes from a site I mentioned last week, "Iraq on the Record." There were 30 such references between September 1st and October 15th according to "Iraq on the Record."

Ann's slams on Gore are typically mean-spirited, but just as typically somewhat difficult to prove. And of course there's this gem. "He grew a beard - just in time for an attack on the nation by fundamentalist Muslims."

But the most problematic part of Ann's essay comes in the first couple of lines.

"The invasion of Iraq has gone fabulously well, exceeding everyone's expectations - certainly exceeding the doomsday scenarios of liberals. The Bush-haters' pre-war predictions - hundreds of thousands dead, chemical attacks on our troops, retaliatory terrorist attacks in the United States, an invasion by Turkey, oil facilities in flames and apocalyptic environmental consequences - have proven to be about as accurate as Bill Clinton's "legally accurate" statements about Monica Lewinsky.

Inasmuch as they can't cite any actual failures in Iraq, liberals busy themselves by claiming the administration somehow "misled" them about the war."

There are no real problems in Iraq, and anybody who says that there are problems in Iraq is a Liberal Liar (and presumably a Bush-Hater). What kind of life does Ann Lead that she's comfortable saying that? I mean part of this is shifting the terrain. The problems that Liberals are pointing out now aren't problems with the invasion itself, but problems with our plans to occupy Iraq. But there seems to be a willful decision on Ann's part to believe that the war in Iraq is going great.

Providing yet more proof for my thesis that Reality itself is Partisan.

Saving Private Chalabi

Joel Mowbray seems to be on a mission to rehabilitate Ahmed Chalabi. His latest article pins the blame for Ahmed Chalabi's downfall squarely where it belongs; on the State Department and the CIA.

He makes fun of the idea that Ahmed Chalabi passed on diplomatic codes to the Iranians. Apparently Mr. Mowbray has a hard time believing that the Iranian spy service would send a message in the broken code. Gosh that does sound a little suspicious.

Reporting by the New York Times, however, makes it clear that the Iranians didn't necessarily believe Mr. Chalabi initially. "According to American officials, the Iranian official in Baghdad, possibly not believing Mr. Chalabi's account, sent a cable to Tehran detailing his conversation with Mr. Chalabi, using the broken code." They article goes on to report that they sent a dummy message to see if the American's would respond.

But of course, the issue here isn't what Mr. Chalabi may or may not have done. The issue is how the CIA and State Department betrayed him. After all, when the CIA was casting doubts on reports of Saddams weapons of mass destruction, Ahmed Chalabi was one of those promoting them. When the State Department was suggesting that holding Iraq might prove more difficult than we initially realized, Ahmed Chalabi was out there saying that the Iraqis would welcome us as liberators and it would be smooth sailing.

So naturally we must place the blame where it belongs; on the CIA and State Department. They, by there lack of faith in our bold plan have caused it to fail.

By the way, if you didn't catch This Modern World this week, you might want to.

Alexandra Polier

If you are interested in the story of Alexandra Polier, the intern whom Matt Drudge acccused of of having an affair with John Kerry you might want to check out this article.

Nice to know what Drudge and the others who promoted this story are made of. Of course, it's also know to meet, in a literary sense, Ms. Alexandra Polier who stikes me as a good writer and a very human person.

Here's a touching bit.

"One reporter had a little girl call up, assuming I wouldn’t hang up on a child. They even made her say, “Can I talk to Alex?” And when I said, “Yes, it’s me,” a reporter jumped on the line. CNN’s Zain Verjee wrote beseeching notes, slipping them under the front gate. It was like a horror movie where the zombies are on the other side of the door and then an arm comes through the window."

By touching, I, of course, meant stomach cramp inducing. Still she was a Democrat and a Kerry supporter, so presumably most Limbaugh Conservatives are happy with this kind of thing.

The Trials of Conservatism

E. J. Dionne, Jr. has an article today about the fractures in the conservative movement. He begins his article with the following sentences.

"Nothing succeeds like success and nothing fails like failure.

In politics, this means that if a leader is seen as doing well, his side in the debate holds together and suppresses disagreements that are quite real but don't seem worth pursuing if they get in the way of winning.

It also means that if a leader is perceived as doing badly, those quite real disagreements are seen as much more important. Parts of the leader's political coalition try to disengage themselves from the perceived failure and differentiate themselves from those whom they see as incompetent and thus representing something other than the true faith."

While I agree with the upshot of Mr. Dionne's analysis, I would argue that there is a countervailing pressure. Political movements expect more out of their leaders when they are in power. They also feel less vulnerable to whatever bad stuff they think the other side is going to do. That's why in 2000, many Nader Voters, I believe, were willing to vote for him because they believed that after 8 years of Clinton things were on a bit of an even keel. They felt comfortable. It's not that they liked Candidate Bush, but they weren't afraid of him.

I'm not sure that in this election we can count on Republican dissatisfaction with President Bush's failures to cause much of an exodus. I think they still fear "President Kerry" enough to vote for President Bush. Of course that's assuming no serious third party candidate shows up (none so far) and that they vote at all. Some Republicans, maybe many Republicans will stay home on election day, which could only help Kerry.

Somedays I Just Wish I Could Stay In Bed

I don't really know what to do with this. But when the same argument pops up in two separate articles, it's probably going somewhere.

"The United Nations is an enabling institution. It enables John Kerry to babble mindlessly about the situation in Iraq. It enables President Bush to assure Americans that our troops will not remain in Iraq forever. The United Nations also enables terrorists in the Middle East to kill with impunity."
- Ben Shapiro, "The United Nations International Terrorism Organization."

"The United Nations and Red Cross have been providing cover for terrorists -- literally. And American taxpayers are footing some of the bill."
- Michelle Malkin, "The ambulances-for-terrorists scandal."

Both articles reference an incident last month in which "Arab Terrorists" (according to Ms. Malkin and Mr. Shapiro) used an ambulance in a raid on this Israeli Military. Young Ben also references an incident a number of years ago in which members of Hezbollah used UN Uniforms to lure Israeli soldiers into a trap. According to Ben there is some possibility that the Indian UN Peacekeepers were bribed into letting Hezbollah use their stuff.

In both articles the point is the same; the United Nations is a bad organization and we shouldn't support it.

The problem is that it is hard to judge the veracity of these reports and it's hard to gauge the involvement of United Nations forces in this. My personal inclination would be to suspect that the United Nations are victims in this scenario, although obviously not to the extent of the Israelis. I seriously doubt that some UN Ambulance Driver threw the keys to some terrorist and said "Just make sure you fill it up before bringing it back."

I also notice there's one player missing in both of these accounts. I mean we have the innocent Israeli Civilians. We have the brave Israeli Soldiers. We have the evil Palestinian terrorists (and lest anybody get any contrary ideas, Palestinian terrorists are pretty evil). But we don't have innocent or even innocent but a bit grimy Palestinian civilians. They don't come into the picture. And I can see why they wouldn't, since both young Ben and Ms. Malkin are asking for a cessation of medical aid to the Palestinians.

At any rate, I wish I were still in bed. And stories like these don't inspire me to change my mind.

A Little Information about Brunei Darussalam

First of it's on the same island as Malaysia. Although I think Malaysia is a string of Islands, and Brunei Darussalam looks like it's only on one island. According to the CIA Worldbook, it is slightly smaller than Delaware.

According to the webpage of the Brunei government, it was part of the British Empire up into the 80s. It is currently ruled by Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah Mu'izzaddin Waddaulah, whose title is Sultan and Yang Di-Pertuan of Brunei Darussalam.

Here's a picture of the Empire Hotel and Country Club, which is the best picture I could find--I did see a really cool palace looking thing, but the caption was in Japanese, so I wasn't sure if it was really in Brunei Darussalam or not.



The national philosophy of Brunei Darussalam is called Melayu Islam Beraja, and according to the countries webpage, it is "a blend of Malay language, culture and Malay customs, the teaching of Islamic laws and values and the monarchy system which must be esteemed and practiced by all. Islam is tolerant of all religions so the MIB philosophy cannot be viewed as a force which stifles the practice of other religions. Rather it is a vehicle by which other religions can carry on as usual their religious practices and rites with the respects and peace they deserve." Interesting. I wonder how that works in practice.

According to the CIA Worldbook, the country is about 67% Muslim, 13% Buddhist, 10% Christian, and about 10% indigineous beliefs and others. Amnesty International doesn't seem to think they are all that bad, although certainly not perfect. "Six members of a banned religious group were reportedly detained without charge or trial. Criminal suspects were sentenced to caning." On the plus side (from Amnesty International's point of view), the Government of Brunei Darussalam haven't carried out any executions since 1957.

Unsurprisingly the food of Brunei Darussalam is somewhat similar to the rest of Malaysian food. Here's a site that gives several recipes you might eat if you were to eat in Brunei Darussalam.

Anyway it's always nice to learn more about other parts of the world.

Diverse Readership

I am using www.Webstat.com to obsessively track how many visitors I have, and they work pretty well. As I've previously reported, it provides states on what countries my readers come from. Well, I'm pleased to note that May was my most diverse month yet, with 36 separate countries representated among my readership (compared to 20 for March, and 22 for April).

Here's the break down.

Number one was the United States of America, with 1,317 hits.
Number two was Canada with 35 hits. Kind of a jump there.
Number three was the United Kingdom with 21 hits.
Number four was Australia with 20 hits.
Number five was Germany with 8 hits.
Number six was Norway with 6 hits.
Number seven was France with 5 hits.
Number eight was Lebanon with 4 hits.
Number nine was a tie between Ireland, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Japan with 3 hits.
Number ten was a tie between Algeria, India, Austria, and Brunai Darussalam (which place I have never heard of) with 2 hits.
Number eleven, with 1 hit, was a tie between Taiwan, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Argentina, Coratia (Hrvatska), Switzerland, Hong Kong, Mexico, Israel, Finland, Gibralter, Belgium, Singapore, Peurto Rico, South Africa, Italy, New Zealand, Korea (South), Morocco, and Nigeria.

Come back later when I'll have some information on Brunai Darussalam, unless I forget.

The Wages of Sin

Here's a story you should look it. God knows we can't allow dissident opinions or dissident art in America now, and thank goodness these brave citizens took it upon themselves to show Ms. Lori Haigh the errors of her way. Next stop the New York Times.

This Modern World pointed this out this morning.

Speaking for the Microphones

Paul Krugman has a typically sharp article today on the financial necessities of President Bush's policies.

"Last week The Washington Post got hold of an Office of Management and Budget memo that directed federal agencies to prepare for post-election cuts in programs that George Bush has been touting on the campaign trail. These include nutrition for women, infants and children; Head Start; and homeland security. The numbers match those on a computer printout leaked earlier this year - one that administration officials claimed did not reflect policy.

Beyond the routine mendacity, the case of the leaked memo points us to a larger truth: whatever they may say in public, administration officials know that sustaining Mr. Bush's tax cuts will require large cuts in popular government programs. And for the vast majority of Americans, the losses from these cuts will outweigh any gains from lower taxes.

It has long been clear that the Bush administration's claim that it can simultaneously pursue war, large tax cuts and a "compassionate" agenda doesn't add up. Now we have direct confirmation that the White House is engaged in bait and switch, that it intends to pursue a not at all compassionate agenda after this year's election."

Of course to many Republicans this has long been a valid theory. Cut off revenue, drain the Countries Purse, and then force massive cuts in programs the Conservatives don't like anyway. A case can be made that cutting these government programs is a smart move. Not a case I would agree with, of course, but at least I understand that other people think this way.

As with Iraq, however, this Administration is unwilling to trust the American people to support their plans. Instead of flatly telling the American people "Hey, if you elect us for a second term, expect to get cuts in most social programs because we believe you don't need them and that they have a negative effect on the country."

That wouldn't sound very good on the campaign trail, though. So they are stuck with the bait and switch of pretending one thing and delivering another.

An Interview with Robot Men From Mars

I recently had the opportunity to sit down with the Robot Men from Mars (well, their designated spokesperson, X12-4 (also known as Chad)). The discussion centered around a recent article by Mike S. Adams, entitled "An Interview with David Horowitz."

MMAC!!! - So tell me, Robot Man from Mars X12-4, why have you chosen to reveal yourself and give an interview at this time?

X12-4 - Well, I was looking at some of the articles at Townhall.Com this morning, and I noticed something I found disturbing. I decided that I needed to speak out against it.

MMAC!!! - And what was that?

X12-4 - There was an article by Dr. Mike S. Adams, entitled "An interview with David Horowitz." But it wasn't an interview with David Horowitz. It was an interview with Mike S. Adams, conducted by Jamie Glazov, an associate of David Horowitz. The only participation Mr. Horowitz apparently had in this process is that he talked with Mr. Adams right before participating in the interview.

MMAC!!! - Holy Moley! That does sound a bit disingenuous on Mr. Adam's part.

X12-4 - You bet, Mr. Make me a Commentator!!! There were some other minor problems with the interview as well, which centered on Academic Freedom or the lack thereof.

MMAC!!! - Can you give us an example, Robot Man from Mars?

X12-4 - Well one particularly troubling passage concerns Dr. Cornell West. Dr. Adams apparently feels that West (who appeared in the movie Matrix Reloaded) must be a racist because he has "ties" with Khalid Muhammad. Of course Mr. Adams leaves the nature of those ties somewhat vague. Were they friends? Political Allies? Dinner Guests?

MMAC!!! - That is a bit suspicious, isn't it?

X12-4 - Yes, it is. And to make matters worse he engages in a bit of vaguely racist characterization in describing West. Allow me to quote from the relevant passage. "I wish that West would stop scratching his beard, whispering, and rocking back and forth like a heroin addict in an all-night jazz bar and just answer some simple questions. Are you an anti-Semite? If not, why do so many of your friends seem to hate Jews?" Of course Dr. Adams only cites one friend and leaves their connection vague, so it is hard for us to judge how many of Cornell's friends are anti-Semitic.

MMAC!!! - Wow. That is interesting. But I'm afraid we are out of time. Thank you so much for speaking with us. Is there anything else you'd like to say?

X12-4 - No not really. Need to get back to finish preparations to invade Venus.

Revealing my Findings

After conducting my research, I have come to the following conclusion.

Dogs have little to no sense of rhythm.

Of course I could be wrong.

So what do you think?

That's the nice thing about a comments section, I get to find out instantly how badly I've screwed up. I still have a few more changes to make this afternoon.

Need to upload my new Logo

Here it is. A sneak preview.

Big Changes today

So if something doesn't work entirely correctly, that's why. Hope to get it all back up soon.

Memorial Day

This is one of Rudyard Kiplings well known poems.

Tommy

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
.....O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
.....But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins," when the band begins to play -
.....The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
.....O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins," when the band begins to play.
I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
.....For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
.....But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide -
.....The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
.....O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.
Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
.....Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
.....But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll -
.....The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
.....O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.
We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
.....While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind,"
.....But it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind -
.....There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
.....O it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind.
You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
.....For it's Tommy this an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
.....But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
.....An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
.....An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool - you bet that Tommy sees!


The Publican is what we would call a bartender, and the Public House is a bar. The Widow of the Widow's Uniform was Queen Victoria.

I've decided not to do any commentary on the poem, only to suggest that readers not assume that my opinions line up perfectly with Mr. Kiplings nor are they entirely dissimilar.

New Quote

Here's your new quote, and of course, a new Quotes Page.

And for good measure, another Lamp!