« January 2006 | Main | March 2006 »
February 28, 2006
When Does It Become a Civil War in Iraq?
More than a few news sources are suggesting that Iraq is on the brink of Civil War. (AP) I would like to know how they define that point? What has to happen and when, before one concludes that it is in fact a civil war? I really don't know. Wikipedia states:
A civil war is a war in which the parties within the same country or empire struggle for national control of state power. As in any war, the conflict may be over other matters such as religion, ethnicity, or distribution of wealth. Some civil wars are also categorized as revolutions when major societal restructuring is a possible outcome of the conflict. An insurgency, whether successful or not, is likely to be classified as a civil war by some historians if, and only if, organized armies fight conventional battles. Other historians state the criteria for a civil war is that there must be prolonged violence between organized factions or defined regions of a country (conventionally fought or not).
Posted by Chip Spear at 6:42 PM | Comments (3)
Loch Ness Monster in Lake Champlain?
I sure hope this is true. (ABC)
This site sure has some fun nonsense.
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:40 PM | Comments (1)
This is a Little Scary
Fast food ice is dirtier than toilet water.(ABC) No more ice for me, that is for sure.
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:37 PM | Comments (2)
Apple Scores
I read the news and had a smile on my face. Apple continues to open doors, expand beyond what we expect. It is innovative and clever. It is not perfect, but it always seems to create products that stand out in a market known for invention. One is hard pressed to think of another "computer" company who is as creative and well known for design and innovation. After reading the article here, go to Apple's website.
Apple Computer Inc. (Nasdaq:AAPL - news) on Tuesday introduced a new iPod "Hi-Fi" home stereo system and a new Mac mini powered by an Intel (Nasdaq:INTC - news) chip the company said was nearly five times faster than the previous version.....
Apple also introduced on Tuesday a new Mac mini with a single core Intel chip as much as three times faster than the previous version. He also said the Mac mini with an even more powerful dual core Intel chip was nearly five times as fast as the previous version.
The Mac mini is Apple's entry level machine aimed at people who already have a computer or are thinking about replacing one because it is sold without a monitor, keyboard or mouse.
Posted by Chip Spear at 3:04 PM | Comments (0)
February 24, 2006
Al Qaeda Hits A Massive Grand Slam
Extremists on every side must take a certain glee in the recent attack on the Al-Askariya "Golden Mosque" in Samarra. The situation is obviously dangerous and extremely complex. The US and voices of moderation appear to be losers right now, or at least they are far behind on the scoreboard. I listed some bulletpoints of my thoughts at the moment
Al Qaeda gets chaos it desires. It would rather have a Sunni country.
They can establish training ground
They don't want a western oriented democracy
Neither do other monarchist states, like Saudi Arabia.
U. S. loses if there is a civil war
Shiites is losing control of the government
Shiites blame the US for not protecting the mosque
Shiites mad at US because they think they are siding with Sunnis in formation of government.
Shiites think they deserve to control government and have been unwilling to compromise which infuriates Sunnis
Shiites attack Sunnis for attacking mosque
Radical Shiites like al-Sadr gain more power
Sunnis blame US for not protecting them from Shiite reprisals
Sunnis pull out of coalition government
Sunnis already angry that Shiite militias and police forces are targeting, killing and torturing Sunnis
Many more Sunnis support insurgents after Shiite reprisals
Kurds sit and watch, eventually moving to secure oil fields in the north. They want control of the fields in case of a civil war
Iran - Influence grows with Iraqi Shiites in a civil war
Iran blames the US for letting Iraq descend into civil war
US might be more inclined to leave Iraq sooner in event of civil war, which again increases Iran's power in the region.
This is quite disastrous for the US.
Posted by Chip Spear at 12:00 PM | Comments (0)
February 23, 2006
White House Runs Another Trick Play
There always seems to be more than meets the eye when it comes to the White House. We now learn that they had a secret deal with Dubai Ports World to provide information. (AP)
Under a secretive agreement with the Bush administration, a company in the United Arab Emirates promised to cooperate with U.S. investigations as a condition of its takeover of operations at six major American ports, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.
The U.S. government chose not to impose other, routine restrictions.
In approving the $6.8 billion purchase, the administration chose not to require state-owned Dubai Ports World to keep copies of its business records on U.S. soil, where they would be subject to orders by American courts. It also did not require the company to designate an American citizen to accommodate requests by the government.
I believe this will turn into a very big political loss for the White House.
Posted by Chip Spear at 9:35 AM | Comments (0)
February 22, 2006
The Port Deal - What If.....
What if the port deal is approved and there is a terrorist attack on the NYC port. What then? What would the political fallout be for the President as opposed to it possibly happening with an American or British company?
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:21 AM | Comments (0)
February 21, 2006
Outsourcing Port Security
Maybe this UAE company is very good, I don't know. What I do know is IF there was a terrorist attack on one of the six ports managed by a state owned company from Dubai, every supporter of this particular contract would probably be lynched. It would be a HUGE embarrassment and indescribable political disaster. In addition there appears to be White House ties to the company. (NYDN)
The Dubai firm that won Bush administration backing to run six U.S. ports has at least two ties to the White House.
This takes stupidity to a level beyond my comprehension. It is like a triple penalty in football. I don't see how this is not a major political loss for the Administration.
Posted by Chip Spear at 2:37 PM | Comments (1)
February 20, 2006
Maybe This Guy Plays for the Muslims
A British historian is sentenced to three years in prison for denying the Holocaust (AP)
Posted by Chip Spear at 3:42 PM | Comments (3)
Player of the Week - Feb. 20 - Sen. Pat Roberts
Senator Pat Roberts, (R-Kan.) wins this week's Political Sports Player of the Week for his superb play on the part of the administration. The play started when Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller called for a broad investigation into the NSA wiretapping program. Sen. Roberts thought he had the votes to defeat the measure along party line votes within his committee, however two Republicans, Senators Snowe and Hagel, indicated they would not support Roberts. In a closed session Roberts then called for adjournment until March 7, which passed along party line vote. Roberts has since come out for some sort of Congressional oversight of the program, but not an investigation.
Roberts gains significant political yardage supporting the White House and the NSA in derailing any investigation into past events. Not letting the White House hog all the attention he grabs the spotlight himself by calling for "some" type of Congressional oversight on the wiretapping. It certainly remains to be seen what he will agree to and how far he would stand against his fearless leader. However, it does establish a degree of independence, which can be useful in any future Kansas political campaigns. It was a very good move.
We should also mention that this is the same Sen. Roberts who claimed that his committee did not have time to investigate the use of pre-war intelligence leading up to the Iraq war. Roberts has done everything he possible to delay that particular investigation. He is clearly a major Senate player for the administration. Congratulations on winning this week's award!
Posted by Chip Spear at 12:07 PM | Comments (1)
Fabulous Fumble of the Week - Feb. 20th - Michael Chertoff
This week's winner was a hard one to decide, really. There was the actual sports fumble, when Lindsey Jacobellis lost a gold medal making a hot dog move in the Snowboard Cross event. And Bryant Gumble amused us with his politically incorrect statement on his show Real Sports with Bryant Gumble on HBO:
"Finally, tonight, the Winter Games. Count me among those who don't like them and won't watch them ... Because they're so trying, maybe over the next three weeks we should all try too. Like, try not to be incredulous when someone attempts to link these games to those of the ancient Greeks who never heard of skating or skiing. So try not to laugh when someone says these are the world's greatest athletes, despite a paucity of blacks that makes the Winter Games look like a GOP convention. Try not to point out that something's not really a sport if a pseudo-athlete waits in what's called a kiss-and-cry area, while some panel of subjective judges decides who won... So if only to hasten the arrival of the day they're done, when we can move on to March Madness - for God's sake, let the games begin."
Nothing like a little politically incorrect comment to spice up the award race.
Then we had a decision by District Court Judge David Trager dismissing a lawsuit by Maher Arar, a completely innocent Canadian citizen seized at JFK airport, flown to Syria, tortured, and held in a prison for almost a year. The judge said it did not matter how badly he had been treated or how the government behaved. He might have been killed and it would not matter. The government was not accountable because of the need for secrecy in the war on terror. Gee, good thing it wasn't you or me that was grabbed. And it makes me wonder if kidnapping and torture are fine, what isn't?
However, we had something even bigger and better to consider. This week's award, after much thought, analysis and plan old gut feelings goes to whoever made the brilliant decision to turn security of 6 of the country's biggest ports, including NYC, over to a company based in the United Arab Emirates. No one knows the direct relationships here, but the U.A.E. was the base for at least a couple of the 9/11 hijackers. The U.A.E. also has known connections to Al Qaeda. That doesn't make the company complicit in anything, but it sure looks terrible. One would think that the U.S. would protect its own ports, instead of turning them over to a Muslim company. Just think of the fallout if by some chance any of these ports are attacked by Al Qaeda and we find a connection within the company. Talk about looking more than stupid. I could not have made up something more ridiculous than this. After all of Bush's talk about terrorism, this is amazing. So the winner this week is the head of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff. Have you ever heard of him before?
Posted by Chip Spear at 11:11 AM | Comments (1)
The West Clearly on the Defensive in Cartoon Controversy
The Muslim world is on the attack, and from all accounts is doing exceedingly well. With election victories in Palestine and Iran, growing influence in Egypt and riots and demonstrations all over the world to list, the West finds itself questioning its actions, motives and policies seeking to mollify any and all policies inciting Muslim anger. The response of many westerners is to call for calm, to reach out to Islamic moderates, engage in dialogue, to ask westerners to be more considerate when they joke or criticize the Muslim religion or mores. Basically they are asking that people in the west practice self-censorship.
Self censorship is not necessarily bad, we do it all the time. We don't insult people at work, we don't tell wives or girlfriends they are overweight. We don't tell our best friends that something they did or are planning to do is not a good idea. We don't tell people that many of their opinions are stupid, whites don't use the word nigger, when many blacks do and we usually practice a certain amount of restraint rather than make some dumb sexist, cultural remark or joke. I am sure you do this all the time. I know that many times when I workout at my pool I see many ways that other swimmers can improve their strokes. Do I criticize them, or even make a suggestion that they something? Almost never, I keep my mouth shut.
So one might ask how this is different, which I think it clearly is. We are engaged in a war, both physically in Iraq and Afghanistan and culturally against Islam. You might think that this is harsh and extreme, but events would suggest otherwise. The publisher of the cartoons states yesterday in the Washington Post. (WaPo)
I commissioned the cartoons in response to several incidents of self-censorship in Europe caused by widening fears and feelings of intimidation in dealing with issues related to Islam....
Our goal was simply to push back self-imposed limits on expression that seemed to be closing in tighter.
At the end of September, a Danish standup comedian said in an interview with Jyllands-Posten that he had no problem urinating on the Bible in front of a camera, but he dared not do the same thing with the Koran....
So, over two weeks we witnessed a half-dozen cases of self-censorship, pitting freedom of speech against the fear of confronting issues about Islam. This was a legitimate news story to cover, and Jyllands-Posten decided to do it by adopting the well-known journalistic principle: Show, don't tell....
We have a tradition of satire when dealing with the royal family and other public figures, and that was reflected in the cartoons. The cartoonists treated Islam the same way they treat Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and other religions. And by treating Muslims in Denmark as equals they made a point: We are integrating you into the Danish tradition of satire because you are part of our society, not strangers. The cartoons are including, rather than excluding, Muslims.
The cartoons do not in any way demonize or stereotype Muslims. In fact, they differ from one another both in the way they depict the prophet and in whom they target. One cartoon makes fun of Jyllands-Posten, portraying its cultural editors as a bunch of reactionary provocateurs. Another suggests that the children's writer who could not find an illustrator for his book went public just to get cheap publicity. A third puts the head of the anti-immigration Danish People's Party in a lineup, as if she is a suspected criminal....
On occasion, Jyllands-Posten has refused to print satirical cartoons of Jesus, but not because it applies a double standard. In fact, the same cartoonist who drew the image of Muhammed with a bomb in his turban drew a cartoon with Jesus on the cross having dollar notes in his eyes and another with the star of David attached to a bomb fuse. There were, however, no embassy burnings or death threats when we published those.
One must remember that Mohammed was a warrior, leading armies, conquering and killing other tribes and cultures. He demanded subservience. Many times his opponents were killed. His religion was a means of control. Jesus did not lead armies, rule an empire or advocate killing, neither did Buddha. We are dealing with a different beast here. If you want to read some interesting analysis of Islam you might try "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam" by Robert Spencer. Islam is not a religion of tolerance as we see by the reactions to the cartoons and the pressure more and more European communities feel. Modern Islam must condemn the calls for violence of any sort when anyone writes, speaks or acts in a way which "insults" the Muslim faith. That type of intolerance is completely unacceptable in a democratic society.
Unless truly moderate, modern Muslims accept secular societies where each individual is able to practice his own religion, we are in for a very bad time, we will truly have a clash of cultures. If you think this is overblown, think again. The Telegraph reports that 40% of British Muslims want sharia law introduced into parts of Britain. (Telegraph) Any religion that advocates killing someone for what they say, draw, paint, or write needs to disappear. Any religion that does not respect an individual's basic human rights needs to disappear. Any religion that does not treat other races, or sexes as equals needs to disappear. Any religion which desires to subjugate or eliminate other religions needs to disappear. Any religion which forbids people from practicing any other religion needs to disappear. We do not need hate, anger, arrogance or power to be the controlling "drug" of any religious institution, whether it is Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindi, or whatever.
From a strategic perspective the West is on the defensive. If it is to survive this religious onslaught it will have to stand up and say no. No to intolerance, no to all the things that begin to restrict the things that make the West what it is, the dirty, messy, insulting, empowering, silly, wonderful acts of freedom. It should never, ever apologize, considering the nature of the opposition, where religion is a tool of domination and war.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:02 AM | Comments (1)
February 18, 2006
Lindsey Takes a Fall
Sometimes a person with beauty, talent, intelligence, ambition, and is about to win the biggest prize is sports makes a mistake, a goofy, immature, silly little mistake that she and almost every fan of fumbles will never, ever forget. It also probably cost her a few million dollars in endorsements. Lindsey will snowboard a whole lot more, maybe make a couple more Olympics and perhaps yet win a gold metal, but she will never forget this. It is a lesson we can all learn from. Read one of many articles at CNNSI.
Posted by Chip Spear at 3:17 PM | Comments (0)
February 16, 2006
Americans Should Demand Release of Secret Service Report
Demanding that the White House release the Secret Service report clearly puts the White House on the defensive regarding the Cheney hunting accident. We do not have a national security issue here. Why would the administration refuse to release this information? Do they have something to hide? Or, will they do everything to maintain their fortress of secrecy no matter what the situation? Perhaps they are worried if they provided information about this the floodgates will break. The White House seems to be waiting this out, marking time until the media changes channels to the next show. There are so many unanswered questions. I wonder if we will ever really find out what happened. I think it is human nature to expect the worst when someone keeps secrets.
Posted by Chip Spear at 2:44 PM | Comments (0)
325,000 Possible U.S. Terrorists
Does anyone outside of the White House and a few paranoid supporters actually believe that there are 325,000 potential terrorists in the country. And consider that the number has quadrupled in the since 2003. With no checks and balances on the N.S.A. and the White House wiretap program one would think the list will get longer and the justifications for snooping expand. That is a conjecture however. What do you think? (SFGATE)
Posted by Chip Spear at 9:04 AM | Comments (0)
February 15, 2006
Crash and Burn
Why did Cheney not call his boss about the shooting? Why was it left to Andrew Card to call George and not Dick on Saturday night? Why did George not take control of the situation immediately? Why did he not tell Dick to hold a press conference immediately? Why did he let the VP handle this on his own when it would clearly affect the entire White House? Why does he not tell him to talk to the press today, even a few days later? Why does Bush not hold a press conference to address the issue himself? What is he doing anyway? Whose team is this anyway? Who is the QB? Is Bush actually a hologram?
As Captain, Road Prison 36 says to Paul Newman in the movie "Cool Hand Luke", "What we have here, is a failure to communicate." But what is most evident is the complete failure of leadership by our fearless leader, who might be out riding his bike for all we know. It is a complete abdication of responsibility that he has not taken control to fix the boat.
Posted by Chip Spear at 9:57 AM | Comments (0)
February 14, 2006
Listen tonight on Subject 2 Discussion
I will be a guest on Shaun Daily's Internet radio show Subject 2 Discussion tonight at 10:30 Eastern time.
To listen LIVE go to http://www.LVROCKS.com and click on LISTEN and click on CAM/CHAT.
To post questions to the program go to the blog at SUBJECT2DISCUSSION.com
For those who miss the LIVE program can catch up with the podcast.
If you have an IPOD and wish to subscribe to the feed here is the RSS url:
http://podcasts.lvrocks.com/rss.aspx?channelid=5
Stop by.
Posted by Chip Spear at 5:05 PM | Comments (0)
McDonalds Follows the Bush Playbook
McDonald's recently admitted that they lied about ingredients to their french fry cooking oil. (AP)
Not long after disclosing that its french fries contain more trans fat than thought, McDonald's Corp. said Monday that wheat and dairy ingredients are used to flavor the popular menu item - an acknowledgment it had not previously made.
The presence of those substances can cause allergic or other medical reactions in food-sensitive consumers.
McDonald's had said until recently that its fries were free of gluten and milk or wheat allergens and safe to eat for those with dietary issues related to the consumption of dairy items. But the fast-food company quietly added "Contains wheat and milk ingredients" this month to the french fries listing on its Web site....
It's not the first time McDonald's forthrightness has been called into question concerning what's in its famous fries.
The company paid $10 million in 2002 to settle a lawsuit by vegetarian groups after it was disclosed that its fries were cooked in beef-flavored oil despite the company's insistence in 1990 that it was abandoning beef tallow for pure vegetable oil.
Last February, it paid $8.5 million to settle a suit by a nonprofit advocacy group accusing the company of misleading consumers by announcing plans in September 2002 to change its cooking oil but then delaying the switch indefinitely within months.
It seems to be a common tactic to say whatever you can get away with, and then when caught, misdirect the response so it doesn't really answer the question and it puts you in the best light possible. I say score points at any cost, so what if some consumers get sick or die. It is a small cost of doing business for a big corp like McDonalds..
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:03 PM | Comments (5)
February 13, 2006
Cheney Delay
Was Cheney drinking before "The Shot"? If it was me, and I was, I probably delay talking to the police at least 12 hours, not that Cheney, an honest, straightforward, open, Vice President of the U.S., would do something like that.
Posted by Chip Spear at 9:38 PM | Comments (1)
The QB Can't Lead the Team
The Congress just released a report indicating a massive "failure of leadership" in confronting the Hurricane Katrina disaster. (CNN)
"Our investigation revealed that Katrina was a national failure, an abdication of the most solemn obligation to provide for the common welfare," the report says. "At every level -- individual, corporate, philanthropic and governmental -- we failed to meet the challenge that was Katrina. In this cautionary tale, all the little pigs built houses of straw."
As I have mentioned before, the President looks like a leader and talks like a leader should talk, but when it comes to action, leading the team, he is a failure. I really don't understand why so many Americans are fooled by disconnect between words and reality.
Posted by Chip Spear at 12:29 PM | Comments (0)
Player of the Week - Rep. Heather Wilson - 2/13
House Representative Heather Wilson wins this week's Political Sports Player of the Week Award for her break with the White House and calling for a Congressional investigation into the wiretap mess. Ms Wilson is the chairwoman of the subommittee that oversees the N.S.A. She is not the only Republican calling for some sort of investigation, but she was one of the first in a leadership position.
I doubt there is a person in the U.S. that is against the "war of terror", as long it is actually a war on the terrorists and their network. No one wants to see another attack on the U.S. or U.S. citizens overseas. And most Americans feel that the President is correct in wanting and needing to wage a war against those enemies. The problem is in how this President has chosen to do so. He and his administration seem to have used every excuse to follow a path without oversight or approval by anyone else, specifically Congress or the courts. They look at "checks and balances" as impediments to doing what they want. They have grabbed as much power as possible and hidden behind the highest walls they can build, all in the name of terror. They have clearly mislead about means and methods using highly questionable legal justifications, whether is be renditions, torture, secret prisons, wiretaps, elevated terror alerts, outing CIA agents, etc. Up until recently almost all of their teammates, other Republicans, have refused to question their tactics. That seems to be changing. And given the retribution that Mr. Rove can dispense, it is courageous for them to act independently.
I do not know if what the President is doing is unconstitutional or not, I am not a lawyer. However it does seem to warrant serious investigation. For that reason we award Heather Wilson this week's award.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:51 AM | Comments (1)
Fabulous Fumble of the Week, Feb. 13 - Dick Cheney
I had a couple of other candidates in mind for this week's award until Dick did his dirty deed. Nothing like shooting an old friend to win you a Fumble Award. Perhaps prominent attorney Harry Whittington mentioned something about leaks, or secrecy, or wiretaps or something else which set Dick off, who knows. Perhaps it really was an accident. The real fumble however, is not the accidental shooting, though that is big news, but the decision by the White House to try to bury the story and not let it get out. (E&P)
More secrecy discovered adds up to another loss of yardage for the White House. Given the President's poll numbers one would think that they would try a different tactic, like truth. It might even score them a few points.
E&P has learned that the official confirmation of the shooting came about only after a local reporter in Corpus Christi, Texas, received a tip from the owner of the property where the shooting occured and called Vice President Cheney's office for confirmation.
The confirmation was made but it is not known for certain that Cheney's office, the White House, or anyone else intended to announce the shooting if the reporter, Jaime Powell of the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, had not received word from the ranch owner.
One of Powell's colleagues at paper, Beth Francesco, told E&P that Powell had built up a strong source relationship with the prominent ranch owner, Katharine Armstrong, which led to the tip.
"White House aides can be expected to say that the Vice President did not shoot Whittington, which suggests a bullet, but rather sprayed him with birdshot, a type of ammunition made up of tiny pieces of lead or steel," Time predicted.
On Sunday, the Chicago Tribune's James wrote on the Washington bureau's blog at the newspaper's site, "When a vice president of the U.S. shoots a man under any circumstance, that is extremely relevant information. What might be the excuse to justify not immediately making the incident public?"
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:11 AM | Comments (1)
February 10, 2006
More Aid for Big Business
Draw your own conclusions. (Gannett)
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert engineered a backroom legislative maneuver to protect pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits, say witnesses to the pre-Christmas power play.
The language was tucked into a Defense Department appropriations bill at the last minute without the approval of members of a House-Senate conference committee, say several witnesses, including a top Republican staff member....
Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., the ranking minority House member on the conference committee, said he asked Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, the conference chairman, whether the vaccine liability language was in the massive bill or would be placed in it.
Obey and four others at the meeting said Stevens told him no. Committee members signed off on the bill and the conference broke up.
A spokeswoman for Stevens, Courtney Boone, said last week that the vaccine liability language was in the bill when conferees approved it. Stevens was not made available for comment.
During a January interview, Frist agreed. Asked about the claim that the vaccine language was inserted after the conference members signed off on the bill, he replied: "To my knowledge, that is incorrect. It was my understanding, you'd have to sort of confirm, that the vaccine liability which had been signed off by leaders of the conference, signed off by the leadership in the United States Senate, signed off by the leadership of the House, it was my understanding throughout that that was part of that conference report."
But Keith Kennedy, who works for Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., as staff director for the Senate Appropriations Committee, said at a seminar for reporters last month that the language was inserted by Frist and Hastert, R-Ill., after the conference committee ended its work.
"There should be no dispute. That was an absolute travesty," Kennedy said at a videotaped Washington, D.C., forum sponsored by the Center on Congress at Indiana University.
"It was added after the conference had concluded. It was added at the specific direction of the speaker of the House and the majority leader of the Senate. The conferees did not vote on it. It's a true travesty of the process."
After the conference committee broke up, a meeting was called in Hastert's office, Kennedy said. Also at the meeting, according to a congressional staffer, were Frist, Stevens and House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:53 PM | Comments (0)
WOW - Words of Wisdom - 2/10
He who allows oppression, shares the crime.
~ Erasmus Darwin
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:01 PM | Comments (0)
White House Loses More "Truth" Yardage
The NY Times reported today that the Bush administration knew about the levee breach the night it happened, which clearly contradicts administration contentions that it found out about the problem the following day. (NYT)
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Bush administration officials said they had been caught by surprise when they were told on Tuesday, Aug. 30, that a levee had broken, allowing floodwaters to engulf New Orleans.
Investigators have found evidence that federal officials at the White House and elsewhere learned of the levee break in New Orleans earlier than was first suggested.
But Congressional investigators have now learned that an eyewitness account of the flooding from a federal emergency official reached the Homeland Security Department's headquarters starting at 9:27 p.m. the day before, and the White House itself at midnight....
But the alert did not seem to register. Even the next morning, President Bush, on vacation in Texas, was feeling relieved that New Orleans had "dodged the bullet," he later recalled. Mr. Chertoff, similarly confident, flew Tuesday to Atlanta for a briefing on avian flu. With power out from the high winds and movement limited, even news reporters in New Orleans remained unaware of the full extent of the levee breaches until Tuesday.
Since this is front page news in the paper of record I don't expect this to be new to you, however what is significant, once again is the discovery of one more deception, i.e. that they didn't know, and one more example of gross mismanagement of the disaster, which continues to this day. This definitely is another yardage loss for the President. It remains to be seen if the Democrats will be able to turn it to their advantage, considering how successful they have been up to now.
Posted by Chip Spear at 11:40 AM | Comments (0)
The "Turn Us Into Them" Strategy - Cartoons 2
Make no mistake, we are involved in a war, sometimes it manifests itself in terrorist violence and sometimes it manifests itself in cultural confrontation. On the one side is a messy, unfocused, moving in a million different direction democratic society that purports to respect people's opinions to the point where one can do and say just about anything. That anything includes making slanderous statements, making fun of racial groups, ethnic groups and religions. That is what makes us who we are.
On the other side is a culture that is theocratic, dictatorial, sexist, uncompromising, racist and in its more extreme manifestations more than willing to kill those it disagrees with. That culture is currently on the war path. It is attacking us in every way it can, using our own diversity and openness against us whenever it has an opportunity. If a person or newspaper publishes something contorversial, no matter how small or insignificant, Muslim fundamentalists use it to inflame the passions of their team. It is a simple tactic solidifying an "us versus them" mentality. They want the people of the region to see themselves under attack. In addition, the extremists are trying to get Western cultures to submit to their value systems.
It is hypocritical for Westerners to apologize for the very thing that makes our culture what it is, with all its warts. We value diversity, and as hard as it is, we also value the right of people to say and do outrageous and insulting things. For us to condemn it and/or begin to morally restrict it begins a process of turning us into that which we truly do not respect, which is that fundamentalist attitude.
We are certainly aware of the physical threat that Muslim fundamentalists pose to the West. I am not so sure that we are aware of how they intend to expand the playing field to include a cultural assult as well. I certainly hope that we are more prepared for that one than the other. As fundamentalist political movements in Muslim countries gain strength, e.g. Iran, Palestine, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Egypt, we should be aware that they will use their influence and power to move beyond their own borders and into the west. The growing immigrant communities throughout Western Europe provide a fertile breeding ground. As more Muslims move into Europe it will be even easier for clerics to push disgrunted immigrants to pressure their governments into making concessions to Islamic mores, including the restriction of freedoms of the press and speech. In such a scenario they definitely win.
Posted by Chip Spear at 9:50 AM | Comments (3)
February 9, 2006
Cartoons - 1
Read "Standing Up To Bullies" on Andrew Sullivan's blog here
He hits the nail on the head. It is becoming increasingly clear that the Muslim faith is exceedingly destructive to anything approaching modern sensibilities about gender, civil rights, religion, open mindedness and an ability to laugh at oneself. Not that the West doesn't have some problems of its own. However the extremists who are rising to power in so many areas are truly a danger. The fundamentalists are using a strategy of political blackmail to force the West to accede to their demands and live under their rules. There is no room for compromise here, no grey area. It is an either/or situation. The West should collectively tell these idiots to take a hike.
Posted by Chip Spear at 5:24 PM | Comments (3)
February 8, 2006
The Budget That Changes the Game
Imagine for a moment that you believed the only true role of the Federal government was to protect the country, everything was subservient to that one mission. The government was not a parent, did not exist to help you at all, that role was to be filled by your friends, family and maybe some local charities. It had no other responsibilities, none, not the environment, not your children's education, not labor laws, or health services, not urban development or energy policy and not transportation. Now extend that belief a bit and further imagine that you ran a government that provided all those services that you would absolutely love to make disappear. For various reasons you are unable to just close the departments dealing with all those things and send all the employees home.
How would you accomplish that goal? One strategy would be to spend the government to death, starving the programs to the point where you eliminated all but the most vital services, like national defense. You would force the government to use every other dollar of revenue to pay off the deficit that you "built". In addition you could pack departments with friends of big business, who were not only campaign contributors, but advocates of open markets, free enterprise, and no government regulations. They would act to undercut whatever rules and regulations existed. If for example they didn't like the results of a particular study, they might cut funding, as they did with research into logging recently burnt forests in Oregon. If one of your programs was blocked in Congress you would surreptitiously put the program in the next year's budget anyway, thinking that you could force it on an unsuspecting country, like Social Security and private accounts.
Farfetched you say? I think not. Just take a look at this year's White House budget of $2.77 trillion. It increases the deficit by $423 billion and cuts or eliminates 141 programs. The NYTimes provides more details: (NYT)
While seeking nearly $15 billion in savings by trimming programs in cancer research, community policing and other areas, Bush would give a record $439.3 billion to the Pentagon, up 4.8 percent from last year. On top of that, the White House will seek new financing for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Back in Washington later, Bush signed a measure to cut $39 billion over five years from the Medicaid health care program for the poor, student loans and other programs.
In ten or fifteen years when folks complain about their taxes wondering where the money goes, make sure you remind them about how much is paying off the debt thanks to policies of our President. When the government says it has no money for the environment, or cancer research, or education, or training, or even body armor, think about what happened this year.
Posted by Chip Spear at 2:07 PM | Comments (0)
No Oath for our Attorney General
The Attorney General of the United States of America did not take an oath when testifying before Congress about wiretaps. How can you beat that? What might he be afraid of? Why would the Congress even bother with his testimony if he refused to tell the truth? Cheerleading for the Administration agenda perhaps? I am sure that his testimony revealed many unknown truths about the wiretap program, don't you? The oath thing worked very well with the oil company executives too, didn't it?
Why change the strategy if it works.
Posted by Chip Spear at 1:24 PM | Comments (0)
Lieberman Undercuts Obama
I have read the reports of the letters going back and forth between John McCain and Barak Obama. I also read that Sen. Lieberman was in the room when the two were meeting about hearings. Lieberman did little to support Obama when questioned by Don Imus this morning on his radio/MSNBC program. Rather than supporting his Democratic partner, Joe followed his own agenda, which is to help Joe as much as possible.
Like John McCain, Joe views Barak as something of a threat, but for different reasons. Where Sen. McCain sees a Presidential run in both his and Barak's future, Joe is thinking about his position in the Democratic hierarchy. I am sure he is not quite ready to annoint Mr. Obama as the second coming of the Democratic salvation. Joe likes being the center of attention and will make sure that a young newcomer to the Senate learns that one must pay respects to one's seniors for a very long time.
Several reports suggest that Obama followed recommendations from the Senate's head Democrat, Harry Reid, who was attempting to rally Democrats into presenting a focused, party response. Lieberman, acting as he often does, screwed his fellow Democrats, presenting himself as the voice of moderation, always willing to reach across the aisle. When Democrats get slammed by the media for not agreeing on anything they can easily use Sen. Joe as the number one reason why. He is more than willing to tell the rest of the Democratic leadership to take a hike whenever it suits his own narrow interests instead of the party's.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:54 AM | Comments (0)
Gonzales Strategy in Wiretap Hearings
Balkinization provides a clear synopsis of Gonzales testimony to Congress.
What we did was legal, or, in our opinion, could have been legal. Since there are arguments on both sides, we will rely on our opinion. However, we won't let a court decide the question, because then we wouldn't be able to rely on our own opinion.
We won't answer hypothetical questions about what we can do legally or constitutionally. We also won't tell you what we've actually done or plan to do; hence every question you ask will about legality be in effect a hypothetical, and therefore we can refuse to answer it.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:52 AM | Comments (0)
February 6, 2006
Al Qaeda Terrorist Slips Away to Score Again
Why is this story about the escape of the Al Qaeda mastermind from a Yemeni prison not a surprise. I am sure he will high tail it to Iraq to help out in the current Al Qaeda party.
Posted by Chip Spear at 6:13 PM | Comments (1)
Fabulous Fumble of the Week - Bill Leavy
We move outside of the pure political arena to present this week's Fabulous Fumble Award to Bill Leavy, referee at this year's Super Bowl, who creatively called Sean Locklear for holding while Matt Hasselback hit Jerramy Stephens on a pass play to the one yard line. Assuming the Seahawks scored they would have taken the lead with about 10 minutes left in the game.
Granted everyone makes mistakes, but this was bigger than big, especially coming from someone who it supposed to be one of the best referees in the NFL. In fact the officating was absolutely horrible from a Seattle perspective. I cannot remember when so many bad calls favored one team. It was very embarrassing. And Bill Leavy was the number one embarrassment of all.
Posted by Chip Spear at 5:45 PM | Comments (0)
An Inspiring Story
This young woman is an true inspiration in a sports filled week. (CNNSI)
Posted by Chip Spear at 1:50 PM | Comments (2)
Player of the Week - G.W. Bush - 2/6
President George wins this week's Political Sports Player of the Week Award, not for his astute play, but because he clearly dominated the news with his State of the Union Speech and its aftermath. It certainly wasn't inspired and isn't going to rally the team, either the Republicans or the country, to any particular victory. At this point in his presidency it is probably too much to ask for an epiphany, some change in direction that actually reflects competency, strength and leadership.
I think the reason so much attention focused on the speech was that we as a country truly wanted him to fix the problems of his administration. We wanted him to honestly confront the issues with Iraq, wiretaps, torture, civil rights, religion, Katrina incompetence, tax breaks for the rich, increasing discrepancy between rich and poor, health care and all the things that Americans worry about other than terror. When that did not happen, and so many facts were wrong, like calling for more money for energy research when he is cutting the research budget, Americans become even more disappointed in an opportunity missed. He wins this weeks award, but not for very positive reasons.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:54 AM | Comments (4)
Islam Slams Hard to the Face
Excellent thoughts on Islamic threat here.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:31 AM | Comments (0)
February 5, 2006
Quick Super Bowl Thoughts
How much did the Steelers pay the refs? It was obviously more than the Seahawks paid them. The Steelers definitely played better, but man, talk about some bad calls. The Seahawks receiver, Stephans ought to be benched. He and Sean Locklear really lost them the game. Sean's penalty was inexcusable. When he did that, the game was over. Nice job Sean. And the kicker, what about the kicker. Granted, 50 yards is long, but two, one right and one left missing sure didn't help.
The bottom line is that the Steelers made fewer mistakes and managed to make a couple of big plays. That 75 yard run was impressive, otherwise the Steelers played a solid game. The Seahawks definitely got screwed on the calls, Matt's "block" below the knees, Ben's "touchdown", the phantom holding penalty, the questionable offensive interference call in the end zone. I don't mind one of two, but there were too many against Seattle to make me feel good about the outcome. However the game is done and the Steelers won. Congratulations Pittsburgh.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:19 PM | Comments (0)
Cheerleader Nomination - Super Bowl - Halftime
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:38 PM | Comments (1)
Cheerleader Nomination - Super Bowl Game
Why hold back?
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:35 PM | Comments (0)
WOW - Words of Wisdom - Super Bowl Sunday
Make the chili HOT and the beer COLD.
~ Block of Granite
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:09 PM | Comments (3)
Super Bowl Sunday
Seahawks in an upset. Why? Too many people think that Pittsburgh will win. Great rationale huh? Most of the time I think the Steelers will win. I want to see the Seahawks win. Ben is good, Matt is good. Bettis is good, Shaun is good. The lines are good, the receivers are good. Special teams on both sides are mediocre. I am going on gut here that we'll see an upset. It will at least make the game interesting between commercials and the Rolling Stones. Maybe Aretha will have a "wardrobe malfunction" Now that would be scary, and turn it into a VERY memorable Super Bowl.
Posted by Chip Spear at 3:58 PM | Comments (3)
February 2, 2006
Cheerleader Nomination - Country Gals
More Super Bowl warm ups.
Do you think they are Steeler or Seahawk Cheerleaders?
GO Team GO
Posted by Chip Spear at 5:20 PM | Comments (1)
WOW - Words of Wisdom - 2/2
As we get closer to Super Bowl Sunday....
Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder
~ Unknown
Posted by Chip Spear at 5:18 PM | Comments (2)
Muslims Attack Concept of Democracy and Free Speech
Many Muslim governments, political organizations, religious groups and cultural entities recently struck at Western media and governments for their support of democratic ideals of free speech. Specifically they protested the publication of a group of cartoons in a small Danish newspaper called Jyllands-Posten. Several other newspapers have since published the cartoons as well. The cartoons have sparked outrage because of their derogatory view of Muhammed. Muslems are insulted and want an apology from the newspaper, Western governments and anyone else they don't like.
Robert Menard, the secretary general of Reporters Without Borders, a Paris-based body that monitors media developments, said in a telephone interview: "All countries in Europe should be behind the Danes and Danish authorities to defend the principle that a newspaper can write what it wishes to, even if it offends people.
"I understand that it may shock Muslims, but being shocked is part of the price of being informed."
On Wednesday, Syria became the latest Arab country to withdraw its ambassador from Denmark, saying publication of the cartoons "constitutes a violation of the sacred principles of hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims," according to SANA, the Syrian state news agency.
Maybe they will score by getting the West to change its ways through political means. However if they do so we turn into what they are, closed minded, arrogant, paranoid, societies who have no respect for individuals, what they think or what they might want. No wonder the Middle East is such a mess.
Posted by Chip Spear at 9:12 AM | Comments (1)
Bush - Caught Again
When one wonders why President Bush has a credibility problem, you don't have to go too far to see the disconnect between his words and deeds. In his State of the Union speech on Tuesday he mentioned he planned on raising research funding for alternative fuels by 20%. Two days later in the NY Times we read this bit of information: (NYT)
The Energy Department will begin laying off researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in the next week or two because of cuts to its budget.
A veteran researcher said the staff had been told that the cuts would be concentrated among researchers in wind and biomass, which includes ethanol. Those are two of the technologies that Mr. Bush cited on Tuesday night as holding the promise to replace part of the nation's oil imports.
The budget for the laboratory, which is just west of Denver, was cut by nearly 15 percent, to $174 million from $202 million, requiring the layoff of about 40 staff members out of a total of 930, said a spokesman, George Douglas. The cut is for the fiscal year that began on Oct. 1.
If this happened only once or twice it would be no big deal, but this is one more example of a huge list of such occurrences that result in serious credibility problems. Eventually people catch on.
Posted by Chip Spear at 8:57 AM | Comments (2)
February 1, 2006
WOW - Words of Wisdom - 2/1
A pessimist is one who makes difficulties of his opportunities, and an optimist is one who makes opportunities of his difficulties.
~ Harry S. Truman
Posted by Chip Spear at 5:39 PM | Comments (2)
SOTU Speech
He is like a Quarterback who stands up before the microphones, looks good, speaks with authority and says all the right things. Unfortunately he has to play the game. That is the rub with George Bush. He talks like a leader should talk, he just doesn't lead. His passes don't hit his receivers and he keeps messing up the hand offs. At this point most Americans see it too. So did this speech change anyone's mind? Did he lay out a bold new vision or direction? Any great new initiatives that will significantly alter his standing in the polls?
I listened, took notes, listened to the response, talked about both speeches on Subject 2 Discussion last night, listened to TV analysis, NPR analysis and read numerous articles and blogs on the speech. My reaction is muted, blah, unexcited, wishing there were more, lots more, not in the number of words, but in substance. I feel disappointed, not only in the speech, but in the man, our President. I have to admit that I am not one of his biggest fans, so take what I say with a degree of scepticism.
The most powerful man on earth has power to achieve true greatness. I sometimes think, "Oh if only I had that opportunity what I could do." I dream, he gets to act. And how has he acted? I won't go down the laundry list of problems other than to say that this man is not the "Uniter, not Divider", or Compassionate Conservative he alluded to during his first campaign. The country is seriously divided, the management of government is a disaster, we have huge deficits, increasing disparity between rich and poor, our international standing is horrible, and most people don't trust him. After 5 years he has seriously divided our country. It seems we have our own form of religious fundamentalism running the government. He has had an opportunity that so few people have, to actually do something valuable to help the U.S. and lead the world to something better. He has seriously squandered that opportunity.
The State of the Union speech was another opportunity to set a better course. Instead we got more fear of terror, the march of freedom throughout the world, justification for his wiretaps, a recognition of our addiction to oil and the need to do something about our lagging educational system. I understand the issues. Some I agree with and some I don't. That is not unusual. The problem is that they do not dig deep enough. There were too many platitudes, nothing to address the real problems, rally the country or offer any substantial programs to actually solve these issues. My grandpa always said that talk was cheap, actions are expensive. George has talked a good game over the past five years, with his so-called leadership, looking tough behind the podium, walking with that swagger to the Presidential helicopter. Like Chauncey Gardiner, in the movie Being There, there is no there there. (Wow, four "there's" in one sentence)
The President clearly aimed this speech at the independent voters of America that could conceivably push him from the under 40 approval ratings back above 50. Did he succeed in addressing their concerns? Were his warnings of terrorists striking America going to gain ground again? I wonder. He has used this play numerous times. Remember the escalating terror alerts before the last election? How many have we had since? I am not sure they will fall for this again. I think that more people are deeply sceptical. They listen to his calls for bipartisanship, but then read that he still refuses to release information about Abramoff/White House meetings. He stonewalls about the Valerie Plame leak, he refuses to discuss his wiretaps. The call to increase funding for alternative fuels meets a wary eye. How much money is he talking about? Will it really happen? What will be the end result? He talks threats to America but plans on cuts to the National Guard and Reserve forces. How is that going to help our security?
I was asked last night if there was anything he said that might help the Republicans in this fall's elections. I replied that I didn't think their was anything in the speech that indicated a change of course in any way. What he did propose was too small to have much impact. If large numbers of troops come home, it might help, but it doesn't seem like too many will be back by the end of the year. The country seeks leadership, unfortunately his speech did not prove that he is the man to provide it.
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:26 PM | Comments (1)