Now here's a man after No Blood for Hubris' heart:
LIBBY AND ROVE SHOULD BE TORTURED
"Since the Bush Administration is advocating torture of individuals they consider a risk to the country's security in order to extract information, I think that they have a very good test case available. Apparently, "Scooter" Libby and Karl Rove have both endangered our national security and are trying to cover up who else might have been involved.
That means that there are a number of other individuals on the loose IN AMERICA who potentially conspired with them and continue to pose a threat to the country. Libby and Rove should be declared enemy combatants. If they are unwilling to talk, our fine CIA has ways of making them talk. I suggest the "water board" treatment as a starter. I'm no expert, though, so perhaps we should leave it to the chief torture advocate Dick Cheney to decide which form of torture would be appropriate.
For those of you who maintain that these two gentlemen are innocent until proven guilty, I should remind you that the "rules have changed since 9/11" and it is now better to torture some innocent people while we are going after the evil-doers. It is time to put our new torture program to good use. Be proud Americans!"
Thanks for your patriotic leadership, ex-pat Steve.
As our constant gentle readers know, No Blood for Hubris has long advocated the shipment to Gitmo of many notables in the black-heart neo-con Bushist administration.
Rove and Libby, however, are a special case.
Waterboarding on prime-time national TV would show that we're serious about finding out the truth: it would also no doubt serve as a deterrent to others who seek to harm our country, and put an end to the pussy anti-torturist claims that torture does not work.
Get at the truth, now! Why wait for a year or two, when we have the methods necessary? Write your congresspeople, your Senators; write to Bubble Boy! Write to Big Dick!
Torture Rove, Libby!
Monday, November 07, 2005
Sunday, November 06, 2005
The Fourth Estate: FUBAR'd
While we're noting down the names of the first wave of Bushist fascists to ship off to Gitmo after the revolution--I mean, after the 06 midterms return control of Congress to the Dems, let's save some space for the fourth estate.
As much as the Bushist fascists are directly responsible for the actual moral and fiscal ruination of America, they never would have been elected (sic) were it not for the conduct of the American press: vile, cowardly, snide. A press that made fun of Al Gore's thoughtful intelligence and failed to make fun of Bush's lack of intelligence. A press that, four years and many Bush failures later, made fun of John Kerry's thoughtful intelligence and failed to make fun of either George W. Bush's failures or his continuing thoughtless, reckless, feckless lack of intelligence.
I was struck, during the 2004 campaign, reading a front-page, above the fold article in the NY Times neatly penned to savage Kerry by framing him as a wimp; it did so by perseverating about Kerry's fondness for peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches.
Sigh.
A Night Light's RJ Eskow neatly skewers the methods of such journalistic madness in his recent piece: Win A Dream Date With Alito!!
In a similar vein, that of holding the the press corps' feet to the fire, visit and take note of Pre$$titutes.
"We believe Pre$$titution is the First Cause of the worst presidency in U.S. history. The transformation of George W. Bush from a smarmy underachiever to a supposedly resolute, pious, compassionate leader is the result of years of methodical Pre$$titution. Journalists have abdicated their interrogative role and pandered to the administration, propagating rightwing talking points and pushing pro-Bush storylines. The cumulative effect of countless implicit and explicit pro-Bush stories and soundbites has been to create the illusion of legitimacy around an individual uniquely unqualified to be president. It is death by a thousand cuts in reverse, the creation of a myth in thousands of small increments. Our aim is to make that process transparent.
Pre$$titutes use sophisticated persuasion tactics to influence public perceptions and to shape the political landscape, from cable coverage of Bush's stage-managed speeches with captions that read "Bush Stands Firm," to the correction and re-framing of Bush's mangled English, to the use of 'negative' stories to push pro-Bush narratives. For example, saying Bush is "unwavering" in the face of sliding poll numbers reinforces the fabricated image of a steadfast, principled leader. Another favored press tactic is to create a self-reinforcing loop by making news and then commenting on it. During the 2004 presidential campaign, the cable networks gave round-the-clock coverage to the Swift Boat slime machine. Weeks into the coverage, these same outlets began asking why Kerry's attackers were getting so much traction in denigrating his military service.
By choosing what to cover, what not to cover, and how to cover it, Pre$$titutes influence ALL aspects of American politics. Touch-screen voting machines fixing elections? If the Pre$$titutes don’t report it, few Americans know or care. Abu Ghraib a permanent stain on America's moral standing? Not if the Pre$$titutes lose interest and move on to round-the-clock Michael Jackson or Natalee Holloway coverage. Our troops coming home in flag-draped coffins? Not if the Pre$$titutes won’t show it to you. Saddam Hussein unconnected to 9/11? Not if the Pre$$titutes let the administration conflate the two.
Bush's resilience in the face of scandals that would bring down any other government is primarily a factor of Pre$$titutes' willingness to give him a pass. Pushing deeply-ingrained fictional narratives about Bush and avoiding the derisive tone they reserve for Democrats like Howard Dean or Al Gore, Pre$$titutes provide cover for Bush's worst transgressions."
Last but not least, hat tip to Wealth Bondage, this piece by Robert Scheer re Judy Judy Judy journalism and the cost of Plamegate in the Nation: How Reporters Helped Lead Us to War.
Scheer concludes:
"The First Amendment protection is not a license for mischief on the part of journalists eager to do the government's bidding. To the contrary, it was conceived by the founders to prevent government from subverting the free press in an effort to misinform the public. Unfortunately, that is precisely what occurred here."
The Fourth Estate in America is totally FUBAR'd--and thanks to them, so are we.
Ship 'em to Gitmo.
Note: sporadic blogging may be a thing of the future. It is certainly a thing of the present. As one more No Blood for Hubris Mental Health Interlude, we have acquired a new puppy. She will be running us ragged until further notice.
As much as the Bushist fascists are directly responsible for the actual moral and fiscal ruination of America, they never would have been elected (sic) were it not for the conduct of the American press: vile, cowardly, snide. A press that made fun of Al Gore's thoughtful intelligence and failed to make fun of Bush's lack of intelligence. A press that, four years and many Bush failures later, made fun of John Kerry's thoughtful intelligence and failed to make fun of either George W. Bush's failures or his continuing thoughtless, reckless, feckless lack of intelligence.
I was struck, during the 2004 campaign, reading a front-page, above the fold article in the NY Times neatly penned to savage Kerry by framing him as a wimp; it did so by perseverating about Kerry's fondness for peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches.
Sigh.
A Night Light's RJ Eskow neatly skewers the methods of such journalistic madness in his recent piece: Win A Dream Date With Alito!!
In a similar vein, that of holding the the press corps' feet to the fire, visit and take note of Pre$$titutes.
"We believe Pre$$titution is the First Cause of the worst presidency in U.S. history. The transformation of George W. Bush from a smarmy underachiever to a supposedly resolute, pious, compassionate leader is the result of years of methodical Pre$$titution. Journalists have abdicated their interrogative role and pandered to the administration, propagating rightwing talking points and pushing pro-Bush storylines. The cumulative effect of countless implicit and explicit pro-Bush stories and soundbites has been to create the illusion of legitimacy around an individual uniquely unqualified to be president. It is death by a thousand cuts in reverse, the creation of a myth in thousands of small increments. Our aim is to make that process transparent.
Pre$$titutes use sophisticated persuasion tactics to influence public perceptions and to shape the political landscape, from cable coverage of Bush's stage-managed speeches with captions that read "Bush Stands Firm," to the correction and re-framing of Bush's mangled English, to the use of 'negative' stories to push pro-Bush narratives. For example, saying Bush is "unwavering" in the face of sliding poll numbers reinforces the fabricated image of a steadfast, principled leader. Another favored press tactic is to create a self-reinforcing loop by making news and then commenting on it. During the 2004 presidential campaign, the cable networks gave round-the-clock coverage to the Swift Boat slime machine. Weeks into the coverage, these same outlets began asking why Kerry's attackers were getting so much traction in denigrating his military service.
By choosing what to cover, what not to cover, and how to cover it, Pre$$titutes influence ALL aspects of American politics. Touch-screen voting machines fixing elections? If the Pre$$titutes don’t report it, few Americans know or care. Abu Ghraib a permanent stain on America's moral standing? Not if the Pre$$titutes lose interest and move on to round-the-clock Michael Jackson or Natalee Holloway coverage. Our troops coming home in flag-draped coffins? Not if the Pre$$titutes won’t show it to you. Saddam Hussein unconnected to 9/11? Not if the Pre$$titutes let the administration conflate the two.
Bush's resilience in the face of scandals that would bring down any other government is primarily a factor of Pre$$titutes' willingness to give him a pass. Pushing deeply-ingrained fictional narratives about Bush and avoiding the derisive tone they reserve for Democrats like Howard Dean or Al Gore, Pre$$titutes provide cover for Bush's worst transgressions."
Last but not least, hat tip to Wealth Bondage, this piece by Robert Scheer re Judy Judy Judy journalism and the cost of Plamegate in the Nation: How Reporters Helped Lead Us to War.
Scheer concludes:
"The First Amendment protection is not a license for mischief on the part of journalists eager to do the government's bidding. To the contrary, it was conceived by the founders to prevent government from subverting the free press in an effort to misinform the public. Unfortunately, that is precisely what occurred here."
The Fourth Estate in America is totally FUBAR'd--and thanks to them, so are we.
Ship 'em to Gitmo.
Note: sporadic blogging may be a thing of the future. It is certainly a thing of the present. As one more No Blood for Hubris Mental Health Interlude, we have acquired a new puppy. She will be running us ragged until further notice.
Thursday, November 03, 2005
Creating Unwanted Children: The Real Cost
We been blogging for a while a No Blood for Hubris about the immoral consequences of increasing the number of unwanted children in America. NBFH has pointed out that we cannot care for the children we already have, that increasing unwantedness leads to increased crime, and that it is the moral responsibility of parents, and of society, to insure that all children are wanted and well-cared for.
Take a look here.
New York Times, Nov. 3--The aunt and cousin of a 7-year-old boy [who died] in 2002 . . .were sentenced to prison yesterday for their roles in one of the state's most horrific child abuse cases."
The cousin had hurled Faheem Williams onto the floor so hard that Faheen died.
Ms. Murphy told prosecutors that she found Faheem, wrapped him in a blanket and left him on a bed for three days before loading his body into a purple storage bin. Several weeks later, she and her children, along with Faheem's twin brother, Raheem, and younger half-brother, Tyrone Hill, moved to a house in Newark, where she placed the bin in a dank area of the basement.
She locked Raheem, now 10, and Tyrone, now 7, in another room in the frigid basement, forcing them to sleep on a filthy mattress and use a bucket as a toilet, prosecutors said. In January 2003, Ms. Murphy's boyfriend found the boys and contacted police.
Faheem, Raheem and Tyrone had been living with Ms. Murphy after their mother, Melinda Williams, went to prison for endangering a child she had been baby-sitting. Ms. Williams was released several weeks before Faheem's death, but was living in New York and had left the children with Ms. Murphy, her sister.
Before sentencing Ms. Murphy, Judge Michael R. Casale said, "People treat pets better than how these kids were treated. Those are conditions no human being should have to suffer through."
Ms. Murphy, convicted of aggravated assault, criminal restraint and child endangerment, did not speak during the sentencing. She looked slightly annoyed at times as the judge spoke, and left without glancing at members of her family seated in the courtroom. . .
Before Mr. Murphy was sentenced on charges of reckless manslaughter, Faheem's mother, Ms. Williams, urged the judge to impose a tougher sentence on him. "He knew what he was doing. He wanted to do it. He feel he don't owe nobody, he don't have to listen to nobody," she said. "He don't have no heart."
But Judge Casale lashed back at Ms. Williams, saying that she was also responsible for her son's death, although she had not been charged with the crime.
"You are not blameless. You are the parent," Judge Casale said. "You could have been charged with murder. What they did was wrong, but you knew what was going on." Ms. Williams, visibly shaken, returned to her seat and said nothing else. . ."
A protective services "caseworker had failed to follow up on a report that the boys were being burned and beaten. The caseworker said that she had been overwhelmed with a workload of more than 100 cases. . .
Ms. Murphy had agreed to the plea deal to avoid having the surviving children testify, but said that Mr. Murphy, who had an extensive juvenile record, had deserved a tougher sentence. Ms. Murphy, she said, "got her due."
It's not enough that children be born, as the pro-birth/anti-post-born hysterics would have us believe. Children have a right to be wanted and well-cared-for.
Take a look here.
New York Times, Nov. 3--The aunt and cousin of a 7-year-old boy [who died] in 2002 . . .were sentenced to prison yesterday for their roles in one of the state's most horrific child abuse cases."
The cousin had hurled Faheem Williams onto the floor so hard that Faheen died.
Ms. Murphy told prosecutors that she found Faheem, wrapped him in a blanket and left him on a bed for three days before loading his body into a purple storage bin. Several weeks later, she and her children, along with Faheem's twin brother, Raheem, and younger half-brother, Tyrone Hill, moved to a house in Newark, where she placed the bin in a dank area of the basement.
She locked Raheem, now 10, and Tyrone, now 7, in another room in the frigid basement, forcing them to sleep on a filthy mattress and use a bucket as a toilet, prosecutors said. In January 2003, Ms. Murphy's boyfriend found the boys and contacted police.
Faheem, Raheem and Tyrone had been living with Ms. Murphy after their mother, Melinda Williams, went to prison for endangering a child she had been baby-sitting. Ms. Williams was released several weeks before Faheem's death, but was living in New York and had left the children with Ms. Murphy, her sister.
Before sentencing Ms. Murphy, Judge Michael R. Casale said, "People treat pets better than how these kids were treated. Those are conditions no human being should have to suffer through."
Ms. Murphy, convicted of aggravated assault, criminal restraint and child endangerment, did not speak during the sentencing. She looked slightly annoyed at times as the judge spoke, and left without glancing at members of her family seated in the courtroom. . .
Before Mr. Murphy was sentenced on charges of reckless manslaughter, Faheem's mother, Ms. Williams, urged the judge to impose a tougher sentence on him. "He knew what he was doing. He wanted to do it. He feel he don't owe nobody, he don't have to listen to nobody," she said. "He don't have no heart."
But Judge Casale lashed back at Ms. Williams, saying that she was also responsible for her son's death, although she had not been charged with the crime.
"You are not blameless. You are the parent," Judge Casale said. "You could have been charged with murder. What they did was wrong, but you knew what was going on." Ms. Williams, visibly shaken, returned to her seat and said nothing else. . ."
A protective services "caseworker had failed to follow up on a report that the boys were being burned and beaten. The caseworker said that she had been overwhelmed with a workload of more than 100 cases. . .
Ms. Murphy had agreed to the plea deal to avoid having the surviving children testify, but said that Mr. Murphy, who had an extensive juvenile record, had deserved a tougher sentence. Ms. Murphy, she said, "got her due."
It's not enough that children be born, as the pro-birth/anti-post-born hysterics would have us believe. Children have a right to be wanted and well-cared-for.
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
ROVE LEAKED PLAME NAME
It's official. Rove leaked the Plame name, Libby confirmed it.
This according to leak recipient Matt Cooper.
ABC News — One of the reporters at the center of the investigation into the leak of the identity of an undercover CIA officer, says he first learned the agent's name from President Bush's top political advisor, Karl Rove.
Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper also said today in an interview with "Good Morning America," that the vice president's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, confirmed to him that Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a CIA operative.
A grand jury charged Libby on Friday with five felonies alleging obstruction of justice, perjury to a grand jury and making false statements to FBI agents. If convicted, he could face a maximum of 30 years in prison and $1.25 million in fines. Libby was not charged with the crime that the grand jury was created to investigate — specifically, who leaked the name of Plame to reporters in 2003. Rove has not been charged.
Wilson, who went to Niger in 2002 to investigate whether or not the country was supplying Iraq with uranium to make weapons of mass destruction, opposed the war. He said he found no evidence of such an exchange in an op-ed in The New York Times. Wilson has argued that the Bush administration revealed his wife's identity in order to silence his opposition to the war.
"There is no question. I first learned about Valerie Plame working at the CIA from Karl Rove," Cooper said.
Libby has since claimed that he heard the Plame rumors from other reporters. Cooper disputed that version of events. "I don't remember it happening that way," he said. "I was taking notes at the time and I feel confident."
If a trial goes ahead, Cooper said he would name Rove as his source of the information.
"Before I spoke to Karl Rove I didn't know Mr. Wilson had a wife and that she had been involved in sending him to Africa."
So, now that we know, tell me again--why does Rove still have a job? A security clearance?
This according to leak recipient Matt Cooper.
ABC News — One of the reporters at the center of the investigation into the leak of the identity of an undercover CIA officer, says he first learned the agent's name from President Bush's top political advisor, Karl Rove.
Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper also said today in an interview with "Good Morning America," that the vice president's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, confirmed to him that Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a CIA operative.
A grand jury charged Libby on Friday with five felonies alleging obstruction of justice, perjury to a grand jury and making false statements to FBI agents. If convicted, he could face a maximum of 30 years in prison and $1.25 million in fines. Libby was not charged with the crime that the grand jury was created to investigate — specifically, who leaked the name of Plame to reporters in 2003. Rove has not been charged.
Wilson, who went to Niger in 2002 to investigate whether or not the country was supplying Iraq with uranium to make weapons of mass destruction, opposed the war. He said he found no evidence of such an exchange in an op-ed in The New York Times. Wilson has argued that the Bush administration revealed his wife's identity in order to silence his opposition to the war.
"There is no question. I first learned about Valerie Plame working at the CIA from Karl Rove," Cooper said.
Libby has since claimed that he heard the Plame rumors from other reporters. Cooper disputed that version of events. "I don't remember it happening that way," he said. "I was taking notes at the time and I feel confident."
If a trial goes ahead, Cooper said he would name Rove as his source of the information.
"Before I spoke to Karl Rove I didn't know Mr. Wilson had a wife and that she had been involved in sending him to Africa."
So, now that we know, tell me again--why does Rove still have a job? A security clearance?
Monday, October 31, 2005
Roe v. Wade: Say Goodbye, Gracie
Bubble Boy packs uber-conservative Judge Samuel Alito onto the Supreme Court: Alito was named this morning to fill the seat vacated by Sandra Day O'Connor, changing the makeup of an already right-wing court just enough to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Whether the Dems will filibuster this choice or not is immaterial. One way or another, Bubble Boy will get his anti-Roe justice on the bench.
Remember, Bush is an angry boy these days: under attack on all fronts, having wasted his political capital, backed into a corner and growling like a junkyard dog. Where can he vent his spleen? By thumbing his nose at the American people, doing what the vast majory does not believe in--undermining reproductive freedom and overturning Roe v. Wade, out of spiteful megalomania.
The point is for the American people to wake up and take seriously the matter of protecting reproductive freedom.
Do you really want the government to determine the size and makeup of your family? Do you really want religious determinations about precisely when life begins to apply to you and your family whether or not you subscribe to them?
From AP:
"Abortion emerged as a potential fault line. Democrats pointed to Alito's rulings that sought to restrict a woman's right to abortion. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Republican who supports abortion rights, said that Alito's views on the hot-button issue 'will be among one of the first items Judge Alito and I will discuss.'
Alito's mother shed some light. 'Of course, he's against abortion,' 90-year-old Rose Alito said of her son, a Catholic."
Who benefits when women are forced to bear children against their will? The child? Surely not. The woman? Clearly not, and the very fact of pregnancy itself puts a woman's life in danger.
Pregnancy and childbearing are unique experiences; they are life-changing and can be life-threatening. Upholding a woman's right to reproductive freedom--through contraception (with abortion kept safe, legal, and rare) and family planning--means she can choose the size of her family, and choose to bear a child who will be wanted, welcomed, and well-cared-for.
Consider:
In the early 1990s, just as the first cohort of children born after Roe v. Wade was hitting its late teen years-the years during which young men enter their criminal prime-the rate of crime began to fall. What this cohort was missing, of course, were the children who stood the greatest chance of becoming criminals. And the crime rate continued to fall as an entire generation came of age minus the children whose mothers had not wanted to bring a child into the world. Legalized abortion led to less unwantedness; unwantedness leads to high crime; legalized abortion, therefore, led to less crime.
Why should the government, fueled by religious concepts from the Taliban right, dictate to individuals how their lives must proceed, promoting pregnancy as punishment? Is there not already sufficient child abuse, poverty, and criminality in America?
Here is Alito's trail on individual reproductive freedom:
"A dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 947 F.2d 682 (3d Cir. 1991), arguing that a Pennsylvania that required women seeking abortions to inform their husbands should have been upheld. As Judge Alito reasoned, '[t]he Pennsylvania legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands' knowledge because of perceived problems--such as economic constraints, future plans, or the husbands' previously expressed opposition--that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion.'"
Does a man need to be forced by government to discuss with his spouse whether he needs bypass surgery? In the normal order of things, he would, but need he be forced to do so? In the normal order of things, a woman might discuss a decision to terminate pregnancy with her husband, but if she does not wish to, need she be forced by law to do so? Whose physical body is at risk? His?
The Supreme Court struck down spousal notification, rejecting Alito’s view, while voting to reaffirm Roe v. Wade. [Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1991]
Bubble Boy Bush's Taliban-totalitarian-packed Supreme Court will not vote to reaffirm.
It will strike down Roe v. Wade.
That's the whole point.
Bush
Alito
Roe v. Wade
Supreme Court
Whether the Dems will filibuster this choice or not is immaterial. One way or another, Bubble Boy will get his anti-Roe justice on the bench.
Remember, Bush is an angry boy these days: under attack on all fronts, having wasted his political capital, backed into a corner and growling like a junkyard dog. Where can he vent his spleen? By thumbing his nose at the American people, doing what the vast majory does not believe in--undermining reproductive freedom and overturning Roe v. Wade, out of spiteful megalomania.
The point is for the American people to wake up and take seriously the matter of protecting reproductive freedom.
Do you really want the government to determine the size and makeup of your family? Do you really want religious determinations about precisely when life begins to apply to you and your family whether or not you subscribe to them?
From AP:
"Abortion emerged as a potential fault line. Democrats pointed to Alito's rulings that sought to restrict a woman's right to abortion. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Republican who supports abortion rights, said that Alito's views on the hot-button issue 'will be among one of the first items Judge Alito and I will discuss.'
Alito's mother shed some light. 'Of course, he's against abortion,' 90-year-old Rose Alito said of her son, a Catholic."
Who benefits when women are forced to bear children against their will? The child? Surely not. The woman? Clearly not, and the very fact of pregnancy itself puts a woman's life in danger.
Pregnancy and childbearing are unique experiences; they are life-changing and can be life-threatening. Upholding a woman's right to reproductive freedom--through contraception (with abortion kept safe, legal, and rare) and family planning--means she can choose the size of her family, and choose to bear a child who will be wanted, welcomed, and well-cared-for.
Consider:
In the early 1990s, just as the first cohort of children born after Roe v. Wade was hitting its late teen years-the years during which young men enter their criminal prime-the rate of crime began to fall. What this cohort was missing, of course, were the children who stood the greatest chance of becoming criminals. And the crime rate continued to fall as an entire generation came of age minus the children whose mothers had not wanted to bring a child into the world. Legalized abortion led to less unwantedness; unwantedness leads to high crime; legalized abortion, therefore, led to less crime.
Why should the government, fueled by religious concepts from the Taliban right, dictate to individuals how their lives must proceed, promoting pregnancy as punishment? Is there not already sufficient child abuse, poverty, and criminality in America?
Here is Alito's trail on individual reproductive freedom:
"A dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 947 F.2d 682 (3d Cir. 1991), arguing that a Pennsylvania that required women seeking abortions to inform their husbands should have been upheld. As Judge Alito reasoned, '[t]he Pennsylvania legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands' knowledge because of perceived problems--such as economic constraints, future plans, or the husbands' previously expressed opposition--that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion.'"
Does a man need to be forced by government to discuss with his spouse whether he needs bypass surgery? In the normal order of things, he would, but need he be forced to do so? In the normal order of things, a woman might discuss a decision to terminate pregnancy with her husband, but if she does not wish to, need she be forced by law to do so? Whose physical body is at risk? His?
The Supreme Court struck down spousal notification, rejecting Alito’s view, while voting to reaffirm Roe v. Wade. [Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1991]
Bubble Boy Bush's Taliban-totalitarian-packed Supreme Court will not vote to reaffirm.
It will strike down Roe v. Wade.
That's the whole point.
Bush
Alito
Roe v. Wade
Supreme Court
Saturday, October 29, 2005
Special Prosecutor Contacts Bush's Lawyer? Hunh?
Noticed this small paragraph amid a long article in the New York Times about the Libby indictment by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald:
"Mr. Fitzgerald was spotted Friday morning outside the office of James Sharp, Mr. Bush's personal lawyer. Mr. Bush was interviewed about the case by Mr. Fitzgerald last year. It is not known what discussions, if any, were taking place between the prosecutor and Mr. Sharp. Mr. Sharp did not return a phone call, and Mr. Fitzgerald's spokesman, Randall Samborn, declined to comment."
One can only wonder what that's all about.
Re: Sharp, recall that "the only other president to hire a private attorney for acts committed while president, Richard Nixon, eventually resigned from office."
Perhaps the grand jury will have the pleasure of seeing President George W. Bush testify to them under oath.
Other interesting information re Bush's choice of lawyer is from a story on the selection of Sharp from last year, which states that "international law Prof. Francis Boyle, of the University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign does not know Jim Sharp personally. But he wonders if Sharp has a very special type of law practice:
"There is sort of a CIA bar out there as it were," Boyle says. "That is,
lawyers who have worked for the CIA in the past or have been CIA agents, either covertly or overtly or whatever. And oftentimes, they are the ones called upon to engage in legal matters related to the CIA, either when they are defending a CIA agent or when the CIA is somewhat involved.
"It's sort of a very small clique of lawyers there in Washington, D.C. with expertise when it comes to the CIA, covert operations and things of that matter."
Lucky that Bubble Boy, in a rare moment of foresight, got himself all lawyered up way back when.
Bubble Boy got lawyered up with Sharp back June 3, 2004.
Golly, wasn't that just hours before CIA Director George Tenet suddenly resigned?
Just one day later, James Pavitt of the CIA resigned as well. Mr. Pavitt was Valerie Plame's CIA boss--in the Directorate of Operations. That would be the spook side.
Hmm.
Bush
Plame
Libby
Rove
"Mr. Fitzgerald was spotted Friday morning outside the office of James Sharp, Mr. Bush's personal lawyer. Mr. Bush was interviewed about the case by Mr. Fitzgerald last year. It is not known what discussions, if any, were taking place between the prosecutor and Mr. Sharp. Mr. Sharp did not return a phone call, and Mr. Fitzgerald's spokesman, Randall Samborn, declined to comment."
One can only wonder what that's all about.
Re: Sharp, recall that "the only other president to hire a private attorney for acts committed while president, Richard Nixon, eventually resigned from office."
Perhaps the grand jury will have the pleasure of seeing President George W. Bush testify to them under oath.
Other interesting information re Bush's choice of lawyer is from a story on the selection of Sharp from last year, which states that "international law Prof. Francis Boyle, of the University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign does not know Jim Sharp personally. But he wonders if Sharp has a very special type of law practice:
"There is sort of a CIA bar out there as it were," Boyle says. "That is,
lawyers who have worked for the CIA in the past or have been CIA agents, either covertly or overtly or whatever. And oftentimes, they are the ones called upon to engage in legal matters related to the CIA, either when they are defending a CIA agent or when the CIA is somewhat involved.
"It's sort of a very small clique of lawyers there in Washington, D.C. with expertise when it comes to the CIA, covert operations and things of that matter."
Lucky that Bubble Boy, in a rare moment of foresight, got himself all lawyered up way back when.
Bubble Boy got lawyered up with Sharp back June 3, 2004.
Golly, wasn't that just hours before CIA Director George Tenet suddenly resigned?
Just one day later, James Pavitt of the CIA resigned as well. Mr. Pavitt was Valerie Plame's CIA boss--in the Directorate of Operations. That would be the spook side.
Hmm.
Bush
Plame
Libby
Rove
Friday, October 28, 2005
Scooter "What Kind of a Name is That for a Grown Man?" Libby Faces 30 Years
What goes around finally came around. Them chickens came home to roost, that other shoe dropped. Now the consummation so devoutly to be wished is happening in real-time.
In a land that is ruled by Bushist fascists from top to toe, where so many have gotten away with so much, finally it seems that the guys and gals in the white hats are holding the keys to the clinker, while the guys with the black hats are deepest shit, and still sinking.
Irving Lewis Libby is the first to be held accountable, charged with five counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements to a grand jury. Libby is also the first White House official to be indicted in 130 years.
From WaPo:
"Asked about what a reporter described as 'Republican talking points' minimizing the significance of today's charges [see 2 stories below], the prosecutor said lying under oath 'is a very, very serious matter" and a "serious breach of the public trust.'
He said, 'We didn't get the straight story, and we had to take action.'
Fitzgerald said that contrary to what Libby told the FBI and the grand jury, he had held at least seven discussions with government officials regarding the CIA agent before the day when he claimed to have learned about her from Tim Russert of NBC News. 'And in fact, when he spoke to Mr. Russert, they never discussed it,' Fitzgerald said.
'At the end of the day, what appears is that Mr. Libby's story that he was at the tail end of a chain of phone calls, passing on from one reporter what he heard from another, was not true,' the special counsel said. 'It was false. He was at the beginning of the chain of phone calls, the first official to disclose this information outside the government to a reporter. And then he lied about it afterwards, under oath and repeatedly.'
The indictment contains one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury and two counts of making false statements. The charges involve testimony that Libby gave to the grand jury and other statements he made regarding his conversations with three journalists: Judith Miller of the New York Times, Matthew Cooper of Time magazine and Russert."
We've referred to the nauseating black-heart neo-con spin machine earlier, and hope that many readers will scroll down, take note, and inundate as many pro-Traitorgate spinners as possible with communications from the Other Side.
Just letting the cabal and their cabalists know that truth is better than political fiction. That wealth is better than poverty. That peace is better than war. That engendering the liberty and happy lives of its populace is the true duty of government.
That right needs to overcome--and defeat--wrong.
Happy Fitzgiving, Happy Fitzukkah.
Merry Fitzmas to all, and to all a good night.
Bush
Plame
Libby
Rove
In a land that is ruled by Bushist fascists from top to toe, where so many have gotten away with so much, finally it seems that the guys and gals in the white hats are holding the keys to the clinker, while the guys with the black hats are deepest shit, and still sinking.
Irving Lewis Libby is the first to be held accountable, charged with five counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements to a grand jury. Libby is also the first White House official to be indicted in 130 years.
From WaPo:
"Asked about what a reporter described as 'Republican talking points' minimizing the significance of today's charges [see 2 stories below], the prosecutor said lying under oath 'is a very, very serious matter" and a "serious breach of the public trust.'
He said, 'We didn't get the straight story, and we had to take action.'
Fitzgerald said that contrary to what Libby told the FBI and the grand jury, he had held at least seven discussions with government officials regarding the CIA agent before the day when he claimed to have learned about her from Tim Russert of NBC News. 'And in fact, when he spoke to Mr. Russert, they never discussed it,' Fitzgerald said.
'At the end of the day, what appears is that Mr. Libby's story that he was at the tail end of a chain of phone calls, passing on from one reporter what he heard from another, was not true,' the special counsel said. 'It was false. He was at the beginning of the chain of phone calls, the first official to disclose this information outside the government to a reporter. And then he lied about it afterwards, under oath and repeatedly.'
The indictment contains one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury and two counts of making false statements. The charges involve testimony that Libby gave to the grand jury and other statements he made regarding his conversations with three journalists: Judith Miller of the New York Times, Matthew Cooper of Time magazine and Russert."
We've referred to the nauseating black-heart neo-con spin machine earlier, and hope that many readers will scroll down, take note, and inundate as many pro-Traitorgate spinners as possible with communications from the Other Side.
Just letting the cabal and their cabalists know that truth is better than political fiction. That wealth is better than poverty. That peace is better than war. That engendering the liberty and happy lives of its populace is the true duty of government.
That right needs to overcome--and defeat--wrong.
Happy Fitzgiving, Happy Fitzukkah.
Merry Fitzmas to all, and to all a good night.
Bush
Plame
Libby
Rove
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Who WOULD Jesus Torture? Hell, let's waterboard Him till He comes up with the answer we're looking for.
No Blood for Hubris is having a major night of right-wing-initiated nausea.
Why might that be? Sure, there was that nauseating thing about the Soft-On-Treason Republicans earlier, and now there's this Torturz-R-US thingie about Big Dick Cheney, he who revealed the name of a clandestine CIA officer to his personal pet Rottweiler, Scooter (what kind of name is that for a grown man?) Libby.
So, one wonders, is it Cheney who's Mr. Sadistic?
See, I always thought it was Rummy.
But no-o-o-o-o.
Consider:
Vice President for Torture
Wednesday, October 26, 2005; Page A18
VICE PRESIDENT Cheney is aggressively pursuing an initiative that may be unprecedented for an elected official of the executive branch: He is proposing that Congress legally authorize human rights abuses by Americans.
"Cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment of prisoners is banned by an international treaty negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the United States. The State Department annually issues a report criticizing other governments for violating it.
Now Mr. Cheney is asking Congress to approve legal language that would allow the CIA to commit such abuses against foreign prisoners it is holding abroad. In other words, this vice president has become an open advocate of torture."
Okay, now, gentle readers, we're having a barf break. We had one on the soft-on-treason post, and I just feel like we need to be having some more, again.
"His position is not just some abstract defense of presidential power. The CIA is holding an unknown number of prisoners in secret detention centers abroad. In violation of the Geneva Conventions, it has refused to register those detainees with the International Red Cross or to allow visits by its inspectors.
Its prisoners have "disappeared," like the victims of some dictatorships."
According to Human Rights Watch:
Earlier this month, in a 90-9 vote, the U.S. Senate approved a measure sponsored by Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham that would prohibit the military and CIA from using “cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment” in the case of any detainee, anywhere in the world.
But last week, Vice President Dick Cheney and CIA director Porter Goss met with Sen. McCain to propose a presidential waiver for the proposed legislation. The proposed waiver states that the measure “shall not apply with respect to clandestine counterterrorism operations conducted abroad, with respect to terrorists who are not citizens of the United States, that are carried out by an element of the United States government other than the Department of Defense. . . if the president determines that such operations are vital to the protection of the United States or its citizens from terrorist attack.”
The waiver, which by its own terms applies to non-military counterterrorism operations against non-citizens overseas, states that such operations need to be “consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and treaties to which the United States is a party.” But the Constitution does not robustly curtail the conduct of the CIA overseas, and relevant domestic laws contain numerous jurisdictional loopholes. Moreover, administration officials have previously told Congress that they do not consider CIA personnel operating outside the United States to be bound by legal prohibitions against “cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment” under treaties to which the United States is party.
“This exception contains code language that could give the CIA a green light to treat prisoners inhumanely,” said Malinowski. “If allowed to stand, it will render President Bush’s past pledges about humane treatment meaningless.”
"Human Rights Watch said the waiver would also open the door for outright torture, as interrogators would find it impossible to draw lines between illegal and 'allowable' mistreatment. Bush administration officials, under questioning from members of Congress in the past, have failed to clearly define differences between torture and lesser forms of mistreatment. They have also made inaccurate statements about the definition of torture; for instance, administration officials have claimed that 'waterboarding' (suffocating a person until he believes he is about to drown) is not a form of torture."
How sick is that?
Back to WaPo:
"The Justice Department and the White House are known to have approved harsh interrogation techniques for some of these people, including "waterboarding," or simulated drowning; mock [simulated] execution; and the deliberate withholding of pain medication."
Note for the uninitiated: this is TORTURE.
Deliberately causing pain counts, deliberately causing horror counts, bringing a fellow human being to the point of death--and back--and then to the point of death--and back again--counts.
Don't let those "organ failure" guidelines from Gonzalez fool you, it's all about the pain. Recall one famed oriental torture, not causing death, but causing exquisite pain--those little slivers of bamboo classically used under the fingernails? Because the digits have many more nerve endings than other parts of the body? Think that that doesn't count as torture?
Think again.
Bush
Rumsfeld
Libby
Rove
Why might that be? Sure, there was that nauseating thing about the Soft-On-Treason Republicans earlier, and now there's this Torturz-R-US thingie about Big Dick Cheney, he who revealed the name of a clandestine CIA officer to his personal pet Rottweiler, Scooter (what kind of name is that for a grown man?) Libby.
So, one wonders, is it Cheney who's Mr. Sadistic?
See, I always thought it was Rummy.
But no-o-o-o-o.
Consider:
Vice President for Torture
Wednesday, October 26, 2005; Page A18
VICE PRESIDENT Cheney is aggressively pursuing an initiative that may be unprecedented for an elected official of the executive branch: He is proposing that Congress legally authorize human rights abuses by Americans.
"Cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment of prisoners is banned by an international treaty negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the United States. The State Department annually issues a report criticizing other governments for violating it.
Now Mr. Cheney is asking Congress to approve legal language that would allow the CIA to commit such abuses against foreign prisoners it is holding abroad. In other words, this vice president has become an open advocate of torture."
Okay, now, gentle readers, we're having a barf break. We had one on the soft-on-treason post, and I just feel like we need to be having some more, again.
"His position is not just some abstract defense of presidential power. The CIA is holding an unknown number of prisoners in secret detention centers abroad. In violation of the Geneva Conventions, it has refused to register those detainees with the International Red Cross or to allow visits by its inspectors.
Its prisoners have "disappeared," like the victims of some dictatorships."
According to Human Rights Watch:
Earlier this month, in a 90-9 vote, the U.S. Senate approved a measure sponsored by Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham that would prohibit the military and CIA from using “cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment” in the case of any detainee, anywhere in the world.
But last week, Vice President Dick Cheney and CIA director Porter Goss met with Sen. McCain to propose a presidential waiver for the proposed legislation. The proposed waiver states that the measure “shall not apply with respect to clandestine counterterrorism operations conducted abroad, with respect to terrorists who are not citizens of the United States, that are carried out by an element of the United States government other than the Department of Defense. . . if the president determines that such operations are vital to the protection of the United States or its citizens from terrorist attack.”
The waiver, which by its own terms applies to non-military counterterrorism operations against non-citizens overseas, states that such operations need to be “consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and treaties to which the United States is a party.” But the Constitution does not robustly curtail the conduct of the CIA overseas, and relevant domestic laws contain numerous jurisdictional loopholes. Moreover, administration officials have previously told Congress that they do not consider CIA personnel operating outside the United States to be bound by legal prohibitions against “cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment” under treaties to which the United States is party.
“This exception contains code language that could give the CIA a green light to treat prisoners inhumanely,” said Malinowski. “If allowed to stand, it will render President Bush’s past pledges about humane treatment meaningless.”
"Human Rights Watch said the waiver would also open the door for outright torture, as interrogators would find it impossible to draw lines between illegal and 'allowable' mistreatment. Bush administration officials, under questioning from members of Congress in the past, have failed to clearly define differences between torture and lesser forms of mistreatment. They have also made inaccurate statements about the definition of torture; for instance, administration officials have claimed that 'waterboarding' (suffocating a person until he believes he is about to drown) is not a form of torture."
How sick is that?
Back to WaPo:
"The Justice Department and the White House are known to have approved harsh interrogation techniques for some of these people, including "waterboarding," or simulated drowning; mock [simulated] execution; and the deliberate withholding of pain medication."
Note for the uninitiated: this is TORTURE.
Deliberately causing pain counts, deliberately causing horror counts, bringing a fellow human being to the point of death--and back--and then to the point of death--and back again--counts.
Don't let those "organ failure" guidelines from Gonzalez fool you, it's all about the pain. Recall one famed oriental torture, not causing death, but causing exquisite pain--those little slivers of bamboo classically used under the fingernails? Because the digits have many more nerve endings than other parts of the body? Think that that doesn't count as torture?
Think again.
Bush
Rumsfeld
Libby
Rove
SOFT ON TREASON IN A TIME OF WAR
Prepare to read the list.
1. Take your nausea medication right now, friends, and wait a while for it to kick in before you read the psychopathic slimespin that follows.
2. Check to make sure you have everything you need for everyone you love when Fitzmas rolls around. Or Fitzukkah. Or Fitzgiving. Remember, thinking of those who are about to be indicted, it is always better to Fitzgive than to Fitzreceive.
3. Meditate upon the Soft on Treason Republicans to prepare oneself mentally for the actual reading of the list, while listening to "As Someday It May Happen," from the Mikado:
Ko-Ko (The Lord High Executioner of the Town of Titipu)
As someday it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list -- I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground
And who never would be missed -- who never would be missed!
There's the pestilential nuisances who write for autographs --
All people who have flabby hands and irritating laughs --
All children who are up in dates, and floor you with 'em flat --
All persons who in shaking hand, shake hands with you like that --
And all third persons who on spoiling tete-a-tetes insist --
They'd none of 'em be missed -- they'd none of 'em be missed!
Chorus of Men
He's got 'em on the list -- he's got 'em on the list;
And they'll none of 'em be missed -- they'll none of 'em be missed!
4. Read the list below, hurl, and take the time to visit www.senate.gov with the thought of letting them all know what you think of what they've said.
(actual list via Americablog,Kent, and the RNC)
Republican Senators Defend Karl Rove:
NRSC Chairwoman Elizabeth Dole (R-NC): “The Partisan Attacks Against Karl Rove Are Out Of Control And Entirely Inappropriate. He Is A Distinguished Member Of The White House And He Is My Friend.” (National Republican Senatorial Committee, “Elizabeth Dole Statement On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
* Dole: “It Is Incredibly Irresponsible For Individuals And Organizations To Make Accusations Based On Rumor And Innuendo. It Is Unfair To The Investigation And Even More Unfair To Karl Rove.” (National Republican Senatorial Committee, “Elizabeth Dole Statement On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN): “My Democratic Friends Would Be Doing The Nation A Great Service If They Spent Half As Much Time Getting Legislation Passed That Will Benefit The Country As They Do In Attacking Karl Rove.” (Sen. Norm Coleman, Press Release, 7/13/05)
* Coleman: “We Have Enough To Do In The Senate In Minding Our Own Business Than To Be Sticking Our Noses Into Someone Else’s Business. Everyone Needs To Cool The Rhetoric, Focus On The Business Of The People, And Allow The Investigation To Run Its Course.” (Sen. Norm Coleman, Press Release, 7/13/05)
Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA): “I Don’t See Any Evidence Out There That He Violated The Law.’’ (Richard Keil and Holly Rosenkrantz, “Rove’s Role In Spy Inquiry Reverberates Throughout Capital,” Bloomberg, 7/12/05)
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT): “In All Honesty, The Facts Thus Far – And The E-Mail Involved – Indicate To Me That There Is Not A Problem Here…” (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)
Hatch: “I Have Always Thought This Is A Tempest In A Teapot." (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): “If Anyone Thought The Anger And Political Sniping That Infested The Capital During The Campaign Would End After The Election, They Were Flat Wrong. Partisan Attacks In Lieu Of The Facts Have Replaced Ideas, Action And Cooperation.” (Sen. John Cornyn, “Attacks On Rove ‘More Anger And Political Sniping,’” Press Release, 7/13/05)
* Cornyn: “Sadly, These Attacks Are More Of The Same Kind Of Anger And Lashing Out That Has Become The Substitute For Bipartisan Action And Progress. While Republicans Focus On Accomplishing An Ambitious Agenda For The American People, Some Democrats And Their Allies In The Hyper-Partisan Interest Groups Continue On Their Path Of Smear And Distract.” (Sen. John Cornyn, “Attacks On Rove ‘More Anger And Political Sniping,’” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL): “Karl Rove Is A Friend Who, By All Accounts, Is Fully Cooperating With The Investigation. He Has Been A Most Valuable Member Of President Bush’s Team And Has Always Conducted Himself According To High Standards. It’s Disappointing That Some Democrats Are Using An Ongoing Investigation To Try And Score Political Points. Instead Of Focusing On The People’s Business, Democrats Are Prejudging An Incomplete Investigation And Doing Nothing More Than Mounting Partisan Political Attacks.” (Sen. Jeff Sessions, “Statement Of U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions On Karl Rove,” 7/13/05)
House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO): “I Think We See Too Many Efforts Now Where People Quickly Rush To Judgment, Rush To Call For The Most Bizarre Solutions To Problems That Are Problems That Are Often Just Created In Their Own Minds.” (Rep. Roy Blunt, Floor Statement, U.S. House Of Representatives, 7/13/05)
House Republican Conference Chair Deborah Pryce (R-OH):” I Think What The Democrats Are Doing With Karl Rove Is Just Another Politically Motivated Part Of Their Agenda.” (CNN’s “Wolf Blitzer Reports,” 7/13/05)
NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds (R-NY): “The Extreme Left Is Once Again Attempting To Define The Modern Democrat Party By Rabid Partisan Attacks, Character Assassination And Endless Negativity. And As Has Become Their Custom, The Rest Of The Democrat Party Is Standing By Silently.” (National Republican Congressional Committee, “NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds Statement On Karl Rove, Democrat Partisan Attacks,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
* Reynolds: “Democrats Are Bitter About Losing In 2004. And They Will Stop At Nothing To Accomplish Through Character Assassination What They Could Not Accomplish At The Ballot Box.” (National Republican Congressional Committee, “NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds Statement On Karl Rove, Democrat Partisan Attacks,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA): “Karl Rove Is Just The Latest In A Long Line Of Targets For The Democrats Vitriol And Political Games. The American People Want To Know How Congress Is Going To Keep The Economy Growing, Lower Energy Prices And Keep Them Secure At Home.” (Rep. Eric Cantor, “Cantor Statement on Democrat Attacks On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA): “Karl Rove Who Did Not Even Know This Woman’s Name Did Not Have Any Information Of Her Acting In Any Covert Manner. It Is Just Silly.” (“Fox News’, “Fox News Live,” 7/13/05)
DeLay: “This Is Typical Of The Democrats. They Smell Blood And They Act Like Sharks. Karl Rove Is A Good Man. He Was Doing His Job. He Was Trying To Talk A Reporter Out Of Filing A False Story Based Upon False Premise. I Don’t See That He Has Done Anything Wrong.” (Fox News’ “Studio B,” 7/13/05)
* Granger: “He Knew Then That Much Of What Joe Wilson Was Saying Was Untrue. The Calls For Mr. Rove’s Resignation Are Simply Partisan Gamesmanship.” (Rep. Kay Granger, “Congresswoman Granger Calls Democrat Attacks On Rove Partisan Gamesmanship,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Rep. Peter T. King (R-NY): “Republicans Should Stop Holding Back And Go On The Offense: Fire Enough Bullets The Other Way Until The Supreme Court Overtakes.” (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)
Silly black-heart neo-cons. Methinks they doth protest too much.
Bwa ha ha.
1. Take your nausea medication right now, friends, and wait a while for it to kick in before you read the psychopathic slimespin that follows.
2. Check to make sure you have everything you need for everyone you love when Fitzmas rolls around. Or Fitzukkah. Or Fitzgiving. Remember, thinking of those who are about to be indicted, it is always better to Fitzgive than to Fitzreceive.
3. Meditate upon the Soft on Treason Republicans to prepare oneself mentally for the actual reading of the list, while listening to "As Someday It May Happen," from the Mikado:
Ko-Ko (The Lord High Executioner of the Town of Titipu)
As someday it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list -- I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground
And who never would be missed -- who never would be missed!
There's the pestilential nuisances who write for autographs --
All people who have flabby hands and irritating laughs --
All children who are up in dates, and floor you with 'em flat --
All persons who in shaking hand, shake hands with you like that --
And all third persons who on spoiling tete-a-tetes insist --
They'd none of 'em be missed -- they'd none of 'em be missed!
Chorus of Men
He's got 'em on the list -- he's got 'em on the list;
And they'll none of 'em be missed -- they'll none of 'em be missed!
4. Read the list below, hurl, and take the time to visit www.senate.gov with the thought of letting them all know what you think of what they've said.
(actual list via Americablog,Kent, and the RNC)
Republican Senators Defend Karl Rove:
NRSC Chairwoman Elizabeth Dole (R-NC): “The Partisan Attacks Against Karl Rove Are Out Of Control And Entirely Inappropriate. He Is A Distinguished Member Of The White House And He Is My Friend.” (National Republican Senatorial Committee, “Elizabeth Dole Statement On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
* Dole: “It Is Incredibly Irresponsible For Individuals And Organizations To Make Accusations Based On Rumor And Innuendo. It Is Unfair To The Investigation And Even More Unfair To Karl Rove.” (National Republican Senatorial Committee, “Elizabeth Dole Statement On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN): “My Democratic Friends Would Be Doing The Nation A Great Service If They Spent Half As Much Time Getting Legislation Passed That Will Benefit The Country As They Do In Attacking Karl Rove.” (Sen. Norm Coleman, Press Release, 7/13/05)
* Coleman: “We Have Enough To Do In The Senate In Minding Our Own Business Than To Be Sticking Our Noses Into Someone Else’s Business. Everyone Needs To Cool The Rhetoric, Focus On The Business Of The People, And Allow The Investigation To Run Its Course.” (Sen. Norm Coleman, Press Release, 7/13/05)
Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA): “I Don’t See Any Evidence Out There That He Violated The Law.’’ (Richard Keil and Holly Rosenkrantz, “Rove’s Role In Spy Inquiry Reverberates Throughout Capital,” Bloomberg, 7/12/05)
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT): “In All Honesty, The Facts Thus Far – And The E-Mail Involved – Indicate To Me That There Is Not A Problem Here…” (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)
Hatch: “I Have Always Thought This Is A Tempest In A Teapot." (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): “If Anyone Thought The Anger And Political Sniping That Infested The Capital During The Campaign Would End After The Election, They Were Flat Wrong. Partisan Attacks In Lieu Of The Facts Have Replaced Ideas, Action And Cooperation.” (Sen. John Cornyn, “Attacks On Rove ‘More Anger And Political Sniping,’” Press Release, 7/13/05)
* Cornyn: “Sadly, These Attacks Are More Of The Same Kind Of Anger And Lashing Out That Has Become The Substitute For Bipartisan Action And Progress. While Republicans Focus On Accomplishing An Ambitious Agenda For The American People, Some Democrats And Their Allies In The Hyper-Partisan Interest Groups Continue On Their Path Of Smear And Distract.” (Sen. John Cornyn, “Attacks On Rove ‘More Anger And Political Sniping,’” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL): “Karl Rove Is A Friend Who, By All Accounts, Is Fully Cooperating With The Investigation. He Has Been A Most Valuable Member Of President Bush’s Team And Has Always Conducted Himself According To High Standards. It’s Disappointing That Some Democrats Are Using An Ongoing Investigation To Try And Score Political Points. Instead Of Focusing On The People’s Business, Democrats Are Prejudging An Incomplete Investigation And Doing Nothing More Than Mounting Partisan Political Attacks.” (Sen. Jeff Sessions, “Statement Of U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions On Karl Rove,” 7/13/05)
House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO): “I Think We See Too Many Efforts Now Where People Quickly Rush To Judgment, Rush To Call For The Most Bizarre Solutions To Problems That Are Problems That Are Often Just Created In Their Own Minds.” (Rep. Roy Blunt, Floor Statement, U.S. House Of Representatives, 7/13/05)
House Republican Conference Chair Deborah Pryce (R-OH):” I Think What The Democrats Are Doing With Karl Rove Is Just Another Politically Motivated Part Of Their Agenda.” (CNN’s “Wolf Blitzer Reports,” 7/13/05)
NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds (R-NY): “The Extreme Left Is Once Again Attempting To Define The Modern Democrat Party By Rabid Partisan Attacks, Character Assassination And Endless Negativity. And As Has Become Their Custom, The Rest Of The Democrat Party Is Standing By Silently.” (National Republican Congressional Committee, “NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds Statement On Karl Rove, Democrat Partisan Attacks,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
* Reynolds: “Democrats Are Bitter About Losing In 2004. And They Will Stop At Nothing To Accomplish Through Character Assassination What They Could Not Accomplish At The Ballot Box.” (National Republican Congressional Committee, “NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds Statement On Karl Rove, Democrat Partisan Attacks,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA): “Karl Rove Is Just The Latest In A Long Line Of Targets For The Democrats Vitriol And Political Games. The American People Want To Know How Congress Is Going To Keep The Economy Growing, Lower Energy Prices And Keep Them Secure At Home.” (Rep. Eric Cantor, “Cantor Statement on Democrat Attacks On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA): “Karl Rove Who Did Not Even Know This Woman’s Name Did Not Have Any Information Of Her Acting In Any Covert Manner. It Is Just Silly.” (“Fox News’, “Fox News Live,” 7/13/05)
DeLay: “This Is Typical Of The Democrats. They Smell Blood And They Act Like Sharks. Karl Rove Is A Good Man. He Was Doing His Job. He Was Trying To Talk A Reporter Out Of Filing A False Story Based Upon False Premise. I Don’t See That He Has Done Anything Wrong.” (Fox News’ “Studio B,” 7/13/05)
* Granger: “He Knew Then That Much Of What Joe Wilson Was Saying Was Untrue. The Calls For Mr. Rove’s Resignation Are Simply Partisan Gamesmanship.” (Rep. Kay Granger, “Congresswoman Granger Calls Democrat Attacks On Rove Partisan Gamesmanship,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Rep. Peter T. King (R-NY): “Republicans Should Stop Holding Back And Go On The Offense: Fire Enough Bullets The Other Way Until The Supreme Court Overtakes.” (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)
Silly black-heart neo-cons. Methinks they doth protest too much.
Bwa ha ha.
Monday, October 24, 2005
CHENEY TOLD LIBBY OF PLAME
Here's the initial link, at rawstory.
Is it Fitzmas yet? Is it Fitzukkah? Something? Fitzgiving?
(Am having serious serious technical problems here today and yesterday; blogger just told me to give up, so I did. Lost all my links and all my custom tweakings; I'll bring them back as soon as I can.)
Scroll far far below for old old story on John Bolton, Mr. Moustache.
I'm still betting it was he--Bolton, Mr. Moustache--who was in charge of the "work-up" on Joe Wilson that Joe Wilson became aware of. Wonder if those intercepts Bolton held so close to his vest were all about Wilson and Plame, as well.
All put together, that would make a nice case for outing a CIA NOC as political retaliation against a whistleblower.
Let's hear it for the good guys in the CIA.
Let's hear it for real virtue in general.
More via the NY Times:
"CHENEY TOLD AIDE OF CIA OFFICER, NOTES SHOW
By DAVID JOHNSTON, RICHARD W. STEVENSON and DOUGLAS JEHL
WASHINGTON, Oct. 24 — I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.
Notes of the previously undisclosed conversation between Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2003, appear to differ from Mr. Libby’s testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, from journalists, the lawyers said.
The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson’s husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration’s handling of intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear program to justify the war.
Lawyers said the notes show that Mr. Cheney knew that Ms. Wilson worked at the C.I.A. more than a month before her identity was made public and her undercover status was disclosed in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak on July 14, 2003. . . "
Oh dearie dear--and, as I understand it, Mr. Libby failed to testify to events under oath in the manner supported by his own notes . . .
Looks like, for a change, someone in the Bush administration actually might be held responsible for something . . .
More later.
Bush
Plame
Libby
Rove
Cheney
Bolton
Is it Fitzmas yet? Is it Fitzukkah? Something? Fitzgiving?
(Am having serious serious technical problems here today and yesterday; blogger just told me to give up, so I did. Lost all my links and all my custom tweakings; I'll bring them back as soon as I can.)
Scroll far far below for old old story on John Bolton, Mr. Moustache.
I'm still betting it was he--Bolton, Mr. Moustache--who was in charge of the "work-up" on Joe Wilson that Joe Wilson became aware of. Wonder if those intercepts Bolton held so close to his vest were all about Wilson and Plame, as well.
All put together, that would make a nice case for outing a CIA NOC as political retaliation against a whistleblower.
Let's hear it for the good guys in the CIA.
Let's hear it for real virtue in general.
More via the NY Times:
"CHENEY TOLD AIDE OF CIA OFFICER, NOTES SHOW
By DAVID JOHNSTON, RICHARD W. STEVENSON and DOUGLAS JEHL
WASHINGTON, Oct. 24 — I. Lewis Libby Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, first learned about the C.I.A. officer at the heart of the leak investigation in a conversation with Mr. Cheney weeks before her identity became public in 2003, lawyers involved in the case said Monday.
Notes of the previously undisclosed conversation between Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney on June 12, 2003, appear to differ from Mr. Libby’s testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, from journalists, the lawyers said.
The notes, taken by Mr. Libby during the conversation, for the first time place Mr. Cheney in the middle of an effort by the White House to learn about Ms. Wilson’s husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, who was questioning the administration’s handling of intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear program to justify the war.
Lawyers said the notes show that Mr. Cheney knew that Ms. Wilson worked at the C.I.A. more than a month before her identity was made public and her undercover status was disclosed in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak on July 14, 2003. . . "
Oh dearie dear--and, as I understand it, Mr. Libby failed to testify to events under oath in the manner supported by his own notes . . .
Looks like, for a change, someone in the Bush administration actually might be held responsible for something . . .
More later.
Bush
Plame
Libby
Rove
Cheney
Bolton
Sunday, October 23, 2005
Pissing on the Post-Born: The Third-Worlding of America
It's not about outsourcing jobs, it's about in-sourcing poverty and pollution. Taking some of that poverty and pollution from the Third World, where they've been hoarding it, and bringing it all back home. (No offense meant to the Third World, where No Blood for Hubris and family lived happily for many years).
Just as Bubble Boy has worked so hard on the hard work of cutting taxes for the wealthiest of the wealthy, the middle class finds itself pancaked down into and onto the lower classes, and they onto the lowest classes, as American society becomes completely re-structured by dualism: US vs. THEM, HAVES vs. HAVE-NOTS. It's so much easier to remember this way, is it not?
We have girly-man pundits like George Will letting us know that the days of union wages are all over, and that the days of health benefits are all over, and that the days of retirement plans are all over, and we had all just better suck it up right now. (George himself is not on the having to suck it up list, however; this is because he possesses the divine virtue of: funds.).
Then we have yappy black-heart neo-cons intent on building Alaskan bridges to nowhere while cutting back on the already feeble benefits available via Medicare and Medicaid. Well, they spin, this is how we're going to pay for Katrina! We'll cap benefits, and then when the poorest of the poor and sickest of the sick actually croak, we'll save money. We can rob Peter to pay Paul, it's all in the Bible!
Yes, and we can cut back on armor for our troops, and cut back on treatment for the PTSD the troops acquired via their engagement in battle--in a war that was started basically because the sophomoric black-heart neo-cons wanted to start a war. They got away with that one. So far.
They've gotten away, so far, with hurtling America into Abu Ghraib moral bankruptcy thanks to psychopath sadist Rumsfeld and his minions Miller and Sanchez and Gonzalez. whilst simultaneously hurtling America into total fiscal bankruptcy.
I'd like to see this stop. part of me would like to see them all pissing their lives away in Gitmo (the other part of me tells me not to think like that).
But even that, delicious as it may seem, will not put our Humpty-Dumpty Post-Fall America back together again.
Looks like it's Dust-Bowl time. Looks like the mighty America has fallen. How will we ever repair the damage done to us by the black-heart neo-cons and their criminal hubris?
How ever did we come to be ruled by the criminally incompetent, the morally dead?
Forget about Drownie, try Karen Hughes' latest moronism: time after time, even AFTER she had been corrected, she overstated Saddam Hussein's war crimes by a factor of two hundred and ninety-five THOUSAND. OK, sure, that's not as bad as giving the imprimatur to torture like Yoo and Gonzalez and Rummy, but still, how can we tolerate having persons in authority who believe that facts are fictionizable?
The neo-con answer to global warming is--white out the offending paragraph. Their answer to problems with affirmative action is--delete the offending information. Their answer to problems with their lies to sell the Iraq war is--shoot the messenger by outing his wife. Venal is as venal does.
Similarly, stupid is as stupid does--our president is not only the hyper-insulated, dimwitted Bubble Boy, but also the plastic spastic Bobblehead Boy who can't put together a simple declarative sentence, whose feeble mind holds zero facts while clinging for dear life to a passel of sappy platitudes--on a good day.
How stupid can you be and keep on getting away with it?
Why, for these people, is stupidity acceptable?
Who got away with making brightness a bad thing?
Why, why are we ruled by these awful people, awful people like Wolfowitz, spit on their own combs and then spread their own spittle over their heads? (Literally and metaphorically.)
Feh.
Bush
Plame
Rumsfeld
Just as Bubble Boy has worked so hard on the hard work of cutting taxes for the wealthiest of the wealthy, the middle class finds itself pancaked down into and onto the lower classes, and they onto the lowest classes, as American society becomes completely re-structured by dualism: US vs. THEM, HAVES vs. HAVE-NOTS. It's so much easier to remember this way, is it not?
We have girly-man pundits like George Will letting us know that the days of union wages are all over, and that the days of health benefits are all over, and that the days of retirement plans are all over, and we had all just better suck it up right now. (George himself is not on the having to suck it up list, however; this is because he possesses the divine virtue of: funds.).
Then we have yappy black-heart neo-cons intent on building Alaskan bridges to nowhere while cutting back on the already feeble benefits available via Medicare and Medicaid. Well, they spin, this is how we're going to pay for Katrina! We'll cap benefits, and then when the poorest of the poor and sickest of the sick actually croak, we'll save money. We can rob Peter to pay Paul, it's all in the Bible!
Yes, and we can cut back on armor for our troops, and cut back on treatment for the PTSD the troops acquired via their engagement in battle--in a war that was started basically because the sophomoric black-heart neo-cons wanted to start a war. They got away with that one. So far.
They've gotten away, so far, with hurtling America into Abu Ghraib moral bankruptcy thanks to psychopath sadist Rumsfeld and his minions Miller and Sanchez and Gonzalez. whilst simultaneously hurtling America into total fiscal bankruptcy.
I'd like to see this stop. part of me would like to see them all pissing their lives away in Gitmo (the other part of me tells me not to think like that).
But even that, delicious as it may seem, will not put our Humpty-Dumpty Post-Fall America back together again.
Looks like it's Dust-Bowl time. Looks like the mighty America has fallen. How will we ever repair the damage done to us by the black-heart neo-cons and their criminal hubris?
How ever did we come to be ruled by the criminally incompetent, the morally dead?
Forget about Drownie, try Karen Hughes' latest moronism: time after time, even AFTER she had been corrected, she overstated Saddam Hussein's war crimes by a factor of two hundred and ninety-five THOUSAND. OK, sure, that's not as bad as giving the imprimatur to torture like Yoo and Gonzalez and Rummy, but still, how can we tolerate having persons in authority who believe that facts are fictionizable?
The neo-con answer to global warming is--white out the offending paragraph. Their answer to problems with affirmative action is--delete the offending information. Their answer to problems with their lies to sell the Iraq war is--shoot the messenger by outing his wife. Venal is as venal does.
Similarly, stupid is as stupid does--our president is not only the hyper-insulated, dimwitted Bubble Boy, but also the plastic spastic Bobblehead Boy who can't put together a simple declarative sentence, whose feeble mind holds zero facts while clinging for dear life to a passel of sappy platitudes--on a good day.
How stupid can you be and keep on getting away with it?
Why, for these people, is stupidity acceptable?
Who got away with making brightness a bad thing?
Why, why are we ruled by these awful people, awful people like Wolfowitz, spit on their own combs and then spread their own spittle over their heads? (Literally and metaphorically.)
Feh.
Bush
Plame
Rumsfeld
Oh Really. Ya Think?
Take a look at this--it's from the Times.
"Leak Case Renews Questions on War's Rationale
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON and DOUGLAS JEHL
WASHINGTON, Oct. 22 - The legal and political stakes are of the highest order, but the investigation into the disclosure of a covert C.I.A. officer's identity is also just one skirmish in the continuing battle over the Bush administration's justification for the war in Iraq.
That fight has preoccupied the White House for more than three years, repeatedly threatening President Bush's credibility and political standing, and has now once again put the spotlight on Vice President Dick Cheney, who assumed a critical role in assembling and analyzing the evidence about Iraq's weapons programs.
The dispute over the rationale for the war has led to upheaval in the intelligence agencies, left Democrats divided about how aggressively to break with the White House over Iraq and exposed deep rifts within the administration and among Republicans.
The combatants' intensity was underscored this week in a speech by Lawrence Wilkerson, the former chief of staff to Colin L. Powell while he was secretary of state, who complained of a "cabal" between Mr. Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld when it came to Iraq and other national security issues and of a "real dysfunctionality" in the administration's foreign policy."
Oy.
"Leak Case Renews Questions on War's Rationale
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON and DOUGLAS JEHL
WASHINGTON, Oct. 22 - The legal and political stakes are of the highest order, but the investigation into the disclosure of a covert C.I.A. officer's identity is also just one skirmish in the continuing battle over the Bush administration's justification for the war in Iraq.
That fight has preoccupied the White House for more than three years, repeatedly threatening President Bush's credibility and political standing, and has now once again put the spotlight on Vice President Dick Cheney, who assumed a critical role in assembling and analyzing the evidence about Iraq's weapons programs.
The dispute over the rationale for the war has led to upheaval in the intelligence agencies, left Democrats divided about how aggressively to break with the White House over Iraq and exposed deep rifts within the administration and among Republicans.
The combatants' intensity was underscored this week in a speech by Lawrence Wilkerson, the former chief of staff to Colin L. Powell while he was secretary of state, who complained of a "cabal" between Mr. Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld when it came to Iraq and other national security issues and of a "real dysfunctionality" in the administration's foreign policy."
Oy.
Saturday, October 22, 2005
"Considering the Gravity of the Suspected Crime"
I've been reading the Fitzgerald website this morning with great interest, and I'm noticing things I must have read about before, but not quite noticed.
Testimony [by Miller] "appears essential in remedying a serious breach of public trust . . ;" "the crimes being investigated have national security implications . . ;" courts should not "protect sources whose leaks harm national security . . ;" "possible violations of laws protecting national security interests . . .."
I was struck also by this phrase from Judge Tatel: "considering the gravity of the suspected crime . . ." That phrase, in and of itself, should have shut up the black-heart neo-con spin machinists, with their "it's just a teeny weeny wittle crime, why should anyone's panties be oh so twisted" warble.
Hmm. No panties quite as twisted as the intelligence on Iraq by the top-level Bushist fascists.
More to come.
Judith Miller
Bush
Valerie Plame
Testimony [by Miller] "appears essential in remedying a serious breach of public trust . . ;" "the crimes being investigated have national security implications . . ;" courts should not "protect sources whose leaks harm national security . . ;" "possible violations of laws protecting national security interests . . .."
I was struck also by this phrase from Judge Tatel: "considering the gravity of the suspected crime . . ." That phrase, in and of itself, should have shut up the black-heart neo-con spin machinists, with their "it's just a teeny weeny wittle crime, why should anyone's panties be oh so twisted" warble.
Hmm. No panties quite as twisted as the intelligence on Iraq by the top-level Bushist fascists.
More to come.
Judith Miller
Bush
Valerie Plame
Friday, October 21, 2005
First We Maim Your Minds, Then We Dump You. It's Hard Work. (Redux)
We've been here before at No Blood for Hubris, and now we're here again. (via A Night Light)
Here we have another story of the black-heart neo-cons screwing the post-born, in this case, the post-born who are veterans. Post-born veterans of wars they fought for on our behalf and who became disabled by PTSD because of the wars they fought. On our behalf.
The figures are even worse than what was previously reported. The Bush government is trying to screw SEVENTY-TWO THOUSAND VETS WITH PTSD by reviewing their files and coming to the conclusion that they don't have PTSD. All in order to save money on treatment (like saving money by having no armor) so they can piss it all away again.
"VA UNDER FIRE FOR PLAN TO REVIEW ALL POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER CLAIMS
By Leo Shane III, Stars and Stripes
WASHINGTON — Veterans groups and House Democrats blasted VA plans to review all post-traumatic stress disorder claims because of irregularities in their compensation system, calling it insulting to heroes who have served their country.
'To the VA, this is simply a process seeking out voids in paperwork,' said Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M, at a Thursday hearing on Capitol Hill. 'But to veterans, it’s a jolting realization that their day-to-day struggles are being questioned again.'
In August, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced plans to review 72,000 cases where veterans had received a 100 percent disability rating for post-traumatic stress disorder . . critics called it a way for the department to save money by shirking its duty to care for disabled veterans.
Quentin Kinderman, deputy director of legislative service for the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, called the IG report flawed and the proposed review a waste of money.
"There is very little potential to reduce the number of cases here," he said. "And we’ve very concerned about the impact of the review and publicity on veterans, especially those returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, who need the kind of counseling that the VA can provide."
Democrats echoed those concerns, and called for a halt to plans to review the cases.
Udall said in one case, a veteran in his district committed suicide after hearing about plans for the review."
Sorry, but do we have another Arabian horse fancier running the VA now? Is someone there unaware of the levels of suicidality and/or homicidality that can occur with cases of PTSD? Does the VA not understand that PTSD is a serious diagnosis? Guess not.
"Officials from New Mexico found the man, a Vietnam veteran, with information regarding the review beside his Purple Heart when he took his life."
Well, that death will save the Bushists a cool ten grand, will it not?
Profits over people. Profiteering over people.
Cutting corners by short-changing veterans who were wounded in battle? These are the people who smugly call themselves "pro-life"? You kidding me?
When will the American people have had enough? When will we care for the post-born?
Bush
Veterans
PTSD
Here we have another story of the black-heart neo-cons screwing the post-born, in this case, the post-born who are veterans. Post-born veterans of wars they fought for on our behalf and who became disabled by PTSD because of the wars they fought. On our behalf.
The figures are even worse than what was previously reported. The Bush government is trying to screw SEVENTY-TWO THOUSAND VETS WITH PTSD by reviewing their files and coming to the conclusion that they don't have PTSD. All in order to save money on treatment (like saving money by having no armor) so they can piss it all away again.
"VA UNDER FIRE FOR PLAN TO REVIEW ALL POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER CLAIMS
By Leo Shane III, Stars and Stripes
WASHINGTON — Veterans groups and House Democrats blasted VA plans to review all post-traumatic stress disorder claims because of irregularities in their compensation system, calling it insulting to heroes who have served their country.
'To the VA, this is simply a process seeking out voids in paperwork,' said Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M, at a Thursday hearing on Capitol Hill. 'But to veterans, it’s a jolting realization that their day-to-day struggles are being questioned again.'
In August, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced plans to review 72,000 cases where veterans had received a 100 percent disability rating for post-traumatic stress disorder . . critics called it a way for the department to save money by shirking its duty to care for disabled veterans.
Quentin Kinderman, deputy director of legislative service for the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, called the IG report flawed and the proposed review a waste of money.
"There is very little potential to reduce the number of cases here," he said. "And we’ve very concerned about the impact of the review and publicity on veterans, especially those returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, who need the kind of counseling that the VA can provide."
Democrats echoed those concerns, and called for a halt to plans to review the cases.
Udall said in one case, a veteran in his district committed suicide after hearing about plans for the review."
Sorry, but do we have another Arabian horse fancier running the VA now? Is someone there unaware of the levels of suicidality and/or homicidality that can occur with cases of PTSD? Does the VA not understand that PTSD is a serious diagnosis? Guess not.
"Officials from New Mexico found the man, a Vietnam veteran, with information regarding the review beside his Purple Heart when he took his life."
Well, that death will save the Bushists a cool ten grand, will it not?
Profits over people. Profiteering over people.
Cutting corners by short-changing veterans who were wounded in battle? These are the people who smugly call themselves "pro-life"? You kidding me?
When will the American people have had enough? When will we care for the post-born?
Bush
Veterans
PTSD
No Blood for Hubris' Official Mental Health Interlude--No. 3 (Patrick Fitzgerald Website)
Do we all love primary sources, or what?
Here is Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald's new website, hat tip to RawStory.
This qualifies as No Blood for Hubris' latest official mental health interlude since it is inspiring and uplifting to learn of honest persons pursuing virtuous ends by virtuous means.
For a change.
Here is Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald's new website, hat tip to RawStory.
This qualifies as No Blood for Hubris' latest official mental health interlude since it is inspiring and uplifting to learn of honest persons pursuing virtuous ends by virtuous means.
For a change.
We Can't Care for the Kids We Already Have, Part Three
Tell me, does this sound familiar? As in echoing the case of the mother in Texas, Andrea Yates, who drowned her own five children?
"Woman Charged in Deaths of Her 3 Children
By CAROLYN MARSHALL
SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 20 - A woman whose family said she heard voices that told her to dump her three young children into the frigid waters of San Francisco Bay was charged Thursday with three counts of murder.
The mother, Lashaun T. Harris, 23, of Oakland, has been in custody since Wednesday in the killings of the children, identified by the police as Treyshun Harris, 6; Taronta Greeley, 2; and Joshoa Greeley, 16 months.
Rescuers recovered Taronta's body at 10 p.m. on Wednesday near the St. Francis Yacht Club, near the Golden Gate Bridge but about two miles from Pier 7 and the Ferry Building, where the police believe that Ms. Harris dumped the children.
The police said the search began at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday after an unidentified man called 911 to report he had seen the woman throw at least one child into the water.
The San Francisco police chief, Heather Fong, said on Thursday that a multiagency air, land and water search was under way, with 80 rescuers from the San Francisco Police and Fire Departments, the California Highway Patrol and the Coast Guard scouring the waterfront area. . . "
But with the San Francisco Bay's notoriously strong tides and 55-degree waters, finding the children alive and rescuing them was unlikely, she said, adding, "We have turned this into a recovery effort. . . "
"The waters are very murky and we literally have zero visibility," said one diver after a 30-minute dive. "We weren't lucky."
Ms. Harris apparently came from a large family, and about 40 of her relatives and friends gathered at Pier 7 on Thursday hoping to get information about the children. Friends and relatives said they had been worried recently about Ms. Harris's mental stability.
"She had been crying out for help," said Avery Garrett, 41, an Oakland resident who identified himself as Ms. Harris's uncle.
Ms. Harris had been living at a Salvation Army shelter in Oakland, Mr. Garrett said. He said he believed that she had been taking medication for emotional problems.
But Ms. Harris desperately wanted to get help, Mr. Garrett said, and recently tried to be admitted to a mental health facility. She was not admitted, he said, perhaps because she did not have health insurance."
Sorry, what was that again? She couldn't get treatment for clearly psychotic symptoms because she did not have health insurance?
Now, as I recall, this Preznit once was so moved by the plight of feti who cannot survive on their own that he pledged to provide health insurance for each and every fetus.
Will he be providing health insurance for the post-born anytime soon?
Don't hold your breath.
Will he and his cronies be cutting back even farther on mental and physical health care for those on Medicaid and Medicare anytime soon? You bet he will. He'll do with the most vulnerable sector of our population just what he did with veterans--pay for his useless, vicious war at the expense of the actual needs of actual people.
"Mr. Garrett said the family had grown increasingly concerned recently after Ms. Harris told a relative about the voices."
"She said she heard some voices in her head," Mr. Garrett said, "and they told her to take the kids and feed them to the sharks."
Failing to treat floridly psychotic symptoms like command hallucinations, such that lack of treatment results in the deaths of three post-born children, that should be a wake-up call for even the black-heart neo-cons.
Don't count on it.
To them, the lives and well-being of the post-born count for exactly nothing.
Bush
children
"Woman Charged in Deaths of Her 3 Children
By CAROLYN MARSHALL
SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 20 - A woman whose family said she heard voices that told her to dump her three young children into the frigid waters of San Francisco Bay was charged Thursday with three counts of murder.
The mother, Lashaun T. Harris, 23, of Oakland, has been in custody since Wednesday in the killings of the children, identified by the police as Treyshun Harris, 6; Taronta Greeley, 2; and Joshoa Greeley, 16 months.
Rescuers recovered Taronta's body at 10 p.m. on Wednesday near the St. Francis Yacht Club, near the Golden Gate Bridge but about two miles from Pier 7 and the Ferry Building, where the police believe that Ms. Harris dumped the children.
The police said the search began at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday after an unidentified man called 911 to report he had seen the woman throw at least one child into the water.
The San Francisco police chief, Heather Fong, said on Thursday that a multiagency air, land and water search was under way, with 80 rescuers from the San Francisco Police and Fire Departments, the California Highway Patrol and the Coast Guard scouring the waterfront area. . . "
But with the San Francisco Bay's notoriously strong tides and 55-degree waters, finding the children alive and rescuing them was unlikely, she said, adding, "We have turned this into a recovery effort. . . "
"The waters are very murky and we literally have zero visibility," said one diver after a 30-minute dive. "We weren't lucky."
Ms. Harris apparently came from a large family, and about 40 of her relatives and friends gathered at Pier 7 on Thursday hoping to get information about the children. Friends and relatives said they had been worried recently about Ms. Harris's mental stability.
"She had been crying out for help," said Avery Garrett, 41, an Oakland resident who identified himself as Ms. Harris's uncle.
Ms. Harris had been living at a Salvation Army shelter in Oakland, Mr. Garrett said. He said he believed that she had been taking medication for emotional problems.
But Ms. Harris desperately wanted to get help, Mr. Garrett said, and recently tried to be admitted to a mental health facility. She was not admitted, he said, perhaps because she did not have health insurance."
Sorry, what was that again? She couldn't get treatment for clearly psychotic symptoms because she did not have health insurance?
Now, as I recall, this Preznit once was so moved by the plight of feti who cannot survive on their own that he pledged to provide health insurance for each and every fetus.
Will he be providing health insurance for the post-born anytime soon?
Don't hold your breath.
Will he and his cronies be cutting back even farther on mental and physical health care for those on Medicaid and Medicare anytime soon? You bet he will. He'll do with the most vulnerable sector of our population just what he did with veterans--pay for his useless, vicious war at the expense of the actual needs of actual people.
"Mr. Garrett said the family had grown increasingly concerned recently after Ms. Harris told a relative about the voices."
"She said she heard some voices in her head," Mr. Garrett said, "and they told her to take the kids and feed them to the sharks."
Failing to treat floridly psychotic symptoms like command hallucinations, such that lack of treatment results in the deaths of three post-born children, that should be a wake-up call for even the black-heart neo-cons.
Don't count on it.
To them, the lives and well-being of the post-born count for exactly nothing.
Bush
children
Thursday, October 20, 2005
Neuroscientists With Nothing Better to Do?
What a crock this is, on so many levels.
"Scientists Bridle at Lecture Plan for Dalai Lama
By BENEDICT CAREY
The Dalai Lama, the exiled leader of Tibet who is revered as a spiritual teacher, is at the center of a scientific controversy.
He has been an enthusiastic collaborator in research on whether the intense meditation practiced by Buddhist monks can train the brain to generate compassion and positive thoughts. Next month in Washington, the Dalai Lama is scheduled to speak about the research at the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience.
But 544 brain researchers have signed a petition urging the society to cancel the lecture, because, according to the petition, "it will highlight a subject with largely unsubstantiated claims and compromised scientific rigor and objectivity."
Sorry, did I get that right? We're not supposed to study a subject because it hasn't yet been studied?
"Defenders of the Dalai Lama's appearance say that the motivation of many protesters is political, because many are Chinese or of Chinese descent. The Dalai Lama fled Tibet in 1959 after the Chinese crushed a Tibetan bid for independence.
But many scientists who signed the petition say they did so because they believe that the field of neuroscience risks losing credibility if it ventures too recklessly into spiritual matters."
Oh, no, not that!
"As the public face of neuroscience, we have a responsibility to at least see that research is replicated before it is promoted and highlighted," said Dr. Nancy Hayes, a neurobiologist at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Jersey who objects to the Dalai Lama's speaking. "If we don't do that, we may as well be the Flat Earth Society."
Like that's your job, Nancy? Publicity gatekeeper for neuroscientists? Defender of the materialist faith? Just asking.
"In the past decade, scientists and journalists have increasingly taken interest in meditation and "mindfulness," a related state of focused inner awareness, topics once left to weekend mystics and religious retreats. The Dalai Lama has been working with a small number of researchers to study how the practice of Buddhist contemplation affects moods and promotes a sense of peace and compassion.
In one widely reported 2003 study, Dr. Richard Davidson of the University of Wisconsin-Madison led a team of researchers that found that 25 employees of a biotechnology company showed increased levels of neural activity in the left anterior temporal region of their brains after taking a course in meditation. The region is active during sensations of happiness and positive emotion, the researchers reported.
In a 2004 experiment supported by the Mind and Life Institute, a nonprofit organization that the Dalai Lama helped establish, and also involving Dr. Davidson, investigators tracked brain waves in eight Tibetan monks as they meditated in a state of "unconditional loving-kindness and compassion."
For the record, this exercise involves mentally creating a sense of unconditional compassion. Example: one visualizes Bubble Boy, Big Dick, Rummy, Condi, Turdblossom and the rest of them, and imagines showering them with compassion, and a wish that they achieve a speedy enlightenment. This example, I think, demonstrates what a very challenging method of meditation this is.
(Quite a change from Pat Robertson and his people praying for Supreme Court justices to drop dead).
"Using an electronic scanner, the researchers found that the monks were producing a very strong pattern of gamma waves, a synchronized oscillation of brain cells that is associated with concentration and emotional control. A group of 10 college students who were learning to meditate produced a much weaker gamma signal.
Taken together, the studies suggest that "human qualities like compassion and altruism may in some sense be regarded as skills which can be improved through mental training," said Dr. Davidson, who is director of the Laboratory for Affective Neuroscience at the University of Wisconsin.
Yet the neuroscientists who have signed the petition say that there are several problems with this research. First, they say, Dr. Davidson and some of his colleagues meditate themselves, and they have collaborated with the Dalai Lama for years. Dr. Davidson said he had helped persuade the spiritual leader to accept the society's invitation to speak, and was with him when he received the request.
The critics also point out that there are flaws in the 2004 experiment that the researchers have acknowledged: The monks being studied were 12 to 45 years older than the students, and age could have accounted for some of the differences. The students, as beginners, may have been anxious or simply not skilled enough to find a meditative state in the time allotted, which would alter their brain wave patterns. And there was no way to know if the monks were adept at generating high gamma wave activity before they ever started meditating.
"This paper has not tested the idea whether meditation promotes compassion or any kind of positive emotion," Dr. Yi Rao, a neuroscientist at Northwestern University who helped draft the petition and was one of the sharpest critics, said in an e-mail message. . . "
Dr. Rao misses the point, which is this: for the first time, there is evidence of distinct physical changes in the brain being brought about by means of intentionally selected, intentionally-directed mental events.
We know about basic mind-body interactions: visualizing oneself biting into a lemon can make one's mouth water. Now we have evidence that the mere act of imagining compassion can change the very waves of one's brain.
For the better, one hopes.
"Scientists Bridle at Lecture Plan for Dalai Lama
By BENEDICT CAREY
The Dalai Lama, the exiled leader of Tibet who is revered as a spiritual teacher, is at the center of a scientific controversy.
He has been an enthusiastic collaborator in research on whether the intense meditation practiced by Buddhist monks can train the brain to generate compassion and positive thoughts. Next month in Washington, the Dalai Lama is scheduled to speak about the research at the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience.
But 544 brain researchers have signed a petition urging the society to cancel the lecture, because, according to the petition, "it will highlight a subject with largely unsubstantiated claims and compromised scientific rigor and objectivity."
Sorry, did I get that right? We're not supposed to study a subject because it hasn't yet been studied?
"Defenders of the Dalai Lama's appearance say that the motivation of many protesters is political, because many are Chinese or of Chinese descent. The Dalai Lama fled Tibet in 1959 after the Chinese crushed a Tibetan bid for independence.
But many scientists who signed the petition say they did so because they believe that the field of neuroscience risks losing credibility if it ventures too recklessly into spiritual matters."
Oh, no, not that!
"As the public face of neuroscience, we have a responsibility to at least see that research is replicated before it is promoted and highlighted," said Dr. Nancy Hayes, a neurobiologist at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Jersey who objects to the Dalai Lama's speaking. "If we don't do that, we may as well be the Flat Earth Society."
Like that's your job, Nancy? Publicity gatekeeper for neuroscientists? Defender of the materialist faith? Just asking.
"In the past decade, scientists and journalists have increasingly taken interest in meditation and "mindfulness," a related state of focused inner awareness, topics once left to weekend mystics and religious retreats. The Dalai Lama has been working with a small number of researchers to study how the practice of Buddhist contemplation affects moods and promotes a sense of peace and compassion.
In one widely reported 2003 study, Dr. Richard Davidson of the University of Wisconsin-Madison led a team of researchers that found that 25 employees of a biotechnology company showed increased levels of neural activity in the left anterior temporal region of their brains after taking a course in meditation. The region is active during sensations of happiness and positive emotion, the researchers reported.
In a 2004 experiment supported by the Mind and Life Institute, a nonprofit organization that the Dalai Lama helped establish, and also involving Dr. Davidson, investigators tracked brain waves in eight Tibetan monks as they meditated in a state of "unconditional loving-kindness and compassion."
For the record, this exercise involves mentally creating a sense of unconditional compassion. Example: one visualizes Bubble Boy, Big Dick, Rummy, Condi, Turdblossom and the rest of them, and imagines showering them with compassion, and a wish that they achieve a speedy enlightenment. This example, I think, demonstrates what a very challenging method of meditation this is.
(Quite a change from Pat Robertson and his people praying for Supreme Court justices to drop dead).
"Using an electronic scanner, the researchers found that the monks were producing a very strong pattern of gamma waves, a synchronized oscillation of brain cells that is associated with concentration and emotional control. A group of 10 college students who were learning to meditate produced a much weaker gamma signal.
Taken together, the studies suggest that "human qualities like compassion and altruism may in some sense be regarded as skills which can be improved through mental training," said Dr. Davidson, who is director of the Laboratory for Affective Neuroscience at the University of Wisconsin.
Yet the neuroscientists who have signed the petition say that there are several problems with this research. First, they say, Dr. Davidson and some of his colleagues meditate themselves, and they have collaborated with the Dalai Lama for years. Dr. Davidson said he had helped persuade the spiritual leader to accept the society's invitation to speak, and was with him when he received the request.
The critics also point out that there are flaws in the 2004 experiment that the researchers have acknowledged: The monks being studied were 12 to 45 years older than the students, and age could have accounted for some of the differences. The students, as beginners, may have been anxious or simply not skilled enough to find a meditative state in the time allotted, which would alter their brain wave patterns. And there was no way to know if the monks were adept at generating high gamma wave activity before they ever started meditating.
"This paper has not tested the idea whether meditation promotes compassion or any kind of positive emotion," Dr. Yi Rao, a neuroscientist at Northwestern University who helped draft the petition and was one of the sharpest critics, said in an e-mail message. . . "
Dr. Rao misses the point, which is this: for the first time, there is evidence of distinct physical changes in the brain being brought about by means of intentionally selected, intentionally-directed mental events.
We know about basic mind-body interactions: visualizing oneself biting into a lemon can make one's mouth water. Now we have evidence that the mere act of imagining compassion can change the very waves of one's brain.
For the better, one hopes.
Monday, October 17, 2005
HARRIET: "YES" ON SECRET PACT TO KILL ROE V. WADE
Gee, and we thought all that fuss about Supreme Court Justices was some quaint philosophical strict constructionism stuff, didn't we?
No, we didn't. We knew it was all about power and control--and it is.
It's all about taking back power and control over reproductive freedom from individual women (and their doctors) and handing over power and control to federal and state governments. So much for drowning government in the bathtub.
So much spin over the years, so many lies about "no litmus tests," so much spin about originalism, so much complete crap.
It all began to fall apart because of Harriet Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court--all those people who couldn't give a damn about Democrats not having enough information on Roberts, suddenly, their panties are in a twist because they don't have enough info on Harriet.
What info? Oh, info like "has Harriet signed on in her own blood to overturning Roe v. Wade"?
That's what the crackpot right and their Taliban Christ-ists are into. That's why they've been foaming at the mouth.
But foam no more, my ladies, my gents--Harriet's in, she's signed on the dotted line, she's pledged to overturn, all available in black and white from the precious Wall Street Journal.
Here.
Here we have an account of a special phone call including James "Dogbeater" Dobson, who also advocates the whipping of toddlers:
"Mr. Dobson says he was surprised the next day to learn that Justice Hecht and Judge Kinkeade were joining the Arlington Group call. He was asked to introduce the two of them, which he considered awkward given that he had never spoken with Justice Hecht and only once to Judge Kinkeade. According to the notes of the call, Mr. Dobson introduced them by saying, "Karl Rove suggested that we talk with these gentlemen because they can confirm specific reasons why Harriet Miers might be a better candidate than some of us think."
What followed, according to the notes, was a free-wheeling discussion about many topics, including same-sex marriage. Justice Hecht said he had never discussed that issue with Ms. Miers. Then an unidentified voice asked the two men, "Based on your personal knowledge of her, if she had the opportunity, do you believe she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?"
"Absolutely," said Judge Kinkeade.
"I agree with that," said Justice Hecht. "I concur."
Nauseating.
Government should dare to dictate how many children someone must bear? That's dead wrong.
Government should dare dictate to me the precise moment at which life begins? Absolutely not: that's a matter of personal religious belief.
The state, reasonably enough, has already protected sentient human beings who are able to survive outside the womb. What the Taliban Christ-ists want now is to impose their religious beliefs upon the rest of us.
Speaking as a Buddhist with a strong religious interest in not taking life, one who believes that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare, I think it is about time Republican women woke up, and that Democratic and Independent women woke up, and realize that their lives are on the line here.
These Talibangelicals have zero actual interest in protecting life. They have an interest in establishing their power over your lives, and establishing their power over the safety and well-being of you and your families.
This conspiracy of medievalist power and control to overturn Roe v. Wade and send women's rights, human rights back into the dark ages must not stand.
Bush
Harriet Miers
Roe v. Wade
No, we didn't. We knew it was all about power and control--and it is.
It's all about taking back power and control over reproductive freedom from individual women (and their doctors) and handing over power and control to federal and state governments. So much for drowning government in the bathtub.
So much spin over the years, so many lies about "no litmus tests," so much spin about originalism, so much complete crap.
It all began to fall apart because of Harriet Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court--all those people who couldn't give a damn about Democrats not having enough information on Roberts, suddenly, their panties are in a twist because they don't have enough info on Harriet.
What info? Oh, info like "has Harriet signed on in her own blood to overturning Roe v. Wade"?
That's what the crackpot right and their Taliban Christ-ists are into. That's why they've been foaming at the mouth.
But foam no more, my ladies, my gents--Harriet's in, she's signed on the dotted line, she's pledged to overturn, all available in black and white from the precious Wall Street Journal.
Here.
Here we have an account of a special phone call including James "Dogbeater" Dobson, who also advocates the whipping of toddlers:
"Mr. Dobson says he was surprised the next day to learn that Justice Hecht and Judge Kinkeade were joining the Arlington Group call. He was asked to introduce the two of them, which he considered awkward given that he had never spoken with Justice Hecht and only once to Judge Kinkeade. According to the notes of the call, Mr. Dobson introduced them by saying, "Karl Rove suggested that we talk with these gentlemen because they can confirm specific reasons why Harriet Miers might be a better candidate than some of us think."
What followed, according to the notes, was a free-wheeling discussion about many topics, including same-sex marriage. Justice Hecht said he had never discussed that issue with Ms. Miers. Then an unidentified voice asked the two men, "Based on your personal knowledge of her, if she had the opportunity, do you believe she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?"
"Absolutely," said Judge Kinkeade.
"I agree with that," said Justice Hecht. "I concur."
Nauseating.
Government should dare to dictate how many children someone must bear? That's dead wrong.
Government should dare dictate to me the precise moment at which life begins? Absolutely not: that's a matter of personal religious belief.
The state, reasonably enough, has already protected sentient human beings who are able to survive outside the womb. What the Taliban Christ-ists want now is to impose their religious beliefs upon the rest of us.
Speaking as a Buddhist with a strong religious interest in not taking life, one who believes that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare, I think it is about time Republican women woke up, and that Democratic and Independent women woke up, and realize that their lives are on the line here.
These Talibangelicals have zero actual interest in protecting life. They have an interest in establishing their power over your lives, and establishing their power over the safety and well-being of you and your families.
This conspiracy of medievalist power and control to overturn Roe v. Wade and send women's rights, human rights back into the dark ages must not stand.
Bush
Harriet Miers
Roe v. Wade
Sunday, October 16, 2005
No Veteran Not Left Behind
Compassion, compassion, compassion.
That's what the Dalai Lama said.
Conservative, conservative, conservative.
That's what the black-heart neo-cons said.
If one scrolls below at No Blood for Hubris, one can see the charming stories such as, "First We Maim Your Minds, Then We Dump You," parts one and two, in which the tale of the notorious non-combatant Daddy's-Friends-Got-Me-Into-The-National-Guards-man and current president Bubble Boy, whose government looks for, and then creates ways to deny mental health treatment to veterans who have post-traumatic stress disorder (they do this by deciding, hey! dude! Your flashbacks aren't soooo bad, after all! Adios, amigo! See ya!)
Now, these cuddly neo-cons are doing it again--only it's arguably even more perverse.
Take a gander, but keep a tight fist on your vomit bag:
I've asked it before, now I'm asking it again: what is frickin' wrong with these people?
Why have they no shame?
Why have they no care, no compassion, no sense of responsibility toward the post-born?
Why is it that only sentimentalist tales of lonely, sightless, womb-encased embryoes, quite unable to live on their own, are able to inspire any kind of fellow-feeling in them, if you can call it that?
Why have these people only charred, black hearts?
Just asking.
Veterans
Bush
That's what the Dalai Lama said.
Conservative, conservative, conservative.
That's what the black-heart neo-cons said.
If one scrolls below at No Blood for Hubris, one can see the charming stories such as, "First We Maim Your Minds, Then We Dump You," parts one and two, in which the tale of the notorious non-combatant Daddy's-Friends-Got-Me-Into-The-National-Guards-man and current president Bubble Boy, whose government looks for, and then creates ways to deny mental health treatment to veterans who have post-traumatic stress disorder (they do this by deciding, hey! dude! Your flashbacks aren't soooo bad, after all! Adios, amigo! See ya!)
Now, these cuddly neo-cons are doing it again--only it's arguably even more perverse.
Take a gander, but keep a tight fist on your vomit bag:
For Injured U.S. Troops, 'Financial Friendly Fire'
Flaws in Pay System Lead to Dunning, Credit Trouble
By Donna St. GeorgeWashington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 14, 2005; Page A01
  At his home near Middletown, N.Y., Robert Loria plays a keyboard. He lost his left hand in a bombing in Iraq. (Dominick Fiorille - Middletown Times Herald Record)
|
I've asked it before, now I'm asking it again: what is frickin' wrong with these people?
Why have they no shame?
Why have they no care, no compassion, no sense of responsibility toward the post-born?
Why is it that only sentimentalist tales of lonely, sightless, womb-encased embryoes, quite unable to live on their own, are able to inspire any kind of fellow-feeling in them, if you can call it that?
Why have these people only charred, black hearts?
Just asking.
Veterans
Bush
Saturday, October 15, 2005
Flame Wars
I can't get over this NY Times story on Traitorgate.
"The Miller Case: A Notebook, a Cause, a Jail Cell and a Deal
"Valerie Flame."
and in another refers to Wilson's wife as:
"Victoria Wilson."
ARE YOU FRICKIN' KIDDING ME?
These are the notes of a professional journalist? These are the notes of someone who makes her living by writing stories based on accurate notes?
Judy Judy Judy is asking us to believe that she made an error in writing down Wilson's wife's name?
She makes a similar error with the same name--TWICE???????
Those two "errors" demonstrate the whole point. Miller is not an objective journalist here, she is also a player in this dark game.
She is not making two mistakes--she is deliberately trying to cover her tracks.
Unfortunately for Judy Judy Judy, her efforts are ham-handed and completely impossible to believe.
Sorry, Judy. By the way, can you spell "consciousness of guilt"?
Oh, and watch your back, girl. I know you know how things can go when there are "many dark actors playing games," do you not?
Judith Miller
Bush
Valerie Plame
"
In a notebook belonging to Judith Miller, a reporter for The New York Times, amid notations about Iraq and nuclear weapons, appear two small words: 'Valerie Flame.'
Ms. Miller should have written 'Valerie Plame'. That name is at the core of a federal grand jury investigation that has reached deep into the White House. At issue is whether Bush administration officials leaked the identity of Ms. Plame, an undercover C.I.A. operative, to reporters as part of an effort to blunt criticism of the president's justification for the war in Iraq.
Reuters
THE DIPLOMAT Joseph C. Wilson IV on "Meet the Press" in 2004. He began criticizing the Iraq war in 2003.
Ms. Miller spent 85 days in jail for refusing to testify and reveal her confidential source, then relented. On Sept. 30, she told the grand jury that her source was I. Lewis Libby, the vice president's chief of staff. But she said he did not reveal Ms. Plame's name.
And when the prosecutor in the case asked her to explain how 'Valerie Flame' appeared in the same notebook she used in interviewing Mr. Libby, Ms. Miller said she 'didn't think' she heard it from him. 'I said I believed the information came from another source, whom I could not recall,' she wrote on Friday, recounting her testimony for an article that appears today. . . "
Judy's account completely defies credulity.
"Valerie Flame."
and in another refers to Wilson's wife as:
"Victoria Wilson."
ARE YOU FRICKIN' KIDDING ME?
These are the notes of a professional journalist? These are the notes of someone who makes her living by writing stories based on accurate notes?
Judy Judy Judy is asking us to believe that she made an error in writing down Wilson's wife's name?
She makes a similar error with the same name--TWICE???????
Those two "errors" demonstrate the whole point. Miller is not an objective journalist here, she is also a player in this dark game.
She is not making two mistakes--she is deliberately trying to cover her tracks.
Unfortunately for Judy Judy Judy, her efforts are ham-handed and completely impossible to believe.
Sorry, Judy. By the way, can you spell "consciousness of guilt"?
Oh, and watch your back, girl. I know you know how things can go when there are "many dark actors playing games," do you not?
Judith Miller
Bush
Valerie Plame
IT'S HERE: Government-Forced Maternity!! (Thanks to Pubic-Hair-on-Coke-Can Commentator Justice Thomas)
Supreme Court halts prison abortion order
Missouri officials had been ordered to transport inmate for procedure
"KANSAS CITY, Mo. - The U.S. Supreme Court late Friday temporarily blocked a federal judge's ruling that ordered Missouri prison officials to drive a pregnant inmate to a clinic on for an abortion.
Justice Clarence Thomas, acting alone, granted the temporary stay pending a further decision by himself or the full court.
Missouri state law forbids spending tax dollars to facilitate an abortion. However, U.S. District Judge Dean Whipple ruled Thursday that the prison system was blocking the woman from exercising her right to an abortion and ordered that the woman be taken to the clinic Saturday."
Here we go again. The womb of an individual post-born person becomes a government-owned and operated "oven," as noted pubic-hair-on-coke-can commentator and dyed in the wool Roe v. Wade Overturner Clarence Thomas exercises his own very special form of judicial activism on an incarcerated woman.
(Oh, goodie, Clarence. Let's start with the down-trodden, they're down-trodden, after all. Let's make sure the poor have no control over their bodies, that they're the very first ones forced to give birth against their will).
In any case, since the prisoner in question is sufficiently pregnant that if the forced maternity lobby can just stall a little longer, the woman will be unable to terminate her pregnancy due to state laws, time is on their side.
Will Justice "Long Dong Silver" Thomas and his ilk be adopting and raising this unwanted child? Will he and they be the one who dies in childbirth?
Certainly not. These anti-choice hysterics are people purely interested in promoting birth and their own "religious" agendas, not promoting health, much less the happiness of families.
It's vile.
UPDATE: October `8, 2005
"GOVERNOR REBUFFED ON ABORTION
Supreme Court lets stand the order forcing Missouri to take inmate to abortion clinic
WASHINGTON--Missouri officials must let a pregnant inmate have an abortion, the Supreme Court said yesterday, rejecting an appeal by anti-abortion Gov. Matt Blunt.. . . Blunt criticized the court, saying its decision is "highly offensive to traditional Missouri values . . ."
So watch out now, ladies and gentlemen. "Traditional Missouri values" (sic) are coming your way--which means having sectarian religious views forced on you by government, instead of exercising freedom to reproduce by consent of the individual.
Friday, October 14, 2005
No Blood for Hubris' Official Mental Health Interlude--No. 2
Short. Unbelievably sweet.
So deeply satisfying--it speaks for itself.
Please, fellow citizens. Use it freely.
Here it is.
Karmically korrect metaphorical karmic korrection for--Bubble Boy.
So deeply satisfying--it speaks for itself.
Please, fellow citizens. Use it freely.
Here it is.
Karmically korrect metaphorical karmic korrection for--Bubble Boy.
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Bubble Boy's Bolton Does It Again.
Really I think No Blood for Hubris' favorite Bushist apparatchik is Jolly John Bolton, Mr. Mustache. The one who arguably ordered the workup on Joe Wilson, the one known as a "kiss-up, kick-down kinda guy" even by his fellow rightwingers, the one who had no problem with screaming at co-workers, threatening subordinates, and generally behaving in ways that would have gotten him thrown out of any civilized society save a special needs kindergarten. (No offense to special-needers nor kindergartners).
Now he's joined up with those shining lights of human rights governments, China, Algeria, and Russia, in order to put the kibosh on a briefing by Kofi Annan on atrocities in sudan and the status of human rights there. Well, we can't have THAT, can we? Give those little countries human rights, and sooner or later, they'll be wanting human rights in the US of A. Can't have that, either, can we? So long as we're happily pro-torture, is pro-government atrocity-ism be far behind? Are they not, indeed, much of a muchness?
Meanwhile, let's get back to the important work of making SURE Harriet Miers has signed off in blood to the all-important task of overturning Roe v. Wade.
Putting rights of beings who can't exist outside the womb before the health, happiness, and welfare of the post-born--which would include the welfare of said pre-beings once they become post-born.
Got that?
In the womb--big deal.
Outside it--you're on your own, buster.
Nice.
Thanks, Mr. Mustache. Thanks all you wacked out black-heart neo-cons. You're on a roll.
Now he's joined up with those shining lights of human rights governments, China, Algeria, and Russia, in order to put the kibosh on a briefing by Kofi Annan on atrocities in sudan and the status of human rights there. Well, we can't have THAT, can we? Give those little countries human rights, and sooner or later, they'll be wanting human rights in the US of A. Can't have that, either, can we? So long as we're happily pro-torture, is pro-government atrocity-ism be far behind? Are they not, indeed, much of a muchness?
Meanwhile, let's get back to the important work of making SURE Harriet Miers has signed off in blood to the all-important task of overturning Roe v. Wade.
Putting rights of beings who can't exist outside the womb before the health, happiness, and welfare of the post-born--which would include the welfare of said pre-beings once they become post-born.
Got that?
In the womb--big deal.
Outside it--you're on your own, buster.
Nice.
Thanks, Mr. Mustache. Thanks all you wacked out black-heart neo-cons. You're on a roll.
Friday, October 07, 2005
What's Wrong With Daryn Kagan? I Mean, Eee-EEW
OK, so clearly we're not trying to talk Lysistrata, here, No Blood for Hubris does not expect either foresight or perspicacity from any rabid Reichwingers, and they probably have to sleep with somebody who's one of their own, since none of the rest of us is going to, God knows. There may be some reichwingers who just don't sleep with anybody until they get permission (like Judge "Peppermint Patty" Roberts and his late-in-life wife, Mrs. Patty. Presumably, they, as good Catholics, didn't sleep with anybody until they got married, and who knows what happened then, they still adopted. And made their poor little adopted son wear short pants so his little knobby knees show. So sorry, kid.).
But why would anybody in his or her right mind sleep with Rush Limbaugh? Eee-eew. Or even hold hands with him. Or even anything. I mean, maybe Phyllis Schlafly would. Maybe Jeanne Kirkpatrick. Maybe Lucianne Goldberg.
Maybe.
Conversely, anybody who would sleep with him, is clearly not in his or her right mind.
I mean, he's fat.
Thus, he's one of the "Bell Curve" inert.
He's not even cute fat, much less sexy cute fat, like James Gandolfini.
Rush is stupid. He's an hysteric. Therefore, he's very undesirable.
To all but idiots.
He's been married three times, and with no kids to show for it. Birth control? Abortion? Infertility? Impotence?
He's been called, memorably, a "drug-addled, gay-bashing, woman-hating, bigoted bag of pus."
He cowarded out of the military because of some big fat horribly-Abu-Ghraib-ly insufferably painful anal cyst.
What was Daryn Kagan thinking?
OK, so she's looking a little butch these days, what with the funny nose job and the puffy lips, but still, she's not hopeless. Is she?
What is Daryn Kagan thinking of?
Maybe she is hopeless. Maybe that's why they're "together." Maybe that's why she writes him "love notes," sucking up to him on national TV while she's supposed to be objectively reporting the uh, news.
Unprofessional.
Not to mention: tasteless, tasteless, tasteless. I mean, which is worse: him in hip-high leather boots with her in chains, or her in stilletto heels giving Tubby Druggie a good, long painful James Dobsonian cat-o'-nine-tails whippin'?
Feh.
Why is she not completely embarassed that he refers to her as "my mistress" on national radio? "My mistress from Georgia." Has he no decency? At long last, has she no decency?
Does she not get that it comes out like "my slut"?
Is that what the black-heart neo-cons' hideous screaming fight to overturn the right to privacy was all about?
Ee-EEW.
But why would anybody in his or her right mind sleep with Rush Limbaugh? Eee-eew. Or even hold hands with him. Or even anything. I mean, maybe Phyllis Schlafly would. Maybe Jeanne Kirkpatrick. Maybe Lucianne Goldberg.
Maybe.
Conversely, anybody who would sleep with him, is clearly not in his or her right mind.
I mean, he's fat.
Thus, he's one of the "Bell Curve" inert.
He's not even cute fat, much less sexy cute fat, like James Gandolfini.
Rush is stupid. He's an hysteric. Therefore, he's very undesirable.
To all but idiots.
He's been married three times, and with no kids to show for it. Birth control? Abortion? Infertility? Impotence?
He's been called, memorably, a "drug-addled, gay-bashing, woman-hating, bigoted bag of pus."
He cowarded out of the military because of some big fat horribly-Abu-Ghraib-ly insufferably painful anal cyst.
What was Daryn Kagan thinking?
OK, so she's looking a little butch these days, what with the funny nose job and the puffy lips, but still, she's not hopeless. Is she?
What is Daryn Kagan thinking of?
Maybe she is hopeless. Maybe that's why they're "together." Maybe that's why she writes him "love notes," sucking up to him on national TV while she's supposed to be objectively reporting the uh, news.
Unprofessional.
Not to mention: tasteless, tasteless, tasteless. I mean, which is worse: him in hip-high leather boots with her in chains, or her in stilletto heels giving Tubby Druggie a good, long painful James Dobsonian cat-o'-nine-tails whippin'?
Feh.
Why is she not completely embarassed that he refers to her as "my mistress" on national radio? "My mistress from Georgia." Has he no decency? At long last, has she no decency?
Does she not get that it comes out like "my slut"?
Is that what the black-heart neo-cons' hideous screaming fight to overturn the right to privacy was all about?
Ee-EEW.
Saturday, October 01, 2005
Black-heart Let-Them-Eat-Cake-ists Bring America, Not Monica, To Her Knees
"If the poor have no bread, why, let them eat cake!!"
In the post-Katrina world, everything changed. The black-heart neo-con let-them-eat-cake-ists rose up from cemeteries everywhere like a zombie army, and they're proudly outing themselves with Black-Heart Pride as they continue to drag America deeper and deeper into moral and fiscal bankruptcy.
Proud to be racist: Barbara Bush, chuckling about the "disadvantaged" doing so very well for themselves by becoming refugees in Texas: noting her own "scary" feeling that all these so very black people might swarm in and outnumber her white-bread Stepford Wife society.
Proud to be racist and explicitly anti-public education: William Bennett, gambling addict-cum-black-heart-ethics pundit, rapping on radio about aborting black babies, thus bringing down the crime rate, and then lying about not having said exactly what he said about if one were to abort all black babies, the result would be bringing down the crime rate. Equating blackness with criminality. Oh, and let's not forget Reed Hundt's report of Bennett nixing support for putting internet access in classrooms: "[Bennett] told me he would not help, because he did not want public schools to obtain new funding, new capability, new tools for success. He wanted them, he said, to fail so that they could be replaced with vouchers, charter schools, religious schools, and other forms of private education."
Proud to be racist and sexist, too: noted supremacist theoretician Charles "The Bell Curve" Murray penning a post-Katrina Wall Street Journal column bemoaning "inert women doing nothing to help themselves or their children."
His "The Hallmark of the Underclass" says: " . . [I]mages show us the face of the hard problem: those of the looters and thugs [Murray fails to note reports of looting were exaggerated], and those of inert women doing nothing to help themselves or their children."
Inert? Inert? I was puzzled about the "inert" thing.
Say, would that be--helium, neon, argon, krypton, xenon, radon?
Nah. Plus--what's "ert"?
Then I figured it out: when Murray says, "inert" he means: fat.
Chuckie's upset about fat Southern women--uh, that would be fat black women, and perhaps fat white women--doing nothing to help themselves or their children.
Now, this is pretty weird in and of itself. What evidence does he have that these fat women do nothing for themselves or their children? His evidence apparently is--their fatness. They lumber when they walk, therefore they're useless social parasites? Let's not talk about the relationship of obesity to economic class, let's not talk about who has enough money to buy protein and fruits and vegetables, and who gets stuck with McDonald's and processed fatty foods.
Charles Murray's basic mindset is emblematic of the black-heart let-them-eat-cake-ists:
Basic principle is: it's their own damn fault.
This applies across the board to whatever problem we're facing.
It's their own damn fault.
In black-heart thinking, fatness is taken as a sign of moral weakness. Actually, more to the point, everything is seen as a sign of moral weakness, and therefore every social ill is regarded as being well-deserved.
Criminality is regarded as completely unrelated to an ego-driven, materialistic society, and completely unrelated to miserable McJobs in McGhettos, such that full-time employment is insufficient to pay one's rent, buy food, buy clothing.
The advertisingly-hypnotically-induced lust for ego-centric uber-pimpoid luxury which bombards Americans 24/7 is seen as having nothing to do with helping fuel forays into crime, an industry open to persons of all races and ethnic origins, without need for education or training or "Daddy's friends," and an industry which can produce a very very tidy capitalistic profit. Huzzah.
As if that's not enough, Chuck suggests that "the lack of home ownership is not caused by the inability to save money from meager earnings, but because the concept of thrift is alien."
Oho? Well, slap them poor people's hands, now!
In fact, our Chuckie states that "unemployment in the underclass is not caused by lack of jobs or job skills, but by the inability to get up every morning and go to work."
Come on, Chuckster. You're racist. Get used to it. Stop beating around the bush.
Speaking of which, tell me when our little Bubble Boy had the ability to get up every morning and go to work?
He's never done it in his life. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.
So why is our lazy, stupid, shiftless, thriftless, reckless, feckless Bubble Boy not part of the American underclass?
You think it might have a little something to do with Mummy and Daddy's M-O-N-E-Y?
Feh, Mr. Murray.
Feh.
In the post-Katrina world, everything changed. The black-heart neo-con let-them-eat-cake-ists rose up from cemeteries everywhere like a zombie army, and they're proudly outing themselves with Black-Heart Pride as they continue to drag America deeper and deeper into moral and fiscal bankruptcy.
Proud to be racist: Barbara Bush, chuckling about the "disadvantaged" doing so very well for themselves by becoming refugees in Texas: noting her own "scary" feeling that all these so very black people might swarm in and outnumber her white-bread Stepford Wife society.
Proud to be racist and explicitly anti-public education: William Bennett, gambling addict-cum-black-heart-ethics pundit, rapping on radio about aborting black babies, thus bringing down the crime rate, and then lying about not having said exactly what he said about if one were to abort all black babies, the result would be bringing down the crime rate. Equating blackness with criminality. Oh, and let's not forget Reed Hundt's report of Bennett nixing support for putting internet access in classrooms: "[Bennett] told me he would not help, because he did not want public schools to obtain new funding, new capability, new tools for success. He wanted them, he said, to fail so that they could be replaced with vouchers, charter schools, religious schools, and other forms of private education."
Proud to be racist and sexist, too: noted supremacist theoretician Charles "The Bell Curve" Murray penning a post-Katrina Wall Street Journal column bemoaning "inert women doing nothing to help themselves or their children."
His "The Hallmark of the Underclass" says: " . . [I]mages show us the face of the hard problem: those of the looters and thugs [Murray fails to note reports of looting were exaggerated], and those of inert women doing nothing to help themselves or their children."
Inert? Inert? I was puzzled about the "inert" thing.
Say, would that be--helium, neon, argon, krypton, xenon, radon?
Nah. Plus--what's "ert"?
Then I figured it out: when Murray says, "inert" he means: fat.
Chuckie's upset about fat Southern women--uh, that would be fat black women, and perhaps fat white women--doing nothing to help themselves or their children.
Now, this is pretty weird in and of itself. What evidence does he have that these fat women do nothing for themselves or their children? His evidence apparently is--their fatness. They lumber when they walk, therefore they're useless social parasites? Let's not talk about the relationship of obesity to economic class, let's not talk about who has enough money to buy protein and fruits and vegetables, and who gets stuck with McDonald's and processed fatty foods.
Charles Murray's basic mindset is emblematic of the black-heart let-them-eat-cake-ists:
Basic principle is: it's their own damn fault.
This applies across the board to whatever problem we're facing.
It's their own damn fault.
In black-heart thinking, fatness is taken as a sign of moral weakness. Actually, more to the point, everything is seen as a sign of moral weakness, and therefore every social ill is regarded as being well-deserved.
Criminality is regarded as completely unrelated to an ego-driven, materialistic society, and completely unrelated to miserable McJobs in McGhettos, such that full-time employment is insufficient to pay one's rent, buy food, buy clothing.
The advertisingly-hypnotically-induced lust for ego-centric uber-pimpoid luxury which bombards Americans 24/7 is seen as having nothing to do with helping fuel forays into crime, an industry open to persons of all races and ethnic origins, without need for education or training or "Daddy's friends," and an industry which can produce a very very tidy capitalistic profit. Huzzah.
As if that's not enough, Chuck suggests that "the lack of home ownership is not caused by the inability to save money from meager earnings, but because the concept of thrift is alien."
Oho? Well, slap them poor people's hands, now!
In fact, our Chuckie states that "unemployment in the underclass is not caused by lack of jobs or job skills, but by the inability to get up every morning and go to work."
Come on, Chuckster. You're racist. Get used to it. Stop beating around the bush.
Speaking of which, tell me when our little Bubble Boy had the ability to get up every morning and go to work?
He's never done it in his life. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.
So why is our lazy, stupid, shiftless, thriftless, reckless, feckless Bubble Boy not part of the American underclass?
You think it might have a little something to do with Mummy and Daddy's M-O-N-E-Y?
Feh, Mr. Murray.
Feh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
