Wednesday, November 01, 2006

1) Open mouth. 2) Insert foot. 3) Hop away.

Hi, Sen. Kerry! Gosh, it feels like its been awhile, hasn't it? How are you doing?

Not good? Why?

Oh. Oh dear, you really said that?

Well, of course they're responding. It's an election silly, no one loves a good pre-election gaffe like our distinguished competitors in the GOP.

Ads, too, huh? Well that's the web for ya, John. MoveOn's not the only fish in that sea, you know.

What about the Democrats, again?

They don't want to play with you now? Wow, that was fast. But it is only days until the election. It's getting really tight. It's understandable that they're all antsy.

Yes, we all know you have good intentions. But you did this before and you apparently haven't learned your lesson.

Yes, yes, I know things aren't good in Iraq and Georgie still can't wrap his head around it, let alone admit it, but you can't mouth off like that. Or at least not without explicitly stating that the poor students will be President, not sent to Iraq.

Yes, I know they won't actually be President, I was just saying you could have-

Hey! I am not in politics, I'm a blogger. I can say unclear and/or misunderstood statements any old time I want. Just 'cause you screwed up, you can't whine at me and shift focus to me like that. It doesn't work. And name calling doesn't help either.

Mr. Senator?

John-

Hey, loser!

I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I was just trying to get your attention. Your righteous indignation was getting a little loud.

Why you don't go over there and sit quietly with your advisers for awhile. Maybe work on your plans for the next election, OK?

Good boy. Have a cookie, it's will give your mouth something to do while we try and fix this.

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Where are we now?

In honor of 9-11, everyone got up on their soapboxes and spoke to the masses. Does it really surprise anyone that the words haven't changed, the speakers haven't changed, and the situation hasn't changed.

In five years, what the hell have we accomplished? What have we gained? Where have we gone?

I feel a longer rant coming on, but in the meantime, here's Keith Olbermann's.

Works for me.

Friday, June 16, 2006

We're in recess...

In case you hadn't noticed, I've been a bit remiss in my cawing on this blog... Life's been interfering a bit.
I'll be back soon, pecking away, but for now, I'm plucked.
Take care, and pay no attention to the little politicians behind the curtain- I'm sure someone will drop a house on them soon....

And in the meantime, flap over to CNN.com or Creator's Syndicate and check out some of Molly Ivins' work. Funny gal, I kinda like her. And she's local, so there's that, too.

The GOP's faulty moral compass.

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Keep your friends close...

...and your enemies talking to the press. Because sooner or later the person you hate the most will say something so deliciously over-the top, you will be able to milk it for weeks.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) House Minority Leader.

Now in an election year, even in mid-terms, you would think that party leaders would show a little, well- restraint, in their interviews. The last thing any party leader wants to do is give the opposition a reason to point and say, "See- they're going to tear this country apart. They're rabid animals who think only of punishing us!"

But that's damn-near what Ms. Pelosi has done.

The Republicans are sitting on some of the lowest approval ratings in recent history, and have been treading water for weeks. Staff changes at the White House, which were supposed to be invigorating and a sign of great things to come, are not having their intended effect. Bush's supporters are shifting nervously in their seats, and the clearest sign of their unease came recently, courtesy of a fundraising letter by Elizabeth Dole. The letter is inflammatory and looks paranoid at the outset:

"If Democrats take control of the Senate in '06, they will cancel the Bush tax cuts, allow liberal activist judges to run our courts and undermine all Republican efforts to win the War on Terror.

Even worse, they will call for endless congressional investigations and possibly call for the impeachment of President Bush!"

Gasp! The horror! An investigation- who would dare?!
It's a bottom-scraping political "hail-Mary" pass: if ya can't win 'em- scare 'em away from the other guys! It's laughable, right?

Right.

Right up until Ms. Pelosi more or less confirms the whole idea, that is.

Can we hold on here for a second? Maybe think before we speak? (Just a thought.)

Yes, by all means, point out that the current administration has done things that warrant investigation, 'cause, you know, they have. Wiretapping, back-room energy deals, fundraising, letting the lobbyists run rampant, gutting the Bill of Rights...., hmmm, where was I?

Ah! This is all well and good. But can we please refrain from the witch-hunt attitude that seems to be permeating the party these days? Shadenfreude is one thing if it's done in private, but some people in Washington are beginning to salivate like Pavlov's dogs at the mere thought of getting their licks in... It's unseemly, unprofessional, and I.Don't.Like.It.

It one thing when a "minor" player gets hot under the collar. It wakes up the team, makes the other guys a little nervous. But then the coach or the captain gets up and says, "He's got a good point there, folks, but let's not do anything to make things worse. There is a right way and a wrong way to do it, so let's play fair." You get to call attention to the problem, to make people look at it who would normally turn away, but you get to reassure them at the same time. "We're all good people here, just folks trying to play a game and win with honor."

There's a line here.

And if we cross it, then we are the radical monsters the Republicans want us to be.

Sunday, April 16, 2006

The scandal that isn't.


OK, so Libby disclosed that Bush OK'd some of his leaks.

OMFG!!

Get a grip, folks. Here are my problems with people trying to make hay out of this...
1. It has nothing to do with Plamegate. In every article, and every interview, everyone takes great pains to point this out.
2. The President, as Commander-in-Chief, and the ultimate authority in the US, (and yes, I know that's debatable, but we're going on perception, here...) has the authority to classify and de-classify information pretty much at will. So if he says it's OK to leak, there's nothing illegal about it.
3. Why does this surprise anyone? Really, this is Washington, DC. Information is power and those who control the flow of information get to control its use. So it makes sense that Georgie's camp would, from time to time, leak like a New Orleans levee.

It's a non-issue. Yes, it shows very bad taste to rant and rave about not having any leaks in the administration, and being the biggest leaker yourself. But there is nothing illegal about it, and those who think they can make this into a scandal are sorely mistaken.

Believe me, there are better ways to fling mud at this administration.

Monday, April 03, 2006

DeLay throws in De Towel...

It's official. Tom DeLay has decided to opt out of the race for his House seat. He's even resigning from Congress before the official end of his term.

This announcement comes less than a week after one of DeLay's former aides pleaded guilty to fraud charges. Whether that played into DeLay's decision or not is up in the air. DeLay still maintains that he broke no laws, and while there is still speculation that he may try to cut a deal, it doesn't seem likely at this point, and he was not named in the former aide's admissions.

Citing polling numbers too close to call with opponent (D) Nick Lampson, DeLay is pulling out of the race to keep the election from becoming "a referendum on me rather than what was important to the district."

Despite his current indictments, DeLay is still planning to move to the D. C. area (specifically, Virginia) to promote his agenda without having to answer to any more of those pesky constituents.

Aw, shucks!

Friday, March 31, 2006

Wiretap tango...

NPR's All Thing's Considered recently aired a story on lawyers trying to get a hold of NSA evidence against their clients. It's really scary. Orwellian scary.

The long and the short of it is that the NSA/Fed. Gov't won't release any records that may have come from the warrant-less wiretaps. These records won't even be released to defense lawyers with the proper security clearance.

Take a listen, it's pretty good. So much for allowing defendants the right to a fair trial....

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

You spin me right 'round...

Can someone in the administration define "Civil War" for us, please?
'Cause I don't think they can.
And if you're unveiling a bold new vision, don't you think it should be, well, new?
And telling us you're listening to us isn't the same as actually doing it.

Ug, the last few weeks, Georgie's been on another popularity kick, trying to appease the base and win back, well everyone who's jumped ship since the beginning of the year. And lately it's been all about Iraq, big surprise. After former PM Ayad Allawi, called the current sectarian violence "civil war," Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld all rushed to the press podium to refute the claim. Only it doesn't seem like anyone's really listening anymore, with casualties amongst the Iraqis still on the rise, and the new gov't's seeming inability to even form a coherent government.

Yet, the Bush camp remains hopeful, and really they can't afford to seem anything else. We are almost back to the "everything's fine, please ignore the fanatic bombers behind the curtain" sunny-days of old.

Which is in stark contrast to the image The White House is trying to portray. While we haven't had any more "mistakes were made" admissions from the top, Georgie's been trying to show he's still listening, he's still in control, and he understands our concerns.

And one has to wonder if the resignation of CoS Andrew Card will have any effect, let alone the "shake-up" everyone's been hoping for.

Here's to more waiting and watching....

Ed. 4-2-06

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Puppet theatre

Welcome to Constitution-trashing 101.

Our instructors for the day are the Republican members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who have decided to toe the party line and allow Georgie to continue wiretapping for up to 45 days without a warrant. Then he has to go to FISA, OR convince members of congress that it's necessary. And since FISA was pretty darn compliant to begin with, and, well, Congress is Congress, AND no one is explicitly saying that Georgie was wrong and supporting what are, constitutionally illegal actions, or threatening action if Georgie doesn't comply, we're.... pretty much where we've been since the story broke.

What kills me is that this "accommodation" has no teeth whatsoever. While the members of Congress who voted down the Dem-led push for an investigation are claiming oversight privileges, the White House has yet to acknowledge them. Through the press office, Georgie is still claiming the authority for the wiretaps, with or without permission. What's an oversight committee going to do- call a press conference and say how disappointed they are? Been there, done that.

So, basically Congress is offering Georgie the ultimate out. If he acts like he's asking permission every 45 days or so, we're just going to let him continue on his merry way. No investigation into previous acts, and likely only a cursory investigation into any future requests. After all, we all know what a great job Congressional Oversight and Intelligence did in looking at pre-war intelligence.

And while Arlen Specter threatening to hold up funding until the Judiciary Committee gets some answers looks good on paper- we all saw/read the last round of Gonzales' testimony. There are no teeth there, either. Funding will come where it will come. They don't call them discresionary funds for nothing.

It's called the Bill of RIGHTS, folks.
Not the Bill of Perks-you-get-for-being-like-us-but-only-when-we're-not-looking-for-a-scapegoat.

Pro-Life Loophole

Slate's William Saletan finds the lovely little ethical/legal loophole in SD's new abortion ban.
Good food for thought.
Take the Fifth

Monday, March 06, 2006

No, no, no...

Photograph of Gov. Mike Rounds copyright Megan Meyers- ArgusLeader.com

The governor of South Dakota has signed the state's abortion ban law.

While the law will likely be suspended/unenforced until all legal challenges are addressed (see Supreme Court) it still sets a horrible precedent and encourages legislatures and governors in other states to follow suit. Supporters of the ban are banking on the Roberts court (with Alito toeing the line) to back the ban and overturn Roe v. Wade.

Not that there's a great deal of surprise here. Since Alito's confirmation, many have simply been counting the days until a state legislature passed an abortion ban. There are several winding their way through state politics, SD just hit the finish line first.

"In the history of the world, the true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I agree with them." Gov. Mike Rounds, who apparently does not think rape and incest victims are in any way "vulnerable" or "helpless" as the law makes no exception for victims of these crimes, just for the life of the mother.

Contact Gov. Rounds to voice your opinion. Whether you're a SD resident or not, this is going to hit the national consciousness like a sledgehammer.

Thanks to CNN.com for the quote.

Friday, March 03, 2006

Head in the sand... Approval numbers, what approval numbers?



Everyone on the left side of the aisle is having a field day with the new polling data that came out this week on our favorite ostritch, Georgie. Dropping to a new low, our President's approval rating sits at a paltry mid-30's (depending on which poll you're looking at).

President Bush is polling with Nixon's numbers. That's gotta hurt.

A sign? One would hope, but then this one's been hoping for awhile and has been sorely disappointed before. I, frankly, see no reason to hope that these numbers will permeate through the sand the President has shoved his head into (down to his waist, it seems sometimes). Why?

"If I worried about polls, I wouldn't be doing my job." Bush's own words in his interview with Elizabeth Vargas on Tuesday night. (Thanks, CNN.com!)

Oh, dear. Last time I checked, Mr. President, the people being polled were the people who elected you. Elected you to do a job. Elected you to protect us, shelter us, lead us, and support us. So if we don't think you're doing your job- why do you?

Yes, over-pandering to the whims of capricious polls is a BAD IDEA. Up, down, up, down, it would be chaos and irresponsible to quiver every time the wind changes direction.

But your numbers have been falling for months, Georgie. This is not a temporary dip. Your strongest numbers used to be your truthfulness and your security numbers. They used to withstand most of the fluctuations in your approval rating with steadfast triumph. Even if we thought you an idiot, we thought you meant well, were (more or less) honest with us, and would protect us as bet you could. No more.

More than half the country no longer trusts you. More than half the country no longer trusts your handling of Iraq. More than 70% of the country thinks you're a tool for big business and could care less about those of us who work for them. (OK, not the exact wording, but you're getting my point, right? Right? Damn. I used an actual number, I think I lost him.)

Georgie, how you gonna do that job we think you can't do when we remove you from it?

Monday, February 27, 2006

Under construction

Representative Raven will be taking the floor shortly.
Until then, a few words have been transferred over here for your entertainment.

Please feel free to move about the chamber.

Thank you for your patience.

Insert your own joke here....

(Originally posted 12-14-2006 and transferred here.)

'cause I'm not touching this one- too damn easy.

Veep Cheney shot a fellow hunter with buckshot over the weekend.
My heart goes out to the wounded man who had to go into surgery with a "minor heart attack" after some of the shot migrated to his heart, I wish him the speediest of recoveries with all due sincerity.

But come on people!!!!

Now we're just being silly...

Originally posted 12-10-2006 and transferred here.

I fear for the children of Kansas- I really do.
This article by Slate's Dahlia Lithwick is the latest in a series she's done about the Kansas Atty. General's neverending quest to punish sexual abuse. Of course, it's completey beyond him to define it.

(Sigh) What is the world coming too?

What "is" is.

Ladies and Gentelmen, the President...

Originally posted 2-3-2006 and transferred here.

(Disclaimer- I did not actually watch the speeches- professional political speakers have a cadence that drives me apeshit, and Georgie’s accent doesn’t help. Also, my roommate would have skinned me alive. Thank you, thank you, thank you CNN.com for transcripts!)

The thing about the State of the Union address (SOTU, hereafter), is that it’s the President’s opportunity to shine in front of Congress, the media and the people who (theoretically) elected him. For one night, the President stands before us all and tells us of his vision. The SOTU is our board meeting, the President our CEO. We’re looking for a leader, and for what to expect in the future of the company we call the USA. We want a business plan. It’s his opportunity Crow over his accomplishments. A chance to outline bold new initiatives and tell the nation that everything’s on track and looking swell.

Well, Georgie, we're glad to know we're on track and looking swell, so one out of three ain’t bad, right? Right?

Hmmm, where to start?

(As we go along, I will be periodically calling “Bush-it.” Thanks to the NY Times, Factcheck.org, CNN.com, and the Democratic response for helping me out on this one- I knew he couldn’t lie, but boy do politicians like to stretch the truth!)

The coin toss is in, so we start with Georgie’s Accomplishments.
(And, yeah, I use that term loosely.)

Throughout his speech, Georgie cites the spread of democracy in the world like he did it himself. He talks about Iraq and Afghanistan and here’s my first “Bush-it” of the evening. In the same speech (the same paragraph, even), he talks about the 122 democracies on this earth and the elections in Iraq and Afghanistan like that qualifies them to be on the list. Later on in the SOTU he goes on to talk about Iraq’s progress on the path to democracy like it’s not there. So is it, or isn’t it?
“In less than three years, [Iraq] has gone from dictatorship, to liberation, to sovereignty, to a constitution, to national elections.” I’ll give him the dictatorship and the elections, but an occupied country is hardly what I’d call liberated or sovereign, and they’re already quibbling about amendments to said constitution. By most definitions, including Georgie’s, this is no where near to being a viable democracy. Not by a long shot. “[T]he rule of law, protection of minorities, and strong, accountable institutions that last longer than a single vote,” is how Georgie puts it. If we pull out today, how long would rule of law last? How would minorities be protected? Georgie says we’re winning; I wanna know just who’s keeping score here?
And just because he did, let’s bring up Palestine. (I know, I know, it’s not a Bush accomplishment, per se, but these days Georgie’s calling every middle-eastern election a triumph of American-led democratization.) In a democratic election, by just about everyone’s standards, Hamas swept the board. Georgie says, “now the leaders of Hamas must recognize Israel, disarm, reject terrorism, and work for lasting peace.” So an independent, democratically-elected, government has to play by our rules or…, what? What exactly are we going to do if they don’t renounce terrorism, if they don’t disarm? Now that they’re in power, what are the odds that they will roll over and play nice with the Israelis?
Ug! Moving on…
Domestic accomplishments: After all, this is the State of OUR Union. It would be nice if we mentioned our own country one or twice. This should go faster; it’s mostly about the numbers.
We created 4.6 million new jobs in the last two and a half years. OK, I’ll give him his 4.6 million, “raise” him the 2.6 lost during his first two and an half years, and call on “Bush-it” ‘cause a net gain of only 2 mil over his entire presidency ain’t that impressive.
We’ve reduced non-security discretionary spending. But that’s OK; we made it all up with interest on the security spending and the rest of the national budget!
Violent crime is at its lowest levels since the 70’s. Yea! But Georgie can’t take credit for that, the decline started during Clinton’s presidency, we’ve just continued it. Yea us!
The No Child Left Behind Act works. But only if it's properly funded, you dolt, and you haven't and likely won’t. Nor will you let anyone with an alternate plan give that a shot. Your way or the highway.
And I’m gonna call a huge “Bush-it” on Georgie’s claims that his surveillance programs have stopped terrorist plots, if only because it can’t be verified. Why you may ask; because verifying it would be a breach of national security. (Catch-22, anyone?) And while he did notify “some” members of Congress about it, exactly who they were and what they were told is so far up in the air, anyone who wants to verify it will need oxygen. And on a non-SOTU tangent, if FISA (the judge’s panel that grants national sec. wiretaps) was rubberstamping all requests that were put to it, why go around it at all? I know everyone’s hit this point, but apparently not hard enough ‘cause there’s still no answer.
There was more, but I’m too tired, so we’re moving on again.

Georgie’s Bold New Initiatives (some more borrowed and recycled than others)

I’m going to call “Bush-it” on these entire sections on general principle. It’s all fine and dandy to say you’re going to do something and then blame Congressional Democrats if you can’t pull it off. While I have high hopes for Bush’s initiatives: increase the numbers of math and science teachers, balance the budget, halve the deficit, reform social security, and most especially the Advanced Energy Initiative, (About damn time, too, US dependency on oil has increased since Georgie took office, and even more of it is imported. (60% now as opposed to 53% in Slick Willie’s last term.)) but where the hell is he gonna get the money? He proposes to cut some 140 programs that aren’t working in the hopes he can funnel that into these initiatives. (I don't buy it, does he really expect Congress to sit by and let their little pork projects fall by the wayside?) He also claims that he will make his tax cuts permanent, and they will benefit the common man. (Not going there, too damn easy.)
Even in my mathematically challenged little world, a ballooning budget plus tax cuts does not equal a halved deficit by 2009. Especially since we added to the deficit this year (and last year, and the year before that, but really, who’s counting? Oh, yeah, I am.).

And here’s where I laud the Democratic response, the party chose a guy to speak who actually managed a bi-partisan effort to balance Virginia’s budget and expand the number and quality of accredited schools. Bush couldn’t manage that even while he was Governor of Texas. (Yes, TX and VA are very different states and I know that- lemme alone, I’m ranting.) He also called “Bush-it” on the fact that the teaching initiatives and energy programs have long been staples of the Democratic canon. Hmmm, I thought those sections sounded awfully familiar....

However, I was touched that Bush mentioned making the Ryan White Act permanent, so kudos to you, but again- the funding?

I had only one WTF ?!? moment reading the entire speech. Georgie states during his health care rant, “[a]nd because lawsuits are driving many good doctors out of practice- leaving women in nearly 1,500 American counties without a single OB-GYN- I ask the Congress to pass medical liability reform this year.” Huh? How the heck do you draw that line from “a” to “q”? I’m still looking for the numbers on that one…. Anyone? Bueller? Where did White House research get this???

Overall I was highly disappointed in the SOTU, but not for the reasons you might be thinking. Yes, we see Congress bouncing up and down and clapping at all of the pre-arranged intervals. We see the obligatory (and oft-times completly random) guests scattered in the gallery. Yes, Georgie’s logic and accounting leave a bit to be desired, but they’re known quantities, well known- that’s my big problem here. Aside from the energy initiative, part of the teaching/education initiative and the Ryan White Act, there was nothing new in this speech I haven’t heard a thousand times. One of the Slate.com authors likened the SOTU address to a cut and paste of all the speeches he's done in the last year. I expect a little more in the way of innovation in the SOTU address, it's the biggest national address of the year! If you don't have anything new to add, don't add anything at all, the speech is too damn long to begin with. And I am really, REALLY sick of parts of it.

Yes, 9-11 was a tragedy and it did change the course of our nation, but maybe it’s time to find a new place from which to draw our strength. Pain and anger can’t be sustained indefinitely, we have to heal. We can’t wallow and keep picking at these scars until we bleed again. President Bush, please, we need to move on. We’re in Iraq; we won’t leave until we can safely. We’re watching Iran, we’re watching Syria, and we’re being vigilant. We are still in danger, but we remember 9-11 just find on our own, stop dragging it into all of your speeches.
Please stop dragging out dead Marines. You hide the flag-draped coffins so we won’t know the raw numbers of the dead, but every time you need to pull the heartstrings of the public, you drag out the name of a dead soldier. You cite his grieving (but proud) family, quote a few lines from a harried (but proud) letter from the soldier in question, and say what a tragedy it would be if they died in vain. (With waving flags and pretty pictures of the fallen hero, wherever possible.) It was effective the first couple of times you did it, now it’s exploitation.
I’m too tired right now to go into the endless nattering on Patriot Act, immigration, “human cloning in all its forms,” and “compassion” overseas. Perhaps at a later time, after all, I’m sure you’ll go over it all again, and again, and again, just like you always do.

Mr. Bush, you said something in your speech that kinda stuck with me. “Before history is written down in books, it is written in courage.” Your approval ratings are down, some of your supporters are wavering, some of your supporters are being indicted for fraud, laundering, and general corrupt acts, and more and more people are wondering why so many decisions are being made behind closed doors, without any oversight. Do you have the courage to try something truly new? To cut the budget where it can be afforded? Cutting troops in a time of war is counter-productive, especially since the high-tech (and really expensive) equipment that’s supposed to compensate for the loss is untested, or not working at all. As for Medicaid- when I see kiosks in every Wal-Mart, grocery store, and drug store promising to “explain your options,” I’m thinking that maybe the program’s a little too complex. Come tax time, I don’t see so many offers of help, and everyone does taxes. And would it kill you to admit you want to get rid of Democratic “activist judges” and replace them with your own?

Your new initiatives are hardly new, and likely not even sustainable if you can get them off the ground to begin with.
Your accomplishments aren't nearly as black and white as you'd like them to be, and you still have a long way to go on most of them.
And I don't care what kind of spin you're dealing, things aren't as on track and as swell as you'd like us to believe. So a final "Bush-it" on you.

Guess we're at 0-3, then. Pity, it promised to be such a nice game.

*If you want to Google anything here (and I reccommend you do- there's plenty out there), there’s a search bar at the top of the page. If you can prove me wrong, please do, I’ll post any verifiable corrections.

Big Brother go home....

Originally posted 12-20-2005 and transferred here.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little tempory safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, In Freedom

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/politics/20spy.html?pagewanted=2&th&emc=th
-Administration cites war vote in spying case.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/opinion/20tue1.html?th&emc=th
-The fog of false choices.

http://www.slate.com/id/2132811/
-The secrets they keep.

http://www.slate.com/id/2132983/
-Uncivil liberties.

He's back!

Originally posted 12-19-2005 and transferred here.

Awww, Georgie, we missed ya!

http://famulus.msnbc.com/famulusgen/ap12-19-052732.asp?t=apnew&vts=

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/18/opinion/18sun1.html?th&emc=th
121920050708

Check it out- Georgie's got his little buddy Al saying congress OK'd domestic wire-tapping as a part of the measures that were passed in the wake of 9-11.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't those measures for use of military force? The NSA 1) isn't an arm of the military, and 2) if the tapping was only to occur if one of the two (or more) parties involved had "ties" to al Qaida and was out of the country, who determined the connection? If the CIA can't properly deal with its own intelligence (or lack thereof), we're supposed to believe Georgie can?
Pardon me while I go beat my head against a post.
But it appears that it's Congress to the rescue. (yea?) Prominent members from both sides of the aisle are looking into hearings, so there will certainly be more to this story. Woo-hoo!
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/18/bush.nsa/index.html

Here's the other shoe...

Originally posted 12-16-2005 and transferred here.

We can't torture 'em, but if we do the testimony's admissible in court!

Yea!
http://www.slate.com/id/2132572/

Investing in ice skates; or, waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Originally posted 12-16-05

OK- where is Georgie, and who is this guy?

Now he's OK-ing Sen. McCain's Anti Torture bill.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/15/torture.bill/index.html

Granted the Senate and House had to bloody his nose a little to get him to do it, but still.... I'd hate to have to start liking the guy.

Actually, this is one of those issues that ethicists and legal eagles (and those of us with former aspirations to both) love to chew over, spit out in disgust and chew over again. Even I still have a metaphorical hand on that fence. While I whole-heartedly, and unreservedly support any legislation that will make torture illegal (or at least get us back in line with the Geneva Conventions), you can't help but wonder about that one case in a thousand. Ain't rampant paranoia a hoot?
And I'm not the only one wondering about that. Michel Kinsley of Slate.com wrote a pretty good piece hearkening back to that wonderful ethics-class debate of "What if you were alone with Hitler in his cradle- would you kill him?" and coming up on what I tend to think of as the "Didn't I just see that on '24'?" scenario of a lone terrorist having vital information on an imminent attack. I had a class spend two whole class periods discussing and arguing the Hitler question alone- I didn't sleep well that entire week, and the professors flat-out refused to let us even bring up the other issue. Here's Kinsley's article for those of you who like chasing links 'round the net:
http://www.slate.com/id/2132195/