Arf!




posted by Quiddity at 1/31/2003 12:04:00 PM

Cut taxes, and cut trees!

From the Los Angeles Times: (emphasis added)

Scope of Logging in Sequoia Monument Plan Angers Critics

Last month, the U.S. Forest Service released a proposal for managing the Giant Sequoia National Monument that has flabbergasted environmentalists and revived their quarrel with the agency's stewardship of sequoias, which can live for millennia and reach skyscraper heights.    Though the monument designation bans commercial logging, the management blueprint would allow, in the name of reduced fire risk, the cutting of enough commercial timber to fill 3,000 logging trucks a year. ...

The argument that you must cut down a lot of trees to reduce forest fire danger is one that the Bush administration is using throughout the West as it moves to reverse Clinton-era policies. ...

Of about 38,000 acres of giant sequoia groves scattered through the Sierra Nevada, roughly two-thirds lie in the monument. Most of the rest are just to the north, in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks.    Logging is banned in the parks, which have for decades successfully used controlled burning to rid groves of flammable undergrowth and to encourage regeneration of sequoias. The giant trees need bursts of heat from fire to open their cones and release showers of seeds, as well as sunny openings to foster sapling growth. ...

More than a century of suppressing wildfire on public land has allowed the buildup of dense growth in forests all over the West, but it has been particularly problematic for fire-dependent sequoias. ...

Environmentalists say they are not against any thinning, but that chopping down fire-resistant big trees is about logging, not forest health. ...

Now we are aware of the technical issues here (e.g. small vs. big fires), but the fact remains that Sequoias are unique in that they depend on fire more than other species. Not only do the seeds depend on fire, but the bark of mature Sequoias is what's allowed them to survive - up to 3,000 years - when other trees have burned down. The real risk to Sequoias is lightning, not fire. And anyway, logging the Sequoias completely defeats the goal of protecting them.



posted by Quiddity at 1/31/2003 07:09:00 AM

The men behind the curtain:

Much has been made of the letter by eight European leaders supporting Bush.

Turns out that the Wall Street Journal editorial board solicited the letter. (as mentioned on KCRW's To the Point)


posted by Quiddity at 1/30/2003 02:25:00 PM

Tripe:

Peggy Noonan writes about Bush's State of the Union address. Some excerpts: (emphasis added)

• It was the speech of a practical idealist ...
  
  
• In the first, domestic part of the speech he was serious and contained, but in the second part of the speech, on Iraq, there was a shift. His voice seemed lower and there seemed a kind of full head-heart engagement in his grave but optimistic message. For a moment I though of earnest Clark Kent moving, at the moment of maximum danger, to shed his suit, tear open his shirt and reveal the big "S" on his chest.
  
  
• In a pre-speech meeting with reporters on Tuesday, a high administration official with intimate knowledge of the president's thinking said that the president did not intend for the speech to be the last word on Iraq.
  
  
• He added to the case against Iraq in a way that seemed compelling ...
  
  
• The new information Mr. Bush offered seemed both believable and incomplete.
  
  
• Mr. Bush's language was interesting. It was Elevated Bushian ...
  
  
• I felt at the end of the speech not roused but moved, and it took me a while to figure out why. It was gratitude.    This, truly, is a good man. And that is a rare thing.
  
  
• There is a profound authenticity to him, and a fearlessness too. ... More and more this presidency is feeling like a gift.

posted by Quiddity at 1/30/2003 01:08:00 PM

What a guy!

The National Review comments on Bush's State of the Union speech:

DAVID FRUM: Bush is consistently pro pro-life . 1/29 12:56 a.m.

"The 2003 State of the Union speech was a fine speech ...

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: Bush gave us elemental good and evil . 1/29 9:00 a.m.

"The State of the Union address was understated, but it was still quite a revolutionary sort of speech.

MICHAEL LEDEEN: Bush is now a great orator . 1/29 9:15 a.m.

"He's turned into a great orator, although I must say I miss the occasional malapropism. And he's a hell of a leader ... It's been a long time since we've heard a president elevate the tone of public discourse so effectively.

CLIFFORD D. MAY: Bush made the case for war . 1/29 9:25 a.m.

"In the second half, the president addressed issues of war and peace. In particular, he began to make the case that a war against Saddam Hussein should be seen as necessary, just, and winnable.

STEPHEN MOORE: Reagan’s third term has arrived . 1/29 9:45 a.m.

"P resident Bush's State of the Union address was confirmation that the Left must now face their worst fears. This past Sunday the New York Times pouted that George W. Bush's presidency suspiciously resembles a Reagan redux ... To that charge, President Bush Tuesday night seemed to respond: Damn right.

MAC OWENS: Bush hit a triple . 1/29 11:00 a.m.

"The second half of the speech ... was magnificent.

WFB: Bush was compelling in his analysis. 1/29 1:15 p.m

"Mr. Bush was compelling in his analysis and in his rhetoric

IMPROMPTUS: Jay Nordlinger on the State of the Union , Frenchies, &c. 1/29 9:00 a.m.  

"President Bush’s speech was good. Better than good: It was magnificent. It was magnificently written, and well delivered.

But back to Victor Davis Hanson for a moment. Hansen also said this:

" ... the looming war was phrased in terms of a pre-Vietnam era ideal of global liberation — a natural dividend of American resoluteness that derives from a particular sense of right and wrong that is more than just cynical Realpolitik.

"pre-Vietnam era"? That doesn't sound particularly encouraging.

posted by Quiddity at 1/30/2003 06:03:00 AM

By the numbers:

Here are the statistics for Bush's State of the Union speech:

words	5,327		faith	3
(APPLAUSE)	73		family	2
reform	6
job(s)	4		threats	5
recession	2		Iraq	22
unemployment	1		Saddam Hussein	19
prosperity	1		Al Qaida	8
			terrorist(s)	8
tax	13		weapon(s)	28
average	2		nuclear	12
relief	4		evil	2
dividend	2		war	10
invest(*)	6		peace	4

posted by Quiddity at 1/28/2003 10:53:00 PM

Your tax dollars really not at work:

Did you know this? (from AP)

President Bush, confronting an ailing economy and the prospect of war in Iraq, declared he will ``rally the American people to some great causes'' in Tuesday night's State of the Union address.

...

Much of Bush's speech will focus on domestic concerns, officials said. Pushing a new plank in his ``faith-based initiative,'' Bush is asking Congress to direct drug treatment dollars to religious organizations. His plan would give addicts treatment vouchers that would allow them to seek help at any center, including those with religious approaches, two senior White House officials said.

...

On the domestic front, Bush's voucher plan for drug treatment is sure to be controversial because many religious drug treatment programs do not employ medical approaches and do not use staff that have been licensed for this work. It would cost $200 million in the next fiscal year.

composite image

At first, Bush embraced voodoo economics. Now it's real voodoo.

What does Dr. Bill Frist think of Bush's plan?

This voucher program is the camel's nose in the (revival) tent.






posted by Quiddity at 1/28/2003 01:40:00 PM

Bestseller:



posted by Quiddity at 1/28/2003 10:09:00 AM

Details, details:

In what might be the basis for Bush's claim that Iraq hasn't disarmed itself of WMD, check out this page at the White House's website:

What Does Disarmament Look Like?

Some entries of interest:

• In the early 1990s, Kazakhstan revealed to us a stockpile of more than 500 kg. of HEU, and asked that we remove it to safety in the United States.
  
  
• This fall, satellite photos revealed activity at several suspected WMD facilities, apparently in anticipation of the resumption of inspections.
  
  
• We have many reports of WMD material being buried, concealed in lakes, relocated to agricultural areas and private homes, or hidden beneath Mosques or hospitals. In one report such material was buried in the banks of the Tigris river during a low water period.
  
  
• Iraq has in the past used, and is likely again to use, cyber attack methods in its efforts to collect intelligence.

  At a minimum, Iraq can apply tools and methods readily available from publicly accessible Internet sources, many of which are quite effective and require only moderate skill to implement.

posted by Quiddity at 1/27/2003 01:18:00 PM

Your tax dollars not at work:

USAToday ranks the 56 commercials aired during the Super Bowl. Turns out that the two by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy didn't do well at all.

38th: Teen pregnancy results from marijuana's effect on judgment.

50th: Subway rider sees vision of victims of his drug use.

Of course, the popular ones are usually the funny ones, which is what you'd expect for a football game. Who's going to care about a message from party-poopers?

posted by Quiddity at 1/27/2003 07:45:00 AM

Quotable:

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." (1918)

"A muttonhead, after an education at West Point—or Harvard—is a muttonhead still."

Theodore Roosevelt

posted by Quiddity at 1/26/2003 07:03:00 AM

We save you 20 minutes of reading time:

In a 7,800 word profile of Bush in the New York Times Magazine (which Sullivan liked), Bill Keller characterized the president thusly:

POLITICIAN	simple basic-man-on-the-street quality plain-spoken unassuming genuineness optimist
EXECUTIVE	hailed for his genius (in helping maneuver a presidential favorite into the Senate leadership) relentless discipline instinctive a work in progress risk-taker   KOREAN freighter to YEMEN sheepishly let it go amateurish misstep
POLICY	ardently antiregulation scorn for environmentalists laissez-faire economics supply-side theory a general mistrust of federal government
LIKE REAGAN	Reaganesque Reagan Lite the fruition of Reagan Reagan's superior (in the management of a divided, competitive staff)
PERSONAL	westerner the least introspective (of presidents) unashamedly spiritual self-disciplined punctual diet-conscious religious about his gym time (and a good night's sleep) devoted to simple mind-clearing outdoor exertion impatient (when meetings dawdle) devoted homebody loner
PHILOSOPHY	Christian moralism American nationalism a world of black and white

posted by Quiddity at 1/26/2003 02:07:00 AM

Bush doesn't want war:

Not really. What he wants, is to assasinate Saddam Hussein. At least that's the impression one gets from this news story:

Excerpts:

A U.S. war plan calls for the launch in March of three or four hundred cruise missiles a day at the start of a war on Iraq, more than were fired during the entire first Gulf War, according to a televised report on Friday.

U.S. officials and analysts have predicted for months that an attack on Iraq would be swift, massive and designed to catch Baghdad by surprise. ...

... this time the target is the Iraqi leadership and the battle plan is designed to "bypass Iraqi divisions whenever possible" ...

Looks a lot like Ari Fleischer's notion that "one bullet" would be a cost-effective way of removing the threat the Iraqi leader represents.

Targeting the leadership of a country. Now that's a change in policy.


posted by Quiddity at 1/25/2003 04:44:00 PM

Old vs New. With us and not:

The coalition to invade Iraq is shaping up. According to the New York Times, we read that:

Over the past several months, as Mr. Bush has mounted his argument for forcing Iraq to disarm, the president himself has once again become the issue here. In interviews in three capitals over the past week, diplomats, politicians and analysts said they believed relations between the United States and two of its most crucial allies — Germany and France — were at their lowest point since the end of the cold war.   ...

From the French Foreign Ministry to the chancellor's office in Berlin, there is broad acknowledgement that the breach between the United States and its traditional allies in Western Europe has gone beyond the friction that has long been a staple of French-American relations or the misunderstandings that have grown since the cold-war ended. Senior officials insisted in interviews that in France and Germany Mr. Bush had not made the case that Iraq posed a more imminent threat than, say, Al Qaeda.   ...

Mr. Bush has made no secret of ranking his allies by their fidelity to his missions. Britain remains at the center of his universe, with Prime Minister Tony Blair a reliable ally. After that comes Poland, the most gung-ho new member of NATO, whose president, Aleksander Kwasniewski, said in an interview last week, "if it is President Bush's vision, it is mine."

Next in line is Spain, whose conservative prime minister, José María Aznar, "probably talks to Mr. Bush more frequently than any other European leader," a White House official reports. Then comes Australia, Italy — with a third conservative prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi — and Russia, led by a man with whom Mr. Bush seems to have bonded, President Vladimir V. Putin.

Currently the status of Russia is unclear, so we'll ignore it for now. But let's take a quick look at the other countries mentioned. How do they stack up? How substantial are Germany and France, Rumsfeld's "old Europe"? Here's a quick look at population and GDP in trillions of dollars. (Data and country links above from CIA factbook)



Did you know that France, Italy, and the United Kingdom have virtually the same population and GDP? It's almost too perfect.

In any event, it does appear that the U.S. has - for the moment - the support of most of Europe. ("most" being a simple measure of the countries strength)

posted by Quiddity at 1/24/2003 09:11:00 AM

Out!

Under Fire, Conservative Withdraws From AIDS Council (New York Times)

Jerry Thacker, a Christian conservative who has called AIDS the gay plague, withdrew his nomination to the Presidential Advisory Council on H.I.V. and AIDS today ...

Earlier: AIDS Panel Choice Wrote of a 'Gay Plague' (Washington Post & Atrios)

The Bush administration has chosen Jerry Thacker, a Pennsylvania marketing consultant who has characterized AIDS as the "gay plague," to serve on the Presidential Advisory Commission on HIV and AIDS.

Next week, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson is scheduled to swear in several new commission members. They include Thacker, a former Bob Jones University employee, who says he contracted the AIDS virus after his wife was infected through a blood transfusion.

...

In his speeches and writings on his Web site and elsewhere, Thacker has described homosexuality as a "deathstyle" rather than a lifestyle and asserted that "Christ can rescue the homosexual."

Simulated image.

posted by Quiddity at 1/24/2003 03:04:00 AM

Taking it seriously:

Bush has proposed there be a limit when awarding damages for Pain and Suffering. In the worst case (lose all four limbs, hearing, sight, and genitals), the total compensation can't be higher than $250,000. A rational extension of that concept is to award smaller amounts for smaller losses (e.g. "only" one foot). We think the following break-down is about right.



Remember, these amounts are what you get for a lifetime of loss. Assuming a 30-year lifetime, the annual Pain and Suffering award for, say, a lost (1st) hand, you divide $5,000 by 30 and arrive at a payment of $166/year.     Generous!

posted by Quiddity at 1/23/2003 06:09:00 PM

These guys don't even know their Bible:

We read that Bush has appointed Jerry Thacker to serve on the Presidential Advisory Commission on HIV and AIDS. Thacker is a controversial figure. He's "a fire-breathing, Bob Jones University alum" (according to Sullivan), with a distinctive view on homosexuality. Here, for instance are notes from a presentation he gave at BJU:

Mr. Jerry Thacker of Fleetwood, Pennsylvania, spoke today on homosexuality.

The media has programmed us to think a certain way about this sinful lifestyle or, as Mr. Thacker calls it, "deathstyle." Romans 1:16-32 tells how we should think about homosexuality. This passage shows a nation setting itself up for all kinds of bad things to happen, one of those is homosexuality.

Let's take look at Romans. Here is what those verses say:

Paul asserts: (in Romans 1: 16-32)

• "I have complete confidence in the gospel."

About the gospel:

• It is God's power to save all who believe (Jews and also the Gentiles).
• It reveals how God puts people right with himself (through faith).
• As the scripture says, "The person who is put right with God through faith shall live."

Statements about God:

• God's anger is revealed from heaven against all the sin and evil of the people whose evil ways prevent the truth from being known.

What can be known about God:

• Is plain for all to see.
• Ever since God created the world, his invisible qualities, both his eternal power and his divine nature, have been clearly seen.
  • They are perceived in the things that God has made.
• There is no excuse for not knowing about God.
• Therefore, God punishes those who do not acknowledge him.

Some people know God

But:

They do not give him the honor that belongs to him. They do not they thank him. They refuse to keep in mind the true knowledge about God.

Instead:

Thinking: Their thoughts have become complete nonsense. Their empty minds are filled with darkness. They say they are wise, but they are fools. Worship: They do not worship the immortal God, They worship images made to look like mortals or birds or animals or reptiles. They exchange the truth about God for a lie. They worship and serve what God has created instead of the Creator himself.

Because they do this:

• God has given them over to shameful passions.

1. Do the filthy things their hearts desire, and they do shameful things with each other.
2. Women pervert the natural use of their sex by unnatural acts.
3. Men give up natural sexual relations with women and burn with passion for each other.
4. Men do shameful things with each other, and as a result they bring upon themselves the punishment they deserve for their wrongdoing.

• God has given them over to corrupted minds:

They do the things that they should not do.

1. They are filled with all kinds of wickedness, evil, greed, and vice.
2. They are full of jealousy, murder, fighting, deceit, and malice.
3. They gossip and speak evil of one another
4. They are hateful to God, insolent, proud, and boastful
5. They think of more ways to do evil
6. They disobey their parents
7. They have no conscience
8. They do not keep their promises
9. They show no kindness or pity for others.
10. They know that God's law says that people who live in this way deserve death.
11. Yet, not only do they continue to do these very things, but they even approve of others who do them.

Conclusion:

Paul asserts that

if people do not worship God,
then they will engage in passions that are shameful

Homosexuality is shameful. This shame is God's punishment.

That's it. There is no explicit prohibition of homosexuality. And anyway, this is one man's opinion, unlike other parts of the Bible which contain direct quotes from God (or Jesus).

posted by Quiddity at 1/23/2003 09:40:00 AM

Food for thought:

Excerpts from Mark Twain's The Mysterious Stranger (chap 9). Here Satan is speaking about the human race:

I know your race. It is made up of sheep. It is governed by minorities, seldom or never by majorities. It suppresses its feelings and its beliefs and follows the handful that makes the most noise. Sometimes the noisy handful is right, sometimes wrong; but no matter, the crowd follows it. The vast majority of the race, whether savage or civilized, are secretly kind-hearted and shrink from inflicting pain, but in the presence of the aggressive and pitiless minority they don't dare to assert themselves.

Monarchies, aristocracies, and religions are all based upon that large defect in your race--the individual's distrust of his neighbor, and his desire, for safety's or comfort's sake, to stand well in his neighbor's eye. These institutions will always remain, and always flourish, and always oppress you, affront you, and degrade you, because you will always be and remain slaves of minorities.

Look at you in war ... how ridiculous!

The loud little handful--as usual--will shout for the war. The pulpit will-- warily and cautiously--object--at first; the great, big, dull bulk of the nation will rub its sleepy eyes and try to make out why there should be a war, and will say, earnestly and indignantly, "It is unjust and dishonorable, and there is no necessity for it." Then the handful will shout louder. A few fair men on the other side will argue and reason against the war with speech and pen, and at first will have a hearing and be applauded; but it will not last long; those others will outshout them, and presently the anti-war audiences will thin out and lose popularity.

Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.

posted by Quiddity at 1/22/2003 09:51:00 AM

A quickie:

This week's Troubletown cartoon is pretty good. (Also, see if you can catch the spelling error.)

posted by Quiddity at 1/22/2003 07:43:00 AM

Who is to blame?

In this New Yorker piece by Seymour Hersh, we get a timeline of events surrounding the North Korean nuclear weapons programs - and the Pakistani connection. Unfortunately, we are not told when the Bush (or Clinton) administration first knew what. All we learn is that there was a CIA report issued in June of 2002 that listed North Korean activities that began in 1997. However, there is a case that can be made that when things started to break down in 2002, the administration didn't handle the situation well.

Once again, we found that presenting the material in a table format helps understand the relationship between the events and the actors.

when	who	what
1980's	Pakistan	nuclear program flourished military and intelligence forces were working closely with the U.S. to repel Soviet invasion of Afghanistan
1985	North Korea	signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty opened of most of its nuclear sites to international inspection
early 1990's	American intelligence and international inspectors	North Koreans were reprocessing more spent fuel than they had declared Might have separated enough plutonium to fabricate one or two nuclear weapons
1994	North Korea	Entered into an agreement with the Clinton Administration: Stop the nuclear-weapons program. Obtain economic aid and the construction of two light-water nuclear reactors
1994	North Korea	Unknown if it had begun to build warheads
1997	North Korea	Trying to produce weapons-grade uranium from natural uranium-with Pakistani technology
1997 and later	Pakistan to North Korea (As outlined in CIA report below. Unclear when U.S. intelligence first knew about these activities.)	Economy had foundered "No more money" to pay for North Korean missile support Paid for missile systems in part by sharing its nuclear-weapons secrets Provided data on how to build and test a uranium-triggered nuclear weapon Helped North Korea conduct a series of "cold tests," simulated nuclear explosions, using natural uranium, which are necessary to determine whether a nuclear device will detonate properlyGave the North Korean intelligence service advice on from American satellites and U.S. and South Korean intelligence agents. Centrifuges: Sent prototypes of high-speed centrifuge machines "Chopped many years off" the North Korean development process With a few thousand centrifuges, could have enough fissile material to manufacture two or three warheads a year Pakistani centrifuges: Slim cylinders, roughly six feet in height, that could be shipped "by the hundreds"
	A. Q. Khan Director of a Pakistani weapons-research lab	At least thirteen visits to North Korea
2001	North Korea	Began to enrich uranium in significant quantities
	Pakistan	There are close ties between some scientists working for the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission and radical Islamic groups
~25 Sep 2001	Bush	Lifted the sanctions that had been imposed on Pakistan because of its nuclear-weapons activities
Jan 2002	John Bolton Under-Sec. of State for Arms Control	Declared that North Korea had a covert nuclear-weapons program and was in violation of the nonproliferation treaty
Feb 2002	3 members of Congress	Urged Bush to withhold support for the two reactors promised to North Korea
May 2002	John Bolton	Accused North Korea of failing to coöperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency
Jun 2002	CIA report: National Intellegence Estimate	Separate and contradictory estimates from C.I.A., the Pentagon, the State Department, and the Department of Energy regarding the number of warheads that North Korea might have been capable of making Provided no consensus on whether or not the Pyongyang regime is actually producing them Predicted that North Korea, if confronted with the evidence of unanium-enrichment program: Would not risk an open break with the 1994 agreement Would do nothing to violate the nonproliferation treaty
5 Jul 2002	Condoleezza Rice	Letter to the congressmen: Bush Administration would continue providing North Korea with: Shipments of heavy fuel oil Nuclear technology for the two promised energy-generating reactors
early Oct 2002	James A. Kelly Assistant Sec. of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs	Flew to Pyongyang with a large entourage for a showdown over the uranium-enrichment program Kelly authorized to tell the Koreans that the U.S. had learned about the illicit uranium program No room for Kelly to negotiate. Scripted message: Written in the N.S.C."-the National Security Council-"by hard-liners. North Korea must stop the program before any negotiations could take place Former intelligence official: "When it came time to confront North Korea, we had no plan, no contact-nothing to negotiate with. ... but we let it all fall apart."
	Kang Suk Ju First Vice Foreign Minister of North Korea	Seemed to confirm the charge when he responded by insisting upon his nation's right to develop nuclear weapons. Sccused the United States of "threatening North Korea's survival" Produced a list of the United States' alleged failures to meet its own obligations under the 1994 agreement Offered to shut down the enrichment program in return for: An American promise not to attack A commitment to normalize relations
	James A. Kelly	Constrained by his instructions, could only re-state his brief: the North Koreans must act first
16 Oct 2002	Bush admin.	Informs the public about North Korea situation, five days after Congress voted to authorize military force against Iraq
late 2002	American policy	Alternated between tough talk in public-vows that the Administration wouldn't be "blackmailed," or even meet with North Korean leaders-and private efforts, through third parties, to open an indirect line of communication with Pyongyang
	North Korea	Expelled international inspectors Renounced the nonproliferation treaty Threatened to begin reprocessing spent nuclear fuel Insisted on direct talks with the Bush Administration
2003	North Korea	Still unknown if it has begun to build warheads
early Jan 2003	Bush	Agreed to consider renewed American aid in return for a commitment by North Korea to abandon its nuclear program Still resisting direct negotiations with the Kim Jong Il government

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2003 10:44:00 PM

Location, location, location:

The Washington Times brings us this story:

Spiritual film a big hit near Sundance festival

An Alexandria filmmaker's documentary on the German theologian and Hitler foe Dietrich Bonhoeffer crashed the Sundance Film Festival in Utah this week and made a splash with packed showings at three churches.    ...    The 11-day Sundance festival, founded by actor Robert Redford, brings critical and financial success to many of its selections, ...

Near Sundance festival?

Well, that's one way to get some cachet for your project. The possibilities are endless. Do it right, and the Washington Times will help you out:

• Scrapping missle defense program gains more support near Pentagon.
  
  
• Tax-raising speech warmly recieved near Heritage Foundation headquarters.
  
  
• Wild sex is catching on near fundamentalist churches.

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2003 09:03:00 AM

Simply amazing:

If you can stomach it, Slate's Chatterbox has been following the Wall Street Journal's Lucky Duckies meme. The latest news is that the WSJ is complaining that Bush's most recent tax cut is "redistributionist" (i.e. too liberal), and that the rich are getting kicked in the teeth yet again. This view is expressed in their most recent editorial titled, "Lucky Duckies Again"

We're surprised that the WSJ has taken such a tame position. After all, conservatives claim that the rich invest, start companies, and provide jobs. That's what trickle-down theory is all about. So why tax the rich at all?

The Journal should forthrightly call for a return to the economic arrangements of 1000 years ago, when peasants gave annual tributes to their lord of the manor, for it was he who had control over their economic fortunes.

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2003 07:55:00 AM

On a lighter note:

Music, not politics. This site   (click on image)



lets you control a Brazilian Bahianese combo. (Flash animation. Appears to work only/best with Microsoft Internet Explorer and is a major CPU hog.)

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2003 01:40:00 AM

Bummer:

Al Hirschfeld has died.

Also this:

It was announced in 2002 that Mr. Hirschfeld would get perhaps the ultimate tribute from the Broadway theatre community on his 100th birthday, June 21, 2003: The Martin Beck Theatre will be renamed the Al Hirschfeld Theatre on that day.

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2003 01:31:00 AM

Fuzzy Wuzzy is Rush's mathematician:

This is a couple of weeks old, but still topical.

The Daily Weasel had an essay about Rush Limbaugh's claims for the Bush and Democratic tax/stimulus plans. One of the reference links is to this page on Limbaugh's website, which is a sterling example of casuistry, and a must-read. Excerpt:

... tax cuts don't "cost" anything, because it's money the government never gets.    ...    Besides, tax cuts aren't a "cost."    ...    If Bush's tax cuts increase revenue up to the $674 billion price tag – and it will – there will be no cost, and bye-bye deficit!

If that kind of thinking is standard-issue over on the right, we might as well give up hope of using reason in political debate.

posted by Quiddity at 1/20/2003 05:29:00 PM

USA Today on Social Security:

In Monday's edition of USA Today, there were two useful essays about Social Security. An alarmist "our view" (i.e. USAT's) and a more reassuring "opposing view".

The hot quote:

" ...Congress, with the administration's blessing, taps an estimated $2.5 trillion in Social Security surpluses over the next decade to pay for other programs."

Either way, the issue should get more coverage than it has recently - especially in light of Bush's proposed additional tax cuts.

posted by Quiddity at 1/20/2003 08:50:00 AM

How to do it:

Josh Marshall (of TalkingPointsMemo.com) examines the connections between the Sons of Confederate Veterans and George Bush. As part of that exercise, Marshall reveals what he calls "ridiculous and arcane procedures" SCV members must follow when reporting a heritage violation. Ridiculous and arcane? We diagram it, you decide:





posted by Quiddity at 1/20/2003 03:01:00 AM

Now he tells us:



UPDATE: An amusing Kausfiles Fray entry.

posted by Quiddity at 1/18/2003 06:12:00 AM

Old news?

skippy the bush kangaroo links to this well-writen piece about Bush's Texas National Guard service (actually, his non-service). We felt compelled to organize the material into a table:

when	Bush	other	situation
	Did not choose to join the full time active duty military
	Chose to enlist for duty in the (Texas) Air National Guard On application: checked "do not volunteer" for overseas assignment listed his "background qualifications" as "none."		Waiting list of 100,000 nationally at the time
17 Jan '68	Took the Air Force officer and pilot qualification tests Scored 25%, the lowest possible passing grade on the pilot aptitude portion	Speaker of the House in Texas at the time, Ben Barnes, admitted he had received a request from a longtime Bush family friend, Sidney Adger of Houston, to help Bush get into the Air National Guard. Barnes further testified that he contacted the head of the Texas Air National Guard, Brig. Gen. James Rose
May '68	Graduated from Yale		1/2 million men fighting; dying @ 350/wk
Years 1 & 2
27 May '68	Sworn in
after 6 weeks of basic airman training	Received a commission as a second lieutenant	By means of a 'special appointment' by the commanding officer of his squadron, with the approval of a panel of three senior officers. Normally required eight full semesters of college ROTC courses or eighteen months of military service or completion of Air Force officer training school. Texas National Guard historian said that he "never heard of that" except for flight surgeons
	Assigned to flight school	Normally reserved to pilots graduating from ROTC training or Air Force officer training
	'fast tracked' into the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, a standby runway alert component of the 143rd Group		Over those on the existing pilot applicant waiting list
	Trained to fly the missile-equipped supersonic F-102 Delta Dart jet interceptor fighter
	Racked up approximately 300 hours of training flight time in the F-102	Qualified him to fly the F-102 without an instructor Short of the 500 hours of experience required for volunteer active duty combat operations in Vietnam
Year 3
Jul '70	Earned his wings
	Applied for a voluntary three month Vietnam tour	Was turned down for this volunteer active duty option	Air Force needed additional F-102 pilots to fly reconnaissance missions.
	Left to fly as a "weekend warrior" in the Texas Air National Guard out of Ellington AFB near Houston
3 Nov '70	Promoted to 1st Lieutenant	by Brig. General Rose
Jun '70 - May '71	Credited with 46 days of flight duty
Year 4
Jun '71 - May '72	Credited with only 22 flight duty days	14 days short of the minimum 36 days owed the Guard for that year
Apr '72	Flew for the last time in the cockpit of an F-102	All the overseas and stateside military services began subjecting a small random sample in their ranks to substance abuse testing for alcohol and drugs. Pentagon had announced its intention to do so back on December 31, 1969
Year 5
15 May '72	"cleared this base" according to a written report by one of his two Squadron supervising officers, Lt. Col. William D. Harris Jr.
24 May '72	Requested in writing a six-month transfer to an inactive postal Reserve unit in Alabama	If Bush had been temporarily transferred there, he would not have continued flying until he returned to Texas, because the Alabama unit had no airplanes
31 May '72	Transfer request was denied by National Guard Bureau headquarters	Bush should have returned to his base in Houston and continued with his flying duties. Instead, he remained in Alabama until late in the fall.
Aug '72	Scheduled physical	Could have been subject to selection for a random substance abuse test
	either: 1st Lt. Bush took his mandatory annual flight physical for pilots and failed it for some as-yet undisclosed reason, or he refused to present himself in the first place to an Air Force Flight Surgeon, who were readily available in almost every state	Release of Bush's military service record would resolve issue.
1 Aug '72	Suspended and grounded from flying duty on verbal order of the TX 147th Group's Commanding Officer for "his failure to accomplish annual medical examination." Two years left of remaining National Guard service.	Expensively trained pilots are not casually suspended There is normally a Flight Inquiry Board If one had been convened, its three senior officer members would have documented why such a severe action was justified in relation to the country's military objectives at the time, as opposed to the simple desire of a trained pilot to just "give up flying". There is no evidence now in the public domain that a Flight Inquiry Board was convened to deal with Bush's official reclassification to a non-flying, grounded status This absence of a Flight Inquiry Board is of particular interest to veteran pilots. The implication is that Bush's misconduct was handled like everything else in his military service: aided and abetted by powerful family connections	Country at the height of the Vietnam (air) War
5 Sep '72	Ordered to start serving three months in an active but non-flying administrative Guard unit, the 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group in Montgomery, Alabama, for four certain duty days in October and November
29 Sep '72		In memo to the Secretaries of the Army and Air Force, Major General Francis Greenleaf, then Chief of the National Guard Bureau in Washington DC, confirmed the suspension of 1st Lt. George W. Bush from flying status.
Oct/Nov '72	No official notation in his service record that Bush ever showed up for this assigned duty in Montgomery, Alabama. Bush: "I was there on temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time. I made up some missed weekends. I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have the same airplanes. I fulfilled my obligations." The Bush campaign conducted its own search of Bush's military records, and could not find evidence that Bush performed any duty in Alabama.	General William Turnipseed and Lt. Col. Kenneth Lott, who commanded the Montgomery, Alabama, base at the time said that Bush never appeared. "To my knowledge, he never showed up," Turnipseed said.
Nov '72 - fall '73	Returned home to Houston Texas. Did not report in person for non-flying duty to his parent Texas 111th Squadron during this whole time.
Year 6
May '73	Ordered to attend nine certain duty days in person during Summer Camp at Ellington AFB between May 22 and June 7. 1st Lt. Bush did not do so.
22 May '73 - 30 Jul '73	Bush was credited with 35 "gratuitous" inactive Air Force Reserve points -- in other words, non-attendance inactive Reserve credit time	No one in the Texas Air Guard at the time, has stepped forward to say they saw Bush in person on a single day between May 22 and July 30, 1973
1 Oct'73	Prematurely discharged with honors from the Texas Air Guard.	This leaves Bush without a single legitimate Texas Air National Guard service day for his fifth and sixth years of service to his Texas Air National Guard discharge.
26 May '74	Scheduled discharge.
Nov '74	Final inactive Reserve discharge with honors.	Bush was attending Harvard Business School as a full-time student by that time

NOTE: We are not familiar with military procedures or Bush's record and cannot vouch for the accuracy of this table. All we did was take the elements in the piece, and organize it so that the timeline may be better understood. (A critical review of some elements is available here.) This presentation is intended as a starting point for discussion.

UPDATE: We came upon this BuzzFlash Reader Commentary on Bush's military service (written on 25 Oct 2002), and this Washington Post story which fills in a few details (dated 28 Jul 1999). The Post story has a revealing picture of Bush while he was at Harvard Business School.

And while we're at it, this site: awolbush.com is devoted to the issue.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Mother Jones has a timeline as well (with a few additional details).

STILL ANOTHER UPDATE: For those who trust Cecil Adams at the Straight Dope (instead of uggabugga), he has written about Bush's service record.

posted by Quiddity at 1/17/2003 06:40:00 AM

Scary fact sheet:

This is an excerpt from the White House's Medical Liability Reform fact sheet:

The President proposes that Congress take action to:

• Reserve punitive damages for cases where they are justified, and limit punitive damages to reasonable amounts.
  Is "reasonable" a non-COLA adjusted 250k?
  
  
• Provide for payments of judgments over time rather than in a single lump sum, to ensure that appropriate payments are there when patients need them.
  Real dollar awards will be significantly reduced. Delaying payments to "ensure they are there when the patient needs them" is a typical confidence-man trick.
  
  
• Ensure that old cases cannot be brought years after an event.
  There are many instances where treatment errors do not manifest themselves until much time has passed. Remember the DES-cancer issue?
  
  
• Provide that defendants pay judgments in proportion to their fault.
  Corporate America can relax, now that their deep pockets have been sewn shut by Bush.

posted by Quiddity at 1/16/2003 11:04:00 PM

Caveat emptor:



Inspired by Bush's speech.

posted by Quiddity at 1/16/2003 09:26:00 PM

posted by Quiddity at 1/16/2003 08:20:00 AM

Headed for disaster:

Proponents of Bush's latest tax plan (notably David Frum) have said that it will "get the economy in shape for the retiring boomers". But how does that square with this news item (NYTimes):

Bush Aide Sees Deficit in 2003 of $200 Billion

... deficit forecasts were made by Mitchell E. Daniels Jr., the president's budget director, in answer to questions after a speech at the United States Chamber of Commerce here. The estimates assume enactment of the tax plan but do not take account of the potential cost of a war with Iraq ...

Mr. Daniels suggested today that the budget was not likely to be in surplus in the next 10 years.

(emphasis added)

That means there will be no surplus funds built up (or debt paid down) to prepare for Social Security's imbalanced pay-as-you-go system when the boomers retire.

posted by Quiddity at 1/16/2003 02:14:00 AM

Announcement:

It is with great sadness that we note the loss of Ted Barlow's sanity.




posted by Quiddity at 1/14/2003 01:08:00 AM

Show me a picture!

This diagram shows key elements in the Pickering / Swan affair. Inspired by Roger Ailes excellent coverage of this matter.



What it's all about:
Conservatives assert that Pickering reduced Swan's sentence because it was disproportionate to the punishment for the other two - plain and simple. As if he was a judge, new to the scene, making an impartial review. They also point out that the Clinton Justice Department's Office of Civil Rights was involved in the case, and bears some responsibility for the various deals/sentences.

Opponents of Pickering note that he was involved with the other two deals, approved them, and it's inconsistent for Pickering to attack Swan's sentence for being disproportionate. Also, in Senate hearings Pickering testified that (at some point in the process) he had no knowledge of a specific issue - the juvenile's use of a gun. But from the beginning, that fact was firmly established and recorded in the trial transcript.

One thing that hasn't gotten much play is that of the three culprits, Swan was the most mature (the others being a juvenile or low-IQ), was instrumental in carrying out the cross-burning (they used his truck and materials), and therefore deserved a tougher plea-bargain offering. When conservatives tell the tale, the juvenile is the ring-leader and Swan a mere tag-along - unworthy of harsh punishment.

References
Pro-Pickering: Byron York (National Review), WSJ Editorial, Byron York again
Anti-Pickering: Michael Crowley (TNR)
Other: Washington Post Media Notes (Kurtz), Yahoo page on the issue, Frist on Meet The Press


posted by Quiddity at 1/11/2003 03:11:00 PM

Then and now:

Then

(October 28): Remarks by the President at New Mexico Welcome

"John Sanchez is the right man for governor." (Applause.) "When you turn out the vote, make sure you back this good man. He's going to make you one you can be proud of." (Applause.)

(November 6):New Mexico Positive Testing Ground for Former Clintonite

Richardson defeated freshman Republican state Rep. John Sanchez 58 to 36, with 80 percent of precincts reporting.

Republican Gov. Gary E. Johnson was forced to step down after being term-limited, so the GOP chose Sanchez, a businessman still in his first term in the House.

Now

(Jan 9): Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer

Q What message does the administration want New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson to convey to the North Koreans?

MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not sure that's quite the issue. In this instance, Governor Richardson, who was the former Ambassador to the United Nations, received communication from the North Koreans in New York -- the North Korean Ambassador -- saying that he wanted to visit with Governor Richardson. Governor Richardson called the State Department. Under all our agreements with North Korea, in order for the U.N. Ambassador to the United Nations from North Korea to travel outside of New York, the State Department has to grant permission, per the agreements. So Governor Richardson, knowing that as a former Ambassador, contacted Secretary Powell. Secretary Powell said that he had no objections to North Korea traveling to New Mexico to visit with Governor Richardson.

Q But sources close to Richardson have said that the administration initiated some contact with him about a discussion with North Korea.

MR. FLEISCHER: The conversation as it was related to me was exactly as I laid out.

(Jan 11): Richardson Hosts 3rd Day of Talks with North Koreans

Talks between a former U.S. envoy and two North Korean diplomats have been extended into a third day, with U.S. officials saying discusssions so far have made little progress on easing tensions over Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions.

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Bill Richardson, is hosting the talks at his residence in Santa Fe, the capital of the southwestern state of New Mexico, where he now is governor.

posted by Quiddity at 1/11/2003 07:18:00 AM

Missed opportunity:

Sometime in the 80's, the ability to offset income with capital losses was set at $3000/year (for non IRA/401k accounts). That hasn't been inflation adjusted for over 15 years, and now makes it virtually impossible to fully use, say, a $60,000 stock loss. You'd have to apply $3k for twenty years, which is a very long time. Why not increase the amount from $3,000 to $10,000?    (or more)

It has a number of virtues:

• It really helps those in the middle income ranges ($30k - $100k).
  
  
• It helps out those who have been unlucky in the stock market. Why reward those who do well? Why not show some compassion for those who "did the right thing" (i.e. participate in the market), but got burned?
  
  
• It provides a sort of compensation for those victimized by the unethical actions that took place on Wall Street. Unfortunately, getting recompense for slippery analysis and other offenses is virtually impossible. The process is expensive, takes forever, and there's no money to pay out anyway.
  
  
• It would provide some reassurance to investors that there will be some help when markets turn bad - which would definitely make the public less wary than they are today.

Alas, the Bush administration's sole focus is on winners. Losers, even those that imbibed the free-market elixir, are of no account.

posted by Quiddity at 1/08/2003 11:44:00 PM

He actually said the first part about half the benefits going to seniors, but failed to note that they are rich seniors, nor did he say what portion of seniors were getting taxable dividend income.

posted by Quiddity at 1/08/2003 10:19:00 PM

Hello Flat Tax!

Bush wants to:

• Eliminate the marriage "penalty".
• End double taxation.
• Abolish the estate tax.
• Eliminate taxes on dividends.
• Cut taxes the most for people who pay the most.

What do all these notions have in common?

Each is another step away from taxing according to ability. Take, for instance, the marriage "penalty." The tax code assumes that if people are married, they share certain expenses and thus are more able to pay taxes than two people living separately. Of course, this is a generalization, but that happens all the time (some children are much more expensive to raise than others, but everyone gets the same credit).

Bush is oblivious to the idea that for those better off, it's less of a burden to pay higher taxes than someone less fortunate. So abolish the estate tax - no matter how big that estate is. Eliminate taxes on dividends - even though most are destined for the wealthy. "Ability to pay" has no meaning to Bush. Which is another way of saying to Americans:

Hello Flat Tax!

It's remarkable how the discussion about taxes has been dominated by these "non-ability" arguments. By positing the notion of equality in the tax code (equal standard deduction for married vs two individuals, equal treatment of corporate debt vs dividends, cut taxes proportional to how much is paid) the debate is immediately moved away from how easy (or hard) it is for people to pay X dollars on Y income. And once you do that, everybody looks the same, and so everybody deserves to be taxed the same. Right?

posted by Quiddity at 1/08/2003 08:21:00 AM

Did you know this?

From the Los Angeles Times on the Bush plan:

... the state aid, if included in the final plan, [is] only [a] one-year program, in contrast to the elimination of the dividend tax, which would be permanent, and the income tax rate cuts, which would remain in effect until 2010. As a result, their price tags are considerably smaller than those for the tax cuts.

In addition, the aid package, which would funnel $6 billion to financially troubled state governments, is largely designed to solve a problem that Bush's elimination of the dividend tax is expected to create for states -- a reduction in their already diminished tax revenue.

The problem occurs because in eliminating the dividend tax -- rather than just reducing it -- the administration would wipe out the need for companies to tell Washington what they pay in dividends and the need for the Internal Revenue Service to collect the information.

As a result, states, which also tax dividends based on the federal information, would no longer be able to impose that tax. The inability would cost them from $4 billion to $5 billion in lost revenue a year, according to the independent Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

Yup, let's hear it for Bush's tax-evasion program.

Seriously - what we are witnessing is a move to eliminate taxes completely. Sounds radical, but that's what's going on. Sure, there may be some base level - say on the scale of Brazil - where absolutely essential programs are paid for, but other than that, it's cash-and-carry time. Privatize everything! Privatize roads, utilities, the electromagnetic spectrum, elder health care, postal service, weather bureau, retirement insurance --- then deregulate --- and watch the "magic of the unregulated marketplace" create huge entities that dominate and overcharge the public.

Almost sounds like science-fiction, doesn't it?


posted by Quiddity at 1/07/2003 09:10:00 PM

Wow!

We read this in the Washington Post about Bush's economic proposal:

Of the $674 billion package, all but $3.6 billion comes in the form of tax breaks ...

The de-funding of the federal government is moving apace.

News reports headline that "the bulk of the program goes to reducing taxes." Bulk of the program? How about all of the program?

posted by Quiddity at 1/07/2003 01:51:00 PM

In order to help you, the Bush administration discourages condom use. It's a matter of money, not morality.




posted by Quiddity at 1/06/2003 08:02:00 PM

Prez speaks out about his economic plan:

From the White House website:

"This is a plan that provides tax relief to the working citizens. It's a plan that is a very fair plan."

So why is it that half the cost of the plan will come from eliminating taxes on dividends - an income stream you get without working?

posted by Quiddity at 1/06/2003 06:30:00 PM

Favor the rich over the general welfare:

We have yet to get the final word on Bush's tax plan, but it looks as if he's proposing that individuals pay no taxes on dividends.

We don't like the idea, but for the sake of argument, let's say that we want to reduce taxes on dividends. The proper thing to do is equalize it with debt: make dividends fully deductible by the corporation.

That means:

• Money goes to work immediately, either in hiring more people, or reducing prices for the consumer.
• The progressivity of the tax system is retained. Wealthy people will continue to pay more taxes on their dividends than others.
• There is no distortion of corporate finances which the current preferential treatment of debt promotes.

Instead, Bush is proposing a less optimal scheme: One that benefits the wealthy, and is less capable of helping the economy.

posted by Quiddity at 1/05/2003 09:09:00 PM

On television:

This week we watched The McLaughlin Group's 2002 Year-End Awards. Categories included: Boldest Political Tactic, Most Overreported Story, Best Idea, and for

The Most Honest Person of the Year    there was this:

Michael Barone: "Well, I'll nominate somebody from the blogerdom - the weblogger - Andrew Sullivan of andrewsullivan.com. A conservative on most issues, who started right from the start against Trent Lott after he made that comment on December 5th. He and Josh Marshall of talkingpoint[s]memo.com, who is a liberal, were both relentless in going after Lott and they picked up the story before anybody in the conventional press did.

Most honest! Congratulations Andy!

posted by Quiddity at 1/05/2003 04:42:00 AM

Yeah, right.

little green footballs (lgf) had a contest to determine the following: It is my great honor to announce the winner of the First Annual Robert Fisk Award for Idiotarian of the Year (Fiskie for short). And the winner is ... There is a cartoon in that post. Very nice, fellows. So, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, former president, and acknowledged do-gooder is an Idiotarian. And Instapundit is willing to link to it (without any commentary). Charming. Speaking of do-gooders, we Googled around and found this abstract for the final chapter in the Cato Institute's Regulation magazine (summer 2002). Here it is: (our emphasis) The War of the We Against the Me    By P. J. O'Rourke ...    Upbeat is for sissy do-gooder organizations like Brookings, the U.N., and the Democratic Party. Cato is not a do-gooder organization. We're libertarians. We're not here to do good. We're here to do anything we damn well please -- and take the consequences -- because we are real advocates of freedom. Spoken like a criminal. Let's see what we can get away with. Maybe we can evade "the consequences." Remember that the next time Bush speaks fondly of "freedom." (especially economic and regulatory freedom)  Freedom to steal under a lax system. Freedom to evade, delay, or reverse enactment of consensus views on the environment, product safety, and fiscal honesty.

posted by Quiddity at 1/04/2003 02:35:00 PM

Plotting politics:

The Economist has an interesting article about attitudes and values throughout the world and includes several thought-provoking graphs. (We like graphs.) Turns out that Americans are more favorably disposed towards the Russians than Europeans are.

posted by Quiddity at 1/04/2003 01:47:00 PM

Is your name sewed in your underwear as well?

George Bush loves to play dress-up. He's been spotted in a number of military outfits, and also puts on this jacket when he's hanging out at his Crawford ranch. Note that it identifies the wearer as "George W. Bush   President"  of the   "United States of America".

Remind you of anything? How about this from the Larry Sanders show:




posted by Quiddity at 1/04/2003 10:19:00 AM

Let's get it out in the open.

David Limbaugh of TownHall.com is firmly against cloning, and presents the logic behind his stance. Some excerpts: While we may have made scientific advancements of godlike proportions, there is one of God's prerogatives we'll never have the remotest license to, and that is His authority over our souls. [...] [The Clonaid group] are neglecting that little detail we refer to as the soul. Cloning advocates such as Clonaid can't possibly believe in the biblical concept that God creates unique human souls in His own image. Even assuming they can precisely duplicate a human being physically, what about his spiritual aspect? Will he/it have a soul? [...] When the God of the Bible tells us through the prophet Jeremiah, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart," I think He's referring to our souls, our essences, not our yet to be fully formed brains. It is a chilling thought that His Jeremiah statement may not apply to beings that He did not form in the womb but that human scientists did.

posted by Quiddity at 1/04/2003 01:40:00 AM

Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who's the weirdest one of all?

Ann Coulter begins her most recent essay with this sentence: Most journalists are so stupid, the fact that they are also catty, lazy, vengeful and humorless is often overlooked. We think those words speak for themselves.

posted by Quiddity at 1/04/2003 01:31:00 AM

Helen Thomas don't like Bush:

Veteran journalist Helen Thomas pens a sharp essay about Bush's disdain for trial lawyers. The administration wants to put a $250,000 cap on "pain and suffering." We wonder if any proposed legislation will have a COLA formula built in. If not (our suspicion), then it's going to be a farce a few years down the road (if it ever becomes law). But back to Helen. She ends her piece with these words: There are two ways of enforcing consumer protections. One is through government intervention. That's the job of agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Labor Department, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Federal Aviation Administration and a host of others and their state and local counterparts. The second way to enforce consumer rights is the private lawsuit. Bush's war on the trial lawyers can only please those from the consumer-be-damned school of corporate wrongdoing. In President Bush's "compassionate conservatism," just whom does he feel compassion for? Thomas is focusing on the "second way", but we hasten to add that Bush doesn't like the "first way" (regulation). One would hope that most problems are stopped with regulation and that litigation is for those cases that slip through the net. But with Bush's emphasis on voluntary-action-instead-of-regulation, the slack has to be taken up by trial lawyers. With caps on awards, that approach is significantly weakened. Thomas is correct when she says Bush is a supporter of "the consumer-be-damned school of corporate wrongdoing." That explains the absurd Harvey Pitt and his do-nothing SEC.

posted by Quiddity at 1/03/2003 01:31:00 PM

Let's play North Korean Brinksmanship!

See how fast you can get to a nuclear conflict. If you land on the special "Bush squares" you can arrive even faster!

Start Here Roll 1 dice per move. è			Cut off talks with North Korea. Move an additional 3 squares. è	Ê Have you stocked up on Potassium Iodide anti-radiation pills? Ã
É New York Times is (predictably) concerned about the direction of U.S. foreign policy. Ä	Snub South Korea’s President Kim Dae-Jung over his détente strategy. ç Move an additional 4 squares.		Scrap ABM treaty. ç Move an additional 3 squares.
	U.S. acts as if it isn't restrained by world opinion (ditch various multinational agreements). Move an additional 2 squares. è	Declare North Korea part of the “axis of evil”. Move an additional 6 squares. è		Ê Wait for Tony Blair to comment on this issue. (lose 1 turn) Ã
É Ä	In the Nuclear Posture Review, put North Korea on a list of potential targets for U.S. nuclear weapons. ç Move an additional 5 squares.		Make disparaging comments about Clinton's handling of North Korea in 1994. ç Move an additional 1 square.
	Talk about lowering the threshold for nuclear weapons by making low-yield tactical nukes available for some battlefield situations. Move an additional 4 squares. è	Bush denounces Kim Jong Il as a "pygmy". Move an additional 2 squares. è	China and Russia appeal for deplomacy to work. ç Move back 3 squares.	Ê Ã
É Conservative webloggers get very excited. Ä	Sen. Richard Lugar presses for cooler heads to prevail. Move back 3 squares. è	Bush compares Kim Jong Il to "a spoiled child at a dinner table." ç Move an additional 2 squares.	U.S. shows how tough it can be, using Iraq as the example. ç Move an additional 3 squares.
	Confront Pyongyang with evidence of uranium enrichment program. Move an additional 3 squares. è	Announce new U.S. policy of preemptive action. Move an additional 2 squares. è	Do a little destabilizing missile defense testing. Move an additional 3 squares. è	Ê Watch Colin Powell go on all the Sunday talk shows and try to talk down the crisis. Ã
É Ä	Bush Assails N. Korean Leader, accuses Kim Jong Il of being "somebody who starves his own people." ç Move an additional 2 squares.		Defense Secretary warns N. Korea that U.S. can wage two wars at once. ç Move an additional 1 square.
	Reject call for non-aggression pact with N Korea. Move an additional 1 square. è		Make last-minute emergency call to Jimmy Carter?

Most (unlinked) entries are from this weblog posting.

posted by Quiddity at 1/03/2003 12:52:00 AM

Frist to the rescue!

From the Washington Post: Sen. Bill Frist Aids Accident Victims 2003 - Incoming Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist stopped minutes after a rollover accident on a Florida highway Wednesday, helping tend to the four survivors until paramedics arrived. 1998 - When a gunman opened fire in the U.S. Capitol, Frist, R-Tenn., rushed to aid the victims. He treated one man who had been shot in the face and performed CPR on another man with a chest wound. 1995 - Frist revived a 60-year-old man who collapsed inside a Senate office building.

posted by Quiddity at 1/01/2003 09:56:00 PM