"Not supported by the facts" - NOT!

From the New Hampshire Democratic debate: (transcript)

JENNINGS: General Clark, a lot of people say they don't you well, so this is really a simple question about knowing a man by his friends. The other day you had a rally here, and one of the men who stood up to endorse you is the controversial filmmaker Michael Moore. You said you were delighted with him.

At one point, Mr. Moore said, in front of you, that President Bush -- he's saying he'd like to see you, the general, and President Bush, who he called a "deserter."

Now, that's a reckless charge not supported by the facts. And I was curious to know why you didn't contradict him, and whether or not you think it would've been a better example of ethical behavior to have done so.

CLARK: Well, I think Michael Moore has the right to say whatever he feels about this.

CLARK: I don't know whether this is supported by the facts or not. I've never looked at it. I've seen this charge bandied about a lot.

Not supported by the facts? Bush was definitely AWOL (absent under 30 days) and most likely a "deserter" (absent more than 30 days). For those interested, check out our table that chronicles Bush's service (or lack therof) in the Texas Air National Guard. Note the several-month period (June, July, August 1972) when he was away from the base without permission.

posted by Quiddity at 1/23/2004 06:53:00 AM

Grow up!



(The first line was part of the 2004 State of the Union speech.)

posted by Quiddity at 1/23/2004 04:31:00 AM

Today's big story:

Diagram derived from the Boston Globe's Senate panel's GOP staff pried on Democrats



posted by Quiddity at 1/22/2004 12:21:00 PM

Trying to figure it out:

From the 2004 SOTU:

Already, the Kay Report identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2004 09:54:00 PM

What a difference a year makes!

2003 State of the Union speech: words spoken about Saddam's WMD = 1197 (out of 5413 = 22.1%)

2004 State of the Union speech: words spoken about Saddam's WMD =     86 (out of 5279 =   1.6%)

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2004 07:24:00 PM

ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATE: We are experiencing a problem (again) with disappearing directories/files that we use to host images. We are working to resolve the issue.

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2004 10:04:00 AM

Living in oxymoronic times:

We like Troubletown this week.

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2004 09:38:00 AM

2004 State of the Union speech - by the numbers:

subject	words
opening remarks	308
WOT: general	86
WOT: Patriot/tracking down	288
WOT: Taliban/al Qaeda, Afghn.	105
Iraq: Saddam	162
Iraq: rebuild	200
WOT: Libya, N.Korea	169
WOT: general	335
WOT: international relat.	303
WOT: WMD	86
Middle East, democracy	217
WOT: wrap-up	74
Taxes	168
New skills, NCLB	476
Taxes	121
Lawsuits, energy, Social Sec.	131
Budget	85
Immigration	138
Medicare	309
Healthcare (misc)	204
Values	84
Children / drugs	177
steroids	100
Children / abstinence	138
Marriage	184
Faith-based	114
prisoner re-entry	142
letter from Ashley	283
closing remarks	92

posted by Quiddity at 1/21/2004 01:48:00 AM

Parallels:

Then:

The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer     pages 471-475

HITLER'S REPLY TO ROOSEVELT (must be registered w/Amazon to view page)

Hitler got to the core of his answer to the President's request that he give assurances not to attack any of thirty-one nations.

"How has Mr. Roosevelt learned which nations consider themselves threatened by German policy and which to not? Or is Mr. Roosevelt in a position, in spite of the enormous amount of work which must rest upon him in his own country, to recognize of his own accord all these inner spiritual and mental impressions of other peoples and their governments?

Finally, Mr. Roosevelt asks that assurances be given him that the German armed forces will not attack, and above all, not invade the territory or possessions of the following independent nations ..."

Hitler then read out slowly the name of each country and as he intoned the names, I remember, the laughter in the Reichstag grew.

Now:

George W. Bush's State of the Union Address of 20 January 2004

"Some critics have said our duties in Iraq must be internationalized. This particular criticism is hard to explain to our partners in Britain, Australia, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, Italy, Spain, Poland, Denmark, Hungary, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Romania, the Netherlands,   (cheering)   Norway, El Salvador, and the 17 other countries that have committed troops to Iraq. "

COMMENTARY: We were listening to the speech and early on thought that it was martial in spirit - even bellicose. In fact, it seemed similar to the sort of speech that a Hitler or a Kruschev might deliver. Then, to our immense surprise, Bush read out - slowly - a list of countries to make a point. This was very much like the well known episode where Hitler read out a list of countries in a speech in the Reichstag. (That speech, on 28 April 1939 is often shown in World War Two documentaries because it shows the Fuhrer in a rare lighthearted moment.) Now, we're not saying Bush is Hitler, but we cannot help but wonder what the speechwriter was thinking when that country-list was included - because even if most Americans aren't aware of the parallel, many others throughout the world (and especially in Europe) will not miss the eerie parallel.

posted by Quiddity at 1/20/2004 07:39:00 PM

A cartoonist to check out:

We recently discovered a cartoonist with a political bent - Fighting Words by No Mind - who can be viewed here. We completely missed out on the timeliness of the Pickering nomination, but No Mind got it.

posted by Quiddity at 1/19/2004 03:37:00 AM

The president speaks:

From his remarks of 7 January 2004:

If an American employer is offering a job that American citizens are not willing to take, we ought to welcome into our country a person who will fill that job.

Deconstruct:

• WHO IS BEING HELPED?
  If an American employer is offering a job that American citizens are not willing to take, we ought to welcome into our country a person who will fill that job.
  
  
• WHO IS NOT BEING HELPED?
  If an American employer is offering a job that American citizens are not willing to take, we ought to welcome into our country a person who will fill that job.
  
  
• WHAT IS THE POINT OF ISSUE?
  If an American employer is offering a job that American citizens are not willing to take, we ought to welcome into our country a person who will fill that job.
  
  
• WHAT IS ANOTHER WAY OF DESCRIBING IT?
  If an American employer is offering a crummy job, we ought to welcome into our country a person who will fill that job.
  
  
• INSTEAD OF ALLOWING THE CITIZEN WORK-FORCE TO USE ITS ECONOMIC POWER IN NEGOTIATING FOR A GOOD JOB, BUSH SAYS:
  If an American employer is offering a crummy job, we ought to welcome into our country a person who will fill that job.

SUMMARY: Bush is proposing a program that deprives American workers economic power by allowing businesses to bring in anybody to work at dirt-cheap rates.

Can anything be more clear?


posted by Quiddity at 1/19/2004 03:19:00 AM