scooter scoots...

the czar has done far fewer pardons and commutations of sentences since he became president than any other, just like no vetoes until this past January.

yes, he has the power to do these things. he also said that he would not make any decisions until the appeals process was completed. the first part of the appeal was turned down today indicating that scooter would have to be in jail while the appeal process was in motion.

the czar then decides to commute the sentence!

now, it seems that this decision is most expeditious on mr. bush's part. was there fear that, since scooter had to be in prison, would he have entertained cooperating with Patrick Fitzgerald? ergo, insinuating that there were others who were more involved.

what do you think mr. cheney? mr. rove? mr. bush?

just asking...


oh, and i'm not under the impression that Mr. Fitzgerald would vent his anger like others would. he's much too upstanding in his demeanor. i'll do it for him - g** d*** m*****f****** s**-**-*-b****** p**** b****** a**h*** f*****

there, i feel a little better now.

monday morning mayhem...

an irreverent one to boot...

1. there's always a test...

A blonde dies and arrives at the Pearly Gates, where she is greeted by St. Peter. "Welcome!" he says. "Because we are currently operating at 99% capacity, we can only let a limited number of souls into heaven. Therefore, you must answer my questions correctly to gain entrance."

"Okay," says the blonde.

"Here's your question: name two days of the week that begin with the letter T."

"That's easy. Today and tomorrow!"

"Oh! Well, that's not the answer I was thinking of, but I'll give you another question. How many seconds are there in a year?"

"That's easy. Twelve!"

"Twelve?"

"January second, February second, March second--"

"Okay, okay. I can see you misunderstood this question as well. Okay, one more chance. What's God's name?"

"That's easy. Howard!"

"Howard?"

"You know -- 'Our Father, who art in heaven, Howard be thy name..."

2. your reward shall be great. uhhh...

A biker was riding along a California beach when the sky clouded above his head and, in a booming voice, the Lord said, "Because you have TRIED to be faithful to me in all ways, I will grant you one wish."

The biker pulled over and said, "Build a bridge to Hawaii so I can ride over anytime I want."

The Lord said, "Your request is materialistic, think of the enormous challenges for that kind of undertaking. The supports required to reach the bottom of the Pacific! The concrete and steel it would take! It will nearly exhaust several natural resources. I can do it, but it is hard for me to justify your desire for worldly things. Take a little more time and think of something that would honor and glorify me."

The biker thought about it for a long time. Finally he said, "Lord, I wish that I could understand my wife. I want to know how she feels inside, what she's thinking when she gives me the silent treatment, why she cries, what she means when she says nothing's wrong, and how I can make a woman truly happy."

The Lord replied, "You want two lanes or four on that bridge?"

3. religious ceremony...

A Jewish girl tells her Catholic college roommate that she's going home for Rosh Hashanah.

The Catholic girl asks the Jewish girl, "Is this the holiday when you light the candles?"

"No," the Jewish girl replies, "That's Hanukah."

The Catholic girl then asks the Jewish girl, "Is that when you eat unleavened bread?"

"No," the Jewish girl replies, "That's Passover. Rosh Hashanah is the holiday when we blow the shofar."

The Catholic girl replies, "That's what I like about you Jewish people, you're so good to your help."

4. John The Baptist

A man who thought he was John the Baptist was disturbing the neighborhood, so for public safety, he was committed.

He was put in a room with another crazy, and immediately began his routine, "I am John The Baptist! Jesus Christ has sent me!"

The other guy looked at him and declared, "I did not!"

think this a reason to be agnostic?

if...

as the religious ultra-right believes, people are gay because of environmental and parenting issues, why are they attacking gays?

shouldn't they be attacking and condemning the people who raised us? our parents? our guardians? our teachers? our churches? our ministers? our priests?

i mean, if being gay is a choice as they say, who gave us that choice?

could someone query Dick Cheney? he probably knows.

'cause i don't know and i'm just asking...

been out of it for a couple of days...

had a major allergic reaction and one I never had before.

i bought a seafood rub with ginger, wasabi and citrus and marinated yellow-fin tuna that i grilled. within a half-hour i felt like there were billions of pin pricks all over my body. if i scratched them, they became extremely painful. never experienced any thing like it. luckily, i have medication that can alleviate reactions and it did.

i'm very careful in reading ingredients of things i buy. i have an acute allergy to celery. my entire life i never liked it and when i was tested i blew up like a balloon with it during the food segment. i've literally been on the floor, gasping for breath and in tears after ingesting celery by accident.

the rub had no celery in it. do you know how many prepared foods have celery in it? it's amazing. celery has almost no nutritional value either. it's mostly used for filler.

usually after a major attack, i get totally wiped out and can't do anything. all i want to do is sleep. it's due to a combination of the allergic reaction and the medication i use.

i also realized a long time ago that i don't make a good sick person. i've thought about it and i suppose i might believe being sick is a weakness. at the least, it's a total inconvenience. i become a complete baby. of course, i don't let anyone know.

injury is totally different. i've had six surgeries on my right knee and had no problems with them, even though the first one had me in a hip-to-ankle cast for six months. suppose those were badges of courage? who knows...

well, any way. i'm catching up on what's happened in the world the last couple of days.

i did get to watch the Concert for Diana. amazing show.

if you missed it, VH1 is going to replay and have it available on their website also.

one of the things that struck me is Elton John's playing the piano while he sings. he's incredible. i never really paid much attention to it.

nothing to ask at the moment...

Bubbles is very ill...

Bubbles was Beverly Sills' childhood nickname and it has continued as an endearment to opera fans around the world.

Ms. Sills is probably second to Maria Callas for bringing the rebirth opera to the masses in the 20th century. She not only is a superb singer but works behind the scenes in fund raising, conducting, producing, etc., etc., etc.

The New York Times this morning has reported that she is gravely ill with cancer and has been fighting it for quite a long time.

Below is a great example of her explosive talent.



all the best, Ms. Sills. I have had the pleasure of hearing you in person and adoring every minute of it...

"on behalf of the minority I object"...

Activist judges [read SCOTUS here] have been joined by obstructionist legislators since the 110th Congress took office in January. Their objections always take the form of using procedural votes to stop legislation that is under consideration.

In the Senate, these procedural votes are to avoid cloture - stopping discussion on a bill to call for a full vote, i.e. filibuster. As long as a filibuster is going on no vote on a measure may be taken and a filibuster can continue indefinitely. The Republicans know that most bills only need a majority vote and would pass with the Democrats in control and a few of their fellow Reps joining them.

Cloture, on the other hand, requires 60 votes and would end a filibuster so that the voting could happen. In effect, since the minority knows that the Dems wouldn't have the required 60 votes to end a filibuster, it is a way of "killing" a bill procedurally without a decision being made.

In the last Congress, when the Republicans were in charge, they cried foul any time the Democrats began to discuss filibuster. They threatened to use what Trent Lott referred to as the nuclear option. In other words, doing away with filibuster. They backed the Dems into a corner every single time.

Now the shoe is on the other foot and the Republicans don't hesitate to use the treat of filibuster. Since January, they have objected at least 23 times. To get an idea of what legislation was involved, watch the video below.



our tax dollars at work...

our freedoms and lives at stake...

weekender...

to help you enjoy the weekend with no guilt -

HEALTH QUESTION & ANSWER SESSION

Q: I've heard that cardiovascular exercise can prolong life; is this true?

A: Your heart is only good for so many beats, and that's it... don't waste them on exercise. Everything wears out eventually. Speeding up your heart will not make you live longer; that's like saying you can extend the life of your car by driving it faster. Want to live longer? Take a nap.

_____


Q: Should I cut down on meat and eat more fruits and vegetables?

A: You must grasp logistical efficiencies. What does a cow eat? Hay and corn. And what are these? Vegetables. So a steak is nothing more than an efficient mechanism of delivering vegetables to your system. Need grain? Eat chicken. Beef is also a good source of field grass (green leafy vegetable). And a pork chop can give you 100% of your recommended daily allowance of vegetable products.

_____

Q: Should I reduce my alcohol intake?

A: No, not at all. Wine is made from fruit. Brandy is distilled wine, that means they take the water out of the fruity bit so you get even more of the goodness that way. Beer is also made out of grain. Bottoms up!

_____

Q: How can I calculate my body/fat ratio?


A: Well, if you have a body and you have fat, your ratio is one to one. If you have two bodies, your ratio is two to one, etc.

_____


Q: What are some of the advantages of participating in a regular exercise program?

A: Can't think of a single one, sorry. My philosophy is: No Pain...Good!

_____

Q: Aren't fried foods bad for you?

A: YOU'RE NOT LISTENING!!! ... Foods are fried these days in vegetable oil. In fact, they're permeated in it. How could getting more vegetables be bad for you?

_____


Q: Will sit-ups help prevent me from getting a little soft around the middle?

A: Definitely not! When you exercise a muscle, it gets bigger. You should only be doing sit-ups if you want a bigger stomach.

_____


Q: Is chocolate bad for me?

A: Are you crazy? HELLO Cocoa beans! Another vegetable!!! It's the best feel-good food around!

_____


Q: Is swimming good for your figure?

A: If swimming is good for your figure, explain whales to me.

_____


Q: Is getting in-shape important for my lifestyle?

A: Hey! 'Round' is a shape!


Well, I hope this has cleared up any misconceptions you may have had about food and diets.

And remember:

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming

"WOO HOO, What a Ride

cheney fodder - part four...

Leaving No Tracks, part 4 of the Washington Post series on Cheney's power, focuses on how he is able to influence policy and decisions for the administration and not have much traceable back to him. A great description comes from Paul Hoffman who owed his placement in the government to Cheney's influence.

"His genius," Hoffman said, is that "he builds networks and puts the right people in the right places, and then trusts them to make well-informed decisions that comport with his overall vision."

No one ever has to second guess what the v.p. wants when he contacts them, because they know beforehand what it is.

To add an air of legitimacy to the recommendations and decisions Mr. Cheney makes, he also puts into place experts in the field for which he focuses.

Aides praise Cheney's habit of reaching down to officials who are best informed on a subject he is tackling. But the effect of his calls often leads those mid-level officials scrambling to do what they presume to be his bidding.

There is no second-guessing. Everyone knows his/her role.

What happens to anyone who doesn't fit into the scheme of things? Christie Todd Whitman is a perfect example. As head of the EPA, she was responsible for overseeing a number of environmental policies that not only had been in place for a while but also those that Mr. Bush had made promises.

Mr. Cheney, on the other hand, was always known to be pro-industry before anything else. On the issue of easing pollution rules for aging power and oil refining plants he wanted action and he wanted it fast. Whitman cautioned that a quick decision could be a grand political problem. Cheney didn't care.

Even after meeting directly with Bush she knew that the decision had been made. She chose to resign instead of put her name to something in which she couldn't abide. At the time the reason given for her departure was that she wanted to spend more time with her family.

Recently, she let it be know that it wasn't the case.

By that time, Whitman had already announced her resignation, saying she wanted to spend more time with her family. But the real reason, she said, was the new rule.

"I just couldn't sign it," she said. "The president has a right to have an administrator who could defend it, and I just couldn't."

There is no room for discussion or dissent with the faux chief-of-staff role that Cheney put himself in place as.

Whitman was probably the first high-visibility resignation from the Bush administration. At the time there was thought that the excuse given was lame. As we've seen in the last couple of months, more and more members of the administration are resigning.

It's almost as if the rats are leaving the unsinkable Titanic administration. How many more will jump ship in the coming months? Especially, since it is starting to look like that there may be legal ramifications and prosecutions are not so out of the question.

just ask libby...

ultra-ultra...

left? right? centrist? communist?

I've never been quite sure. I noticed that the Larouchies have been out in force in the southwest suburbs of Chicago this past week. I've seen them at many of the major intersections, wearing their hand-made placards, handing out their propaganda and willing to talk an arm off. I sure most people are glad that the lights turn green ofter. They can escape.

The one thing that all of their signs have in common is an immense hatred for the Bush administration. They don't mince their words at all. They really hate him.

One of the gentleman had a sign that made me laugh out loud and I just had to share with y'all.

Pull the Cheney and Flush!

would it count as recycling?

just asking...



and some history...

We take a crap because the original indoor flushable toilet was popularized by a man named, you got it, John Crapper. Honest! Click on the name for the link. I went to an exhibit of underground Seattle and they had a big display and explanation about the history of the crapper, its original name.

the trick to getting an iPhone...

I stopped in my local Apple store the other day because I needed to replace my Cube's power block. I asked the guys if there was any trick to getting a new iPhone any easier. They snickered and said,

"Yeah, camping gear."

As much as I've been waiting for years, I can wait...

[biting my knuckles as i wrote this...]

cheney fodder - part three...

Flipping channels I briefly landed on Chris Matthews' program today. It was long enough to hear Ann Coulter say something along the following: Bush is brilliant on the war on terror and Iraq but his domestic policies are a disaster.

duh!

In today's Washington Post installment of Jo Becker and Barton Gellman's report on Cheney's power, A Strong Push From Backstage they discuss Cheney's hands are in everything, not just foreign affairs.

Scores of interviews with advisers to the president and vice president, as well as with other senior officials throughout the government, offer a backstage view of how the Bush White House operates. The president is "the decider," as Bush puts it, but the vice president often serves up his menu of choices.

Cheney led a group that winnowed the president's list of potential Supreme Court nominees. Cheney resolved a crisis in the space program after the Columbia shuttle disaster. Cheney fashioned a controversial truce between the legislative and executive branches -- and averted resignations at the top of the Justice Department and the FBI -- over the right of law enforcement authorities to investigate political corruption in Congress.

And it was Cheney who served as the guardian of conservative orthodoxy on budget and tax matters. He shaped and pushed through Bush's tax cuts, blunting the influence of Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, a longtime friend, and of Cabinet rivals he had played a principal role in selecting. He managed to overcome the president's "compassionate conservative" resistance to multiple breaks for the wealthy. He even orchestrated a decision to let a GOP senator switch parties -- giving control of the chamber to Democrats -- rather than meet the senator's demand for billions of dollars in new spending.

The article continues to explain all of the back door kitchen cabinet maneuvering that Cheney is really good at accomplishing.

One of the most telling lines in the article is that The president is "the decider," as Bush puts it, but the vice president often serves up his menu of choices. He manipulates just about everything that goes on in the White House and what gets to the president. And at all times, Cheney is the last person that talks to the president before any announcement of major policy is made, even minor policy.

This is frightening for a big reason. If Mr. Cheney is the one controlling everything, does that mean that Bush is really a dolt? Unaware? Oblivious? Nescient?

AND if this is true, then is Coulter's statement about Bush's domestic policies being a disaster cause for greater concern? Certainly, her belief that the tactics of the War on terror are delusional. Using delusional is being kind.

This may be one of the times when it is okay to say, f***...

speaking of faith-based...

TEACHER: Now, Sam, tell me frankly, do you say prayers before eating?

SAM: No ma'am, I don't have to, my Mom is a good cook.

activists judges...

In rulings today, activist judges set new precedents* on their agenda.

...a group of taxpayers did not have standing to sue the US government for its funding of faith-based initiatives with federal money.

...schools could censor student expression outside of school grounds.

...a Wisconsin-based anti-abortion group should have been allowed to run so-called 'issue ads' in the two months leading up to the 2004 Election.

We can't question the federal government's faith-based initiative; students can be censored even if they are not on school property and are making a joke; pro-lifers can run inflammatory ads to sway elections.

how much more freedom can we stand?

these activists judges will be the death of our democracy if they don't stop.

oh, wait. these decisions were handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States today.

never mind...

*Source: Raw Story - " Supreme Court hands victory to Bush on faith-based initiatives"

John Dean and Rahm Emmanuel agree...

John Dean: John Dean says stop funding Dick Cheney AmericaBlog.com

Rahm Emannuel: Lawmaker challenges Cheney on executive order USA Today

Dean's words -

Let me tell you the fastest way to get him to comply. Cut off his salary. Cut off his salary for all of his staff. And the Congress has the power to do that.

Emmanuel's words -

"Today, we discovered that everything we learned in U.S. government class was wrong. Evidently, the Vice President does not consider himself a part of the executive branch, and therefore believes he can obstruct meaningful oversight and avoid being held accountable. If the Vice President truly believes he is not a part of the executive branch, he should return the salary the American taxpayers have been paying him since January 2001, and move out of the home for which they are footing the bill."

Cheney has opened up this can of worms himself by saying that his office is not part of the Executive Branch but in a unique position because he is the President of the Senate and is therefore part of the Legislative Branch also. Thus, he doesn't have to follow the same rules, executive orders, procedures or laws regarding the Executive Branch.

Well, now...

When is the federal budget up for consideration again?

and...

Can Cheney then accept money from, say, Halliburton, if he's not being paid or funded by Congress?

just asking...

more, more fodder on Cheney - part 2...

In the middle of reading part two, Pushing the Envelope on Presidential Power of the four-part Washington Post series on Vice-President Cheney's power in the Bush administration [Part One, 'A Different Understanding With the President'], I was struck as to how it reads like a Robert Ludlum novel. The intrigue, plotting, back-stabbing, and spying are a read comparable to Ludlum's books. If you haven't been reading it, you should, if just for the shear enjoyment of a spy story. Of course, the facts of the story may also just bring you to understand that this is really going on in our government, a republican form of democracy based on the paramount document espousing freedom.

Today's installment has two very interesting points. Well, it has a lot of them, but these are the two that struck me the most:

No longer was the vice president focused on procedural rights, such as access to lawyers and courts. The subject now was more elemental: How much suffering could U.S. personnel inflict on an enemy to make him talk? Cheney's lawyer feared that future prosecutors, with motives "difficult to predict," might bring criminal charges against interrogators or Bush administration officials.

"How much suffering could U.S. personnel inflict on an enemy to make him talk?"

Why would this even be a question for anyone? When I was in high school, the senior high school English/literature class I had dealt with thematic topics. The one that has stayed with me to this day is Man's inhumanity to man. The very idea that one person has less value than another is anathema to me. To inflict suffering for the purpose of forwarding a political agenda makes all of us less human not just less humane.

The second point:

...the president may authorize any interrogation method, even if it crosses the line into torture. U.S. and treaty laws forbidding any person to "commit torture," that passage stated, "do not apply" to the commander in chief, because Congress "may no more regulate the President's ability to detain and interrogate enemy combatants than it may regulate his ability to direct troop movements on the battlefield."

.
I have to think about this one very hard. The Constitution puts the President of the United States above the law? Somehow I don't think that the framers of the Constitution had that accurately in mind. They had just ended a war against a tyrant and sought to limit the powers of the executive to avoid the establishment of a monarchical president.

I mean, come on. This should be a no-brainer for any one who has even a cursory understanding of U.S. Constitutional history. Hell, I remember my high school history and political science teachers making a big deal of it.

George Washington made a big deal of it. He was hesitant about becoming the first president. He disliked the adulation, though no president since has had an approval rating of 100%!

I have this disgust welling up in my gullet with what I'm reading in the Post's series. I also have a sadness that could easily push me. Most of all, I have anger that makes me want to open the window and -



that makes me feel better...