inevitable legacy...

It will all come down to this.

def. legacy: |lěg'ə-sē|; noun; Something handed down from an ancestor or a predecessor or from the past: a legacy of religious freedom. American Heritage Dictionary

Over the past week, Mr. Bush has announced initiatives on AIDS, greenhouse gas emissions, and Darfur. Why? There hasn't seemed to be a rush to do so in the past.

Could it possibly be that the focus has routinely been on negative aspects of his administration? Number one, of course, is Iraq, but the word is out on deficit, budget, healthcare, Social Security....

Did Jimmy Carter's comment of the Bush Administration being the worst in history make the Czar realize that his legacy as president is not going to be at all positive? Others have said it, but they didn't have the authority of an ex-president.

Richard Nixon had this annoying habit in most of his speeches of saying, Let history record.... It would drive me nuts. It was as if the most important thing on his mind was how history was going to view everything he said and did, and that was the reason that he was saying and doing what he did. Ironically, we know that Nixon's legacy is highlighted by the fact that he was the first and only president to resign over a major scandal.

If you look at the column to the right, you will see that Mr. Bush has 598 days left in office. Sounds like a lot of time, but it isn't. Does he now have a mission to change what looks like to be his inevitable legacy?

just asking...

weekender...

hold onto your sides for this one. I totally lost it...

A woman was very distraught over the fact that she had not had a date or any sex for over 5 years. She was afraid she might have something wrong with her, so she decided to seek the medical expertise of the well known Chinese sex therapist, Dr. Chang.

Upon entering the examination room, Dr. Chang said, "OK, take off all your crose."

The woman did as she was told.

"Now, get down and craw reery, reery fass to odderside of room."

Again, the woman did as she was instructed.

Dr. Chang then said, "OK, now craw reery, reery fass back to me." As she did, Dr. Chang shook his head slowly. "Your probrem vewy bad. You haf Ed Zachary Disease. Worse case I ever see. Dat why you not haf sex or dates.

"The woman asked anxiously, "Oh my God, Dr. Chang, what is Ed Zachary Disease?"

Dr. Chang sighed deeply and replied, "Ed Zachary Disease is when your face look ed zachary like your ass.

may explain a lot for some people.

I wonder if it's contagious?

there is unique beauty in the world...

...a scene we will probably never get to see in person.

This is the sunset at the North Pole with the moon at its closest point. You also see the sun below the moon.



awesome...

because sometimes...

I just wanna @#$@% dance!


Thanks, Bob, aka Little Voice.

You made me laugh, bounce and smile making my day better...

pre-weekender...

With all of the things going on lately, I need a joke for hump day.

Sven found a printing press at a garage sale and decided to print some counterfeit money. He printed up a batch and showed them to Ollie.

Ollie said "Uff da! Yew must be noots! Nobody vill take an eighteen dollar bill."

Sven said, "Vell ay tink ay know yust vhere ve can get rid of dem -- in Nord Dakota."

Ollie said, "Well come on den, let's get rid of dem fast."

They drive to a store in Wahpeton, pulled out an eighteen dollar bill and asked the clerk, "Yew got change for dis here bill?"

The clerk looks it over carefully and says, "Ya, you betcha. Whaddya want: two nines or three sixes?"

from my Minnesota friends...

king, czar, führer...

What's in a name, especially when they all mean about the same thing? The Bush administration has put out propaganda condemning the reference any time that someone does a comparison to the Third Reich. Now there appears to be proof of the similarity.

Verschärfte Vernehmung is the German for enhanced interrogation techniques. It was coined by the Gestapo in 1937. You can find a copy of the document and an appeal that Andrew Sullivan has made to spread the word about this [coincidence?] here: "Verschärfte Vernehmung".

Moneyquote:

The phrase "Verschärfte Vernehmung" is German for "enhanced interrogation". Other translations include "intensified interrogation" or "sharpened interrogation". It's a phrase that appears to have been concocted in 1937, to describe a form of torture that would leave no marks, and hence save the embarrassment pre-war Nazi officials were experiencing as their wounded torture victims ended up in court. The methods, as you can see above, are indistinguishable from those described as "enhanced interrogation techniques" by the president.[Andrew even includes a translation of the Gestapo documents.]

The methods identified in the document? simple rations, ie. bread and water; hard bed; sleep deprivation; exhaustion excercises....

I recently finished watching the PBS series Secret Files of the Inquisition. These were just some of the techniques used, along with the rack, the iron maiden, branks.... Oh, let's not forget waterboarding. It was a favorite not only during the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution but also of the Gestapo.

Let's see... the Inquisition, the Gestapo, gulags, Abu Grhaib...

Gives credence to the old French saying Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. "The more things change, the more they stay the same."

Let's Start the Internet Revolution...

Dear Friends:

The FCC is on the verge of turning over a large chunk of the public airwaves to the same giant phone and cable companies that control high-speed Internet access for more than 96 percent of connected American homes.

This public "spectrum" could revolutionize the Internet in America. Its wireless signal passes through concrete buildings and over mountains; it can connect tens of million of Americans who are being passed over by Internet providers like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast.

Don't let the FCC give away our wireless Internet to these price-gouging giants. The FCC deadline is fast approaching. Act now:

Tell the FCC: Use Our Airwaves for the Public Good

Broadcast television channels will soon vacate these airwaves when they go digital by 2009. If used right, these public airways will revolutionize the ways we connect to laptops, cell phones, PDAs, music players and other mobile Internet devices. They can deliver an open Internet into your house without the need for a telephone wire or cable modem.

Phone and cable lobbyists are pressuring the FCC to sell companies like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast our airwaves so they can horde spectrum and stifle competitive and cheaper alternatives to their established networks.

This would be a disaster. After years of phone and cable company control over Internet access, the United States has fallen to 16th in the world in high-speed Internet rankings, with few choices and some of the highest prices for the slowest speeds in the world. We will continue this decline as long as we let AT&T, Verizon and Comcast dictate the terms of Internet access for the majority of Americans.

These phone and cable giants refuse to open their networks to competitive applications and services. They lobby Washington to stifle new innovations like Internet phone service and to destroy Net Neutrality, the one principle that protects equal opportunity and free choice on the Web.

We need to end their stranglehold and demand a better Internet for everyone:

Tell the FCC: Keep the New Internet Open to All

With open networks, the rest of the world has rapidly adopted high-speed, Internet platforms for education, economic innovation, creativity and civic participation. Countries like South Korea, Japan, France and Canada have leapfrogged the United States and now offer faster Internet connections at far lower prices.

It's time we caught up.

Act now and help clear the path for a technology that will deliver faster, more open and affordable Internet for everyone.

Thank you,

Timothy Karr
Campaign Director
Free Press

The FCC needs to hear from you about the importance of setting aside the public airwaves for a faster, more open and neutral Internet.

I just told my story at SavetheInternet.com and urged the FCC to protect the public airwaves for the public good. This is our one best chance to make America's Internet more accessible and open to everyone.

Click here to take action to improve the Internet for generations to come:
Save the Internet

and tell your friends.

Thank you

on this Memorial Day...

Today there are posts on the internet from soldiers serving in Iraq talking about how they work during the day helping to train the Iraqi's against the insurgents. Most all of them reference how, at night, the Iraqi's they train are the insurgents trying to kill them.

"I thought, 'What are we doing here? Why are we still here?' " said Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the 1st Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. "We're helping guys that are trying to kill us. We help them in the day. They turn around at night and try to kill us." International Herald Tribune

Some reports put up to 50% of the Iraqi military and police force as actually being members of the insurgency. The US seems to be prolonging and extending the conflict both militarily and monetarily.

In the meantime, for the last few weeks, Congress was waffling over funding the war, facing off the president, demanding a timetable for redeployment of the troops and turning the responsiblility of Iraq over to its own people. Ironically, the US citizenry indicated that they want all of this to happen by having voted last November. What did the senators and representatives do? They gave the Czar $100 billion to continue his surge and, in effect, allowing the insurgents to soldier on.

Here's a quote asking an important question that is to the point:

Isn't it time that we either win this war or tell the American people why we can't? Isn't it time to recognize the great immorality of sending our neighbors' sons to die with hope we can do so without angering the enemy too much?

Oh, wait. This wasn't about Iraq. It's a quote by then Governor Ronald Reagan at a Veteran's Day address he gave in Albany, Oregon on November 11, 1967. He was talking about Vietnam. ["Reagan Says Indecisive Action in War is Immoral', New York Times, November 12, 1967.]

At the top right of this blog is a quote by George Santayana - "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

over and over and over...

monday morning mayhem...

1. Vietnam Vets,

...says Roseanne Barr. I have a lot of empathy for them. They had to go to a horrible place and perform a hideous job for people who didn't appreciate it.

I know what that's like; I used to be a waitress at Denny's.

2. P.J. O'Rourke on Bill Maher, Friday, May 25, 2007.

Republicans should never skip their meds.

3. Dispatcher 9-1-1 What is the nature of your emergency?

Caller: I'm trying to reach nine eleven but my phone doesn't have
an eleven on it.
Dispatcher: This is nine eleven.
Caller: I thought you just said it was nine-one-one.
Dispatcher: Yes, ma'am nine-one-one and nine-eleven are the same thing.
Caller: Honey, I may be old, but I'm not stupid.

[Yes, this is from the transcript of a real 9-1-1 call!]


4. My new car has so much horse power...

...and is fun to drive. I tend to have a heavy foot on the gas pedal. I blame it on the turbo engine.

Anyway, I got stopped for speeding the other day.

I thought I could talk my way out of it,
until the cop looked at my dog in the back seat...

oh my...

outrage on the funding bill...

Olbermann is the only one who seems to be able to get away with the truth. His special comment on Thursday was one of his best. No one goes unscathed.



why is no one taking to the streets?

no d*r*a*f*t!

it's a dirty little war. three-five-zero-zero...

in the face of defeat... UPDATED

Click here for the original post.

UPDATE - 25 May 2007: Rahm Emmanuel even voted for the funding last night. I'm now getting more and more interested in just what may be going on here. The risk is that, if the Czar's surge works in even the slightest way, the Dems' might be playing with more than fire. Of course, the language in the bill gives the Czar the say on what's working or not working. Strange wording. If the loud after-the-vote reaction against the bill by the people who voted in November is an indicator, then part of the gamble may be paying off. Of course, it's still quite a gambit.

what DID Rosie actually say?

Rosie O'Donnell: Six-hundred and fifty-five thousand Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?

Elisabeth Hasselbeck: Who are the terrorists?

RO: ...six-hundred and fifty-five... I'm saying you have to look from... We invaded...

EH: Who are you calling terrorists?

RO: ...I'm saying if you were in Iraq, and another country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed six-hundred and fifty-five thousand of your citizens, what would you call us?

EH: Are you saying we're killing their citizens or are they, their people also killing their citizens?

RO: We're invading a sovereign nation and occupying a nation against the UN...

First, the 655,000 figure is not accurate. Second, Hasselbeck's remark that it's not just the troops killing Iraqis but many many more are killing each other is undeniable. Third, what has been most misconstrued is O'Donnell actually calling the troops terrorists. If you listen carefully, you can tell that she is giving another possible viewpoint - a viewpoint that might be one that the Iraqis could have. At no point did she say the troops were terrorists that I could hear.

I was watching the program that day, and I very seldom watch it, and did not think that she actually said that the troops were terrorists. Here is a clip from Scarborough Country that has the dialogue above. Unfortunately, I cannot find a stand-alone version of the exchange. The dialogue happens almost at the beginning and continues until about 1:01 minutes. Then Scarborough goes off on his rant, along with his guests, that she called the troops terrorists.



Of course what became more important is the rant that Rosie had this week with Elisabeth over not coming to her defense against the Republican pundits and now Rosie's early departure from The View. Donald Trump has weighed in on the fray; FOX has hit hard on the exchange; the rest of the media has focused on the terrorist aspect.

Isn't it sad that we are still listening to the main stream media not questioning the basic discourse about Iraq? Not attempting to give a fair balance to the issues? Not standing on its own two feet as the Fourth Estate?

In what should be an inspiration to the media:

"Il nous faut de l'audace, et encore de l'audace, et toujours de l'audace." Georges Danton

"We must dare, and again dare, and forever dare.

Of course, eventually he lost his head...

weekender...

now why can't Czar George have someone like this in is Cabinet? Quick. To the point. Solution oriented. More of his problems would go away...

Everyone concentrates on the problems we're having in this country lately; illegal immigration, hurricane recovery, wild animals and sharks attacking people in Florida...



Not me! I concentrate on solutions to problems. The result is a win-win-win situation:


+ Dig a moat the length of the Mexican border

+ Use the dirt to raise the levies in New Orleans

+ Put the Florida alligators and sharks in the moat .


Any other problems you would like for me to solve today?

now, all we need is for Maxine to spend some time solving that other little problem. What's it called?

Oh, yeah - Iraq...

Maxine for President!!

anyone with reason could smell this one coming...

Bush may turn to UN in search for Iraq solution from the Guardian Unlimited.

The Bush administration is developing plans to "internationalise" the Iraq crisis, including an expanded role for the United Nations, as a way of reducing overall US responsibility for Iraq's future and limiting domestic political fallout from the war as the 2008 election season approaches....

"The blame game has already begun. The Democrats want to run against a 'chaos in Iraq' scenario. The Republicans will want to keep extending it [the surge] past next February. The White House may offer a schedule for a drawdown - but what does that really mean?... The only policy Republicans have is a policy of delaying the inevitable."

AND putting the blame anywhere but where it belongs - Czar George! Pursuing U.N. participation could help him try to clear his name and the Republicans who supported him.

The problem? He originally rejected all of the possible points being brought up with this plan. He thinks that he will be able to avoid blame. It's typical behaviour for an alcoholic, especially when recovery is not complete.

in the face of defeat...

People are being very harsh towards the Democrats over backing down on insisting on a timetable for getting US troops out of Iraq. On face value, the American people last November spoke in favor of getting the military out of an impossible situation, a civil war, by voting the Dems into the very small majority in Congress.

The first funding bill included the timetable. Bush vetoed it. He said he'd veto any bill with them. He will, and he knows that there is no where near the votes to override his veto, because he has the sheep in the Republican party who thing that they safely graze. They will bow to him out of fear, until...

their political lives are on the line come next election cycle.

The Republicans also know that they have no clear front-runner for the 2008 presidential race; so they have no reason to change what they are doing, and what they are doing is just that - nothing!

The Dems, on the other hand, may be playing a very tricky game of cat and mouse. It seems that they may have the most to lose, especially after the latest poll that puts their approval rating at the same as Czar George's, but do they have something more up their collective sleeves?

Maybe, just maybe, they have an endgame strategy in mind.

In chess, the endgame (or end game or ending) refers to the stage of the game when there are few pieces left on the board.

Reid and Pelosi are just too cool in their reactions to what exactly is going on with this bill. Rahm Emmanuel, the attack dog, it being very quiet. Could the Dems finally have learned a lesson from the Grand Ole Party's manueverings over the last few decades?

just asking...



UPDATE - 25 May 2007: Rahm Emmanuel even voted for the funding last night. I'm now getting more and more interested in what just may be going on here. The risk is that, if the Czar's surge works in even the slightest way, the Dems' might be playing with more than fire. Of course, the language in the bill gives the Czar the say on what's working or not working. Strange wording. If the loud after the vote reaction by the people who voted in November is an indicator, then part of the gamble may be paying off. Of course, it's still quite a gambit.