"Rush Limbaugh was arrested Friday on prescription drug charges, law enforcement officials said." [Yahoo]
Yes, that's correct. Everyone's favorite wingnut radio host was arrested today in Florida on charges of "fraud to conceal information to obtain prescription."
He posted bail and was released an hour later. We all knew he was on drugs (look at half of the stuff he says), but really, good one Rush-o!
Friday, April 28, 2006
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Mouth of Sauron Resigns
Breaking: The "White House shakeup" continues today with Bush mouth-piece Scott McClellan resigning.
"Appearing with Bush on the White House South Lawn just before the president boarded a helicopter at the start a trip to Alabama, McClellan, who has parried especially fiercely with reporters on Iraq and on intelligence issues, told Bush: "I have given it my all sir and I have given you my all sir, and I will continue to do so as we transition to a new press secretary." [Yahoo]
Glad this liar is leaving...can we get rid of the rest of them too? Will Rumsfeld have the stones to do the same? Nope.
"Appearing with Bush on the White House South Lawn just before the president boarded a helicopter at the start a trip to Alabama, McClellan, who has parried especially fiercely with reporters on Iraq and on intelligence issues, told Bush: "I have given it my all sir and I have given you my all sir, and I will continue to do so as we transition to a new press secretary." [Yahoo]
Glad this liar is leaving...can we get rid of the rest of them too? Will Rumsfeld have the stones to do the same? Nope.
Monday, April 17, 2006
Reverse Glass Ceiling
I've never written about my job before. Those of you that have attended Drinking Liberally (when I've been able to attend) know where I work, and that I love it there...except for this:
I've run into a brick wall lately. I have applied for a position in another department three times, and have not been treated fairly all three times. I'm applying for this position for several reasons: interest, a new challenge, it's a natural career path for me, and of course the pay raise. But I've run up against a glass ceiling, one usually reserved for one of the not so much white-male sector of the population.
To define, from Wiki: "The term glass ceiling (or officially known as 'vertical segregation') refers to the observation that upper management in corporations and other large organizations consists predominately, if not exclusively, of a certain demographic (e.g., white heterosexual men) despite non-discrimination policies. A "ceiling" is suggested because persons outside the dominant demographic group are evidently limited in how far they are able to advance inside the organization ranks; the ceiling is "glass" (transparent) because the limitation is not immediately apparent. The "glass ceiling" is distinguished from formal barriers to advancement, such as education or experience requirements. The existence of the glass ceiling is frequently cited as a failure of existing anti-discrimination action."
Basically, what happened is that three times I've applied, and three times this department has hired a less qualified woman. I have absolutely no issue with whomever they would hire, if they are the most qualified/best fit person that applied and interviewed. That is, however, not the case. My company works on the basis that you can hire whomever you want, just make it look legit. Even in my own department, many people have been passed over for promotions and extra duties because they weren't part of the "inner circle," those that have the power and make the decisions. Apparently, I have to be a woman to be hired in this department, or kiss a lot of ass in my own to move up. Sorry, but I come from the school of thought that those with the best ideas, the merit, the talent, and the proven abilities move up. Apparently, not so much. I guess it only took me 4 years out of college to figure that out.
Does anyone else out there have a similar experience here in Milwaukee? Any suggestions?
I've run into a brick wall lately. I have applied for a position in another department three times, and have not been treated fairly all three times. I'm applying for this position for several reasons: interest, a new challenge, it's a natural career path for me, and of course the pay raise. But I've run up against a glass ceiling, one usually reserved for one of the not so much white-male sector of the population.
To define, from Wiki: "The term glass ceiling (or officially known as 'vertical segregation') refers to the observation that upper management in corporations and other large organizations consists predominately, if not exclusively, of a certain demographic (e.g., white heterosexual men) despite non-discrimination policies. A "ceiling" is suggested because persons outside the dominant demographic group are evidently limited in how far they are able to advance inside the organization ranks; the ceiling is "glass" (transparent) because the limitation is not immediately apparent. The "glass ceiling" is distinguished from formal barriers to advancement, such as education or experience requirements. The existence of the glass ceiling is frequently cited as a failure of existing anti-discrimination action."
Basically, what happened is that three times I've applied, and three times this department has hired a less qualified woman. I have absolutely no issue with whomever they would hire, if they are the most qualified/best fit person that applied and interviewed. That is, however, not the case. My company works on the basis that you can hire whomever you want, just make it look legit. Even in my own department, many people have been passed over for promotions and extra duties because they weren't part of the "inner circle," those that have the power and make the decisions. Apparently, I have to be a woman to be hired in this department, or kiss a lot of ass in my own to move up. Sorry, but I come from the school of thought that those with the best ideas, the merit, the talent, and the proven abilities move up. Apparently, not so much. I guess it only took me 4 years out of college to figure that out.
Does anyone else out there have a similar experience here in Milwaukee? Any suggestions?
Sunday, April 09, 2006
Friday, April 07, 2006
Tom, In His Own Words
With the hammer falling on...well, the hammer this week, here are some of my favorite Tom DeLay quotes, from Christy Harvey at the Center for American Progress:
1. “Nothing is more important in the face of a war than cutting taxes.” – Those famous DeLay priorities. (And here we thought it would be “providing armor” or “having an exit strategy.”)
2. “I AM the federal government.” – Smokin’ Tom to a staffer, after being told he wasn’t allowed to puff on his cigar in a federal building.
3. “You know, you’re never a prophet in your own hometown.” – DeLay, explaining his unpopularity with some of his constituents. (Houston Chronicle, 8/23/98)
4. “We march forward with a biblical worldview, a worldview that says God is our Creator, that man is a sinner, and that we will save this country by changing the hearts and minds of Americans.” – DeLay’s view of his role in government.
5. “When faced with the truth, the truth hurts. It is human nature not to face that… People hate the messenger. That’s why they killed Christ.” – DeLay, explaining why some Americans weren’t delighted with that “biblical worldview.”
6. “Now tell me the truth boys, is this kind of fun?”— DeLay to children living in the Astrodome during Hurricane Katrina
7. “So many minority youths had volunteered for the well-paying military positions to escape poverty and the ghetto that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like himself.” – Houston Chronicle, repeating DeLay’s rationale for not serving in Vietnam.
8. They’re the “Gestapo of government:” – DeLay, proving it’s not easy being green, talking about the Environmental Protection Agency.
9. “Our school systems teach the children that they are nothing but glorified apes who are evolutionized [sic] out of some primordial soup.” – DeLay, blaming the shootings at Columbine on, obviously, teaching evolution in schools.
10. “This whole thing about not kicking someone when they are down is BS – not only do you kick him – you kick him until he passes out – then beat him over the head with a baseball bat – then roll him up in an old rug – and throw him off a cliff into the pounding surf below!!!!” – DeLay right-hand Michael Scanlon (yes, that Michael Scanlon, the Jack Abramoff buddy who used to work for The Hammer) in an email during the Clinton impeachment trial.
Special Bonus Countdown: Five Things You Wish You Knew About Tom DeLay
1. DeLay Gone Wild. DeLay was kicked out of Baylor University for…oh, how did his spokesman put it… “too vigorous a social life.”
2. Smoke ‘Em If You Got ‘Em. DeLay reportedly started smoking at age 6, becoming the first kid in 2nd grade to suffer from nic fits.
3. Magnum P.I. He Ain’t. DeLay shaved his moustache in 1984 after a study found Republicans wouldn’t elect a guy with facial hair. (Houston Chronicle, 6/22/06)
4. Wasn’t Indiana Jones Taller? DeLay “keeps two large leather bullwhips on display in his Capitol office, occasionally demonstrating his prowess in whipcracking.” Oooh, Tom!
5. The Nicknames That Aren’t Fit to Print. The Hammer. The Exterminator. The Meanest Man In Congress. Hot Tub Tom.
1. “Nothing is more important in the face of a war than cutting taxes.” – Those famous DeLay priorities. (And here we thought it would be “providing armor” or “having an exit strategy.”)
2. “I AM the federal government.” – Smokin’ Tom to a staffer, after being told he wasn’t allowed to puff on his cigar in a federal building.
3. “You know, you’re never a prophet in your own hometown.” – DeLay, explaining his unpopularity with some of his constituents. (Houston Chronicle, 8/23/98)
4. “We march forward with a biblical worldview, a worldview that says God is our Creator, that man is a sinner, and that we will save this country by changing the hearts and minds of Americans.” – DeLay’s view of his role in government.
5. “When faced with the truth, the truth hurts. It is human nature not to face that… People hate the messenger. That’s why they killed Christ.” – DeLay, explaining why some Americans weren’t delighted with that “biblical worldview.”
6. “Now tell me the truth boys, is this kind of fun?”— DeLay to children living in the Astrodome during Hurricane Katrina
7. “So many minority youths had volunteered for the well-paying military positions to escape poverty and the ghetto that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like himself.” – Houston Chronicle, repeating DeLay’s rationale for not serving in Vietnam.
8. They’re the “Gestapo of government:” – DeLay, proving it’s not easy being green, talking about the Environmental Protection Agency.
9. “Our school systems teach the children that they are nothing but glorified apes who are evolutionized [sic] out of some primordial soup.” – DeLay, blaming the shootings at Columbine on, obviously, teaching evolution in schools.
10. “This whole thing about not kicking someone when they are down is BS – not only do you kick him – you kick him until he passes out – then beat him over the head with a baseball bat – then roll him up in an old rug – and throw him off a cliff into the pounding surf below!!!!” – DeLay right-hand Michael Scanlon (yes, that Michael Scanlon, the Jack Abramoff buddy who used to work for The Hammer) in an email during the Clinton impeachment trial.
Special Bonus Countdown: Five Things You Wish You Knew About Tom DeLay
1. DeLay Gone Wild. DeLay was kicked out of Baylor University for…oh, how did his spokesman put it… “too vigorous a social life.”
2. Smoke ‘Em If You Got ‘Em. DeLay reportedly started smoking at age 6, becoming the first kid in 2nd grade to suffer from nic fits.
3. Magnum P.I. He Ain’t. DeLay shaved his moustache in 1984 after a study found Republicans wouldn’t elect a guy with facial hair. (Houston Chronicle, 6/22/06)
4. Wasn’t Indiana Jones Taller? DeLay “keeps two large leather bullwhips on display in his Capitol office, occasionally demonstrating his prowess in whipcracking.” Oooh, Tom!
5. The Nicknames That Aren’t Fit to Print. The Hammer. The Exterminator. The Meanest Man In Congress. Hot Tub Tom.
Saturday, April 01, 2006
Milwaukee Democratic Party
I just wanted to give a quick shoutout to the Milwaukee Democratic Party. They have a new website, and even though my blog is listed on there as The Ben Pac, you should still check it out. They have a smattering of Milwaukee blogs on the right side, and the site is pretty clean and user friendly.
Note to the Milwaukee Dems: my blog is actually Ben PAC (as in Political Action Committee)...for those of you new to my site, it started as a joke while working on the Kerry and Feingold campaigns in 2004, and now, it's my blog name. Although, the "The" title is pretty quality...Is that like Stephon Marbury calling himself Starbury?
Note to the Milwaukee Dems: my blog is actually Ben PAC (as in Political Action Committee)...for those of you new to my site, it started as a joke while working on the Kerry and Feingold campaigns in 2004, and now, it's my blog name. Although, the "The" title is pretty quality...Is that like Stephon Marbury calling himself Starbury?
$2.65?
Weren't our gas prices supposed to go DOWN? Here's a site that shows the current state of Milwaukee gas prices. I'll give you a hint: not pretty.
Didn't Bush tell us that by going to Iraq, and "fighting HIS good fight" that we'd have lower gas prices? Bush allowed fuel rules to be tightened this week, but not by much, and they don't go into effect until 2008. This "savings" amounts to a few weeks worth of oil consumption, not the years that Bush would have you believe.
It's getting harder and harder to afford to drive to work. Other countries pay a lot more for gas than we do, but they also use LESS of it. With wages stagnant (while CEO salaries shoot through the roof), it becomes harder for middle-class Americans to afford gas. (Read the original post at STiTP).
Didn't Bush tell us that by going to Iraq, and "fighting HIS good fight" that we'd have lower gas prices? Bush allowed fuel rules to be tightened this week, but not by much, and they don't go into effect until 2008. This "savings" amounts to a few weeks worth of oil consumption, not the years that Bush would have you believe.
It's getting harder and harder to afford to drive to work. Other countries pay a lot more for gas than we do, but they also use LESS of it. With wages stagnant (while CEO salaries shoot through the roof), it becomes harder for middle-class Americans to afford gas. (Read the original post at STiTP).
Cheney Steps Down
In a bold move, Vice-President Dick Cheney has stepped down effective immediately, according to White House sources. They would not state the reason why he has stepped down, or if Bush asked him to step aside.
Cheney is expected to address the media shortly.
Cheney is expected to address the media shortly.
Friday, March 24, 2006
Walker Walks Away
Scott Walker gave up his bid for the Wisconsin Governorship today.
"Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker is pulling the plug on his bid for the governor’s office, leaving fellow Republican Mark Green a clear shot at incumbent Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle in November. He planned to make the announcement early this evening during a speech at a Republican Party congressional caucus in
Make no mistake; this is a big win for
"“The good news for
Good Riddance
Sunday, March 19, 2006
End the War
I apologize for the lack of bloggy-goodness lately. Life has been interesting.
But this got me (and has had me) riled up. This weekend is the three year anniversary of our illegal invasion of Iraq. What have we accomplished? What does the future hold? Why are we still there? These are questions that our leadership cannot, and is not qualified to, answer.
There have been many rallies to end the war all around the world, including Sydney, Australia, Tokyo, and Turkey. Sunday, they protested in South Korea, Sweden, Denmark, and London.
All protesting under one theme: Get the US out of Iraq. I think that it would come as no surprise to most of you that popular world opinion is against this war. Popular opinion in the US has turned against the administration, and against our occupation. Blame can be spread around for this. Bush wanted to take us into Iraq from the moment he took the oath of office (and probably before). Rumsfeld, our Secretary of Defense, has botched the war planning on every level.
From the NYTimes:
"Many who supported the invasion have taken this anniversary to argue that it all would have been worthwhile if things had been run better. They argue that if the coalition forces had been large enough to actually secure the country, to keep insurgents from raiding Saddam Hussein's ammunition depots, to give the people a sense of safety, the country might well be on the road to a hopeful future. We doubt it. The last three years have shown how little our national leaders understood Iraq, and have reminded us how badly attempts at liberation from the outside have gone in the past. Given where we are now, the question of whether a botched invasion created a lost opportunity might be moot, except for one thing. The man who did the botching, Donald Rumsfeld, is still the secretary of defense."
But this got me (and has had me) riled up. This weekend is the three year anniversary of our illegal invasion of Iraq. What have we accomplished? What does the future hold? Why are we still there? These are questions that our leadership cannot, and is not qualified to, answer.
There have been many rallies to end the war all around the world, including Sydney, Australia, Tokyo, and Turkey. Sunday, they protested in South Korea, Sweden, Denmark, and London.
All protesting under one theme: Get the US out of Iraq. I think that it would come as no surprise to most of you that popular world opinion is against this war. Popular opinion in the US has turned against the administration, and against our occupation. Blame can be spread around for this. Bush wanted to take us into Iraq from the moment he took the oath of office (and probably before). Rumsfeld, our Secretary of Defense, has botched the war planning on every level.
From the NYTimes:
"Many who supported the invasion have taken this anniversary to argue that it all would have been worthwhile if things had been run better. They argue that if the coalition forces had been large enough to actually secure the country, to keep insurgents from raiding Saddam Hussein's ammunition depots, to give the people a sense of safety, the country might well be on the road to a hopeful future. We doubt it. The last three years have shown how little our national leaders understood Iraq, and have reminded us how badly attempts at liberation from the outside have gone in the past. Given where we are now, the question of whether a botched invasion created a lost opportunity might be moot, except for one thing. The man who did the botching, Donald Rumsfeld, is still the secretary of defense."
"Chances are that at the time George W. Bush did not have an inkling of how badly he was being served by the decision makers at the Pentagon. But the fact that Mr. Rumsfeld continues to hold his job tells us that Mr. Bush doesn't care, that he prefers living in the same dream world that his secretary of defense inhabits. In their wishful thinking, Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld undoubtedly tell themselves what they tell us: that the Iraqi people are better off than they were under the brutal dictator, that the Iraqi security forces are gradually learning how to take over defense of their own country and that a unified government is still a good possibility. It's true that many Iraqis are better off. Others are in far worse straits — their homes have been ruined, their relatives killed, their jobs evaporated and their ability to walk the streets in safety obliterated. Women's rights are being threatened in the south, and sectarian warfare has put families with mixed Shiite-Sunni ancestry at risk in their own neighborhoods. It is hard to quantify relative degrees of misery and pain in these circumstances. But unlike the horrors of Saddam Hussein, the horrors of the present can be laid at America's doorstep." [NYT]
There are several conclusions that we can draw from all of this, but I'll leave most of that for the historians. One, Bush got us into this war on false pretenses, and to disasterous results. Two, Donald Rumsfeld is a terrible decision maker, and lives in the same fantasy-world that Bush lives in. They call it "Everything-is-fine-land."
"The most important quote in it was this: "It is impolite to criticize your host; it is militarily stupid to criticize your allies." By that rule, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is not competent to lead our armed forces. First, his failure to build coalitions with our allies from what he dismissively called "old Europe" has imposed far greater demands and risks on our soldiers in Iraq than necessary. Second, he alienated his allies in our own military, ignoring the advice of seasoned officers and denying subordinates any chance for input. In sum, he has shown himself incompetent strategically, operationally and tactically, and is far more than anyone else responsible for what has happened to our important mission in Iraq. Mr. Rumsfeld must step down." [NYT]
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Wisdom at Last
On March 1st, 2006, in
“Mr. Raskin, my Bible says that marriage is only between a man and a woman. What do you have to say about that?”
Raskin replied:
I received this this in an e-mail, but I found the quote online. You can view this candidates profile here, where he is a candidate for State Senate in Maryland. While the quote above differs just a wee bit from the original on his site, the sentiment is the same. People, let's put religion and prejudice aside, and allow everyone the same rights.
Saturday, March 04, 2006
Shoot Harry
You have to check out this online game! Make sure you have LOTS of beer before you shoot, just like Unka Dick!!!
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
The OK to Discriminate Amendment
A lot has been said in the blogosphere and cheddarsphere about the so-called "Marriage Amendment." I will from now on call this the "Ok to Discriminate Amendment," which passed the assembly last night 62-31. One Republican voted No, and six democrats voted yes.
You all know where I stand on this issue: it's a terrible idea, rooted in fear and bad politics. Republicans are trying to turn out more of the vote in November against Doyle, and now, against common sense. Why do we have to discriminate? Are we really going to amend the Constitution of our state to write in discrimination? This will not defend "traditional marriage." All this does is legalize discrimination against a particular group. I thought all men were created equal, endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I guess I was wrong. Aren't representatives supposed to listen to their constituents? I guess not...only 70% of Wisconsin is opposed to this.
Here, however, is my favorite quote from Rep. John Gard (R-Sun Prairie) : "Schneider confronted Gard in the hallway to criticize the move. "Go to hell, Marlin," Gard responded." Wow...was Gard channeling his inner Dick Cheney? [GB P-G]
Xoff has it right...Be sure to also read NO on the Amendment, and Fair Wisconsin.
You all know where I stand on this issue: it's a terrible idea, rooted in fear and bad politics. Republicans are trying to turn out more of the vote in November against Doyle, and now, against common sense. Why do we have to discriminate? Are we really going to amend the Constitution of our state to write in discrimination? This will not defend "traditional marriage." All this does is legalize discrimination against a particular group. I thought all men were created equal, endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I guess I was wrong. Aren't representatives supposed to listen to their constituents? I guess not...only 70% of Wisconsin is opposed to this.
Here, however, is my favorite quote from Rep. John Gard (R-Sun Prairie) : "Schneider confronted Gard in the hallway to criticize the move. "Go to hell, Marlin," Gard responded." Wow...was Gard channeling his inner Dick Cheney? [GB P-G]
Xoff has it right...Be sure to also read NO on the Amendment, and Fair Wisconsin.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
My Favorite Headlines: 02/22/06
Bush Out of Loop on Port Deal [NYT] [CBS]
"President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday."
Hmm...so, who was "approving" this deal? Who in the administration was approving this deal, and how did Bush not know about it? And wouldn't they then have to get Congressional approval after "approving" it? This totally doesn't add up, and someone is lying. My bet is on Bush, who was most likely told by Rove and "senior officials" to say that he didn't know about the deal until after. Purely my speculation, of course, but nonetheless, it fits. So if Bush says he didn't know about it until after it was "approved," then my question is, why is he so vehement about vetoing any Congressional attempt to block this terrible deal?
Mosque Attack Pushes Iraq Toward Civil War [Yahoo] [NYT]
"A powerful explosion shattered the golden dome of one of Iraq's most revered Shiite shrines this morning, setting off a day of almost unparalleled sectarian fury in cities and towns across Iraq as protesting mobs took to the streets to chant for revenge and set fire to dozens of Sunni mosques." and "Insurgents posing as police destroyed the golden dome of one of Iraq's holiest Shiite shrines Wednesday, setting off an unprecendented spasm of sectarian violence. Angry crowds thronged the streets, militiamen attacked Sunni mosques, and at least 19 people were killed."
I thought the insurgency was in its last throes? At least that's what they want you to think. Nope, they disguise themselves as police, and then bomb a holy site. I'm telling you that insurgency is dying out! Is it 2008 yet?
"President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday."
Hmm...so, who was "approving" this deal? Who in the administration was approving this deal, and how did Bush not know about it? And wouldn't they then have to get Congressional approval after "approving" it? This totally doesn't add up, and someone is lying. My bet is on Bush, who was most likely told by Rove and "senior officials" to say that he didn't know about the deal until after. Purely my speculation, of course, but nonetheless, it fits. So if Bush says he didn't know about it until after it was "approved," then my question is, why is he so vehement about vetoing any Congressional attempt to block this terrible deal?
Mosque Attack Pushes Iraq Toward Civil War [Yahoo] [NYT]
"A powerful explosion shattered the golden dome of one of Iraq's most revered Shiite shrines this morning, setting off a day of almost unparalleled sectarian fury in cities and towns across Iraq as protesting mobs took to the streets to chant for revenge and set fire to dozens of Sunni mosques." and "Insurgents posing as police destroyed the golden dome of one of Iraq's holiest Shiite shrines Wednesday, setting off an unprecendented spasm of sectarian violence. Angry crowds thronged the streets, militiamen attacked Sunni mosques, and at least 19 people were killed."
I thought the insurgency was in its last throes? At least that's what they want you to think. Nope, they disguise themselves as police, and then bomb a holy site. I'm telling you that insurgency is dying out! Is it 2008 yet?
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Budget Fictions
I rarely do this, because I don't like to just copy and paste, but this editorial from the NYT was just too good to pass up:
"When it comes to President Bush's new budget plan, what you don't know will hurt you."
"Mr. Bush's spending and taxing proposals are a mass of missing information. The cost of keeping the military in Iraq and Afghanistan isn't included. Neither, as it turns out, are the usual projections of the long-term effects of proposals to cut $183 billion from domestic programs other than entitlements."
"When it comes to President Bush's new budget plan, what you don't know will hurt you."
"Mr. Bush's spending and taxing proposals are a mass of missing information. The cost of keeping the military in Iraq and Afghanistan isn't included. Neither, as it turns out, are the usual projections of the long-term effects of proposals to cut $183 billion from domestic programs other than entitlements."
"The administration's obfuscation is, however, being deciphered by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, an independent watchdog organization. Specialists backtracked through tables of opaque data and deduced the following: Over five years, veterans' benefits would be cut 13 percent, or $10 billion. Despite all the political talk about energy research and alternate fuels, $4.4 billion would be cut from energy programs. Environmental spending, including for national parks, would be cut 22 percent, or $28 billion; housing, fuel, child care and nutrition programs for the poor and elderly would lose 13 percent, or $24 billion. Topping this surreal concoction is a 13 percent cut — $53 billion — in education and job programs by 2011."
"Political realists have already declared the budget dead on arrival on Capitol Hill. That's not enough. The administration's assault on domestic programs should stand as a permanent reminder of the folly of the $285 billion in additional upper-bracket tax cuts the president and the Republican-controlled Congress are aiming for across the next five years. Despite the budget fictions, the damage from the tax-cut mania will haunt future generations." [NYT]
Veto?
"President Bush said this afternoon that he would veto any legislation seeking to block the administration's decision to allow a state-owned company from Dubai to assume control of port terminals in New York and other cities."
What happened to "we won't negotiate with terrorists?"
"Mr. Bush's rare veto threat came as Republican leaders and many of their Democratic counterparts called up today for the port takeover to be put on hold. They demanded that the Bush administration conduct a further investigation of the Dubai company's acquisition of the British operator of the six American ports."
"After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward," Mr. Bush told reporters who were traveling with him on Air Force One to Washington, according to news agencies. "I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company. I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, 'We'll treat you fairly." [NYT]
Could this be the first veto from Bush??? He would really choose this issue as his first veto in office? Ok, so pretty much every Senator has come out against this idea. And how does the Administration respond? By calling it racism. David Sirota says that this is all about free trade, and that there is a deal in the works for a free trade agreement with the UAE:
What happened to "we won't negotiate with terrorists?"
Monday, February 20, 2006
No Safe Port
The rats are in charge of watching the cheese.
"Two Republican governors on Monday questioned a Bush administration decision allowing an Arab-owned company to operate six major U. S. ports, saying they may try to cancel lease arrangements at ports in their states."
"The deal -- which will affect the ports of New York and New Jersey; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Baltimore, Maryland; Miami, Florida; and New Orleans, Louisiana -- has triggered security concerns among some members of Congress and the public."
Bush has sold and turned over control of US Port Security to a company from the United Arab Emirates, or UAE. Great idea! Let's turn control of six of our most important, and largest ports to a foreign government with documented links to terrorism against our country. How many times did Bush use the term 9/11 in any of his recent speeches, and yet, he can't figure out that the UAE actually had a part in that attack?
"Critics have cited the UAE's history as an operational and financial base for the hijackers who carried out the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In addition, they contend the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea, and Libya by a Pakistani scientist." [Yahoo] [CNN] [WP] [NYDaily]
Just another way that Bush is making this country less safe.
"Two Republican governors on Monday questioned a Bush administration decision allowing an Arab-owned company to operate six major U. S. ports, saying they may try to cancel lease arrangements at ports in their states."
"The deal -- which will affect the ports of New York and New Jersey; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Baltimore, Maryland; Miami, Florida; and New Orleans, Louisiana -- has triggered security concerns among some members of Congress and the public."
Bush has sold and turned over control of US Port Security to a company from the United Arab Emirates, or UAE. Great idea! Let's turn control of six of our most important, and largest ports to a foreign government with documented links to terrorism against our country. How many times did Bush use the term 9/11 in any of his recent speeches, and yet, he can't figure out that the UAE actually had a part in that attack?
"Critics have cited the UAE's history as an operational and financial base for the hijackers who carried out the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In addition, they contend the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea, and Libya by a Pakistani scientist." [Yahoo] [CNN] [WP] [NYDaily]
Just another way that Bush is making this country less safe.
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
MY Spring Starts Today
Well, the weather outside is frightful, but that doesn't dampen my spirits today. Whatever the forecast may be, MY spring starts today.
Is Ben crazy? (No more than usual...). Today, pitchers and catchers reported for spring training! It is one of the happiest days of the year, and marks the true beginning of spring. Sure, they practice in warm, sunny climes like Mesa, AZ, and Winter Haven, FL, but that means that better weather, and better days are on their way.
Hope springs eternal.
Is Ben crazy? (No more than usual...). Today, pitchers and catchers reported for spring training! It is one of the happiest days of the year, and marks the true beginning of spring. Sure, they practice in warm, sunny climes like Mesa, AZ, and Winter Haven, FL, but that means that better weather, and better days are on their way.
Hope springs eternal.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Cheney's Got A Gun
From David Letterman last night:
Top Ten Dick Cheney Excuses
10. "Heart palpitation caused trigger finger to spasm"
9. "Wanted to get the
8. "Not enough Jim Beam"
7. "Trying to stop the spread of bird flu"
6. "I love to shoot people"
5. "Guy was making cracks about my lesbian daughter"
4. "I thought the guy was trying to go 'gay cowboy' on me"
3. "Excuse? I hit him, didn't I?"
2. "Until Democrats approve medicare reform, we have to make some tough choices for the elderly"
1. "Made a bet with Gretzky's wife"
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Cheney Shoots Fellow Hunter
"Vice President Dick Cheyney accidentally shot and wounded a companion during a weekend quail hunting trip in Texas, spraying the fellow hunter in the face and chest with shotgun pellets. Harry Whittington, a millionaire attorney from Austin, was "alert and doing fine" in a Corpus Christi hospital Sunday after he was shot by Cheney on a ranch in south Texas, said Katharine Armstrong, the property's owner." [Yahoo]
So, what information did this guy have on Cheney?
So, what information did this guy have on Cheney?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
