"First of all, I meant it figuratively, not literally. Let me be very clear about that. I wasn't sitting around counting," she replied. "The point I was making to the questioner ... is that, of course, if you've ever made decisions, you've undoubtedly made mistakes.Oh yes, you've made mistakes. And you lied. And you killed a lot of people for no reason. And you have no plan to get out. What else? Read the rest of this post...
Elections | Economic Crisis | Jobs | TSA | Limbaugh | Fun Stuff
Follow @americablog
Saturday, April 01, 2006
No Condi, you were right the first time...you really have made thousands of mistakes
Condi said yesterday that the Bush team has made thousands of tactical errors in Iraq. Today, she's trying to backtrack a bit. But Condi, even if you meant it figuratively, it is literally true:
Journalist Jill Carroll disavows statements she made while being held captive
It's an interesting question. What would you do if they put a gun to your head and told you to criticize your country for the camera?
Read the rest of this post...
Helen Thomas sent flowers of thanks for grilling Bush
How cute. Joe and I saw Helen Thomas eating dinner in a restaurant around the corner, it's her favorite. She was with a group of friends, we didn't want to bother her. But man I'd love to speak with her some day, too cool of a woman.
(Photo credit: the Hill) Read the rest of this post...
(Photo credit: the Hill) Read the rest of this post...
New Maine Law includes animals in domestic violence protections
Maine has a history of adopting innovative legislation. This latest law should have an impact in domestic violence cases:
Maine's governor, John Baldacci, signed a bill yesterday that allows animals to be included in protection orders in domestic violence cases.Read the rest of this post...
"Many national studies on victims of domestic violence tell us that their abusers have threatened to kill, threatened to harm or actually harmed their pets as a means of keeping the victim from leaving the relationship," Mr. Baldacci, a Democrat, said. "With this new law, we hope to help remove another tool for emotional and physical violence used by the abuser to exert power and control over their victims."
Maine is believed to be the first state with such a law. But the issue has captured attention around the country as police departments, domestic-violence programs, animal protection societies and state officials become increasingly aware of a link between domestic violence and animal abuse.
NYT's Adam Nagourney editorializes in news story, calls Joe Lieberman a "moderate Democrat," attacks blog
If Joe Lieberman is a moderate Democrat, then who exactly is a conservative Democrat in Adam Nagourney's view?
Joe Lieberman is a conservative Democrat and is widely known as one. He supports President Bush every chance he gets, including Lieberman's support for the war in Iraq about which he claims it's going really well. That would put Lieberman at odds with 60-some percent of the American people - not just Democrats, the American people at large. So what part of that minority Republican view makes Lieberman the "moderate" voice of the Democratic party?
And just as importantly, why is the New York Times allowing partisan editorializing in a news story?
We had intelligence a few weeks ago that Nagourney was trying to write a hit piece on the progressive blogs. He was intent on slamming us with this article, no matter what the facts said. You'll note that Nagourney's piece says nothing negative about the right-wing blogs. Not a word. It doesn't mention the embarrassment of the Domenech fiasco last week. It doesn't mention that the right-wing blogs are the far-right of the Republican party, whereas the Democratic blogs are the center of the Democratic party.
Nope.
Nagourney even mentions the Republican attack sites like FancyFord.com, yet somehow fails to mention the Democrats' response, FancyFrist.com. Isn't that amazing.
All you read in Nagourney's piece is criticism of progressive blogs, and no criticism at all of the right-wing blogs that are far more extreme politically, and strident, than anything you'd find on the left.
It's fine for the New York Times to quote someone saying they think the progressive blogs are pulling the party to the left, that would be that person's OPINION - totally quotable. But then you'd find another expert to see if they agree with that assessment, or even better, you'd interview a left-wing blogger to respond to the charge. Not this article. We don't even get the charge in a quote, we get it in blatant editorializing by the reporter himself.
I'll leave you again with Nagourney's ridiculous notion that Joe Lieberman is a moderate Democrat. A moderate Democrat. So Nagourney thinks that the majority of Democrats are immoderate, since almost every Democrat in the Senate is to the left of Joe Lieberman?
Real news, real journalism, doesn't include such editorializing, especially when the editorializing is based on the reporter's known bias rather than fact.
We knew it was coming, we went public in the hopes that a New York Times editor would keep an eye on Nagourney while writing this piece, and the Times dropped the ball. This is why the public is losing faith in traditional journalism.
And finally, it would have been nice if Nagourney had revealed his own conflict of interest with this story. He's been the subject of a humorous attack from a blog claiming to be his own, AdNags. It's difficult to imagine with all the publicity this blog ahs gotten that it hasn't influenced Nagourney's perception of progressive blogs. But you won't find that mentioned in the story because that's what an impartial journalist would do. Read the rest of this post...
Joe Lieberman is a conservative Democrat and is widely known as one. He supports President Bush every chance he gets, including Lieberman's support for the war in Iraq about which he claims it's going really well. That would put Lieberman at odds with 60-some percent of the American people - not just Democrats, the American people at large. So what part of that minority Republican view makes Lieberman the "moderate" voice of the Democratic party?
And just as importantly, why is the New York Times allowing partisan editorializing in a news story?
Bloggers, for all the benefits they might bring to both parties, have proved to be a complicating political influence for Democrats. They have tugged the party consistently to the left, particularly on issues like the war, and have been openly critical of such moderate Democrats as Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut.Tug the party to the left? You mean, the 60-some percent of the American people who agree with Democratic/progressive blogs that the war in Iraq is a disaster are now "lefties," all 60-some percent of them? That is simply absurd.
We had intelligence a few weeks ago that Nagourney was trying to write a hit piece on the progressive blogs. He was intent on slamming us with this article, no matter what the facts said. You'll note that Nagourney's piece says nothing negative about the right-wing blogs. Not a word. It doesn't mention the embarrassment of the Domenech fiasco last week. It doesn't mention that the right-wing blogs are the far-right of the Republican party, whereas the Democratic blogs are the center of the Democratic party.
Nope.
Nagourney even mentions the Republican attack sites like FancyFord.com, yet somehow fails to mention the Democrats' response, FancyFrist.com. Isn't that amazing.
All you read in Nagourney's piece is criticism of progressive blogs, and no criticism at all of the right-wing blogs that are far more extreme politically, and strident, than anything you'd find on the left.
It's fine for the New York Times to quote someone saying they think the progressive blogs are pulling the party to the left, that would be that person's OPINION - totally quotable. But then you'd find another expert to see if they agree with that assessment, or even better, you'd interview a left-wing blogger to respond to the charge. Not this article. We don't even get the charge in a quote, we get it in blatant editorializing by the reporter himself.
I'll leave you again with Nagourney's ridiculous notion that Joe Lieberman is a moderate Democrat. A moderate Democrat. So Nagourney thinks that the majority of Democrats are immoderate, since almost every Democrat in the Senate is to the left of Joe Lieberman?
Real news, real journalism, doesn't include such editorializing, especially when the editorializing is based on the reporter's known bias rather than fact.
We knew it was coming, we went public in the hopes that a New York Times editor would keep an eye on Nagourney while writing this piece, and the Times dropped the ball. This is why the public is losing faith in traditional journalism.
And finally, it would have been nice if Nagourney had revealed his own conflict of interest with this story. He's been the subject of a humorous attack from a blog claiming to be his own, AdNags. It's difficult to imagine with all the publicity this blog ahs gotten that it hasn't influenced Nagourney's perception of progressive blogs. But you won't find that mentioned in the story because that's what an impartial journalist would do. Read the rest of this post...
"Path to Nowhere"
I like this soundbite courtesy of Wesley Clark:
"This administration has taken us on a path to nowhere - replete with hyped intelligence, macho slogans and an incredible failure to see the obvious," Clark said in the broadcast.Read the rest of this post...
GOP launches new attack ad that actually makes Feingold look pretty good
Hell, they put Feingold up, wrap him in Al Gore (which for Democrats and Independents is probably not a bad thing), also compare him to Senator Durbin of Illinois and Senator Reid (again, Democrats who are hardly left-wing, are well-liked by Democrats, and whom independents would probably like as well), and then, the best part, they compare all of these guys WITH BUSH! LOL
Yes, the brilliant Republican attack ad was to put several of the Democratic party's best and brightest, who aren't really disliked at all by the public, up against George Bush's face in an ad.
I think we need a campaign to thank the Republican National Committee for this ad.
The best part is the end of the ad says something like "who do you support?"
Gee, tough question. Who do you support, the president who got us into this mess, and now is polling at 33% support in the country, or the Democrats who are saying enough is enough and challening that president. Are the Republicans sure THAT'S the question they want to spending money on promoting? Who does the public support right now, the unpopular and incompetent George Bush or the Democrats?
Again, thanks Ken. We needed that. And hey, for the next ad, maybe you can compare dems to Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, Jack Abramoff and Tom Delay too. Read the rest of this post...
Yes, the brilliant Republican attack ad was to put several of the Democratic party's best and brightest, who aren't really disliked at all by the public, up against George Bush's face in an ad.
I think we need a campaign to thank the Republican National Committee for this ad.
The best part is the end of the ad says something like "who do you support?"
Gee, tough question. Who do you support, the president who got us into this mess, and now is polling at 33% support in the country, or the Democrats who are saying enough is enough and challening that president. Are the Republicans sure THAT'S the question they want to spending money on promoting? Who does the public support right now, the unpopular and incompetent George Bush or the Democrats?
Again, thanks Ken. We needed that. And hey, for the next ad, maybe you can compare dems to Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, Jack Abramoff and Tom Delay too. Read the rest of this post...
Saturday Morning Open Thread
Indulge me a little Boomer blogging...I got my dog six years ago today. He was a pound dog whose time had run out, but he was rescued by a foster mother. I adopted him from her. Best relationship ever...although I really have to work at it.
So, what's happening in the world today? Read the rest of this post...
So, what's happening in the world today? Read the rest of this post...
Wash. Post dutifully reports that Bolten is planning changes at WH
Whatever. The White House is continuing to spoon feed the Post reporters their spin and the Post dutifully reports. So now they have the BIG scoop that Josh Bolten might make some changes:
And replacing Claude Allen -- who is facing criminal charges -- doesn't really count as a major staff change. Read the rest of this post...
The White House is planning additional staff changes that could come as early as next week as part of a broader effort to repair relations with Congress and revive the Bush presidency, according to several Republicans familiar with the emerging strategy.And, but just so every knows how plugged in the Post reporters are, we get this VERY important scoop:
Joshua B. Bolten, who takes over April 15 as White House chief of staff, is developing a proposal to overhaul West Wing operations with the twin aims of bringing more voices into the policymaking process and avoiding staff breakdowns such as the slow response to the Hurricane Katrina disaster.
As he prepares to assume the top staff job, Bolten has focused heavily on rebuilding ties with Congress, telephoning 30 key lawmakers in the first 24 hours after his appointment.Wow. Josh Bolten is doing his job -- call the Washington Post!!
And replacing Claude Allen -- who is facing criminal charges -- doesn't really count as a major staff change. Read the rest of this post...
"Canned hunting" in Africa
I had never heard about this until spending time at a game lodge in Botswana, talking to a guest who had recently visited South Africa for a "canned hunting" trip. I was so completely disgusted by his story so I started asking guides around southern Africa about it only to discover that it was seriously big business. So-called hunting lodges often buy old lions previously held in captivity and then "hunters" get a chance to kill the old animals. If a hunter is a bad shot, no problem. The guides will drug the targeted animal so it's easy enough for even someone like Dick Cheney to hit. It all adds up to big bucks from macho cowards who aren't satisfied with shooting with a camera.
Rich huntsmen are willing to pay up to £625,000 [$1,088,506] a time to shoot and stuff animals bred commercially for their sport as part of the so-called "canned hunting" trade.Read the rest of this post...
Figures reveal that 164 trophy licences have been granted to British hunters since 1999 allowing them to bring big game mementoes home. However, it is estimated that as many as a thousand UK citizens a year travel abroad in search of quarry after having booked a canned hunting safari over the internet.
Six years ago trophy hunting in South Africa was worth about £14m [$24m] a year. By last year that figure reached nearly £80m[$139m]. Zimbabwe is also vigorously promoting itself as a canned hunting destination and other African nations are also developing it.
Another open thread
I'm listening to police sirens because that's what cops do in DC, they blare their sirens at 3 in the frigging morning, I think just for fun. There are no cars on the streets, so it's not like they need the siren on 100% of the time. Whatever. Gnite.
Read the rest of this post...
Chirac folds, protests and riot police still meet
How predictable was this? I was nearly run over last night by bus loads of riot police heading to put out an event, one of many around town last night after Chirac signed into law the new employment program that reduces traditional job protections for those under 26 years old. He immediately told the nation that he was toning down a few aspects of the new law but of course, the protests still happened.
So, that's politics in France. An inability to govern with an ounce of creativity coupled with street protests that will continuously dictate policy and the classic government collapse in the face of opposition. It's always the same process over and over and over. Change comes in small pieces at the slowest pace imaginable. Of course, sometimes there are distinct benefits to a government that does nothing...think Iraq. Read the rest of this post...
So, that's politics in France. An inability to govern with an ounce of creativity coupled with street protests that will continuously dictate policy and the classic government collapse in the face of opposition. It's always the same process over and over and over. Change comes in small pieces at the slowest pace imaginable. Of course, sometimes there are distinct benefits to a government that does nothing...think Iraq. Read the rest of this post...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)