One day a nurse came in to ask Rodgers if he wanted to meet President Bush, who was visiting the hospital. Rodgers declined.
"I don't want anything to do with him," he explains. "My belief is that his ego is getting people killed and mutilated for no reason -- just his ego and his reputation. If we really wanted to, we could pull out of Iraq. Maybe not completely but enough that we wouldn't be losing people -- at least not at this rate. So I think he himself is responsible for quite a few American deaths."
Bill Swisher, a spokesman for Walter Reed, says it's "fairly common" for patients to decline to see visitors. "We've had visitors from Sheryl Crow to Hulk Hogan," he says, but he has no idea how many have refused to see Bush, who has visited the hospital eight times.
Rodgers says he also declined to meet Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice. This wounded soldier has lost faith in his leaders, and he no longer believes their repeated assurances of victory.
"It's gonna go on as long as we're there," he says. "There's always gonna be insurgents trying to blow us up. There's just too many of 'em that are willing to do it. You're never gonna catch all of 'em. And it seems like they have unlimited amounts of ammunition. So I don't think it's ever gonna end."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/09/AR2005080901441_pf.html
8.11.2005
Hannity the Hypocrite (Along with the rest of the Conservative Machine)
Discussing Judge Robert's confirmation...
Hannity on the August 1 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
You know, I look at the Democrats in the case of John Roberts. They want documents handed over by him that no other Department of Justice person appointed to a court position has ever had to hand over.
They want questions answered that have never been answered before by a nominee. They want an abortion litmus test. And they want a religious litmus test. Are they preparing to Bork this man?
After this, it came out that Judge Robert's provided pro bono assistance to gay-rights activists in the case of Romer vs Evans.
Here is Hannity's new position:
I'm gonna be honest, I'm concerned. Seven of the nine Supreme Court justices that currently comprise this court were appointed by Republicans. We have been burned by four of the seven, so we must look at whatever information becomes available, as always we encourage intellectual honesty about what it shows.
This is one of the most important and defining moments in our history. You cannot make a mistake here. And so we've got to be intellectually honest, and we've got to read over these memos. He's gotta answer questions. I wanna hear good questions from Republicans, as well as Chuck Schumer and the Democrats. We've been burned four out of seven times on the Supreme Court, and I don't want to be burned again.
Hannity on the August 1 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
You know, I look at the Democrats in the case of John Roberts. They want documents handed over by him that no other Department of Justice person appointed to a court position has ever had to hand over.
They want questions answered that have never been answered before by a nominee. They want an abortion litmus test. And they want a religious litmus test. Are they preparing to Bork this man?
After this, it came out that Judge Robert's provided pro bono assistance to gay-rights activists in the case of Romer vs Evans.
Here is Hannity's new position:
I'm gonna be honest, I'm concerned. Seven of the nine Supreme Court justices that currently comprise this court were appointed by Republicans. We have been burned by four of the seven, so we must look at whatever information becomes available, as always we encourage intellectual honesty about what it shows.
This is one of the most important and defining moments in our history. You cannot make a mistake here. And so we've got to be intellectually honest, and we've got to read over these memos. He's gotta answer questions. I wanna hear good questions from Republicans, as well as Chuck Schumer and the Democrats. We've been burned four out of seven times on the Supreme Court, and I don't want to be burned again.
Blumenthal on the Prince of Darkness...
The tension of possibly being asked an impertinent question about Valerie Plame was unbearable for Robert Novak. Before it could be posed on CNN's Aug. 4 "Inside Politics," Novak growled a vulgarism, threw off his microphone, and stalked off the set.
Then he gives an overview of the history behind leak gate.
Miller's sentencing tightened the ring around Novak. He had covered numerous politicians in trouble, but finding himself in this spotlight was a novelty for him. Appearing on C-SPAN just before Miller went to jail, he expressed irritation at her and Cooper for making a case against testifying about their sources. "I don't know why they're upset with me," Novak said. "They ought to worry about themselves. I worry about myself."
Over the past two years, he has offered several conflicting accounts of the circumstances surrounding the information he received about Plame's identity. "I didn't dig it out; it was given to me," he told Newsday in his first explanation. "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name, and I used it." Then, on Sept. 29, 2003, the day the criminal investigation was formally announced, Novak declared on CNN, "Nobody in the Bush administration called me to leak this." Shifting back and forth in his chair, he engaged in a show of bravado. "It looks like the ambassador [Wilson] really doesn't know who leaked this to me," he said. He turned to a guest on the show, Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee, and asked, "Do you know whether my source was in the White House? Do you know that at all?"
At CNN, Novak's Aug. 1 column created something of a crisis. For some time, the news director and producers had tried to ask Novak about his knowledge of the Plame affair. How could the network claim to be a serious news organization if it gave Novak a free pass? Now they decided that Novak had to be asked about "Who's Who." Is that where he learned about Valerie Plame? Or was he diverting attention from where he really got the information?
CNN anchor Ed Henry placed a copy of "Who's Who" on the desk in front of Novak as he prepared to parry with his usual foil, Democratic political consultant James Carville. The proximate subject was the Senate candidacy of Republican Rep. Katherine Harris of Florida. "Don't be too sure she's going to lose ... all the establishment's against her and I've seen these Republican anti-establishment candidates who do pretty well," Novak said. Carville attempted to make a comment, but Novak cut him off. "Just let me finish what I'm going to say, James. Please, I know you hate to hear me, but you have ..." Carville replied that Novak has "got to show these right-wingers that he's got backbone, you know. It's why the Wall Street Journal editorial page is watching you. Show 'em you're tough." "Well, I think that's bullshit!" spat back Novak. "And I hate that." He turned to Henry, glancing at the volume of "Who's Who," and said, "Just let it go." With that, he removed his microphone and departed.
"I'm sorry as well that Bob Novak obviously left the set a little early," Henry explained to viewers. "I had told him in advance that we were going to ask him about the CIA leak case. He was not here for me to be able to ask him about that. Hopefully we'll be able to ask him about that in the future." But perhaps not for a long time, until CNN decides when to lift Novak's suspension, which some at CNN have suggested to me may not be until the Plame imbroglio is entirely resolved.
He then follows up with an interesting overview of Novak's career.
Read it all here:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2005/08/11/novak/
Then he gives an overview of the history behind leak gate.
Miller's sentencing tightened the ring around Novak. He had covered numerous politicians in trouble, but finding himself in this spotlight was a novelty for him. Appearing on C-SPAN just before Miller went to jail, he expressed irritation at her and Cooper for making a case against testifying about their sources. "I don't know why they're upset with me," Novak said. "They ought to worry about themselves. I worry about myself."
Over the past two years, he has offered several conflicting accounts of the circumstances surrounding the information he received about Plame's identity. "I didn't dig it out; it was given to me," he told Newsday in his first explanation. "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name, and I used it." Then, on Sept. 29, 2003, the day the criminal investigation was formally announced, Novak declared on CNN, "Nobody in the Bush administration called me to leak this." Shifting back and forth in his chair, he engaged in a show of bravado. "It looks like the ambassador [Wilson] really doesn't know who leaked this to me," he said. He turned to a guest on the show, Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee, and asked, "Do you know whether my source was in the White House? Do you know that at all?"
At CNN, Novak's Aug. 1 column created something of a crisis. For some time, the news director and producers had tried to ask Novak about his knowledge of the Plame affair. How could the network claim to be a serious news organization if it gave Novak a free pass? Now they decided that Novak had to be asked about "Who's Who." Is that where he learned about Valerie Plame? Or was he diverting attention from where he really got the information?
CNN anchor Ed Henry placed a copy of "Who's Who" on the desk in front of Novak as he prepared to parry with his usual foil, Democratic political consultant James Carville. The proximate subject was the Senate candidacy of Republican Rep. Katherine Harris of Florida. "Don't be too sure she's going to lose ... all the establishment's against her and I've seen these Republican anti-establishment candidates who do pretty well," Novak said. Carville attempted to make a comment, but Novak cut him off. "Just let me finish what I'm going to say, James. Please, I know you hate to hear me, but you have ..." Carville replied that Novak has "got to show these right-wingers that he's got backbone, you know. It's why the Wall Street Journal editorial page is watching you. Show 'em you're tough." "Well, I think that's bullshit!" spat back Novak. "And I hate that." He turned to Henry, glancing at the volume of "Who's Who," and said, "Just let it go." With that, he removed his microphone and departed.
"I'm sorry as well that Bob Novak obviously left the set a little early," Henry explained to viewers. "I had told him in advance that we were going to ask him about the CIA leak case. He was not here for me to be able to ask him about that. Hopefully we'll be able to ask him about that in the future." But perhaps not for a long time, until CNN decides when to lift Novak's suspension, which some at CNN have suggested to me may not be until the Plame imbroglio is entirely resolved.
He then follows up with an interesting overview of Novak's career.
Read it all here:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2005/08/11/novak/
8.09.2005
Another Oldie but Goodie...
A Day in the Life of Joe Republican
Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffee pot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of coffee, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to insure their safety and that they work as advertised. All but $10 of Joe's medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry. In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune. It's noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so the can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression. Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.
After work this evening, Joe plans to visit his father at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. Joe is happy to see his father, who is now retired and lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to. Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."
Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffee pot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of coffee, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to insure their safety and that they work as advertised. All but $10 of Joe's medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry. In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune. It's noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so the can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression. Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.
After work this evening, Joe plans to visit his father at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. Joe is happy to see his father, who is now retired and lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to. Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."
A Neat Look at Polling Trends
Tony Plameri linked to this site earlier, I had never seen it. If you are a numbers geek like me, it is cool to look at the trends.
Here are some examples:
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?
Date Approve Disapprove No opinion
2005 Aug 5-7 45 51 4
2005 Jul 7-10 49 48 3
2005 Jun 6-8 47 49 4
2005 May 2-5 50 45 5
2005 Apr 1-2 48 48 4
2005 Mar 7-10 52 44 4
2005 Feb 4-6 57 40 3
2005 Jan 3-5 52 44 4
2004 Dec 5-8 53 44 3
2004 Nov 7-10 53 44 3
Looks like buyer's remorse to me.
As you may know, John Roberts is the person nominated to serve on the Supreme Court. Would you like to see the Senate vote in favor of Roberts serving on the Supreme Court, or not?
Date Yes, vote in favor No, would not No opinion
2005 Aug 5-7 51 28 21
2005 Jul 22-24 59 22 19
That's a heck of a change in one week.
Do you think the federal government should – or should not – fund research that would use newly created stem cells obtained from human embryos?
Date Yes, should No, should not No opinion
2005 Aug 5-7 56 40 4
In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?
Based on 481 adults surveyed
Date Yes, a mistake No, Not No opinion
2005 Aug 5-7 54 44 2
2005 Apr 29-May 1 49 48 3
2005 Mar 18-20 46 51 3
2005 Feb 25-27 47 51 2
2005 Feb 4-6 45 55
2005 Jan 14-16 52 47 1
2005 Jan 7-9 50 48 2
2004 Nov 19-21 47 51 2
2004 Oct 29-31 44 52 4
2004 Oct 22-24 47 51 2
2004 Oct 14-16 47 52 1
2004 Oct 9-10 46 53 1
2004 Oct 1-3 48 51 1
2004 Sep 24-26 42 55 3
2004 Sep 3-5 35 57 5
2004 Aug 23-25 48 50 2
2004 Jul 30-Aug 1 47 51 2
2004 Jul 19-21 50 47 3
2004 Jul 8-11 54 45 1
2004 Jun 21-23 54 44 2
2004 Jun 3-6 41 58 1
2004 May 7-9 44 54 2
2004 Apr 16-18 42 57 1
2004 Jan 12-15 42 56 2
2003 Nov 3-5 39 60 1
2003 Oct 6-8 40 59 1
2003 Jul 7-9 27 72 1
2003 Mar 24-25 23 75 2
Final Thought: Things are not going well for the Republicans.
Here are some examples:
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?
Date Approve Disapprove No opinion
2005 Aug 5-7 45 51 4
2005 Jul 7-10 49 48 3
2005 Jun 6-8 47 49 4
2005 May 2-5 50 45 5
2005 Apr 1-2 48 48 4
2005 Mar 7-10 52 44 4
2005 Feb 4-6 57 40 3
2005 Jan 3-5 52 44 4
2004 Dec 5-8 53 44 3
2004 Nov 7-10 53 44 3
Looks like buyer's remorse to me.
As you may know, John Roberts is the person nominated to serve on the Supreme Court. Would you like to see the Senate vote in favor of Roberts serving on the Supreme Court, or not?
Date Yes, vote in favor No, would not No opinion
2005 Aug 5-7 51 28 21
2005 Jul 22-24 59 22 19
That's a heck of a change in one week.
Do you think the federal government should – or should not – fund research that would use newly created stem cells obtained from human embryos?
Date Yes, should No, should not No opinion
2005 Aug 5-7 56 40 4
In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?
Based on 481 adults surveyed
Date Yes, a mistake No, Not No opinion
2005 Aug 5-7 54 44 2
2005 Apr 29-May 1 49 48 3
2005 Mar 18-20 46 51 3
2005 Feb 25-27 47 51 2
2005 Feb 4-6 45 55
2005 Jan 14-16 52 47 1
2005 Jan 7-9 50 48 2
2004 Nov 19-21 47 51 2
2004 Oct 29-31 44 52 4
2004 Oct 22-24 47 51 2
2004 Oct 14-16 47 52 1
2004 Oct 9-10 46 53 1
2004 Oct 1-3 48 51 1
2004 Sep 24-26 42 55 3
2004 Sep 3-5 35 57 5
2004 Aug 23-25 48 50 2
2004 Jul 30-Aug 1 47 51 2
2004 Jul 19-21 50 47 3
2004 Jul 8-11 54 45 1
2004 Jun 21-23 54 44 2
2004 Jun 3-6 41 58 1
2004 May 7-9 44 54 2
2004 Apr 16-18 42 57 1
2004 Jan 12-15 42 56 2
2003 Nov 3-5 39 60 1
2003 Oct 6-8 40 59 1
2003 Jul 7-9 27 72 1
2003 Mar 24-25 23 75 2
Final Thought: Things are not going well for the Republicans.
Eisenhower Calls Bush Stupid From Beyond the Grave...
I saw this several places - I wasn't sure if it was true, so I went to my favorite source:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ike.asp
Turns out it is right on... Here's the quote:
President Dwight Eisenhower, Republican, uttered these words on November 8, 1954:
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ike.asp
Turns out it is right on... Here's the quote:
President Dwight Eisenhower, Republican, uttered these words on November 8, 1954:
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
Genius in the Northwestern Today...
http://www.wisinfo.com/northwestern/news/opinion/stories/opinion_22115234.shtml
(Scroll down to my letter...)
It is about time! Only several weeks later!
(Scroll down to my letter...)
It is about time! Only several weeks later!
8.08.2005
Is there a housing bubble?
Look at this from Krugman in the NY Times:
This is the way the bubble ends: not with a pop, but with a hiss.
Housing prices move much more slowly than stock prices. There are no Black Mondays, when prices fall 23 percent in a day. In fact, prices often keep rising for a while even after a housing boom goes bust.
So the news that the U.S. housing bubble is over won't come in the form of plunging prices; it will come in the form of falling sales and rising inventory, as sellers try to get prices that buyers are no longer willing to pay. And the process may already have started.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/opinion/08krugman.html?ex=1124164800&en=cc85744ba23dc384&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Compare that with this from the Northwestern:
As of the end of June, there were 89 duplexes of 50 years or older on the market,” Captain said.
“Last year, 29 duplexes of that sort sold. In other words, we have a three-year supply (of duplexes) on the market. What’s happening is some (landlords) are deciding to get out of the business, but we can’t sell the ... things.”
http://www.wisinfo.com/northwestern/news/local/stories/local_22108218.shtml
Just something to toss around....
This is the way the bubble ends: not with a pop, but with a hiss.
Housing prices move much more slowly than stock prices. There are no Black Mondays, when prices fall 23 percent in a day. In fact, prices often keep rising for a while even after a housing boom goes bust.
So the news that the U.S. housing bubble is over won't come in the form of plunging prices; it will come in the form of falling sales and rising inventory, as sellers try to get prices that buyers are no longer willing to pay. And the process may already have started.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/opinion/08krugman.html?ex=1124164800&en=cc85744ba23dc384&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Compare that with this from the Northwestern:
As of the end of June, there were 89 duplexes of 50 years or older on the market,” Captain said.
“Last year, 29 duplexes of that sort sold. In other words, we have a three-year supply (of duplexes) on the market. What’s happening is some (landlords) are deciding to get out of the business, but we can’t sell the ... things.”
http://www.wisinfo.com/northwestern/news/local/stories/local_22108218.shtml
Just something to toss around....
Ohio Unit Requested More Troops
A Marine regiment that took heavy casualties last week in western Iraq including 19 killed from a Reserve unit headquartered in Ohio - had repeatedly asked for about 1,000 more troops. Those requests were not granted.
Regimental Combat Team 2 began asking for additional troops to police its volatile 24,000-square-mile territory before most of its Marines deployed in February, said operations officer Lt. Col. Christopher Starling, 39, of Jacksonville, N.C.
Starling said the unit could "optimally" use one more battalion, about 1,000 troops, to take some of the pressure off the Reserve unit, which is spearheading an offensive in the region. "With a fourth battalion, I wouldn't have to play pick-up ball," Starling said.
The requests for additional forces were passed to higher headquarters in nearby Ramadi; it is unclear whether they went beyond that level, Starling said.
And what was the Pentagon response:
Pentagon spokesman Larry DiRita said Sunday, "I don't doubt every colonel wishes he had more in his area, but the decisions about how troops are (deployed) are made by the commanders above them."
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said that he would authorize an increase in the number of troops in Iraq if top commanders asked for them. The Pentagon says that so far they haven't.
Alston said it was "not uncommon for commanders in the field to say 'I need more troops.' "
When will people see and understand the disconnect between the ground forces and the incompetence of the civilian leadership?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20050808/ts_usatoday/unithadaskedformoremarines
Regimental Combat Team 2 began asking for additional troops to police its volatile 24,000-square-mile territory before most of its Marines deployed in February, said operations officer Lt. Col. Christopher Starling, 39, of Jacksonville, N.C.
Starling said the unit could "optimally" use one more battalion, about 1,000 troops, to take some of the pressure off the Reserve unit, which is spearheading an offensive in the region. "With a fourth battalion, I wouldn't have to play pick-up ball," Starling said.
The requests for additional forces were passed to higher headquarters in nearby Ramadi; it is unclear whether they went beyond that level, Starling said.
And what was the Pentagon response:
Pentagon spokesman Larry DiRita said Sunday, "I don't doubt every colonel wishes he had more in his area, but the decisions about how troops are (deployed) are made by the commanders above them."
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said that he would authorize an increase in the number of troops in Iraq if top commanders asked for them. The Pentagon says that so far they haven't.
Alston said it was "not uncommon for commanders in the field to say 'I need more troops.' "
When will people see and understand the disconnect between the ground forces and the incompetence of the civilian leadership?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20050808/ts_usatoday/unithadaskedformoremarines
The Past Few Days in History...
On Aug. 8, 1974, President Richard Nixon announced he would resign following damaging revelations in the Watergate scandal.
On Aug. 7, 1964, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, giving President Johnson broad powers in dealing with reported North Vietnamese attacks on United States forces.
On Aug. 6, 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II, killing an estimated 140,000 people in the first use of a nuclear weapon in warfare.
http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/20050808.html
On Aug. 7, 1964, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, giving President Johnson broad powers in dealing with reported North Vietnamese attacks on United States forces.
On Aug. 6, 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II, killing an estimated 140,000 people in the first use of a nuclear weapon in warfare.
http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/20050808.html
A Good Overview of the Iraq Situation in Public Opinion...
Judging from what's out there, it appears to be time to pile on the Administration over Iraq. A strikingly close outcome in a special congressional election in Ohio last week suggested that voters in a traditionally Republican stronghold are more receptive to criticism about President Bush's conduct of the war. Sixty-one percent of Americans disapprove of his handling of it, per Newsweek. Jessica Lynch tells Time magazine that she feels she was "used as a symbol." The mother of a US soldier killed in Iraq, an anti-war activist, is getting national media attention for her vigil in Crawford; she has already met with Administration officials but hopes to meet with Bush, etc.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3626796/
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3626796/
8.07.2005
Great Editorial in the Northwestern
They never cease to amaze.... They got it spot on this time, and deserve the kudos for it.
Excerpts:
Oshkosh man’s role in Iraq more clear than nation’s
The loss of Oshkosh Army Capt. Benjamin Jansky has given all of those national questions about our involvement in the Iraq war a local face.
Our city has reached a point where the national questions about the duration of the war and its price are no longer separate. Some who have questioned these issues in the past may now find company in people who hadn’t.
We strain now to serve loyalties to a president who declared “mission accomplished” when we now know it isn’t. In our search for answers about where Jansky fit into the bigger picture, we see honorable service. In our search for answers about where our nation fits into the bigger picture, we see less clarity.
In the name of Benjamin Jansky, we implore our president who authorized this war to give the reassurances that we need.
Tell us, Mr. President, how many more good men and women our military planners expect to die in order to win this war, American and Iraqi? How many?
Tell us, Mr. President, what are the specifics of which troops will leave first, reserve or regulars?
Tell us, Mr. President, what is the exit strategy so we may know that there is one. Is there an exit strategy?
The only certainty that Oshkosh has in this war in Iraq is that we don’t have answers to the above questions. But we know for a fact that we have lost a fine and very young man.
The Final Thought: The loss of a local son in Iraq in the face of a continued lack of direction in that war is an imbalance that isn’t acceptable.
http://www.wisinfo.com/northwestern/news/opinion/stories/opinion_22074201.shtml
Excerpts:
Oshkosh man’s role in Iraq more clear than nation’s
The loss of Oshkosh Army Capt. Benjamin Jansky has given all of those national questions about our involvement in the Iraq war a local face.
Our city has reached a point where the national questions about the duration of the war and its price are no longer separate. Some who have questioned these issues in the past may now find company in people who hadn’t.
We strain now to serve loyalties to a president who declared “mission accomplished” when we now know it isn’t. In our search for answers about where Jansky fit into the bigger picture, we see honorable service. In our search for answers about where our nation fits into the bigger picture, we see less clarity.
In the name of Benjamin Jansky, we implore our president who authorized this war to give the reassurances that we need.
Tell us, Mr. President, how many more good men and women our military planners expect to die in order to win this war, American and Iraqi? How many?
Tell us, Mr. President, what are the specifics of which troops will leave first, reserve or regulars?
Tell us, Mr. President, what is the exit strategy so we may know that there is one. Is there an exit strategy?
The only certainty that Oshkosh has in this war in Iraq is that we don’t have answers to the above questions. But we know for a fact that we have lost a fine and very young man.
The Final Thought: The loss of a local son in Iraq in the face of a continued lack of direction in that war is an imbalance that isn’t acceptable.
http://www.wisinfo.com/northwestern/news/opinion/stories/opinion_22074201.shtml
More on Community WI-FI
Kristoff in the NY Ttimes:
HERMISTON, Ore.
This is cowboy country, where the rodeo is coming to town, the high school's "kiss the pig" contest involves a genuine hog, and life seems about as high-tech as the local calf-dressing competition, when teams race to wrestle protesting calves into T-shirts.
But Hermiston is actually a global leader of our Internet future. Today, this chunk of arid farm country appears to be the largest Wi-Fi hot spot in the world, with wireless high-speed Internet access available free for some 600 square miles. Most of that is in eastern Oregon, with some just across the border in southern Washington.
Driving along the road here, I used my laptop to get e-mail and download video - and you can do that while cruising at 70 miles per hour, mile after mile after mile, at a transmission speed several times as fast as a T-1 line. (Note: it's preferable to do this with someone else driving.)
This kind of network is the wave of the future, and eastern Oregon shows that it's technically and financially feasible. New York and other leading cities should be embarrassed that Morrow and Umatilla Counties in eastern Oregon are far ahead of them in providing high-speed Internet coverage to residents, schools and law enforcement officers - even though all of Morrow County doesn't even have a single traffic light.
Indeed, we need to envision broadband Internet access as just another utility, like electricity or water. Often the best way to provide that will be to blanket a region with Wi-Fi coverage to create wireless computer networks, rather than running D.S.L., cable or fiber-optic lines to every home.
Read more about it here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/07/opinion/07kristof.html?th&emc=th
Could this be a way for Oshkosh to become a Wisconsin pioneer?
Would we better attract and keep residents?
HERMISTON, Ore.
This is cowboy country, where the rodeo is coming to town, the high school's "kiss the pig" contest involves a genuine hog, and life seems about as high-tech as the local calf-dressing competition, when teams race to wrestle protesting calves into T-shirts.
But Hermiston is actually a global leader of our Internet future. Today, this chunk of arid farm country appears to be the largest Wi-Fi hot spot in the world, with wireless high-speed Internet access available free for some 600 square miles. Most of that is in eastern Oregon, with some just across the border in southern Washington.
Driving along the road here, I used my laptop to get e-mail and download video - and you can do that while cruising at 70 miles per hour, mile after mile after mile, at a transmission speed several times as fast as a T-1 line. (Note: it's preferable to do this with someone else driving.)
This kind of network is the wave of the future, and eastern Oregon shows that it's technically and financially feasible. New York and other leading cities should be embarrassed that Morrow and Umatilla Counties in eastern Oregon are far ahead of them in providing high-speed Internet coverage to residents, schools and law enforcement officers - even though all of Morrow County doesn't even have a single traffic light.
Indeed, we need to envision broadband Internet access as just another utility, like electricity or water. Often the best way to provide that will be to blanket a region with Wi-Fi coverage to create wireless computer networks, rather than running D.S.L., cable or fiber-optic lines to every home.
Read more about it here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/07/opinion/07kristof.html?th&emc=th
Could this be a way for Oshkosh to become a Wisconsin pioneer?
Would we better attract and keep residents?
Is Inteligent Design Science?
From Newsweek, excerpts here:
Monkey See, Monkey Do
Offering ID as an alternative to evolution is a cruel joke. It walks and talks like science but in the lab performs worse than medieval alchemy.
Eighty years after the Scopes "monkey trial," the threat to science and reason comes less from fundamentalists who believe the earth was created in six days than from sophisticated branding experts and polemical Ph.D. s who are clever enough to refrain from referring to God or even the Creator, and have now found a willing tool in the president of the United States.
Lest you think this is merely of academic interest, consider the stakes: the Pentagon last week revealed that it is spending money to train certain scientists how to write screenplays for thrillers related to their specialties. Why? Because the status of science has sunk so low that the government needs these disciplines to become sexy again among students or the brain drain will threaten national security.
When Bush was asked about intelligent design last week, he answered, "Both sides ought to be properly taught... so people can understand what the debate is about." This sounds reasonable until you realize that, as the president's own science adviser, John H. Marburger III, admits, there is no real debate. "Intelligent design is not a scientific concept."
Its (Ineligent Design's) basic claim—that the human cell is too complex to be explained by natural selection—is unproven and probably unprovable.
Brown University biologist Kenneth Miller (who attends mass every week) says the "unspoken message" peddled by the Discovery Institute is that evolution is the single shakiest theory in science. In fact, despite its flaws, it remains among the most durable theories in all of science.
The scholarly articles (on Inteligent Design) are often well written and provocative. But the science within these papers has been demolished over and over by other scientists. As Miller explains, science is perhaps the last true marketplace of ideas. After a decade in circulation, intelligent design has failed the market test. So now its backers are seeking the equivalent of a government bailout, by going around their scientific peers to Red State politicians trying to slip religious dogma into the classroom.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8853604/site/newsweek/
Monkey See, Monkey Do
Offering ID as an alternative to evolution is a cruel joke. It walks and talks like science but in the lab performs worse than medieval alchemy.
Eighty years after the Scopes "monkey trial," the threat to science and reason comes less from fundamentalists who believe the earth was created in six days than from sophisticated branding experts and polemical Ph.D. s who are clever enough to refrain from referring to God or even the Creator, and have now found a willing tool in the president of the United States.
Lest you think this is merely of academic interest, consider the stakes: the Pentagon last week revealed that it is spending money to train certain scientists how to write screenplays for thrillers related to their specialties. Why? Because the status of science has sunk so low that the government needs these disciplines to become sexy again among students or the brain drain will threaten national security.
When Bush was asked about intelligent design last week, he answered, "Both sides ought to be properly taught... so people can understand what the debate is about." This sounds reasonable until you realize that, as the president's own science adviser, John H. Marburger III, admits, there is no real debate. "Intelligent design is not a scientific concept."
Its (Ineligent Design's) basic claim—that the human cell is too complex to be explained by natural selection—is unproven and probably unprovable.
Brown University biologist Kenneth Miller (who attends mass every week) says the "unspoken message" peddled by the Discovery Institute is that evolution is the single shakiest theory in science. In fact, despite its flaws, it remains among the most durable theories in all of science.
The scholarly articles (on Inteligent Design) are often well written and provocative. But the science within these papers has been demolished over and over by other scientists. As Miller explains, science is perhaps the last true marketplace of ideas. After a decade in circulation, intelligent design has failed the market test. So now its backers are seeking the equivalent of a government bailout, by going around their scientific peers to Red State politicians trying to slip religious dogma into the classroom.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8853604/site/newsweek/
8.05.2005
Why I love English....
...or at least how easy it is to make a sentence lose it's meaning.
This is directly cut and pasted from the Winnebago County Fair Website:
Expo and Exhibit Buildings Open
Tuesday, Aug. 9: 5:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.
Wednesday, Aug. 10 through
Saturday, Aug. 13: 10:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.
Sunday, Aug. 14: 10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
(Animals will be released at 4:00 p.m.)
Watch out for the animals - try to be out of the park on Sunday early!
http://www.winnebagocountyfaironline.com/
This is directly cut and pasted from the Winnebago County Fair Website:
Expo and Exhibit Buildings Open
Tuesday, Aug. 9: 5:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.
Wednesday, Aug. 10 through
Saturday, Aug. 13: 10:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.
Sunday, Aug. 14: 10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
(Animals will be released at 4:00 p.m.)
Watch out for the animals - try to be out of the park on Sunday early!
http://www.winnebagocountyfaironline.com/
8.04.2005
Couldn't Happen to a Nicer Guy...
CNN suspends Robert Novak for on-air outburst
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - CNN issued a public rebuke to syndicated columnist and political analyst Robert Novak and asked him to "take some time off" after he uttered a profanity and walked off the set during a live broadcast on Thursday.
The on-air outburst by Novak, 74, came when the conservative commentator was interrupted by liberal political strategist James Carville during a discussion of the upcoming U.S. Senate race in Florida on CNN's "Inside Politics" show.
"Let me finish what I was going to say, James, please. I know you hate to hear me," Novak said as he and Carville jousted over the Senate election chances of Republican U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris.
Carville persisted, saying: "You got to show those right-wingers that he's got backbone. ... the Wall Street Journal editorial page is watching. Show 'em you're tough."
An angry Novak shot back, "I think that's bull****, and I hate that." Then to the show's host, Ed Henry, he added, "Just let it go," before standing up from his seat, unclipping his microphone and walking off the set.
Carville and Henry continued the discussion without pausing, but Henry acknowledged Novak's departure at the end of the hour, saying he was sorry "Bob Novak left the set a little early."
CNN, a unit of Time Warner Inc., later issued a statement chiding Novak for his conduct.
"Bob Novak's behavior on CNN today was inexcusable and unacceptable," the network said. "Mr. Novak has apologized to CNN, and CNN apologizes to its viewers for his language and actions. We've asked Mr. Novak to take some time off."
Novak has been the subject of intense media interest for months as a central figure in a political scandal involving the public disclosure of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity and investigations of that leak.
Federal investigators are looking into who leaked the identity of the covert agent, whose name appeared in a July 14, 2003 newspaper column by Novak.
Henry told viewers he had informed Novak in advance of Thursday's show that he intended to ask him on the air about his role in the Plame affair but missed the opportunity when Novak walked off.
A publicist for Novak at CNN said the veteran columnist had no additional comment.
Novak has been a regular CNN contributor since his days as a conservative commentator on the public affairs show "Crossfire." His newspaper column is syndicated nationally.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050805/pl_nm/media_novak_dc
I think John Stewart got it right when he said Novak is melting from the inside.
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - CNN issued a public rebuke to syndicated columnist and political analyst Robert Novak and asked him to "take some time off" after he uttered a profanity and walked off the set during a live broadcast on Thursday.
The on-air outburst by Novak, 74, came when the conservative commentator was interrupted by liberal political strategist James Carville during a discussion of the upcoming U.S. Senate race in Florida on CNN's "Inside Politics" show.
"Let me finish what I was going to say, James, please. I know you hate to hear me," Novak said as he and Carville jousted over the Senate election chances of Republican U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris.
Carville persisted, saying: "You got to show those right-wingers that he's got backbone. ... the Wall Street Journal editorial page is watching. Show 'em you're tough."
An angry Novak shot back, "I think that's bull****, and I hate that." Then to the show's host, Ed Henry, he added, "Just let it go," before standing up from his seat, unclipping his microphone and walking off the set.
Carville and Henry continued the discussion without pausing, but Henry acknowledged Novak's departure at the end of the hour, saying he was sorry "Bob Novak left the set a little early."
CNN, a unit of Time Warner Inc., later issued a statement chiding Novak for his conduct.
"Bob Novak's behavior on CNN today was inexcusable and unacceptable," the network said. "Mr. Novak has apologized to CNN, and CNN apologizes to its viewers for his language and actions. We've asked Mr. Novak to take some time off."
Novak has been the subject of intense media interest for months as a central figure in a political scandal involving the public disclosure of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity and investigations of that leak.
Federal investigators are looking into who leaked the identity of the covert agent, whose name appeared in a July 14, 2003 newspaper column by Novak.
Henry told viewers he had informed Novak in advance of Thursday's show that he intended to ask him on the air about his role in the Plame affair but missed the opportunity when Novak walked off.
A publicist for Novak at CNN said the veteran columnist had no additional comment.
Novak has been a regular CNN contributor since his days as a conservative commentator on the public affairs show "Crossfire." His newspaper column is syndicated nationally.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050805/pl_nm/media_novak_dc
I think John Stewart got it right when he said Novak is melting from the inside.
Interesting Idea for Public Broadband
Friedman on America's falling behind in tech:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/03/opinion/03friedman.html?ex=1123732800&en=c7a5ef6c43908f9c&ei=5070&emc=eta1
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/03/opinion/03friedman.html?ex=1123732800&en=c7a5ef6c43908f9c&ei=5070&emc=eta1
I've been thinking of running for high office on a one-issue platform: I promise, if elected, that within four years America will have cellphone service as good as Ghana's. If re-elected, I promise that in eight years America will have cellphone service as good as Japan's, provided Japan agrees not to forge ahead on wireless technology. My campaign bumper sticker: "Can You Hear Me Now?"
I began thinking about this after watching the Japanese use cellphones and laptops to get on the Internet from speeding bullet trains and subways deep underground. But the last straw was when I couldn't get cellphone service while visiting I.B.M.'s headquarters in Armonk, N.Y.
The fact that the U.S. has fallen to 16th in the world in broadband connectivity aroused no interest.
Philadelphia, which decided it wouldn't wait for private companies to provide connectivity to all. Instead, Philly made it a city-led project - like sewers and electricity. The whole city will be a "hot zone," where any resident anywhere with a computer, cellphone or P.D.A. will have cheap high-speed Wi-Fi access to the Internet.
Message: In U.S. politics, the party that most quickly absorbs the latest technology often dominates. F.D.R. dominated radio and the fireside chat; J.F.K., televised debates; Republicans, direct mail and then talk radio, and now Karl Rove's networked voter databases.
Pharmacist's Oath
Did you know they have one? I have bolded my favorite parts:
At this time, I vow to devote my professional life to the services of all humankind through the profession of pharmacy.
I will consider the welfare of humanity and relief of human suffering my primary concerns.
I will apply my knowledge, experience, and skills to the best of my abilityto assure optimal drug therapy outcomes for the patients I serve.
I will keep abreast of developments and maintain professional competency in my profession of pharmacy.
I will maintain the highest principles of moral, ethical and legal conduct.
I will embrace and advocate change in the profession of pharmacy that improves patient care.
I take these vows voluntarily with the full realization of the responsibility with which I am entrusted by the public.
Nowhere does it say anything about not giving out contrception....
At this time, I vow to devote my professional life to the services of all humankind through the profession of pharmacy.
I will consider the welfare of humanity and relief of human suffering my primary concerns.
I will apply my knowledge, experience, and skills to the best of my abilityto assure optimal drug therapy outcomes for the patients I serve.
I will keep abreast of developments and maintain professional competency in my profession of pharmacy.
I will maintain the highest principles of moral, ethical and legal conduct.
I will embrace and advocate change in the profession of pharmacy that improves patient care.
I take these vows voluntarily with the full realization of the responsibility with which I am entrusted by the public.
Nowhere does it say anything about not giving out contrception....
A Must Read - Kristoff - "A Pakistani Rape, and a Pakistani Love Story "
I'm going to put up the entire story, because it disappears after a week:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/02/opinion/02kristof.html?ex=1123732800&en=45f7cab5fa7a84c1&ei=5070&emc=eta1
A Pakistani Rape, and a Pakistani Love Story
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Rapes occur in Pakistan at an estimated rate of one every two hours, and the rape itself is only the beginning of the horror. As in much of the world, the victim is frequently expected to atone for her "sin" by killing herself, while her attacker goes unscathed.
But Dr. Shazia Khalid, through all her tears, guilt and self-doubt, pushed for something more: punishment for the man who raped her. In my column on Sunday, I described how local authorities reacted after Dr. Shazia was raped early this year: they drugged her and confined her to a psychiatric hospital to hush her up.
It didn't work, and the incident provoked unrest in the wild area of Baluchistan, where the rape occurred, because of rumors that the rapist was not only an outsider, but also an army captain. President Pervez Musharraf became determined to make the embarrassment disappear.
So the authorities locked up Dr. Shazia and her husband, Khalid Aman, keeping them under house arrest for two months. Then officials began to hint that Dr. Shazia was a loose woman, perhaps even a prostitute - presumably as a way to pressure her and her husband to keep quiet.
Dr. Shazia, mortified, tried to kill herself. Mr. Khalid and their adopted son, Adnan, stopped her.
Meanwhile, the family's patriarch, Mr. Khalid's grandfather, sent word that because Dr. Shazia had been raped, she was "kari" - a stain on the family's honor - and must be killed or at least divorced. Then, Mr. Khalid said, his grandfather began gathering a mob to murder Dr. Shazia.
"I was very angry because he must know that Shazia is innocent," Mr. Khalid said. "They treat a woman like a cow."
General Musharraf was finding this couple's determination to get justice increasingly irritating. So, Dr. Shazia and Mr. Khalid said, the authorities ordered them to leave the country, and warned that if they stayed, they would be killed - by government "agencies" - and that no one would even find their bodies.
When Dr. Shazia demanded that Adnan be allowed to accompany her, the officials warned that there was no time and that she would be murdered if she delayed. Then the officials forced Dr. Shazia to make a video recording in which she thanked the government for helping her. And, she said, they warned her that if she had any contact with journalists or human rights groups, they would strike back at her - or at her relatives still in Pakistan.
"They said, 'We know where your family is here,' " Dr. Shazia recalled. "I'm very scared and concerned about my family and their safety. But I believe we must tell the truth, and I have entrusted my family to God."
So the Pakistani officials put Dr. Shazia and Mr. Khalid on a plane to London, without their son. As soon as they arrived, Dr. Shazia inquired about asylum in Canada, where she has relatives and friends. But a Canadian bureaucrat rejected the asylum application on the ground that they were now safe in Britain. (Come on, Canadians - have you no heart?)
Dr. Shazia and Mr. Khalid are now living in a one-room dive in a bad neighborhood in London, while applying for asylum in Britain. Dr. Shazia dreams of someday returning to Pakistan to found a hospital for raped and battered women, but for now she is simply a lonely, fragile and frightened refugee who leaves her bare room only to make trips to a nearby Internet cafe.
With Dr. Shazia constantly tearful and unable to sleep at night, Mr. Khalid gave up his job to take care of her and drive home a message: "Shazia, you did nothing wrong. You are still pure!"
Dr. Shazia's voice broke as she said: "Khalid supported me. He showed me his true love. ... He showed me that I have committed no sin. I am pure today, no matter what the world says."
Half-sobbing, she added: "I stay awake at night, thinking, 'Why me?' My career is ruined. My husband's career is ruined. I cannot see my son. ... If I had died then, it would have been better."
But it wouldn't have been. Dr. Shazia's ordeal offers us a glimpse of life for women in much of the developing world today, and it's also a reminder of the one factor that gives me hope. That's the growing number of people who refuse to cower in the face of injustice and instead become forces for change. To me, Dr. Shazia is a hero, for her courage and determination - and, yes, her purity.
E-mail: nicholas@nytimes.com
I'm sure I'll get inquiries from readers wanting to help Dr. Shazia and Mr. Khalid. Since they are lonely and isolated in London, but have friends and relatives in Canada, the single thing that would help the most is if Canada reconsidered its refusal to grant them asylum. You can suggest that by writing to Joseph Volpe, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1L1, Canada. You can send e-mail to Minister@cic.gc.ca. If Canada gives Dr. Shazia asylum, this love story can still end well; otherwise, I'm afraid it'll be one more tragedy.
Readers who want to help Dr. Shazia more directly, or find out more about her case, can contact the Asian American Network Against Abuse of Women, www.4anaa.org.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/02/opinion/02kristof.html?ex=1123732800&en=45f7cab5fa7a84c1&ei=5070&emc=eta1
A Pakistani Rape, and a Pakistani Love Story
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Rapes occur in Pakistan at an estimated rate of one every two hours, and the rape itself is only the beginning of the horror. As in much of the world, the victim is frequently expected to atone for her "sin" by killing herself, while her attacker goes unscathed.
But Dr. Shazia Khalid, through all her tears, guilt and self-doubt, pushed for something more: punishment for the man who raped her. In my column on Sunday, I described how local authorities reacted after Dr. Shazia was raped early this year: they drugged her and confined her to a psychiatric hospital to hush her up.
It didn't work, and the incident provoked unrest in the wild area of Baluchistan, where the rape occurred, because of rumors that the rapist was not only an outsider, but also an army captain. President Pervez Musharraf became determined to make the embarrassment disappear.
So the authorities locked up Dr. Shazia and her husband, Khalid Aman, keeping them under house arrest for two months. Then officials began to hint that Dr. Shazia was a loose woman, perhaps even a prostitute - presumably as a way to pressure her and her husband to keep quiet.
Dr. Shazia, mortified, tried to kill herself. Mr. Khalid and their adopted son, Adnan, stopped her.
Meanwhile, the family's patriarch, Mr. Khalid's grandfather, sent word that because Dr. Shazia had been raped, she was "kari" - a stain on the family's honor - and must be killed or at least divorced. Then, Mr. Khalid said, his grandfather began gathering a mob to murder Dr. Shazia.
"I was very angry because he must know that Shazia is innocent," Mr. Khalid said. "They treat a woman like a cow."
General Musharraf was finding this couple's determination to get justice increasingly irritating. So, Dr. Shazia and Mr. Khalid said, the authorities ordered them to leave the country, and warned that if they stayed, they would be killed - by government "agencies" - and that no one would even find their bodies.
When Dr. Shazia demanded that Adnan be allowed to accompany her, the officials warned that there was no time and that she would be murdered if she delayed. Then the officials forced Dr. Shazia to make a video recording in which she thanked the government for helping her. And, she said, they warned her that if she had any contact with journalists or human rights groups, they would strike back at her - or at her relatives still in Pakistan.
"They said, 'We know where your family is here,' " Dr. Shazia recalled. "I'm very scared and concerned about my family and their safety. But I believe we must tell the truth, and I have entrusted my family to God."
So the Pakistani officials put Dr. Shazia and Mr. Khalid on a plane to London, without their son. As soon as they arrived, Dr. Shazia inquired about asylum in Canada, where she has relatives and friends. But a Canadian bureaucrat rejected the asylum application on the ground that they were now safe in Britain. (Come on, Canadians - have you no heart?)
Dr. Shazia and Mr. Khalid are now living in a one-room dive in a bad neighborhood in London, while applying for asylum in Britain. Dr. Shazia dreams of someday returning to Pakistan to found a hospital for raped and battered women, but for now she is simply a lonely, fragile and frightened refugee who leaves her bare room only to make trips to a nearby Internet cafe.
With Dr. Shazia constantly tearful and unable to sleep at night, Mr. Khalid gave up his job to take care of her and drive home a message: "Shazia, you did nothing wrong. You are still pure!"
Dr. Shazia's voice broke as she said: "Khalid supported me. He showed me his true love. ... He showed me that I have committed no sin. I am pure today, no matter what the world says."
Half-sobbing, she added: "I stay awake at night, thinking, 'Why me?' My career is ruined. My husband's career is ruined. I cannot see my son. ... If I had died then, it would have been better."
But it wouldn't have been. Dr. Shazia's ordeal offers us a glimpse of life for women in much of the developing world today, and it's also a reminder of the one factor that gives me hope. That's the growing number of people who refuse to cower in the face of injustice and instead become forces for change. To me, Dr. Shazia is a hero, for her courage and determination - and, yes, her purity.
E-mail: nicholas@nytimes.com
I'm sure I'll get inquiries from readers wanting to help Dr. Shazia and Mr. Khalid. Since they are lonely and isolated in London, but have friends and relatives in Canada, the single thing that would help the most is if Canada reconsidered its refusal to grant them asylum. You can suggest that by writing to Joseph Volpe, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1L1, Canada. You can send e-mail to Minister@cic.gc.ca. If Canada gives Dr. Shazia asylum, this love story can still end well; otherwise, I'm afraid it'll be one more tragedy.
Readers who want to help Dr. Shazia more directly, or find out more about her case, can contact the Asian American Network Against Abuse of Women, www.4anaa.org.
When is Competition Good?
A great article in Slate:
http://www.slate.com/id/2123557/
I wish Rick Santorum would make up his mind.
On the one hand, the Republican senator from Pennsylvania says that the free market system is godly: It "not only produces wealth but also virtuous people whose worldly enterprise complements the work of the Creator." Big government, I need hardly add, is an unholy lumbering giant that's "overly intrusive and burdensome."
On the other hand, private companies like AccuWeather, which disseminate information collected by the National Weather Service—a big-government agency—cannot hope to compete with the NWS if the NWS itself disseminates that information. The combined might of Adam Smith and the Man Upstairs are simply no match for the brain-dead time-wasters on the federal payroll. Or so Santorum must believe, because he has introduced a bill forbidding the NWS from providing "a product or service ... that is or could be [italics mine] provided by the private sector" unless the secretary of commerce (who oversees NWS) determines that "the private sector is unwilling or unable" to do so, or unless some international treaty requires the NWS to do so. (A thoughtful exception is made for "preparation and issuance of severe weather forecasts and warnings designed for the protection of life and property.")
Imagine if Federal Express were to decide it could no longer compete against the U.S. Postal Service and sought legislation to prevent the mailman from delivering packages. Better yet, imagine if Federal Express had emerged only as a result of the federal government stepping in and telling those bullies at the Post Office to stop delivering packages. Absurd, correct? FedEx became a free-market success story not by seeking special favors, but by beating the government at its own game. By contrast, AccuWeather (which happens to reside in Santorum's home state of Pennsylvania) would like you to know that it exists only because NWS has, over the past half-century, pursued a "non-competition" policy with the private sector, the idiocy of which apparently only occurred to NWS this past December, when it revoked that policy. The earlier non-competition policy, says an AccuWeather press release, "led to the development of specialized weather services" like, well, AccuWeather. The company became a success story only because the federal government built it a special incubator.
http://www.slate.com/id/2123557/
I wish Rick Santorum would make up his mind.
On the one hand, the Republican senator from Pennsylvania says that the free market system is godly: It "not only produces wealth but also virtuous people whose worldly enterprise complements the work of the Creator." Big government, I need hardly add, is an unholy lumbering giant that's "overly intrusive and burdensome."
On the other hand, private companies like AccuWeather, which disseminate information collected by the National Weather Service—a big-government agency—cannot hope to compete with the NWS if the NWS itself disseminates that information. The combined might of Adam Smith and the Man Upstairs are simply no match for the brain-dead time-wasters on the federal payroll. Or so Santorum must believe, because he has introduced a bill forbidding the NWS from providing "a product or service ... that is or could be [italics mine] provided by the private sector" unless the secretary of commerce (who oversees NWS) determines that "the private sector is unwilling or unable" to do so, or unless some international treaty requires the NWS to do so. (A thoughtful exception is made for "preparation and issuance of severe weather forecasts and warnings designed for the protection of life and property.")
Imagine if Federal Express were to decide it could no longer compete against the U.S. Postal Service and sought legislation to prevent the mailman from delivering packages. Better yet, imagine if Federal Express had emerged only as a result of the federal government stepping in and telling those bullies at the Post Office to stop delivering packages. Absurd, correct? FedEx became a free-market success story not by seeking special favors, but by beating the government at its own game. By contrast, AccuWeather (which happens to reside in Santorum's home state of Pennsylvania) would like you to know that it exists only because NWS has, over the past half-century, pursued a "non-competition" policy with the private sector, the idiocy of which apparently only occurred to NWS this past December, when it revoked that policy. The earlier non-competition policy, says an AccuWeather press release, "led to the development of specialized weather services" like, well, AccuWeather. The company became a success story only because the federal government built it a special incubator.
Santorum can't have it both ways. If big government really is as inherently dopey and inefficient as he maintains, then AccuWeather has nothing to worry about. But if AccuWeather is in a desperate fight for its life merely because the NWS wants to release weather information in consumer-friendly form, that would seem to suggest that the NWS does its job at least as well as AccuWeather ever will. An orthodox belief in big government's inefficiency cannot coexist with an orthodox belief in private industry's inability to compete with big government.
How do you resolve this riddle? Perhaps by concluding that the common denominator to contemporary conservative thought isn't ideology at all, but rather, the crude imperative for big government to shovel as many special privileges as possible to big corporations. Adam Smith would be appalled.
Actual Bush Quote:
"Rafael Palmeiro is a friend. He testified in public and I believe him," Bush said in an interview published Tuesday in several Texas newspapers.
"He's the kind of person that's going to stand up in front of the klieg lights and say he didn't use steroids, and I believe him. Still do," the US president said.
He also still believes that Iraq has WMD....
Diebold E-voting Machines Rejected
After possibly the most extensive testing ever on a voting system, California has rejected Diebold's flagship electronic voting machine because of printer jams and screen freezes, sending local elections officials scrambling for other means of voting.
"There was a failure rate of about 10 percent, and that's not good enough for the voters of California and not good enough for me," Secretary of State Bruce McPherson said.
If the machines had been used in an election, the result could have been frustration for poll workers and long lines for thousands of voters, elections officials and voter advocates said Thursday.
http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/localnews/ci_2898234
8.03.2005
7.30.2005
Another Thought on the CAFTA Vote
I wrote this in response to an online discussion we were having on a Yahoo group:
I just have a problem with the 15 Dems that voted for it (here, on other blogs and in the media) being the entire story.
Everyone is saying that this passing is their fault. That is the media spin - "15 Democrats pass CAFTA." This is simply not true.
The truth is:
CAFTA passed because of the HUNDREDS of Republicans that voted for it. Not the 15 Democrats.
Working families were SOLD OUT by the HUNDREDS of Republicans voting for CAFTA.
Working families were DEFENDED by the HUNDREDS of Democrats voting against CAFTA.
This fact is being lost in the spin that we are unfortunately helping to perpetuate.
My 2 cents.
I just have a problem with the 15 Dems that voted for it (here, on other blogs and in the media) being the entire story.
Everyone is saying that this passing is their fault. That is the media spin - "15 Democrats pass CAFTA." This is simply not true.
The truth is:
CAFTA passed because of the HUNDREDS of Republicans that voted for it. Not the 15 Democrats.
Working families were SOLD OUT by the HUNDREDS of Republicans voting for CAFTA.
Working families were DEFENDED by the HUNDREDS of Democrats voting against CAFTA.
This fact is being lost in the spin that we are unfortunately helping to perpetuate.
My 2 cents.
7.28.2005
Thoughts on the Labor Split and the Passage of CAFTA
I had originally prepared part of this as a comment on Oshblog, but it seems that site is down right now, so I will put it here in a larger form.
There has been a lot of talk over the last few days about how the split in labor signals the end of support for Democrats, and that 15 Dems voted for CAFTA shows we 'deserve' it.
I agree, it is shamefully that these 15 Dems voted for it. I do not know the circumstances of their districts, or their other votes, but on this one, I believe they got it wrong.
However, the overwhelming percentage of Dems voted against CAFTA, including Wisconsin's entire Democratic delegation (all of the Republicans were for it). But, there is a name for a government that requires everyone to tow the same line, and it is not democracy. I believe that our party should be evaluated as a whole, and as a whole we are the party of the working, poor and middle classes. This is undeniable.
Secondly, after the 15 minutes given for this vote, CAFTA was defeated. The Republicans kept the vote open 40+ minutes past the deadline until they had the votes to pass it. This is the same way they rammed through the Medicare prescription drug debacle.
Thirdly, solid union support for democrats is already a myth. Lets look at Tom Petri, our Republican Congress Member. He has a lifetime rating from the AFL-CIO under 30%. Many unions have ranked him a 0% recently. He not only voted for CAFTA, NAFTA, most favored for China but he co-sponsored the regulations to remove overtime from a huge section of American workers (on a side-note, we were protected from this by Gov. Jim Doyle).
Would you not agree that Petri's consistent anti-labor voting record should disqualify him from Labor's support?
But, over the years, he has received $190,000+ in funds from Labor PAC's, including:
AFL-CIO
AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Dept
Air Line Pilots Assn
Allied Pilots Assn
Amalgamated Transit Union
American Maritime Officers
American Maritime Officers Retirees Assn
Carpenters & Joiners Union
International Assn of Fire Fighters
Ironworkers Union
Laborers Union
Maintenance of Way Employees
National Air Traffic Controllers Assn
National Assn of Letter Carriers
National Assn of Postal Supervisors
National Assn of Postmasters
National Assn Retired Federal Employees
National Education Assn
National League of Postmasters
National Rural Letter Carriers Assn
Operating Engineers Union
Service Employees International Union
Transport Workers Union
UNITE HERE
United Transportation Union
Details at www.opensecrets.org
Statewide, unions have given to Ryan, Green and Sensenbrenner as well. None of these men qualify as the allies of working families.
Many of these union donors are in the new Unite to Win Coalition, many others are still AFL-CIO.
Just as the Dems need to encourage more of our members vote with us, Labor needs to focus their efforts behind candidates that will advance not, degrade Labor issues.
There needs to be a whole lot of reforming going on....
But, it is not lost. Just as the overwhelming amount of Democrats vote consistently with Labor, Labor is the Democrats greatest support base. We cannot let those who wish to work against us divide and conquer.
Remember, solidarity is the strength. For both Dems and Labor.
There has been a lot of talk over the last few days about how the split in labor signals the end of support for Democrats, and that 15 Dems voted for CAFTA shows we 'deserve' it.
I agree, it is shamefully that these 15 Dems voted for it. I do not know the circumstances of their districts, or their other votes, but on this one, I believe they got it wrong.
However, the overwhelming percentage of Dems voted against CAFTA, including Wisconsin's entire Democratic delegation (all of the Republicans were for it). But, there is a name for a government that requires everyone to tow the same line, and it is not democracy. I believe that our party should be evaluated as a whole, and as a whole we are the party of the working, poor and middle classes. This is undeniable.
Secondly, after the 15 minutes given for this vote, CAFTA was defeated. The Republicans kept the vote open 40+ minutes past the deadline until they had the votes to pass it. This is the same way they rammed through the Medicare prescription drug debacle.
Thirdly, solid union support for democrats is already a myth. Lets look at Tom Petri, our Republican Congress Member. He has a lifetime rating from the AFL-CIO under 30%. Many unions have ranked him a 0% recently. He not only voted for CAFTA, NAFTA, most favored for China but he co-sponsored the regulations to remove overtime from a huge section of American workers (on a side-note, we were protected from this by Gov. Jim Doyle).
Would you not agree that Petri's consistent anti-labor voting record should disqualify him from Labor's support?
But, over the years, he has received $190,000+ in funds from Labor PAC's, including:
AFL-CIO
AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Dept
Air Line Pilots Assn
Allied Pilots Assn
Amalgamated Transit Union
American Maritime Officers
American Maritime Officers Retirees Assn
Carpenters & Joiners Union
International Assn of Fire Fighters
Ironworkers Union
Laborers Union
Maintenance of Way Employees
National Air Traffic Controllers Assn
National Assn of Letter Carriers
National Assn of Postal Supervisors
National Assn of Postmasters
National Assn Retired Federal Employees
National Education Assn
National League of Postmasters
National Rural Letter Carriers Assn
Operating Engineers Union
Service Employees International Union
Transport Workers Union
UNITE HERE
United Transportation Union
Details at www.opensecrets.org
Statewide, unions have given to Ryan, Green and Sensenbrenner as well. None of these men qualify as the allies of working families.
Many of these union donors are in the new Unite to Win Coalition, many others are still AFL-CIO.
Just as the Dems need to encourage more of our members vote with us, Labor needs to focus their efforts behind candidates that will advance not, degrade Labor issues.
There needs to be a whole lot of reforming going on....
But, it is not lost. Just as the overwhelming amount of Democrats vote consistently with Labor, Labor is the Democrats greatest support base. We cannot let those who wish to work against us divide and conquer.
Remember, solidarity is the strength. For both Dems and Labor.
Petri Votes For CAFTA - 6th CD Democrats Response
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Gordon N. Hintz
920.279.1870
July 28, 2005
Petri Votes Against Workers, Jobs, and Constituents in Supporting CAFTA
OSHKOSH – Ignoring the negative impact on workers and farmers in his 6th Congressional District, and throughout Wisconsin, Rep. Tom Petri voted in favor of the Central American Free Trade Act (CAFTA) early Thursday morning. This vote of support comes despite the large failure of previous trade agreements to bring about the promises of new markets for businesses, workers, and farmers in Wisconsin and the rest of the United States.
“It is pretty clear there is a growing disconnect between Rep. Petri and the people he is supposed to be representing,” said Gordon Hintz, 6th CD Democratic Chair. “Who benefits under the current terms of CAFTA? Wisconsin has been devastated by the outsourcing of jobs overseas and has little in return to show for it except lower paying jobs with fewer benefits and an increased struggle for working families. This is another example of a flawed trade bill that provides few if any assurances for jobs, working conditions, and the environment.”
Since 2000, previous trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and Most Favored Nation status for China, have led to the loss of 92,000 manufacturing jobs in Wisconsin. The six countries in the CAFTA have a collective buying power comparable to that of New Haven, Connecticut. Due to the limited size of their economies, these countries account for barely one percent of U.S. trade, an amount that makes it unlikely to provide much benefit to U.S. workers producing exports. This includes cheese and other agriculture exports from Wisconsin. The trade deregulation model in CAFTA primarily benefits global food corporations and pharmaceutical cartels, instead of Wisconsin's family farmers and rural communities. The proposed CAFTA agreement comes when the United States is actually projected to become a net importer of agricultural products for the first time in 45 years, a disturbing trend when combined with the increasing U.S. trade deficit.
“Trade agreements should contribute to economic growth, promote development and respect democracy in other nations, and be part of comprehensive efforts to ensure economic opportunities for U.S. workers,” said Hintz. “This agreement fails to do these things. Given the challenges facing Wisconsin’s economy, it is disappointing that Rep. Petri won’t stand up for the workers, businesses, and farmers in his own District.”
CONTACT: Gordon N. Hintz
920.279.1870
July 28, 2005
Petri Votes Against Workers, Jobs, and Constituents in Supporting CAFTA
OSHKOSH – Ignoring the negative impact on workers and farmers in his 6th Congressional District, and throughout Wisconsin, Rep. Tom Petri voted in favor of the Central American Free Trade Act (CAFTA) early Thursday morning. This vote of support comes despite the large failure of previous trade agreements to bring about the promises of new markets for businesses, workers, and farmers in Wisconsin and the rest of the United States.
“It is pretty clear there is a growing disconnect between Rep. Petri and the people he is supposed to be representing,” said Gordon Hintz, 6th CD Democratic Chair. “Who benefits under the current terms of CAFTA? Wisconsin has been devastated by the outsourcing of jobs overseas and has little in return to show for it except lower paying jobs with fewer benefits and an increased struggle for working families. This is another example of a flawed trade bill that provides few if any assurances for jobs, working conditions, and the environment.”
Since 2000, previous trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and Most Favored Nation status for China, have led to the loss of 92,000 manufacturing jobs in Wisconsin. The six countries in the CAFTA have a collective buying power comparable to that of New Haven, Connecticut. Due to the limited size of their economies, these countries account for barely one percent of U.S. trade, an amount that makes it unlikely to provide much benefit to U.S. workers producing exports. This includes cheese and other agriculture exports from Wisconsin. The trade deregulation model in CAFTA primarily benefits global food corporations and pharmaceutical cartels, instead of Wisconsin's family farmers and rural communities. The proposed CAFTA agreement comes when the United States is actually projected to become a net importer of agricultural products for the first time in 45 years, a disturbing trend when combined with the increasing U.S. trade deficit.
“Trade agreements should contribute to economic growth, promote development and respect democracy in other nations, and be part of comprehensive efforts to ensure economic opportunities for U.S. workers,” said Hintz. “This agreement fails to do these things. Given the challenges facing Wisconsin’s economy, it is disappointing that Rep. Petri won’t stand up for the workers, businesses, and farmers in his own District.”
A Run Down of Pharmacists in Oshkosh That Pledge to Fill Birth Control
This letter appeared in the Oshkosh Northwestern this morning:
Not all pharmacists sign contraceptive pledge
My NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) friends and I have asked pharmacists in Oshkosh pharmacies to sign a pledge that reads: “I, (the pharmacist), am giving my personal assurance as your pharmacist that I will fill every woman’s prescription for contraception, every time. When a woman and her doctor have made the decision that a prescription for contraception is in her best interest, I respect their decision.”
Ken Bressers of Omro; Jennifer L. Villeneuve of Walgreen’s, Murdock Avenue; and James Bartelt of Schultz, Main Street, had no concerns when they signed the pledge. I personally want to thank them!
I thank Tom Ehrhardt at Aurora Pharmacy and Michael Maloney at the Kmart Pharmacy on Koeller Street who signed the pledge for themselves. Other pharmacists who would not sign it worked at Aurora on Westhaven Avenue and Bowen Street, Morton’s and Shopko on Koeller Street, Morton’s on 9th Avenue, Wal-Mart, and Walgreen’s on 9th Avenue, Koeller Avenue and Emmers Lane. They would send a patient to another pharmacy if they could not in good conscience fill the prescription. However Wal-Mart does not carry the preventative “morning after pill.”
The results indicate that Omro Pharmacy, Walgreen’s on Murdock Avenue or Schultz’s on Main Street guarantee that birth control prescriptions will be filled immediately. Tom Ehrhardt at Aurora Pharmacy and Michael Maloney at the Kmart, both on Koeller Street would be happy to fill your prescription.
If you would like to be listed as someone who would pledge to fill all birth control prescriptions, please send your name, your pharmacy’s name, address and telephone number to me at donley@athenet.net by July 31.
Corrine R. Donley Oshkosh
http://www.wisinfo.com/northwestern/news/opinion/stories/opinion_21967902.shtml
Not all pharmacists sign contraceptive pledge
My NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) friends and I have asked pharmacists in Oshkosh pharmacies to sign a pledge that reads: “I, (the pharmacist), am giving my personal assurance as your pharmacist that I will fill every woman’s prescription for contraception, every time. When a woman and her doctor have made the decision that a prescription for contraception is in her best interest, I respect their decision.”
Ken Bressers of Omro; Jennifer L. Villeneuve of Walgreen’s, Murdock Avenue; and James Bartelt of Schultz, Main Street, had no concerns when they signed the pledge. I personally want to thank them!
I thank Tom Ehrhardt at Aurora Pharmacy and Michael Maloney at the Kmart Pharmacy on Koeller Street who signed the pledge for themselves. Other pharmacists who would not sign it worked at Aurora on Westhaven Avenue and Bowen Street, Morton’s and Shopko on Koeller Street, Morton’s on 9th Avenue, Wal-Mart, and Walgreen’s on 9th Avenue, Koeller Avenue and Emmers Lane. They would send a patient to another pharmacy if they could not in good conscience fill the prescription. However Wal-Mart does not carry the preventative “morning after pill.”
The results indicate that Omro Pharmacy, Walgreen’s on Murdock Avenue or Schultz’s on Main Street guarantee that birth control prescriptions will be filled immediately. Tom Ehrhardt at Aurora Pharmacy and Michael Maloney at the Kmart, both on Koeller Street would be happy to fill your prescription.
If you would like to be listed as someone who would pledge to fill all birth control prescriptions, please send your name, your pharmacy’s name, address and telephone number to me at donley@athenet.net by July 31.
Corrine R. Donley Oshkosh
http://www.wisinfo.com/northwestern/news/opinion/stories/opinion_21967902.shtml
7.27.2005
Some Interesting Poll Results
American voters support the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v Wade decision 65 - 30 percent, the highest level of support in two years of national polls by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.
By a 61 - 32 percent margin, American voters say U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts should publicly state his position on abortion
However, most Americans must THINK they are the majority, but must FEEL left out:
A total of 83 percent of voters say "the views of the majority of Americans" should have a "great deal" or "some" influence on the Senate confirmation process. But only 35 percent of voters believe that majority views actually have any influence.
Newest on Bush and Congress:
American voters disapprove of the job President George W. Bush is doing 53 - 41 percent, his lowest approval rating since becoming President.
So much for activist judges being the problem.....
Read it all here:
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x11385.xml?ReleaseID=820
By a 61 - 32 percent margin, American voters say U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts should publicly state his position on abortion
However, most Americans must THINK they are the majority, but must FEEL left out:
A total of 83 percent of voters say "the views of the majority of Americans" should have a "great deal" or "some" influence on the Senate confirmation process. But only 35 percent of voters believe that majority views actually have any influence.
Newest on Bush and Congress:
American voters disapprove of the job President George W. Bush is doing 53 - 41 percent, his lowest approval rating since becoming President.
| Voters disapprove 60 - 30 percent of the way Congress is doing its job and approve 50 - 39 percent of the way the Supreme Court is doing its job. | |
| "The judges outscore the President and Congress on job performance," Carroll said |
So much for activist judges being the problem.....
Read it all here:
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x11385.xml?ReleaseID=820
7.26.2005
Fortunate Son
Quoted in full from the New York Press:
FORTUNATE SON
"With supreme guts and righteousness, President Bush went into Iraq," Gov. Pataki told the Republican National Convention last August. The place erupted with applause. It was all very stirring.
Almost one year later, Pataki's son Teddy is, with supreme guts and righteousness, seeking a three-year law school deferment from the Marines, which last week commissioned the recent Yale grad as a second lieutenant.
The governor, who himself received a medical deferment during the Vietnam War because of poor eyesight, has said he hopes his son is granted the deferment. Of course he does. No doubt all the parents of New York's nearly 100 war dead also wish their children could have gotten deferments. But they couldn't. They got killed instead.
During the run-up to the invasion, Pataki was one of Bush's biggest war whores in the Northeast, taking his pro-war stump speech on the road to warn New Yorkers about the imminent threat posed by Saddam Hussein. Since the governor's support for the war has yet to waver, it is more than a little annoying to hear him publicly wishing for his son's deferral.
If the cause in Iraq is even half as important as the governor has led us to believe, then surely his son is more needed in Fallujah than in some Cambridge lecture hall. If, on the other hand, the governor no longer considers the war important enough to justify his son's immediate contribution, then he should speak up as loudly as he did in the winter of 2003. Which is it, George?
http://www.nypress.com/18/26/pagetwo/newshole4.cfm
FORTUNATE SON
"With supreme guts and righteousness, President Bush went into Iraq," Gov. Pataki told the Republican National Convention last August. The place erupted with applause. It was all very stirring.
Almost one year later, Pataki's son Teddy is, with supreme guts and righteousness, seeking a three-year law school deferment from the Marines, which last week commissioned the recent Yale grad as a second lieutenant.
The governor, who himself received a medical deferment during the Vietnam War because of poor eyesight, has said he hopes his son is granted the deferment. Of course he does. No doubt all the parents of New York's nearly 100 war dead also wish their children could have gotten deferments. But they couldn't. They got killed instead.
During the run-up to the invasion, Pataki was one of Bush's biggest war whores in the Northeast, taking his pro-war stump speech on the road to warn New Yorkers about the imminent threat posed by Saddam Hussein. Since the governor's support for the war has yet to waver, it is more than a little annoying to hear him publicly wishing for his son's deferral.
If the cause in Iraq is even half as important as the governor has led us to believe, then surely his son is more needed in Fallujah than in some Cambridge lecture hall. If, on the other hand, the governor no longer considers the war important enough to justify his son's immediate contribution, then he should speak up as loudly as he did in the winter of 2003. Which is it, George?
http://www.nypress.com/18/26/pagetwo/newshole4.cfm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)