Replies: 15 Comments
Comment #1: Nolip said on 10/3/06 @ 10:43am ET...
This painfully obvious piece of news that surfaced in Woodward's book is something that's been addressed for the entire Bush presidency by those who challenged the status quo as put forth by Bush, that Iraq was the target and not Bin Laden. It begs the question: "Now that Woodward has put the exclamation point on this administration's failure to act against Bin Laden because they were too caught up in wanting war with Iraq, why isn't impeachment the singular solution for eliminating "with prejudice" this blight on our nation's governance, that is, why isn't Bush in jail?
Comment #2: Truth_in_action said on 10/3/06 @ 1:17pm ET...
I suggest everyone keep one eye keenly on this Administration regarding their desire for a pre-emptive war in Iran while we have all this disruption well-timed book releases.
I think Condolezza was caught in a big, bold-faced indiscretion this time. Can't wiggle out of this one, I'm afraid!
Concerning a separate topic of Foley and the pages, it appears other pages may be coming forth with information about other members of Congress.
Some pages are afraid to speak because it might dismantal potential future political careers.
Why do I feel like a lot of Republican luck has just started to run out? It feels like their house of cards is beginning to fall, their fun-house mirrors are suddenly reflecting their true personages. It's very interesting.
Comment #3: Frosted Flake said on 10/3/06 @ 2:38pm ET...
They put the yams out for the monkeys. The monkeys came down to the beach to eat them. Ate a lot of sand too. One took his yam to the water, and ate no sand. Another saw and did. Then a few more. After a certian number had learned, suddenly all of them knew. This is called the Hundredth Monkey effect. It shows that you don't have to teach ALL of them, in order to teach all of them. You need only teach enough of them. Then, as if by magic, everyone "knows" what the deal is.
This is, I think, what Cali, Unspun and Nolip are commenting on. The Woodward book is being addressed as revelation, not because it is, but because we have achieved the hundredth monkey.
The focus on Rice, on her refusal to acceed to cause for concern when it was brought to her, is, I think, due to the subtextual awareness (99th monkey) of the actual threat America faces. Bin Laden, et al, was/is a tiny and fundamentaly hopeless faux threat. While capable of trouble (who isn't, really?), they need help to be viewed as threat. And the help they need came, from the Whitehouse, as remains true till now. Al-ciada has been blown up like a balloon in order to make an impressive display. Those not taken in were threatened and abused, ridiculed and tarred as unpatriotic, etcetera, in order to tie thier hands while the Constitution was redefined as a weapon being used against the United States...used by faux terrorists...the ultimate objective being to discredit the idea of limited government. Limited government being one of specific, defined powers. As opposed to the alternate concept of anything goes.
Who would want such a thing? The folks the Constitution exists to control, of course. There is a reason we have a Constitution. It is the same reason it was written in the first place. And this reason is, at last, backing slowly into the public consciousness.
And Foley is helping that happen. The folks he is upsetting could care less about death, particularly others peoples deaths. Gay pedofilia, on the other hand, has an effect on them similar to pouring a gallon of icewater in one ear and out the other. Now they are awake. (!) And they now realize these ain't the good guys. Tragic as it is, these are awakened, alerted, alarmed. And embarressed.
And now comes Frist. Is this really a surprise? To who?
Sorry, that should have been, to whom?
Comment #4: Frosted Flake said on 10/3/06 @ 3:45pm ET...
This is a joke. This isn't. Which is the more funny?
I don't mean that in a good way.
Postscript. This ain't Secret. But apparently DOD thinks a reflected distributed denial of service attack IS a secret. Whatabunchafrigginmorons.
Comment #5: Citizen J said on 10/3/06 @ 3:46pm ET...
Nice, Frosty- the "Hundreth Monkey Syndrome". I've mentioned that in relation to 9/11.
Slowly, but surely. One by one.
Comment #6: Ron said on 10/3/06 @ 4:21pm ET...
Off Topic , again!
Seeing as I,m from Florida ,I just had to comment on Mark!
Mark Foley R e-thug-likin from Florida
The holy, religious, congressman has quit his post in congress. Naturally, with ALL the same benefits and salary, as those, that are really doing their jobs? I guess you can now say Mark, (A nice biblical name by the way,) has turned a new PAGE! I wonder if he wears dresses at home?
And I wonder if those bad boy colleagues of his,all of whom knew what he was up to, are doing the same thing,you know wearing dressis ,and turning pages?
Comment #7: number6 said on 10/3/06 @ 4:49pm ET...
On the topic of Foley, I hear rumors of 'something' big to be announced at 5pm EST.
Comment #8: cali said on 10/3/06 @ 5:14pm ET...
here's the headline from ABC number 6
FOLEY BOMBSHELL COMING ... FORMER CONGRESSMAN'S ATTORNEY TO HOLD NEWS
Comment #9: number6 said on 10/3/06 @ 6:48pm ET...
That really wasn't much of a revelation was it?
Comment #10: unspun said on 10/3/06 @ 7:27pm ET...
THIRTEEN US Troops have been killed in Iraq in since October 1—11 in the last two days. TWO US troops were killed in Afghanistan yesterday, 3 were wounded. If that death rate were to continue for the rest of the month, the result would be 1 3 5 deaths in Iraq/Afghanistan by the end of this month.
Is it acceptable to Congress and America to continue to lose troops in an effort that has no plan—no “mission”—there is the nebulous “we’ll stand down as Iraqi’s stand up”. What exactly does that mean??? What are the concrete goals and the timeline for accomplishing these goals? How long are the Iraqi’s being given to “stand-up”? If they never “stand-up” are we going to stay there forever, or till we run out of troops, whichever comes first? Do we have any projection of how many troops and how much money we can pour into this effort before we determine that it is costing us TOO MUCH?
What is the Republican Plan—is it to: A. Redeploy ASAP, as in the Murtha plan? Of course not they won't (let other people's kids) "cut & run". B. Go back to bombing and shooting everything in sight, until the Iraqi’s that are left standing give up & quit fighting each other and us? C. Keep sending in troops to patrol around Iraq, not knowing friend from foe, and not being able to accomplish much of permanent impact, meanwhile being shot and blown-up?
Congressman Conyers—the Democrats must ask these questions of their Republican opponents in the next few weeks before the elections—make them answer them—hold their feet to the fire. Iraq and Afghanistan are spinning out of control, the military is being literally bled to death, the country is being bankrupted, and the Republicans are allowing it to continue.
While the media is 24/7 on Foley, and Woodward’s “revelations” re: Condi-liar, our soldiers are dying and their deaths are just a footnote on the back page on the newspaper.
Comment #11: MAX 1 said on 10/3/06 @ 7:28pm ET...
It IS always someone else's fault when you're a member of the Repugnant Party, NO???
If it's not Clenis, it's the liberals or the Muslims or the gays or the immigrants or the Democrats or the abortionists or the stem cell scientists or the Patriots or the ...(fill in blank).
Comment #12: unspun said on 10/3/06 @ 7:36pm ET...
TIA, re: #2: I've seen some reports of the military "ramping up" & positioning around Iran. There is talk of two carrier groups deploying in the area & as far as I know, this would be a ramping up, as the Navy had cut back to deploying just one carrier group at a time.
I've been looking for more solid reporting on this, but the media is MIA so far. Apparently it takes all their reporters, newspaper space, and air time to cover the Foley case, with a bit of Woodward coverage. Any time left over is taken up by Anna Nicole Smith, et al. Nothing else is apparently very important.
Comment #13: cali said on 10/4/06 @ 12:47am ET...
Computer Science Professor Argues For a Paper Trail With E-Voting
The back cover of "Brave New Ballot," a new book on the young and controversial subject of electronic voting, promises dramatic revelations: "Aviel Rubin, a computer scientist at Johns Hopkins University and a specialist in systems security, knows something the rest of us don't. Maybe we suspected it, maybe we've thought it, but we didn't have proof. Until now."
Declaring that "democracy has never been more vulnerable," the book sells itself as something more than a summary of the bitter battle that has unfolded in recent years: computer scientists and activists who argue that electronic voting machines are vulnerable vs. machine vendors and election officials who say the systems are safe.
"Brave New Ballot," released this fall, comes as the vast majority of the American public will use electronic voting machines in next month's midterm elections -- many for the first time. And primaries this year in Maryland and other states have shown that electronic voting can cause election chaos.
Comment #14: number6 said on 10/4/06 @ 1:47am ET...
I wonder if Bush gave away the October suprise.
Comment #15: wallen said on 10/4/06 @ 7:28am ET...
what\'s up with this?