What's This About?
 

What's with you guys? You all resolve to dumb down your arguments so SS can seem more like an equal member of the team?

What's This About?
 

I'll admit I'm a little slow to understand your willingness to defend all actions of the administration, no matter the cost. I'm not sure whether it's the sophistication of your arguments or if it's just difficult to understand what you're saying while you've got Rumsfeld's nuts in your mouth.

Does this Count as Bipartisan?
 

• WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush on Monday tapped two former presidents - his father, President George H.W. Bush, and his predecessor, President Clinton - to lead a nationwide, private fund-raising campaign to help victims of the Asian tsunamis.
  
  "I ask every American to contribute as they are able to do so," Bush said in the White House's Roosevelt Room, the two former presidents at his side.
  
  Clinton and the first President Bush are to lead an effort to encourage the American people and businesses to support relief and reconstruction activities in areas devastated by the tsunamis, the president said. He also ordered that American flags fly at half-staff all week in sympathy for "the victims of a great tragedy," particularly the many thousands of dead and orphaned children.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050103/D87CNQ900.html

Does this Count as Bipartisan?
 

Depends on whether he gives Clinton more than a mop and bus fare to Sri Lanka.

What's This About?
 

If I thought you were speaking literally, I'd try to scare Hank by posting something like, "Ben Wallace and Rasheed Wallace dead in murder-suicide pact; distraught Chauncey Billups leaves the NBA to become Russian Orthodox monk."

Diego Garcia
 

More on the island and the tsunami here. The skinny:

• "Favorable ocean topography minimized the tsunami’s impact on the atoll. Diego Garcia is part of the Chagos Archipelago, situated on the southernmost part of the Chagos-Laccadive Ridge. To the east lies the Chagos Trench, a 400 mile long, underwater canyon that ranges in depth from less than 1,00 meters below the surface to depths that plunge to over 5,000 meters. It is one of the deepest regions of the Indian Ocean.
  Diego Garcia is located to the west of Chagos Trench, which runs north and south. The depth of the Chagos Trench and grade to the shores does not allow for tsunamis to build before passing the atoll. The result of the earthquake was seen as a tidal surge estimated at six feet."

Six feet is still higher than the average elevation of the island, but maybe it was low tide.

Does this Count as Bipartisan?
 

Yup. It's a bipartisan effort to encourage private donations. I don't really think that this is what you would like "count" to mean here, but it's an encouraging step nonetheless in raising funds to help, and in promoting Americans as a generous people.

FWIW, others have noted that the dynamic of calibrating the public response very badly in the beginning and trying to catch up later is not unusual for this Administration.

• President Bush's initial, halting response to the Indian Ocean tsunami catastrophe, followed within days by strong expressions of concern and decisive action, spotlighted a governing style that sometimes finds its stride only after stumbling at the gate.
  
  This seems especially true when Bush is confronted with a cataclysmic event and must improvise quickly — as with the Dec. 26 tsunami or the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
  
  "The pattern we tend to see is an administration that quite often ends up doing the right thing, even though their initial judgments and first reactions are often wrong and short-sighted," said Charles Cook, a Washington-based political analyst and publisher of the Cook Political Report.
  
  Slow to speak out, Bush first offered $15 million in financial aid, then $35 million. But now, having upped the aid package to $350 million and dispatched both Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Bush's brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, to survey relief efforts, the president may capitalize on an opportunity to provide world leadership and improve his image among Muslims opposed to the Iraq war. Many of the tsunami victims are Muslim.
  
  The president's decision to send his brother to the region was "about as strong a signal of personal concern and intent to help as Bush could send without going himself," said Bruce Buchanan, a University of Texas historian.

Does this Count as Bipartisan?
 

Tens of thousands of homeless hungry girls? I'd make that fucker put on a chastity belt before I gave him the airplane tickets.

What's This About?
 

You bring new meaning to the term "bleeding heart."

Does this Count as Bipartisan?
 

You're really not being fair to Bush. The initial chintzy response to the tsunami was not a result of bad judgment. There just weren't enough dollars being printed. It's a matter of physics.

What's This About?
 

Hardly. I just happen to subscribe to the notion that you don't win hearts and minds by putting bullets through them. Sometimes you gotta kill a motherfucker, but you can't then expect his brother to be your friend.

I'm just sayin'...

What's This About?
 

Yes, Hank. My evidence is that they're upgrading the existing vehicles now and making new armored HMMVs according to some kind of government-approved plan.

If those plans weren't in place or approved before we invaded Iraq, I can only ask "why bilmore, why"?

I don't know how quickly they moved to get armored HMMVs, Hank -- but it wasn't quickly enough. You see, IIRC, your basic HMMV is not an armored vehicle at all.

Planning for this war began in November, 2001, Hank. 18 months is more than enough time to "up-armor" a few thousand HMMVs even if they couldn't procure armored ones in that time period. The armed forces built entire bases, airstrips, docks, etc. in that time.

I'll omit the cheap shot about no-bid contracting, and just note that there are legal mechanisms by which one can bypass procurement requirements. We could have used them.

You should stick to topics you know something about (but then, it would get awfully quiet).

S_A_M

P.S. You're right, though, that the initial issue really wasn't one of lack of military funding due to the tax cuts. It was one of poor planning - and a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem at high levels. Fast, light, cheap. We win. Remember Rumsfeld insisting throughout the summer of 2003 that there was no insurgency?

I believe it had become an issue of funding since then, as the government simply hasn't done it as fast as possible, but kept those tax cuts going. Its all about choices.

Don't worry, though, Hank, the up-armoring is just about done now, so we hope not to have too many more kids missing limbs which could have been saved by the money Bush sent back to us taxpayers.

edited by Not Bob to fix quote tag.

Does this Count as Bipartisan?
 

This was cute. Nicely done.

What's This About?
 

Really? Hundreds of thousands of lives at stake, and your qualm is that it might cost more than it initially seems to help them?

And aren't their pretty easy ways around this problem (NGOs)?

What's This About?
 

Does anyone think that government funds should ever be spent other than for the benefit of US citizens? Isn't the disagreement entirely over how broadly you define "benefit?"

Caption please
 

http://photos1.blogger.com/img/78/1172/400/1004.jpg

Club cops a feel?

Caption please
 

hmmm a box with an X in it?

Oh I know. what did the Buchanan portion of Ty's ballot look like in 2000?

Caption please
 

Hank, sorry you have a defective browser; try right clicking and "showing picture".

If that fails, click on the link: http://photos1.blogger.com/img/78/1172/400/1004.jpg

This just in!
 

Christmas at the Rumsfelds!

http://www.lowculture.com/archives/images/rummytree.jpg

Lovely article. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

The Economist was one of the earliest supporters of invading Iraq. Even after it became obvious that there were no WMDs (and the Economist was calling Bush and Blair "Eager Deceivers"), the editors maintained that the invasion was the right thing to do.

Are they having second thoughts yet? Or still maintaining the illusion that you can evaluate a policy in the abstract, without considering how it is likely to be, and actually, implemented?

Zarqawi Caught!
 

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashai.htm

Counterintuitive?
 

• A new and provocative study on affirmative action, which will appear in the Stanford Law Review this month, is attracting such attention that there is a special click-through on the publication's Web site to field questions about it. The conclusions of the study, that racial preferences at law schools produce fewer rather than more black lawyers, is already generating controversy that is sure to only increase.
  
  The study, "A Systematic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools," argues, using statistical analysis, that although total elimination of racial preferences would cause a 14 percent reduction in the number of blacks accepted to law school, there would be an 8 percent increase in the number of blacks actually becoming lawyers. The reason for this, according to the analysis in the 100-plus page study, is because of the improvement in grades, graduation rates, and rates in passing bar examinations that would result from color-blind admissions policies.
  
  The author of the study, Richard Sander, is a law professor at UCLA who is also trained as an economist. It is interesting to also note that, according to press profiles, Sander is a long-time liberal and advocate of race-conscious public policy. His apparent motive in doing the study was to provide rigorous analysis that would examine if indeed racial preferences produce the net benefit to blacks that are the alleged justification of these policies.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/S...20050104.shtml

Caption please
 

Hank's apparently not the only one. I clicked on your link and got this:

ERROR
The requested URL could not be retrieved

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While trying to retrieve the URL: http://127.0.0.1:8000/img/78/1172/400/1004.jpg

The following error was encountered:

Access Denied.
Access control configuration prevents your request from being allowed at this time. Please contact your service provider if you feel this is incorrect.

Your cache administrator is root.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Generated Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:44:25 GMT by photos1.blogger.com (squid/2.5.STABLE3)

I'm still at a loss for a caption.

Zarqawi Caught!
 

Now updated to say that U.S. officials are calling reports 'dubious'.

Is the Iraqi Information Minister back in the business?

Zarqawi Caught!
 

But this shit is true....maybe sending relief isn't the way to get people to like us......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4144405.stm

Zarqawi Caught!
 

'twould be wonderful if Zarqawi was captured, or dead. But everything Drudge says about Iraq is suspect, at least since he reported the discovery of a stockpile of nuclear missiles.



I miss Baghdad Bob. Wonder what happened to him -- did someone fry his stomach?

What's This About?
 

Any expenditure of money or resources chosen through democratic expression that serves and advances our essential moral positions is spent for our benefit. We support "the good", and fight "the bad", as a way of advancing our chosen moral positions and definitions. For me, but obviously not for you, your two examples work equally well. Long live democracy, eh?

Has this been said?
 

When viewing the recent press conference regarding the tsunami, am I the only person thinking that we'd all be better off with the either of the two persons flanking the actual president?

Zarqawi Caught!
 

Actually, Wonkette ran it first, but carefully noted that it was from the China Daily and unconfirmed and used a headline that downplayed it; Drudge was the one who just put it in big bold letters at the top of the page without any qualification.

Give it to Matty; he'll eat anything!

Zarqawi Caught!
 

"Really, I Just Make Shit Up!"

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashai.htm

Zarqawi Caught!
 

Here's something made up- Pamela and David ickes!
http://www.icke-media.com/archives/i...ke1[1].jpg

Zarqawi Caught!
 

That is so hot.

Zarqawi Caught!
 

Give it a week or two before making final judgments.

All official sources would no doubt want to keep news of the capture of Zarqawi from spreading while they put panties on his head and try to roll up as much of his network as possible.

S_A_M

P.S. Speaking of panties on the head, what happened to the search for the mysterious WH aides who leaked Valerie Plame's identity?

Zarqawi Caught!
 

I thought that the Bush Administration had admitted it was unable to figure out which of its members had violated the law. Given this failure of intelligence, it was looking for the NY Times to bail it out through a simple breach of journalistic ethics.

But breaking the law is no big deal, we're told, because nobody really likes Wilson anyways.

Zarqawi Caught!
 

Josh Marshall had it. He brought it out, like, fifty times. People were getting really bored with it.

But then Sandy Berger came over one day, and now nobody can find it . . .

Zarqawi Caught!
 

Since all the good jokes have been taken . .

The grand jury is still convened; Novak apparently has not yet testified (unless he revealed his source, thus avoiding the need to invoke any kind of privilege).

Zarqawi Caught!
 

Or maybe it's just proof that people who listen to the Sea Gods know when they are angry.

What's This About?
 

I agree that both are sometimes necessary expenditures. I don't think both are equally desirable. But I acknowledge that sometimes a show of force is more effective.

Zarqawi Caught!
 

Query - why is Novak not in jail? I don't mean for contempt for refusing to reveal the WH source, I mean because, regardless of the crimes of his source, he, too, outed Plame and independently broke the applicable law protecting our spies' identities. Why, therefore, is that hack not in fucking jail? The only excuse for it would be granting him a pardon to get him to spill his source, but I haven't heard anything to indicate such a deal was on offer.

BR(old rant, sorry)C