Bob Cesca's Goddamn Awesome Blog! Go!: January 09, 2005

« January 02, 2005 - January 08, 2005 | Main | January 16, 2005 - January 22, 2005 »

January 15, 2005

The Bush Crime Family must be stopped

As Biederman points out below, there aren't words to describe the criminality of the Bush administration's latest brazen violation of all things ethical and legal. Once again, the Bushies are taking our money in order to... what else? Take our money.

Complain to the Social Security Administration here.

Write to your Congressman here.

Write to your Senator here.

Write to Mr. Bush: president@whitehouse.gov (Keep it polite. The Secret Service frowns on fighting words.)

Contact the White House here.

Write to the AARP here. They'll want to hear about this.

10:36 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Social Security cash used for Bush effort

In today's NY Times:

Over the objections of many of its own employees, the Social Security Administration is gearing up for a major effort to publicize the financial problems of Social Security and to convince the public that private accounts are needed as part of any solution.

So it's apparently a "moral obligation" to fix the "bankrupt" Social Security Net by spending tax payer social security dollars to promote how Social Security will fail. Sounds just like a Bush/Rove plan to me. And it's immoral to boot!

09:15 PM | Comments (3) | Posted By Jim Biederman

Swift Boat Liars get inaugural reception?

In and amongst a Washington Post item today about the counter-inaugural "protests" happening on Thursday (WaPo: "The Revolution will be polite. Imagine a do-over of the '60s, this time without the acid and the poor hygiene and the bad craziness.") I noticed a throw-away line that stood out like a sore thumb. A lying sore thumb.

Swift boat veterans who torpedoed John Kerry will be honored in a reception after the parade.

So a group of men whose talking points have been widely and repeatedly debunked (FactCheck) -- a group of men on the front lines of the GOP effort to diminish John Kerry's military service while Mr. Bush dodged the draft -- are being honored at the post-inaugural festivities.

Tell me this is a joke. Funny, funny Washington Post!

Hahahaha.

Ha?

08:34 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Marriage banned at Connecticut church

Rev. Michael F. Ray photo by Douglas Healey Slowly, supporters of civil liberties in the religious community are beginning a counter-revolution in the name of freedom for all Americans.

First, Sister Joan Chittister appeared on "Now with Bill Moyers" to throw down the civil liberties gauntlet and to debunk the "moral values mandate", and now Rev. Michael F. Ray of St. Thomas's Episcopal Church in New Haven, Connecticut is refusing to administer weddings to everyone. That is until the Episcopal Church lifts its ban on gay marriage.

It's a small but powerful protest. The New York Times:

The church has adopted the new policy even though no gay couples have asked to be married there.

Only about five heterosexual couples a year seek to be married at St. Thomas's. The Rev. Michael F. Ray, the church's priest, said he would refer those couples to one of a dozen other Episcopal churches in the area. He also said he would ask the couples "to postpone their marriage and stand in solidarity with same-sex couples so they understand what it's like not to have that privilege."

Sounds like a great idea -- not just for members of St. Thomas's, but for all straight couples. Add that to the idea of proposing constitutional amendments banning divorce and adultery. See how quickly anti-gay wingnuts like Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Bill Bennett, and Bob Barr begin to -- what's the word -- flip-flop on their moral obligation to uphold the "sanctity of marriage".

03:36 PM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Graner 'followed military, civilian orders'

Was the 'thumbs up' part of the orders? The official Bush administration line is: Abu Ghraib was perpetrated by a few bad apples.

That's not what Spc. Charles Graner said on the stand today. The AP:

He said he initially resisted pressure to mistreat prisoners, but his Army superiors made it clear to him that he was expected to obey the commands of the military and civilian intelligence agents who ran his part of Abu Ghraib.

Graner said a lieutenant in his unit told him: "If (military intelligence) asks you to do this, it needs to be done. They're in charge, follow their orders." (emphasis added)

That's right. Follow their orders or else because they just got a "mandate" and have plenty of protective "political capital".

02:56 PM | Comments (2) | Posted By Bob Cesca

U.S. human rights authority diminished

Human Rights Watch just issued a scathing 527 page report in which it details the chief crux of the administration's covert torture practices. The BBC:

"Governments facing human rights pressure from the United States now find it easy to turn the tables," said Mr Roth [executive director of HRW]. "Washington can't very well uphold principles that it violates itself."

The solution they propose, in my opinion, is just the beginning:

The group calls for the Bush administration to set up a fully independent investigative commission, similar to the 9/11 Commission, to look into the Abu Ghraib allegations.

The administration says that the trial of Spc. Graner and so forth should suffice. The Nazis used this excuse at Nuremberg, and the whole world stood up and said that excuse is no longer valid.

09:48 AM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

O'Reilly on bloggers, Air America

Here's some choice quotes from last night's O'Splotchy fest:

HUGH HEWITT [AUTHOR]: Now Daily Kos says, this is one of the bloggers from the left, says he disclosed it, but not to the satisfaction of anyone who watches him. I didn't know.

O'REILLY: Aw, this is bunk. This is bull. Nobody knew about this.

HEWITT: That's right.

As Kos pointed out this morning:

Nobody? ABC News knew about it, Salon knew about it, Online Journalism Review knew about it, the San Francisco Chronicle knew about it, Wired knew about it, New York Times Magazine knew about it, American Journalism Review knew about it, everyone who visited my site in the summer and fall of 2003 knew about it. And I got those links with about 5 minutes of Googling.

Shame on Hewitt, who just wrote a book about blogs. Well informed author, this Hewitt guy. Then O'Reilly ripped into the perfectly legal and ethical funding of private enterprise:

O'REILLY: Then you've got George Soros, he's paying a lot more than that to have these defamation websites that attack people all day long. Then you've got guys pumping Air America, that radio network. That's not profitable; that's running on money from some crazy left-wing nut. And, I mean, it's getting out of control, is it not?

Replace "Air America" with "Fox News" and George Soros with "Rupert Murdoch". And "crazy left-wing nut" with "crazy right-wing nut". Also, I misquoted O'Reilly last night. I used the word "nutjob" in the article below.

O'REILLY: All right, but here's the danger, and I've just been through this, OK? You've got websites, as you call them Black Ops websites, who will print defamation. All right, that's what they're in the business to do. They'll fabricate stuff, they'll make stuff up, they print it.

All the stuff he's talking about is stuff that he and his network have been engaging in since the Clinton presidency. It's remarkable -- the delusion.

O'REILLY: No, but you're not going to lose credibility if you smear people. People like to read smear stuff.

Does he mean smear stuff like "crazy left-wing nuts"?

Falafel with extra liar

09:04 AM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

January 14, 2005

O'Reilly: Air America funding unethical?

By way of a follow-up on the Kos item... O'Reilly did a segment on the Kos/Dean non-issue tonight.

In and amongst ripping blogs for smearing people (him), O'Reilly screamed about the funding of Air America by "liberal nutjobs", casting it as if it were some sort of heinous ethical violation.

Three things here.

1. How the hell is this wrong? How is this unethical?

2. Isn't FNC funded by a right-wing nutjob?

3. In the same breath, O'Reilly pontificated with self-righteous indignation about how he has rules he has to follow*, and the bloggers have no rules; how he'd be thrown off the air for smearing people in the same way bloggers smear people (him); then proceeded to smear people like George Soros by calling them "nutjobs" and insinuating that Soros, Air America, and the radio network's investors are somehow engaged in ethical violations.

O'Reilly isn't to be taken seriously. Problem is, 2 million viewers take him seriously every damn night.

*O'Reilly's rules: 1) Lie at least once per segment; 2) Over-use the word "stuff" so as to sound "of the people"; and 3) Decry others for smearing, then smear away!

08:36 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Markos vs. Armstrong: the bottom line

Can you see it? The way the right is deflecting allegations of propaganda against the White House and Armstrong Williams? Instead of facing the issue head-on and acquitting itself, they're trumping up a year old story about Kos being paid by the Dean campaign to consult on the primaries.

Despite the massive coverage this is getting on O'Reilly, the WSJ, Drudge, and the freeper blogs, the issue isn't an issue at all. And the circumstances are very different.

1. Dean didn't use taxpayer cash to pay Kos. The administration used federal funds to pay Williams.

2. Kos fully disclosed his employment on the Dean campaign and much discussion took place about it (over a year ago!) on hbis site. Williams only disclosed after USA Today uncovered it with a FOIA request.

3. MyDD's Jerome Armstrong actually stopped publishing his blog during his employment. Williams kept writing, broadcasting, and pundit-ing while on the administration payroll.

4. Dean was a primary candidate for president and, clearly, had no power to propose legislation to Congress under the banner of the office of the presidency, with the "will of the people" as a bargaining tool. I mention the obvious here because you'd actually be surprised by how badly the freepers don't get this very obvious detail.

Mainly, expect the Kos/MyDD/Dean story to completely eclipse the White House propaganda allegations with a zeal far exceeding the limp coverage of the Williams issue.

08:09 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Global warming is real

The earth is getting hotter, and the United States official policy is "no, it isn't."

Uh, yes, it is. And you can throw up every excuse for driving poison-emitting SUVs, but the ozone isn't listening. It's deteriorating. But it's not the heat that's gonna hurt us first: it's the water. Because as it gets hotter, giant blocks of ice (scientists call them glaciers, Mr. Bush) melt. And the ocean level gets higher. And it rains a lot more.

Courtesy of truthout.org, check out this story on melting glaciers. Here's a pretty alarming quote:

Around the world, high-altitude regions are warming and melting. Kilimanjaro's glaciers have all but disappeared. Glacier National Park's are melting so fast that federal computer models predict they'll be gone by 2030.

2030. We're not talking about leaving a world for our grandchildren, folks. We're talking about leaving a world for us.

06:17 PM | Comments (2) | Posted By John Christian Plummer

Powell: "We're losing."

The Financial Times gives us this great bit of high-level conversation:

Mr Bush recently asked Mr Powell for his view on the progress of the war. "We're losing," Mr Powell was quoted as saying. Mr Freeman said Mr Bush then asked the secretary of state to leave.

Powell is a career soldier who has seen war first-hand more than once. Powell was chairman of the joint chiefs. Bush failed at the oil business. He failed as a baseball team owner. And he failed to complete his draft-avoiding air national guard duty. And Bush tells him to get out of the room.

Now, more than ever, we need to read "The Emperor's New Clothes."

12:45 PM | Comments (1) | Posted By John Christian Plummer

Bush kinda' sorta' regrets 'Bring 'em on'

The AP:

"'Bring 'em on' is the classic example, when I was really trying to rally the troops and make it clear to them that I fully understood, you know, what a great job they were doing. And those words had an unintended consequence. It kind of, some interpreted it to be defiance in the face of danger. That certainly wasn't the case."

Is that an apology? Perhaps a thread of regret?

"I don't know if you'd call it a regret, but it certainly is a lesson that a president must be mindful of, that the words that you sometimes say. ... I speak plainly sometimes, but you've got to be mindful of the consequences of the words. So put that down. I don't know if you'd call that a confession, a regret, something."

Yeah. Put that down, mainstream media. "Mr. Bush issues quasi-regretful non-regret-based statement which may or may not be regret or a confession. Definitely not an apology -- or maybe a regretful confession of pseudo-guilt? If nothing else, Mr. Bush issues statement of 'something'."

So the tens of thousands of casualties as a result of these statements... Any thoughts, Mr. Bush? Didn't think so.

07:58 AM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

His daddy didn't pull strings

This is Pfc. Alan Jermaine Lewis. He's 23. He's from Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He was wounded July 16, 2003 on Highway 8 in Baghdad when the Humvee he was driving hit a land mine blowing off both legs, burning his face, and breaking his left arm in 6 places. He was delivering ice to other soldiers at the time.

When George W. Bush was 23, he had a stateside gig his dad scored to keep Georgie out of Vietnam. A job which Georgie didn't even complete. How can we ever expect Bush to realize that the Iraq War is worse than Vietnam, and getting worse by the day?

Bush will probably never know Alan Jermaine Lewis. But Alan Lewis will never forget Bush. I hope, when you hear some ignorant person trying to tell you that the Iraq War is okay, you will tell them about Alan Lewis. And the tens of thousands of men and women like him.

01:07 AM | Comments (2) | Posted By John Christian Plummer

January 13, 2005

America to Bush - Torture Wrong

A new USA Today poll released today shows that an overwhelming amount of Americans feel that torture during interrogations is wrong. And, many also felt that the Abu Ghraib torture scandal has hurt the image of Americans around the world as the defenders of liberty. And they would be correct. On both counts. But the White House continues it's odd crusade of defending their right to use torture. Strange.

Uh duh: FBI software still not working

Far be it from me to criticize the FBI's attempt at updating a high tech computer software system they have been trying to install since 9/11. And I am sure there are alot of moving parts to worry about. Indeed, a senior staff member said today that updating the FBI's computer system, specifically it's Virtual Case File system was like "changing wheels on a car that is going at 70 miles per hour". But this just seems like they are really behind the times:

The FBI is now doing a pilot on the small portion of the software that does seem to work -- one that will allow agents to create case files on a computer instead of on paper.

What the...? Wow, we're fucked.

Homeland Security money well spent

As we know, the District of Columbia is being forced to use Homeland Security funds for next week's "George W. Bush Wartime Tilt-a-Whirl". Guess what some of that precious anti-evildoer money will be spent on. ABC News:

The [D.C.] mayor's spokeswoman, Sharon Gang, says that includes reviewing stands for the inaugural parade and special license plates for the event.

No balloon animals?

08:08 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Driving your SUV while the planet burns

For all you Americans who drive SUVs: JUST CUT IT OUT.

If the heaviest rainfall in the history of California isn't enough to convince you that our planet is in deep environmental shit, then check out this little piece from the CBC on the lack of snow in Europe this winter.

Automakers are starting to produce hybrids en masse, but they still won't change the emissions standards for SUVs. Is your pathetically needy ego going to be able to shield your skin from the sun's harmful rays? Deal with feeling small in some way that doesn't destroy the only planet we've got.

07:04 PM | Comments (4) | Posted By John Christian Plummer

Vote AND die: elections in Iraq

Today, gunmen shot and killed Kassim Imhawi, the director of a Baghdad election center. Al Jazeera has the story.

Despite this latest deadly bit of election news, Prime Minister Allawi, the Iraqi puppet of our American puppet, Li'l Georgie the Talking President, assures his people that the elections will go forward as planned.

It's just that not that many people will vote. Which is fine with Mr. Allawi, as he'd like to "win." And if some voters have to be killed in the process, well...shit happens.

06:50 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By John Christian Plummer

Borat nearly causes stampede at rodeo

Wowee-wowa! Success! This is a beautiful thing. Sacha Baron Cohen -- Ali G -- duped an entire red state crowd at a rodeo in Salem, Virginia.

It started when a 'Middle Eastern man in an American flag shirt and a cowboy hat' was introduced to the crowd as Borat Sagdiyev from Kazakhstan, an immigrant touring America.

Speaking in broken English, the man said: "I hope you kill every man, woman and child in Iraq, down to the lizards. And may George W. Bush drink the blood of every man, woman and child in Iraq."

He then told the crowd to be seated, put his hat back on, and launched into a butchered version of The Star-Spangled Banner that ended with the words "your home in the grave".

Full story. Cohen's aptitude for screwing with rednecks borders on some of the most brilliant satire of our time. Here's another example.

12:17 PM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Washington Monthly: Candidates for '08

Washington Monthly has a great summation of potential and dare-to-dream Democratic candidates for 2008, including Bill Cosby, Tom Brokaw, Tom Hanks, and (strong possibility) Senator Bill Nelson.

Check it.

The only two they missed: Martin Sheen and Oprah.

11:35 AM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Grounds for impeachment: the Quotes

We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud. Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor CNN Late Edition 9/8/2002

But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them. George W. Bush, President Interview with TVP Poland 5/30/2003

How the United States should react if Iraq acquired WMD. "The first line of defense...should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence--if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration." Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor January/February 2000 issue of Foreign Affairs 2/1/2000

We are greatly concerned about any possible linkup between terrorists and regimes that have or seek weapons of mass destruction...In the case of Saddam Hussein, we've got a dictator who is clearly pursuing and already possesses some of these weapons.. A regime that hates America and everything we stand for must never be permitted to threaten America with weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President Detroit, Fund-Raiser 6/20/2002

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President Speech to VFW National Convention 8/26/2002

There is already a mountain of evidence that Saddam Hussein is gathering weapons for the purpose of using them. And adding additional information is like adding a foot to Mount Everest. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Response to Question From Press 9/6/2002

Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons. George W. Bush, President Speech to UN General Assembly 9/12/2002

Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons. We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have George W. Bush, President Radio Address 10/5/2002

The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas. George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

And surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it had used to produce chemical and biological weapons. George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

After eleven years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon. George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

Iraq, despite UN sanctions, maintains an aggressive program to rebuild the infrastructure for its nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile programs. In each instance, Iraq's procurement agents are actively working to obtain both weapons-specific and dual-use materials and technologies critical to their rebuilding and expansion efforts, using front companies and whatever illicit means are at hand. John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control Speech to the Hudson Institute 11/1/2002

We estimate that once Iraq acquires fissile material -- whether from a foreign source or by securing the materials to build an indigenous fissile material capability -- it could fabricate a nuclear weapon within one year. It has rebuilt its civilian chemical infrastructure and renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, and VX. It actively maintains all key aspects of its offensive BW [biological weapons] program. John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control Speech to the Hudson Institute 11/1/2002

Iraq could decide on any given day to provide biological or chemical weapons to a terrorist group or to individual terrorists,...The war on terror will not be won until Iraq is completely and verifiably deprived of weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President Denver, Address To Air National Guard 12/1/2002

If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 12/2/2002

The president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not true, and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Response to Question From Press 12/4/2002

We know for a fact that there are weapons there. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 1/9/2003

I am absolutely convinced, based on the information that's been given to me, that the weapon of mass destruction which can kill more people than an atomic bomb -- that is, biological weapons -- is in the hands of the leadership of Iraq. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader MSNBC Interview 1/10/2003

What is unique about Iraq compared to, I would argue, any other country in the world, in this juncture, is the exhaustion of diplomacy thus far, and, No. 2, this intersection of weapons of mass destruction. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader NewsHour Interview 1/22/2003

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. George W. Bush, President State of the Union Address 1/28/2003

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. George W. Bush, President State of the Union Address 1/28/2003

We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Remarks to UN Security Council 2/5/2003

There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more. And he has the ability to dispense these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction. If biological weapons seem too terrible to contemplate, chemical weapons are equally chilling Colin Powell, Secretary of State Addresses the U.N. Security Council 2/5/2003

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have. George W. Bush, President Radio Address 2/8/2003

In Iraq, a dictator is building and hiding weapons that could enable him to dominate the Middle East and intimidate the civilized world -- and we will not allow it. George W. Bush, President Speech to the American Enterprise Institute 2/26/2003

If Iraq had disarmed itself, gotten rid of its weapons of mass destruction over the past 12 years, or over the last several months since (UN Resolution) 1441 was enacted, we would not be facing the crisis that we now have before us . . . But the suggestion that we are doing this because we want to go to every country in the Middle East and rearrange all of its pieces is not correct. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Interview with Radio France International 2/28/2003

I am not eager to send young Americans into harm's way in Iraq, or to see innocent people killed or hurt in military operations. Given all of the facts and circumstances known to us, however, I am convinced that if we wait, a threat will continue to materialize in Iraq that could cause incalculable damage to world peace in general, and to the United States in particular. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Letter to Future of Freedom Foundation 3/1/2003

Iraq is a grave threat to this nation. It desires to acquire and use weapons of mass terror and is run by a despot with a proven record of willingness to use them. Iraq has had 12 years to comply with UN requirements for disarmament and has failed to do so. The president is right to say it's time has run out. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Senate Speech 3/7/2003

So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our judgment has to be clearly not. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Remarks to UN Security Council 3/7/2003

Getting rid of Saddam Hussein's regime is our best inoculation. Destroying once and for all his weapons of disease and death is a vaccination for the world. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Washington Post op-ed 3/16/2003

Let's talk about the nuclear proposition for a minute. We know that based on intelligence, that [Saddam] has been very, very good at hiding these kinds of efforts. He's had years to get good at it and we know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. Dick Cheney, Vice President Meet The Press 3/16/2003

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. George W. Bush, President Address to the Nation 3/17/2003

The United States . . . is now at war "so we will not ever see" what terrorists could do "if supplied with weapons of mass destruction by Saddam Hussein." Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Senate Debate 3/20/2003

Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 3/21/2003

There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them. General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief Central Command Press Conference 3/22/2003

One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites. Victoria Clark, Pentagon Spokeswoman Press Briefing 3/22/2003

I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction. Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board member Washington Post, p. A27 3/23/2003

We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense ABC Interview 3/30/2003

We simply cannot live in fear of a ruthless dictator, aggressor and terrorist such as Saddam Hussein, who possesses the world's most deadly weapons. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Speech to American Israel Political Action Committee 3/31/2003

We still need to find and secure Iraq's weapons of mass destruction facilities and secure Iraq's borders so we can prevent the flow of weapons of mass destruction materials and senior regime officials out of the country. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Conference 4/9/2003

You bet we're concerned [concerned that those weapons might have been shipped out of the country]about it. And one of the reasons it's important is because the nexus between terrorist states with weapons of mass destruction ... and terrorist groups -- networks -- is a critical link. And the thought that ... some of those materials could leave the country and [get] in the hands of terrorist networks would be a very unhappy prospect. So it is important to us to see that that doesn't happen.
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Conference
4/9/2003

Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty.
Robert Kagan, Neocon scholar
Washington Post op-ed
4/9/2003

I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found.
Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
4/10/2003

But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.
Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
4/10/2003

Were not going to find anything until we find people who tell us where the things are. And we have that very high on our priority list, to find the people who know. And when we do, then well learn precisely where things were and what was done.
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Meet the Press
4/13/2003

I have absolute confidence that there are weapons of mass destruction inside this country. Whether we will turn out, at the end of the day, to find them in one of the 2,000 or 3,000 sites we already know about or whether contact with one of these officials who we may come in contact with will tell us, ``Oh, well, there's actually another site,'' and we'll find it there, I'm not sure. General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief Central Command
Fox News
4/13/2003

We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.
George W. Bush, President
NBC Interview
4/24/2003

There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Briefing
4/25/2003

We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.
George W. Bush, President
Remarks to Reporters
5/3/2003

I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.
Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Remarks to Reporters
5/4/2003

We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Fox News Interview
5/4/2003

I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.
George W. Bush, President
Remarks to Reporters
5/6/2003

U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.
Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor
Reuters Interview
5/12/2003

I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean, there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago -- whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're still hidden.
Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne
Press Briefing
5/13/2003

We said all along that we will never get to the bottom of the Iraqi WMD program simply by going and searching specific sites, that you'd have to be able to get people who know about the programs to talk to you.
Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Interview with Australian Broadcasting
5/13/2003

Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found.
Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps
Interview with Reporters
5/21/2003

It's going to take time to find them, but we know he had them. And whether he destroyed them, moved them or hid them, we're going to find out the truth. One thing is for certain: Saddam Hussein no longer threatens America with weapons of mass destruction.
George W. Bush, President
Speech at a weapons factory in Ohio
5/25/2003

Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.
Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
NBC Today Show interview
5/26/2003

They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations
5/27/2003

For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.
Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Vanity Fair interview
5/28/2003

The President is indeed satisfied with the intelligence that he received. And I think that's borne out by the fact that, just as Secretary Powell described at the United Nations, we have found the bio trucks that can be used only for the purpose of producing biological weapons. That's proof-perfect that the intelligence in that regard was right on target.
Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
5/29/2003

We have teams of people that are out looking. They've investigated a number of sites. And within the last week or two, they have in fact captured and have in custody two of the mobile trailers that Secretary Powell talked about at the United Nations as being biological weapons laboratories.
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Infinity Radio Interview
5/30/2003

You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons ...They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two...And we'll find more weapons as time goes on.
George W. Bush, President
Press Briefing
5/30/2003

It was a surprise to me then -- it remains a surprise to me now -- that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there. Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force Press Interview 5/30/2003

Do I think we're going to find something? Yeah, I kind of do, because I think there's a lot of information out there. Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton, Defense Intelligence Agency Press Conference 5/30/2003

Q: The fact that there hasn't been substantial cache of weapons of mass destruction -- is that an embarrassment? Wolfowitz: No. Is it an embarrassment to people on the other side that we've discovered these biological production vans, which the defector told us about?
Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense
CNN Interview
5/31/2003

This wasn't material I was making up, it came from the intelligence community. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Press Briefing 6/2/2003

We know that some of them, especially the biological weapons, were being destroyed," Hastert said, adding that it would "take a little while to find weapons of mass destruction... and we're going to continue to do it. Dennis Hastert, House Speaker R-IL Press Briefing 6/4/2003

We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents. This is the man who spent decades hiding tools of mass murder. He knew the inspectors were looking for them. You know better than me he's got a big country in which to hide them. We're on the look. We'll reveal the truth George W. Bush, President CAMP SAYLIYA, Qatar 6/5/2003

I would put before you Exhibit A, the mobile biological labs that we have found. People are saying, "Well, are they truly mobile biological labs?" Yes, they are. And the DCI, George Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence, stands behind that assessment. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Fox News Interview 6/8/2003

No one ever said that we knew precisely where all of these agents were, where they were stored. Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor Meet the Press 6/8/2003

What the president has said is because it's been the long-standing view of numerous people, not only in this country, not only in this administration, but around the world, including at the United Nations, who came to those conclusions...And the president is not going to engage in the rewriting of history that others may be trying to engage in. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Response to Question From Press 6/9/2003

Iraq had a weapons program...Intelligence throughout the decade showed they had a weapons program. I am absolutely convinced with time we'll find out they did have a weapons program. George W. Bush, President Comment to Reporters 6/9/2003

The biological weapons labs that we believe strongly are biological weapons labs, we didn't find any biological weapons with those labs. But should that give us any comfort? Not at all. Those were labs that could produce biological weapons whenever Saddam Hussein might have wanted to have a biological weapons inventory. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Associated Press Interview 6/12/2003

Those documents were only one piece of evidence in a larger body of evidence suggesting that Iraq attempted to purchase uranium from Africa ... The issue of Iraq's pursuit of uranium in Africa is supported by multiple sources of intelligence. The other sources of evidence did and do support the president's statement. Sean McCormack, National Security Council Spokesman Statement to press 6/13/2003

My personal view is that their intelligence has been, I'm sure, imperfect, but good. In other words, I think the intelligence was correct in general, and that you always will find out precisely what it was once you get on the ground and have a chance to talk to people and explore it, and I think that will happen. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Briefing 6/18/2003

I have reason, every reason, to believe that the intelligence that we were operating off was correct and that we will, in fact, find weapons or evidence of weapons, programs, that are conclusive. But that's just a matter of time...It's now less than eight weeks since the end of major combat in Iraq and I believe that patience will prove to be a virtue Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Pentagon media briefing. 6/24/2003

MS. BLOCK: There were no toxins found in those trailers. SECRETARY POWELL: Which could mean one of several things: one, they hadn't been used yet to develop toxins; or, secondly, they had been sterilized so thoroughly that there is no residual left. It may well be that they hadn't been used yet. Colin Powell, Secretary of State All Things Considered, Interview 6/27/2003

That was the concern we had with Saddam Hussein. Not only did he have weapons -- and we'll uncover not only his weapons but all of his weapons programs -- he never lost the intent to have these kinds of weapons. Colin Powell, Secretary of State All Things Considered, Interview 6/27/2003

I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of mass destruction to tell the world where they are. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 7/9/2003

Thanks to this BRILLIANT dKos diary.

10:41 AM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Stuart Carlson on CBS vs. Bush

Cartoon By Stuart Carlson

09:04 AM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

More reasons to hate Ann Coulter

Not an action figure. This is really Ann. From an interview in the New York Observer via Media Matters:

I'm getting a little fed up with hearing about, oh, civilian casualties. I think we ought to nuke North Korea right now just to give the rest of the world a warning.

I just think it would be fun to nuke them and have it be a warning to the rest of the world.

Seriously, I think the rest of the countries in the Middle East, after Afghanistan and Iraq, they're pretty much George Bush's bitch.

Well, [President Clinton] was a very good rapist. I think that should not be forgotten.

This is the brand of discourse we're up against. Coulter is one of the "most respected" pundits in the Republican Party and yet we still can't win?

Send her pie and an e-mail: tom@anncoulter.org

08:26 AM | Comments (3) | Posted By Bob Cesca

U.S. lowers expectations on Iraq vote

In a statement today the White House played down the fact that voter turnout in the Iraqi elections might be on the low side. Turns out... it doesn't matter!

"I would . . . really encourage people not to focus on numbers, which in themselves don't have any meaning, but to look on the outcome and to look at the government that will be the product of these elections," a senior administration official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity at a White House briefing yesterday. The official highlighted the low voter turnout in U.S. elections as evidence that polling numbers are not essential to legitimacy.

Yeah, for Chrissakes, look at our own elections! Voting and legitimacy don't have anything to do with each other.

What held up last month's intel reform?

The answer begins with the letter "t" and rhymes with "plorture".

Remember when the intelligence reform legislation was stymied in Congress despite overwhelming support last month? Turns out the bill included strengthened restrictions on interrogation techniques (torture) and the White House lobbied to cut those restrictions from the bill -- effectively killing that version of the bill even though it passed the Senate 96-2. The New York Times:

But in intense closed-door negotiations, Congressional officials said, four senior members from the House and Senate deleted the restrictions from the final bill after the White House expressed opposition.

The White House opposition came from our next Secretary of State:

In a letter to members of Congress, sent in October and made available by the White House on Wednesday in response to inquiries, Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, expressed opposition to the measure on the grounds that it "provides legal protections to foreign prisoners to which they are not now entitled under applicable law and policy."

Now it makes sense. At the time, we figured maybe it was Rumsfeld, who didn't want to cede power to a Director of National Intelligence. As it turns out, the White House wanted to continue to torture people so -- BOOM! -- the bill went back for revisions while we all stared, confused at The Stay-Puft Denny Hastert and wondered, "Whattup?"

But who cares. Pitt and Aniston broke up!

12:09 AM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

January 12, 2005

No WMD: grounds for impeachment?

Is this justice? Clinton was impeached, ultimately, for lying to the American people about a sexual fling with an intern. Now that it's absolutely confirmed that no WMD existed, why should Bush not be impeached?

Even after it became clear that no WMD existed and the CW reflected this, Bush and his administration continued to insist that there were WMD. In fact, last Spring 2004, Bush joked about not finding weapons at the annual press dinner. Yet he kept up the charade.

Granted, there's a GOP majority in Congress and thus articles of impeachment would face massive opposition, but I find it hard to believe that Republicans don't care that their leader lied for so long, forcing each one of them to lie for him -- potentially ruining their own reputations with their constituency?

Tens of thousands of American casualties and billions of tax dollars later with no end in sight, the war wages on with reason number one: WMD. Prove to me that this doesn't qualify as "high crimes and misdemeanors".

08:31 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Who cares about elections?

As the Bush PR machine continues its relentless spewing about the value of Iraqi elections, pockets of American media are starting to report the reality about the alleged upcoming vote. The LA Times is on the case, as is the editorial page of the NYT. But none of the media is asking who cares about the vote.

Iraq is a bloody mess. It is an occupied land, a breeding ground for Al Qaeda, and a shell of what it was two years ago. Do you think this little girl is happy that the Americans came to "help" her parents vote?

This just in... No WMD in Iraq (shhh!)

This, from Reuters:

The U.S. force that scoured Iraq for weapons of mass destruction -- cited by President Bush as justification for war -- has abandoned its long and fruitless hunt, U.S. officials said on Wednesday.

Hey, it's not like we didn't try, right?

Read the full story here.

07:23 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Jim Biederman

Bush flubs line at bogus town hall

The White House held a town-hall meeting yesterday to discuss Bush's plan for Social Security. By "discuss", I mean "perform".

THE PRESIDENT: Good, thanks. Well done. (Applause.) Now what about your -- introduce your mom.

MS. STONE: I would like to introduce my mom. This is my mother, Rhoda Stone. And she is grandmother of three, and originally from Helsinki, Finland, and has been here over 40 years.

THE PRESIDENT: Fantastic. Same age as my mother.

MS. STONE: Just turned 80.

There aren't word to describe... Sheesh.

Tip courtesy Liberal Oasis.

06:25 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Trade deficit (chasm) at an all-time high

The trade deficit numbers from November are in. The AP:

The U.S. trade deficit hit an all-time high of $60.3 billion in November as American appetites for foreign oil and even imported food reached record levels.

How massive is the trade deficit?

"We now have the Grand Canyon of trade deficits," said Joel Naroff, head of a Holland, Pa., forecasting firm. "Actually, deficit is really a misnomer. Chasm, gorge, black hole, infinitely deep well all fit the description better."

And the total 2004 trade deficit?

The deficit through November totaled $561.3 billion and is expected to top $600 billion once December's figures are tallied, far surpassing last year's record of $496.5 billion.

And do you recall Bush's wizard-like solution?

Bush: "There's a trade deficit. That's easy to resolve: People can buy more United States products if they're worried about the trade deficit."

03:22 PM | Comments (2) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Don't look directly at Bush, Part II

From the Armed Forces Inaugural Committee:

Besides marching bands, the military provides escorts and honor cordons that line the walkway of the president with crisp salutes.

"Crisp salutes" would definitely qualify as a "sudden movement" and would involve, to a certain degree, "looking directly at Bush".

Also, be warned. Remember what happened in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" when Toht looked looked directly at something he shouldn't have... This could happen to YOU.

11:19 AM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Warning: Do not look Bush in the eye

In 2001 and 2002, some friends and I produced one of the first post-9/11 anti-Bush films called "The War Effort". In the third act, I included a joke in which overly patriotic participants in a radio contest are warned to not make direct eye contact with the morning show "talent". This, of course, is based on numerous accounts of from the trenches of the entertainment industry.

Now it appears parade performers at next week's inauguration have been warned not to make direct eye contact with George W. Bush. Scripps-Howard News Service:

Other instructions given performers include a warning not to look directly at Bush while passing the presidential reviewing stand, not to look to either side and not to make any sudden movements.

This has only one appropriate response: "What a dick!"

10:36 AM | Comments (2) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Bush and his voters hate the troops

If you voted for the Bush Unit, you can no longer have a yellow ribbon magnet on your car. Sorry. The Washington Post:

Veterans programs are also expected to be pinched [in Bush's proposed budget], with flat funding, higher deductibles and co-payments for health care and a squeeze on benefit eligibility, aides said.

Hey you. Bush voter. Go outside. Take the magnet off. Throw it away. You voted for a man who thrust the troops into a frivolous war designed for his own political gain, and who continues to ask for cuts in their benefits if they happen to survive. That hardly qualifies as "supporting the troops". Shame on you and shame on your president.

09:29 AM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Palast: Meet the CBS independent panel

Greg Palast notes today that the CBS independent review panel was a stacked deck. Who was the two-man panel? Dick Thornburgh, Bush 41's attorney general, and Louis Boccardi:

Remember Dickie Thornburgh? He was on the Bush 41 Administration's payroll. His grand accomplishment as Bush's Attorney General was to whitewash the investigation of the Exxon Valdez Oil spill, letting the oil giant off the hook on big damages. Thornburgh's fat pay as counsel to Kirkpatrick & Lockhart, the Washington law-and-lobbying outfit, is substantially due to his job as a Bush retainer. This is the kind of stinky conflict of interest that hardly suggests "independent." Why not just appoint Karl Rove as CBS' grand inquisitor and be done with it?

Read Palast's whole article here.

09:20 AM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

It's official: No WMD in Iraq

In Bob Woodward's "Plan of Attack", the issue of WMD was discussed heavily based on accounts from candid White House interviews with Colin Powell et al. About halfway through the book, the issue takes center stage. Condi Rice, amongst others in late 2002, said that regime change to liberate the Iraqi people was too weak a catalyst for war. Strangely, that remains the only remaining excuse these days. And the terrorist angle was hogwash from the very beginning. So the case for WMD was made.

Dick Cheney in providing strategy for the U.N. Security Council vote on pressuring Saddam to disarm, devised a catch-22 strategy in which Iraq was screwed no matter their response. According to Woodward, if they said, "We don't have weapons," we'd claim they were lying. If they said, "We HAVE weapons," we'd claim they'd been lying since the Gulf War.

The whole climate was one of cooking a strategic excuse for war in Iraq based on WMD.

Clearly, there were no weapons. And the search has ended. The Washington Post:

The hunt for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in Iraq has come to an end nearly two years after President Bush ordered U.S. troops to disarm Saddam Hussein. The top CIA weapons hunter is home, and analysts are back at Langley.

And Bush is sad.

Bush has expressed disappointment that no weapons or weapons programs were found, but the White House has been reluctant to call off the hunt, holding out the possibility that weapons were moved out of Iraq before the war or are well hidden somewhere inside the country.

Despite the Duelfer Report which made it clear that Saddam had no weapons since the first Gulf War, the talking point has gone out to claim that he somehow got rid of all his weapons in the interim. Clifford May, of the National Review and the President of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (a right-wing think tank), appeared on CNN this morning to begin the revisionist history drum beat.

Meanwhile, if you make a mistake as slight as showing up late for work today you might be fired.

08:51 AM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

January 11, 2005

Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, and now...

CAMP JENNY!

Yes, the horrific abuse of Iraqi prisoners continues, and this time, in a new location, and by some new people! Now, it's Navy SEALS and CIA ops. Read about it here.

Josef Goebbels would be so proud of us.

04:13 PM | Comments (1) | Posted By John Christian Plummer

Horkulated graphic: Bush and CBS

Courtesy Horkulated.com
Agitprop graphic by Horkulated.com

01:46 PM | Comments (3) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Chertoff: no lawyers for detainees

Gollum The Village Voice, in an article by Nat Hentoff about Steven Brill's book "After", reported in 2003 that Chertoff is in favor of lengthy imprisonment for detainees. Brill and Hentoff also noted:

"Chertoff reasoned that while they were being held they would be discouraged from calling lawyers, and could be questioned without lawyers present because they were not being charged with any crime."

If you're not charged, you don't need an attorney? Sounds like, "If you sink and drown, you're not a witch."

Chertoff and the others in [a Justice Department strategy meeting], reports Brill, knew that under INS rules, the prisoners "were entitled to call a lawyer from jail, but the lists the INS provided of available lawyers invariably had phone numbers that were not in service." (Emphasis added.)

Brill adds that "according to one person who says he was there, someone in the room remarked that the government should not try too hard to make sure these people could contact lawyers. 'Let's not make it so they can get Johnnie Cochran on the phone,' another lawyer added."

Wonderful. More human rights violators elevated in the Bush administration.

11:52 AM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Screw terrorism, Bush wants a party!

The District of Columbia will be forced to use nearly $12 million from their Homeland Security budget for the inauguration. The Washington Post:

...the Bush administration is refusing to reimburse the District for most of the costs associated with next week's inauguration, breaking with precedent...

The event is expected to cost $17 million -- way up from $8 million four years ago -- and only $5 million of that cost is covered so far.

"We want to make this the best possible event, but not at the expense of D.C. taxpayers and other homeland security priorities," said Gregory M. McCarthy, [Mayor Anthony A. Williams] deputy chief of staff. "This is the first time there hasn't been a direct appropriation for the inauguration."

"It's an unfunded mandate of the most odious kind. How can the District be asked to take funds from important homeland security projects to pay for this instead?" said [Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA)] spokesman David Marin.

Meanwhile, we still don't know the full federal cost of the inauguration (aside from the privately donated $40 million estimate).

Historical note... In 1945, President Roosevelt opted to forgo lavish inauguration ceremonies. From Bartleby:

[The] inauguration was conducted without fanfare. Because of the expense and impropriety of festivity during the height of war, the oath of office was taken on the South Portico of the White House... No formal celebrations followed the address.

Bush's decision? Spend more! Wahhh! I want a party!

08:40 AM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

January 10, 2005

McClellan: it was an isolated felony

Scott McClellan fired off some great lines this afternoon. The AP:

The White House said Monday that the case of the Education Department paying a conservative commentator to plug its policies was an isolated incident...

Next time you're pulled over for speeding, use the "isolated incident" line. In either case: total bullshit. I wonder how many black people Bush executed in Texas for committing "isolated" murders?

"Questions have been raised about that arrangement, it ought to be looked into, and there are ways to look into matters of that nature," McClellan said.

We will, thank you.

McClellan said the news media "ought to be reporting in an objective, unbiased and fair manner."

When Bush hugged Rush Limbaugh (who is a thrice divorced, yet "moral" alleged drug user/dealer) at the December 16 holiday party, did Bush mention the "objective, unbiased, and fair manner" thing to Limbaugh? Has he whispered this sweet nothing into Hannity's boyish ear?

McClellan said he knew of no other contract in the administration like the one Williams had. He also hinted that Williams shared the blame.

So how can he know it's an "isolated incident" if he's not really sure? Because it's the Bush White House, that's why.

09:27 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

The Oath of Honesty in Journalism

The American Prospect has written an oath for all right-wing propapundits:

I swear that I have never taken money -- neither directly nor indirectly -- from any political campaign or government agency -- whether federal, state, or local -- in exchange for any service performed in my job as a journalist (or commentator, or blogger, or whatever you think I should be called).

What say you, Punditman?

09:20 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Hardball wastes 90 minutes on Rather?

Watching Chris Matthews tonight, you'd never know that the White House is engaged in a propaganda campaign paying right-wing pundits and "journalists" to shill for them. In fact, strike that. It was a perfect illustration of right-wing pundits mouth-piecing the Bush agenda.

Matthews, an alleged "Democrat", spent a full 30 minutes of his 7pm show talking about CBS's findings in the Bush Memo issue. In other words, half-an-hour of "damn that liberal media" masturbation, when, in fact, the right-wing media is being paid with tax money to propagandize for the White House.

Three "analysts" including Pat Buchanan wallowed in CBS News' crisis like red-state pigs in shit, with Matthews furnishing the unfettered air time.

It gets worse. Right now, 9pm EST, Matthews is spending a full hour discussing CBS in a "Very Special Edition" of Hardball.

If you're ready to rip your hair out, join the queue. All I ask is for a second queue for ripping out the hair of cable news pundits. Slowly. While being waterboarded and lathered in their own feces. The obvious mantra: if they only spent this much time on important, "in the now" issues like White House sponsored torture, death squads, and propaganda...

Write to Hardball here: hardball@msnbc.com
Write to MSNBC: viewerservices@msnbc.com
Additional MSNBC contacts here.
For the industrious old-schoolers:
MSNBC TV
One MSNBC Plaza
Secaucus, N.J. 07094

08:53 PM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca

What about Robert Novak? Of course!

Randi Rhodes just mentioned the name Robert Novak regarding the White House propaganda machine. BOING! Of course! Novak leaps to the top of the FOIA propaganda search. What's promising about Novak as a possibility is that there'd be a money trail directly from the White House to a treasonous act (revealing the name of undercover CIA operative, Valerie Plame). Imagine if Novak was paid to leak Plame's identity.

So the new suspect list goes as follows: Novak, Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter.

05:29 PM | Comments (0) | Posted By Bob Cesca

Williams: There's other propapundits

Armstrong Williams spilled the beans to David Corn regarding White House propaganda efforts:

"This happens all the time," he told me. "There are others." Really? I said. Other conservative commentators accept money from the Bush administration? I asked Williams for names. "I'm not going to defend myself that way," he said. The issue right now, he explained, was his own mistake.

Full article here. Though I love to watch right-wingers crash and burn, the real issue has less to do with Williams and much, much, much more to do with the administration, actually. Kos, for one, is going under the assumption that all right-wing pundits and journalists are on the White House payroll. Of course, but the White House is ultimately responsible and MUST be held accountible.

Again, the list... Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter. Add Kristol, Hume, Kavuto, Kudlow. Here's who's probably NOT on the list: Buchanan, Savage, Scarborough. But always remember, the men at the top of the list: Bush, Rove, Cheney.

01:08 PM | Comments (1) | Posted By Bob Cesca