posted by The Vidiot @ 11:33 AM Permalink
Love him, hate him, whatever, I don't care. What I do care about are gross misrepresentations of anybody's viewpoints.
The media are reporting, after this interview of Ron Paul by Chris Matthews, that Ron Paul wouldn't have voted for the Civil Rights Act. The media narrative that they're trying to construct is that Ron Paul is a stealth (or not so stealth) racist. They know full well that the easiest way to discredit anybody these days is to call them a racists or an anti-Semite or some other sort of bigoted fool.
Paul's real stand on the Civil Rights Act is, judging from what he actually said, that governments are the ones that first implemented policies of segregation and racism. He simply wants to repeal those laws that systematically segregate people on the basis of race, ethnicity, etc., and not codify so-called non-discriminatory laws. He trusts that people will do the right thing and they don't need any laws to tell them to do it. What the media is trying to do is go back in history and say oh well, Ron Paul is advocating a return to our racist past. What Ron Paul is really doing is he's looking towards the future. He knows the world wouldn't return to a racist past.
Bottom line, the laws that the US government has passed in the form of the Civil Rights Act did little to end segregation and discrimination. And here's where it become complicated.
Culturally, the American people are not racist. The few who are are irrelevant because racists are generally ostracized by civil society. What is true is that despite whatever laws the government wants to pass or has passed, American apartheid is still very much alive in the United States. Black and other minority groups remain spatially and geographically isolated and, as most sociologists would agree, hyper-segregated from the rest of US society. Hyper-segregation is a term to describe how black and minority groups are segregated -- not just spatially, but culturally, economically, politically, and socially -- from the dominant society. And don't forget, that it's the American government that created laws that segregated and discriminated against people and what Ron Paul understands is that their laws to end their mistakes did not curtail the problem. It was the American people, not the beloved nation state that ended segregation. It wasn't casting votes that ended it, it was the will of black, white and women revolutionaries that took to the streets and demanded government end their racists and discriminatory ways. It was the people that ended it. Not the government.
Ron Paul gets this and so other critical thinkers like Chomsky and Zinn, et al. They, Chomsky, Paul, et al, advocate the end of government interference, whether it's creating racist laws or laws to ameliorate racist laws, because the American people can handle it from here. The government can go home.
When we look at the so-called objective nature of government policies, the managing of all our human social institutions, we can see, under closer inspection, that government laws are far from neutral and objective. In fact, under the cloak of objectivity, lies overt racism. In our educational policies, we see eurocentric, white-dominant, bourgeoisie values that take precedent over values that exist in the many different heterogenous populations and minority groups in the US. We see white-dominant values in our legal system over the values of our hispanic, black, native american and women groups. We see laws of all kinds situated within all our institutions that instill dominant white values that uphold the dominant class at the expense of all other groups. There is nothing objective or neutral about any of our laws.
These laws support an obvious dominant class in the name of democracy, but democracy is far from what we have. The proof is who commands the dominant institutions and how those laws and ideas and values perpetuated by government economic elites make laws that serve their own interests and legitimate their own power. As its very essence, government cannot pass laws that are against its own self- interest. Its preservation is its first priority; the preservation of the status quo and the preservation of the commanders of the dominant institutions.
Though Ron Paul's ideas are progressive, they're not perfect, but at least they are a start.
But those ideas sure as hell don jibe with the media narrative.
And that's my point. Take him or leave him, I don't care, but at least be honest about what they guy says.
posted by Bill Arnett @ 3:21 PM Permalink
…I had an inquiry arrive in my email box (a mythical thing existing only in the minds of unicorns, circus ponies, and Chinese acrobats unless otherwise noted in "The Book of Mythical Things," subtitled "Or Not") regarding NAFTA, yet another creature existing only in the imagination but given a semi-real treatment of its terms since one goofball former president, ghwb, pushed really hard for it, and it was signed into existence by another former president, Bill Clinton, Arkansas' greatest wrestler, seducer of women, and listed in the "Guinness Book of Irrelevant Information" as record holder for long distance spitting out of both sides of his mouth, 396 feet into a gale force wind while standing upright on one of those raging bull bucking machines simultaneously.
The question posed was this: "Why is it that when clinton established NAFTA the goal of simply raising the standard of living for all -- the process got away from us to the point that our economic standing has so drastically declined? Was that always the intention? Or did the process get away from us? Was NAFTA a scam from the beginning?" (and yes, I know that's more than one question, sheesh, I can count to three, too, y'know.)
NAFTA was signed by President George H.W. Bush, Mexican President Salinas, and Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney in 1992. It was ratified by the legislatures of the three countries in 1993. The House approved it by 234 to 200 on November 17 and the Senate by 60 to 38 on November 20. It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on December 8, 1993 and entered force January 1, 1994. Although it was signed by President Bush, it was a priority of President Clinton's, and its passage is considered one of his first successes.
So Clinton liked it and actually signed it into law, but the inception (or conception, I get those mixed up) was initially a Prime Directive issued by Über Leader Ronnie Raygun. A young Bill Clinton eavesdropped on the negotiations from the copy room and was never noticed, much less heard the odd sounds issuing therefrom.
At the link above, also see:
The impetus for NAFTA actually began with President Ronald Reagan, who campaigned on a North American common market. In 1984, Congress passed the Trade and Tariff Act. This is important because it gave the President "fast-track" authority to negotiate free trade agreements, while only allowing Congress the ability to approve or disapprove, not change negotiating points. Canadian Prime Minister Mulroney agreed with Reagan to begin negotiations for the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, which was signed in 1988, went into effect in 1989 and is now suspended due to NAFTA.
Of course even Reagan did not, and could not, know that NAFTA was really never about free trade at all. It all began when Nancy allowed Reagan to sleep through several meetings. The topic was NAFTA, and was negotiated by Nancy, former CIA Director of the CIA, ghwb, and a conglomeration of an ever increasing numbers of aliens whose existence was being concealed by our government who cleverly renamed these vital negotiations from the original name NAFTAE, the Northern Andromedian Freedom to Annihilate Everything, to a name more suitable for covering up the true nature of this treaty by calling it NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement. Could anyone think of a more benign name?
Now for the $64,000.00 question: Does it work?:
NAFTA [North American Trade Organization] has eliminated trade barriers, increased investment opportunities, and established procedures for resolution of trade disputes. Most important, it has increased the competitiveness of the three countries involved on the global marketplace. This has become especially important with the launch of the European Union. In 2007, the EU replaced the U.S. as the world's largest economy. (Article updated December 21, 2009)
Since America gave away the store, sold the watchdogs, AND figured out how to blame the democrats by delaying signing until Clinton was in office it was a rousing success. It was easy: the aliens would suck so much money out of our financial engine, trade, that record deficits, insolvency, runaway unemployment, and the shift of financial titans from America to Europe. (Too bad we didn't trade the rethugs for something useful, like marbles, a piece of chalk, a ball of string, and republicans.)
Another $64,000.04 question…um… ANSWER from the same source as to any benefit:
NAFTA is short for the North American Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA covers Canada, the U.S. and Mexico making it the world’s largest free trade area (in terms of GDP). NAFTA was launched 15 years ago to reduce trading costs, increase business investment, and help North America be more competitive in the global marketplace.
As of January 1, 2008, all tariffs between the three countries were eliminated. Between 1993-2007, trade tripled from $297 billion to $1 trillion.
So NAFTA has been a bang up, fine and fancy, thrill a minute for all we Americans as we watched our economy tank, perhaps for good, the rest of the world laughs as the republicans, teabaggers-gop-er, conservatives, neocons, and the fanatic religious right dream up even more devious means to deprive the poor, kill off the ill, discard the infirm by using them as padding for the Big Guns of our now nearly defunct military, and STILL somehow manage to blame, successfully, the Democratic Party as the root beer of Satan's Soda Shoppe, still located conveniently on the third ring of Hell (all the other rings have been taken by or reserved for future republicans.
So there it is. Yet another major success for rethugs, more blame for democrats. Entirely understandable when we have an abject coward for president unwilling to take any drastic measures to serve those whom elected him even when he obviously has the backing of almost 75% of Americans and could win handily if he had the testicles to stand and fight back. (WARNING: Do not stand on your testicles while fighting back unless you are a trained expert.)
Well, I gotta return the "Mr. Answer Hat" I borrowed to help answering this trio of very good questions that, alas for America, means two more years of the coward-in-chief and then someone guaranteed to be worse since there isn't any politicians remaining to piss off their bosses, Michael Steele and the GOP.
The abbreviated answers:
"Why is it that when clinton established NAFTA the goal of simply raising the standard of living for all -- the process got away from us to the point that our economic standing has so drastically declined? ANS.- Clinton did not establish NAFTA. Our economy tanked thanks to father-son tag team ghwb and gwb
Was that always the intention? Yes. Northern Andromeda intends to invade and conquer us all.
Or did the process get away from us? A process we never controlled makes it impossible for it to 'get away from us.'
Was NAFTA a scam from the beginning? Asked and answered.
I do hope I have been able to help to the questioner. If not there are still Northern Andromedian WarshipsPeace Delegations still circling our Solar System waiting for their solar batteries to recharge for the trip back to their home.
Thank you for your questions, but I am afraid I will have to limit questions and answers to no more than three from each person, as here.
NOTE: Aw, hell, I'll raise the question limit to 3,694 or until I fall asleep at the keyboard.
Photo montage from Etemananki, 'cause it was good and I was too lazy to make one myself.
So, I'm at work yesterday, and my girlfriend in Cleveland calls and says "Are you on lockdown over there?" and I was all, "WHaaaa?" She told me about the bomb-like things from Yemen and I said, "Please tell me you don't really think there were bombs." She said, "Of course not. [good girl] I just wondered if your company or New York was freaking out."
I guess I had seen a few headlines crawling around that said something about a bomb scare, but I'm so cynical (or I'm such a realist, or just not a sucker) that it didn't phase me in the least bit. I figured it was some sort of pre-election scarefest to get everyone in the mood to vote for whoever they powers that be wanted them to vote for. I knew there weren't any bombs because it would've been too damn convenient for there to be bombs. Especially from Yemen. Jeebus.
A Yemeni official told Yemen Post that no U.S. cargo aircraft of any American company flew out of Yemen over the last 48 hours. "Whether UPS, Fed Ex, DHL or any other U.S. cargo company left Yemen over the last 48 hours."
No, there weren't bombs. No, whatever it was didn't come from Yemen. It was, once again, another load of horse-crap.
posted by The Vidiot @ 11:10 AM PermalinkRead and watch this clip from ABC news and just try to tell me it doesn't look like a Saturday Night Live clip:
Strong concerns that terrorist teams in Europe have selected their targets, completed their surveillance, eluded capture and are now ready to strike at airports and tourist attractions have prompted the State Department to ready a highly unusual travel advisory for Europe, multiple law enforcement and intelligence sources tell ABC News.
Ok, you watched it, right?
Here's some alternative dialogue that pretty much says the same thing:
Anchor one: So, if I'm going to travel to Europe, what should I expect to see.
Reporter: You won't see anything different, even though the warnings are extremely vague and nonsensical. Nothing will be obvious to the traveler. Nothing has changed, even though there's an alert. But you won't notice anything. You won't see extra troops or police, no extra bomb-sniffing dogs, even though the alert has been issued.
Anchor one: So I wouldn't necessarily notice anything out of the ordinary.
Reporter: No.
Anchor one: So, even though it all looks normal, no matter what I see, no matter how normal and relaxed it appears, even if I should ask a local, or a police officer or someone who should know what's going on and they say "nothing is going on" they may just be trying to keep me calm. So I should really just remain vigilant.
Report: Yes. You should be observant and vigilant.
Anchor one: Observant and vigilant.
Reporter: Yes, believe what I tell you; be observant, vigilant and afraid. Don't forget afraid.
posted by The Vidiot @ 9:36 AM Permalink
I was too busy this weekend. But I don't have to. I speak MSM, that strange sort of newspeak that the MSM uses to convey their propaganda. When I saw a few headlines that said, "Ahmadinejad said the US was behind 9/11" I could easily translate that to "Ahmadinejad alluded to the various theories of who or what was behind the events of 9/11 and suggested that they be more thoroughly investigated by an impartial international tribunal."
And, if you go to the transcript if his speech, on page 5, you find this:
It is proposed that the United Nations set up an independent fact-finding group for the event of the II September so that in the future expressing views about it is not forbidden.
I'm going to paste the 9/11 part of his speech right here so you can see that he doesn't say anything offensive at all. Not even a little bit. In fact, he sounds like the rational one.
B) The Global Management and Ruling Structures The League of Nations and, then, the United Nations were established with the promise to bring about peace, security and the realization of human rights, which in fact meant a global management. One can analyze the current governance of the world by examining three events: First, the event of the II September 2001 which has affected the whole world for almost a decade. All of a sudden, the news of the attack on the twin towers was broadcast using numerous footages of the incident. Almost all governments and known figures strongly condemned this incident. But then a propaganda machine came into full force; it was implied that the whole world was exposed to a huge danger, namely terrorism, and that the only way to save the world would be to deploy forces into Afghanistan. Eventually Afghanistan, and shortly thereafter Iraq were occupied. Please take note: It was said that some three thousands people were killed on the II September for which we are all very saddened. Yet, up until now, in Afghanistan and Iraq hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, millions wounded and displaced and the conflict is still going on and expanding. In identifying those responsible for the attack, there were three viewpoints. 1- That a very powerful and complex terrorist group, able to successfully cross all layers of the American intelligence and security, carried out the attack. This is the main viewpoint advocated by American statesmen. 2- That some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order also to save the Zionist regime. The majority of the American people as well as other nations and politicians agree with this view. 3- It was carried out by a terrorist group but the American government supported and took advantage of the situation. Apparently, this viewpoint has fewer proponents. The main evidence linking the incident was a few passports found in the huge volume of rubble and a video of an individual whose place of domicile was unknown but it was announced that he had been involved in oil deals with some American officials. It was also covered up and said that due to the explosion and fire no trace of the suicide attackers was found. There remain, however, afew questions 10 be answered: 1- Would it not have been sensible that first a thorough investigation should have been conducted by independent groups to conclusively identify the elements involved in the attack and then map out a rational plan to take measures against them? 2- Assuming the viewpoint of the American government, is it rational to launch a classic war through widespread deployment of troops that led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people to counter a terrorist group? 3- Was it not possible to act the way Iran countered the Riggi terrorist group who killed and wounded 400 innocent people in Iran. In the Iranian operation no innocent person was hurt. It is proposed that the United Nations set up an independent fact-finding group for the event of the II September so that in the future expressing views about it is not forbidden. I wish to announce here that next year the Islamic Republic of Iran will host a conference to study terrorism and the means to confront it. I invite officials, scholars, thinkers, researchers and research institutes of all countries to attend this conference.
And MSM wonders why their reader and veiwer numbers are dwindling.
4,719° it was yesterday in California, and even though my thermometer lied to me shamelessly…
posted by Bill Arnett @ 1:39 PM Permalink
…and did its digital best to convince me that it was only 110º inside the house, I've lived in the deserts of America before and I know heat when I feel it. Besides, when all five dogs have collapsed in various positions of repose on the cool, cool tile of our kitchen floor, reclining beneath the cyclonic winds created by four electric, count 'em, four commercial grade electric fans, it's either become too hot for any kind of activity other than seeking respite from the heat or the dogs are again pulling impractical jokes on me to try and amuse me so that the stress of this superheated air as it peels the skin from my body doesn't feel quite so bad and/or without some modicum of appreciation for their efforts to take my mind off my plight.
This is why I'm not sure how apt is Obama's claim that the gop talks about him like a dog to the cheers, jeers, and screams of whatever crowd he happens to be addressing. I wish he would stop bringing disrepute upon dogs which, thousands of years ago took one look at man and thought, "Oh, shit. Those assholes won't last a century without our help. Look how pitiful and pitiable they are! They can't see in the dark, they couldn't outrun a fat bear heading to hibernate, their hearing is atrocious and utterly lame - can't even hear all those fat, well fed field mice right beneath their feet! - and though they themselves smell awful their sense of smell is so bad they don't realize their social gaffe and discomfort this causes others, indeed, making them prey for larger beasts, and every time they try to growl, act threateningly, waving their spears about and shouting unintelligibly, somewhere a large predator dies laughing. Besides, we'll work cheap, for whatever scraps of meat they want to give us remaining from the hugh beasts we help them kill for food, a place by the fire, an appellation by which we shall be known among our peers, a scratch behind the ears, and once in a while a full-body massage. Why I predict that one day Man, as he is known, will so come to appreciate us that they will allow us indoors, a special place by the fire, and food we don't even have to hunt! I know, I know, but as unlikely as this sounds I do believe it is time to hook our rising star to that of Man, laugh all you want you frickin' hyenas!"
And how do we honor an animal this noble, by citing them as a cause for derision and contempt. Puh-lease! If the gop, republicans, conservatives, religious right, neocons, party of no, teabaggers or whatever they want to reinvent themselves to be and to be called today consulted their dogs they would learn what a bunch of pussy…cats they really are.
Think about it. Dogs come in all sorts of recognized categories: hunting and sport dogs, companion dogs, working dogs, etc., etc., etc., but cats? Long hair, short hair, and no hair. Just like the gop, all flash and pomp and not a working bone or brain in their body, 'cept for that portion of the lizard-like, primal primitive brain that controls the autonomic systems of most people (you know, important stuff like breathing, eye-blinking, beating heart, fight or flight responses), but that seems to have, in republicans, devolved to the point where, incapable of honesty, empathy, and the usual survival instincts that no longer function normally and instead allow only the pursing of their lips and the uttering of a single monosyllabic response to everything: no.
These are the people who would depose President Obama and return us to those idyllic days of illegal and unnecessary wars, the slaughtering of millions and displacement of millions more in their continuing efforts to more efficiently run and manage genocides, once again doubling the size of government and completely blowing out any possibility of ever having a balanced budget, healthy citizens, informed discourse, an adherence to our Constitution which the gop has many times taken an oath to preserve and protect and defend against all enemies foreign and domestic and then gone way out of their way to denigrate the document, call for judges to strictly enforce its provisions, except where it comes to all those provisions providing for the life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that annoy the gop because they empower mere citizens and constituents and endow them with the unalienable rights granted them by THEIR maker, and not the maker, the christian god, the gop desires.
Oh! And pity the poor press! Those poor asses have the unenviable task of trying to portray the country as ready to lynch Obama and return to the good old days of gwb. The republicans are always so ready to point out endlessly that polls are "…merely a picture of how people feel at this moment of time and not accurate in the long term," when the polls are running against them but that polls are infallible predictions of the future when they are running with them. Of course, that is one area where they shine, talking out of both sides of their mouths at the same time, without using their brains and sometimes without even moving their lips! Amazing!
Look! Up in the sky! It's an endangered bird falling dead from pollution! It's an utterly unnecessary and monstrously expensive war plane! No! It's the gop! Able to allow tall buildings to be downed by terrorist-manned aircraft! Spend money faster than a speeding bullet train! More powerful smelling than an aromatic votive! Yes, born on another as yet unidentified planet destroyed by their own folly they have now arrived on earth to repeat their dismal performance, just as on the last planet they blew up with newly designed weapons no one needed anyway!
Whew! I told you the heat does funny things to me, and the heat of yesterday still has its grasp on whatever is left of my enfeebled mind today. I feel like Wimpy from the old Popeye cartoons, "I'll gladly repay you with some literacy Tuesday for some relief from the heat today!"
I don't have any really good reasons for not writing lately…
posted by Bill Arnett @ 11:09 AM Permalink
…unless seeing a son and his affianced off to university (SFSU) where 120,000 applicants did what applicants do and applied for entry, 1,200 were admitted, getting them an apartment within short walking distance to the campus, obtaining a $100,000 personal liability renter's insurance policy for them (I guess Daly City on the SF peninsula must be extremely slippery for reasons I cannot ascertain as I haven't physically been there yet, probably has something to do with the Pacific on one side and on the other San Francisco Bay, where seventy-three men went sailing, I think the Sailor must have been one of them), getting a DSL installed, and doin' my very best to help load up their treasury counts for anything.
My son fixed our Macs so we can use the "iChat" feature to video conference with each other (that somehow sounds mildly obscene, like,"Boy! Did he video conference her! Did you see dat?") on important matters like keeping his Mom, my Warrior Woman, from cryin' her eyes out 'cause she hasn't seen him or talked to him in the last thirty minutes or so.
My hands remain problematic as well, most often the left hand especially, hurts like hell and seriously cramps my style (as if I had any). This cramping and pain prevented me from being of much help when it came to loading and unloading cars, and transporting the stuff myself to Daly City, a mere hoot 'n' holler from San Francisco, but enough of a hoot to make insurance and stuff a lot cheaper in San Mateo County vs San Francisco County. Fortunately my son and fiancé had help from a very good friend who happened to be a whiz at packing stuff into cars (I take great pride in being an excellent packer myself, but this girl, damn!).
A logical extension of all this personal stuff taking precedence was that for the last two or three weeks or more I haven't watched anything more than very brief snippets of MSM horse crap so I find myself at a disadvantage as to what is going on in the world, who's bad-mouthing whom, how many lies both old and new are being spread by breathless, panting, shiny red-lipped newsreaders (and that's just the men), and what current crises there are besides the Oilcano and whether or not in the land of the free and the home of the brave a mosque may be either built and opened or just opened in an existing structure, either of which would signal the end of civilization and the certain destruction of the planet Earth, itself.
I mean, hellfire and damnation, I can't think of a single thing that outweighs this crisis. Oh, sure, we've got lots of people dying from a lack of basic health insurance provided by the government, lots and lots of children going uneducated because so many teachers are being laid off and schools closed, thousands and thousands of homeless veterans and the highest suicide rates among veterans ever seen before, and the only other issue that even comes close is whether or not you can pack heat when going to church.
But, oh your god (he's not mine so he must belong to someone out there), a small, minuscule, tiny, microscopic number of citizens in New York (a hundred? two hundred? a thousand?) , Muslims, want to build a mosque in the same neighborhood as Ground Zero, surrounded by several million New York citizens with the right to bear arms and a police force with a proven proclivity for using their firearms (why they pump forty or fifty rounds into unarmed people!), and yet these New Yorkers are afraid and/or insulted that what, .0000000000000001%, of the population wish to pursue their religion in a location near to Ground Zero.
Hell, I can almost agree, and would agree, if they also closed down, locked the doors, and boarded up the windows of all the Catholic, Protestant, Methodist, Calvinist, and Latter Day Saints churches and all the churches and named religions not included here (I'm not on that tier in my head, so for a while there is much information missing from me), 'cause otherwise it's just plain old bigotry, racism, baseless prejudice, a denial of equal rights, and makes a mockery of our Constitution.
And don't go giving me that shit about it being muslims that attacked the WTC as it has been show, at least to my satisfaction, that all the attackers were foreign, mostly by far Saudi Arabians, and not muslims that could legitimately assert all the rights and privileges of citizens and lawful resident aliens. And the hijackers even gave us plenty of clues as what they were up to what with the fly but don't land training and all the intelligence and FBI warnings ignored by bush, cheney, condi rice, and the other clowns of the bush maladministration. bush's vacations and planning to engineer a war with Iraq took his attention away from real security threats.
Oh, well. I just wanted to let everyone know why I was gone for so long and that I'm back now.
President Barack Obama's national security advisor has voiced concern about Americans growing weary of the war in Afghanistan, despite what he called apparent "elements of success."
Asked in an interview whether US engagement in Afghanistan risked the same loss of support that undermined the war in Vietnam, James Jones replied that such a prospect was "very worrisome."
There's a few of 'em:
First, the administration reps are idiots if they really think that we think they care what we think.
Second, the AFP are idiots if they really think that we think they their polls are for real.
Third, and finally, anybody who reads such a thing and doesn't question any of it is a complete and utter idiot.
I was watching "Futurama" last night and it was this whole thing about how these creationists were going on about how evolution was just a theory and how the doctor was trying to convince them all that they were idiots until finally, when they denied the absolute proof that man did evolve from apes and they STILL believed in creationism, he said very quietly, yet resolutely, "I don't even want to live on this planet anymore."
Pursuant to 14 CFR section 91.137(a)(1) temporary flight restrictions are in effect for deepwater horizon/mississippi canyon (mc252) incident cleanup and reconstitution operations an area bounded by: 290500n/0904000w or the leeville /lev/ vortac 258 degree radial at 30.1 NM to 300000n/0890000w or the gulfport /gpt/ vortac 169 degree radial at 24.7 NM to 300000n/0870000w or the crestview /cew/ vortac 196 degree radial at 52.2 NM to 280000n/0870000w or the panama city /pfn/ vortac 208 degree radial at 149.6 NM to 280000n/0904000w or the leeville /lev/ vortac 201 degree radial at 76.3 NM to the point of beginning at and below 3000 feet AGL excluding the airspace outside of 12 nautical miles from the us coastline.
Here's a map of the closed area. (h/t UrbanSurvival)
Trying to control what the public sees, I suppose.
The MSM (sure to be followed by every rightwing, lunatic fringe, mouth-breathing republican or teaparty member)…
posted by Bill Arnett @ 11:32 AM Permalink
…is breathlessly reporting that there may be scurrilous action afoot in that Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania was offered a job in the current administration by the dreaded and despised Bill Clinton in order to discourage Sestak from running for Arlen Spector's senatorial seat.
This strikes me as hilariously funny as I always assumed it was common knowledge that political parties have always sought to have their favorite son or daughter on the ballot and that they often offer any opposing candidate a position elsewhere in the party or with any of the large number of "think tanks" maintained by the political parties for just such a purpose. 'Specially the 'pub-lie-cans, a party with so many conservative think tanks that you might believe that the solution for all the worlds problems is imminent.
Of course though it would be bad form for the 'pub-lie-cans to allow any election to pass without trying to besmirch the reputation of the president or the intent of the democratic party, as well as taking another cheap shot at that most reviled-on-the-right former president Bill Clinton. It's doubly ridiculous when you stop to consider that the worst president and most despised former world leader, former presidential officeholder gwb, has been appearing in commercial pleas for help to gain donations to provide relief to earthquake victims in Haiti or tsunami victims a couple of years ago, with Bill Clinton in a desperate attempt to associate himself with one of America's great presidents [my opinion] to try and rehabilitate his (gwb) image by appearing to be a humanitarian and not the worlds worst torturer, starter of wars of aggression for oil, war criminal supreme, once considered the world's greatest threat to peace, and the number one terrorist of all. Even gwb's daddy appeared with sonny boy and that ne'er-do-well and reckless premature eja…well, you know what I mean…Bill Clinton in order to sanitize gwb's reputation.
So, to recap: it is now either a crime or despicable illegal or unethical act to offer a job to a potential candidate to discourage that candidate from running for a particular office, especially an unpaid position within an administration as we all know how tempting a non-paying job is and how men (or women) will sell their souls to the devil and be absolutely corrupted beyond any hope of redemption for even having heard of such an offer, much less having the non-paying job actually offered.
Utah Republican Sen. Bennett, rejected by party, considering running as a write-in candidate
Sen. Bob Bennett said on Tuesday he's still considering running for a fourth term as a write-in candidate even as Republican leaders publicly discouraged him from doing so.
Bennett failed to win enough delegates at the Utah GOP convention on Saturday to advance to the state's primary election. Conservatives and "tea party" activists rejected his bid. He said Tuesday that some of his Senate colleagues privately have encouraged him to run as a write-in, but he declined to identify them.
'Pub-lie-cans are too cheap to even offer a non-paying job, but IOKIYAR to discourage candidates from running.
They've warned you as it drains away, But you don't listen
posted by The Sailor @ 8:39 PM Permalink
What's up with Fire Dog Lake these days!? First Jane Hamsher joins Grover Norquist and now Marcy Wheeler aligns with large corporations. I expect smear tactics from Faux News, but this is a non-story that's now all over the news. Here are some of the headlines:
Professor Gruber wasn't paid by the Obama Administration, he had a grant from HHS. Just like my work is paid for by a grant from the NIH. Obama can't just call up any Federal agency and get a paper written, all of these grants are peer reviewed at multiple stages.
How do these people think research gets done? Would they rather corporations pay for it? So what if reporters didn't do due diligence, they don't even fact check, and no one has suggested that anything Gruber has said isn't factual. And it's not like he gets all the money, there's overhead for MIT, technical and administrative support services, researchers.
The folks at FDL are doing everything they can to stop health care reform, even dishonest smear tactics like this, trying to make some conspiracy theory out of what is publicly available information. In fact, their 'source' was a website setup by the Obama Admin.
Their stance on HCR aligns them with insurance companies, the US Chamber of Commerce and drug corporations.
I still have hopes we'll get a better bill, but my god if all those folks are against it, then I'll take what I can get.
posted by The Vidiot @ 4:16 PM Permalink
I don't normally blog from work, but I'm taking a break from setting up WAY too many biz cards to post this because it's awesome.
When their bosses were for the war, they were for the war, and they battered any candidate who was “weak on foreign policy.” When the political winds shifted four years later and the consensus inside the Beltway suddenly was that Iraq had been a hideous mistake, the campaign-trail reporters mysteriously started sounding like Sixties peaceniks on the plane and they hammered Hillary for refusing to admit her error on the Iraq vote (none of these pundits had to admit their mistake on the same question, but whatever), clearing the way for Obama.
posted by The Vidiot @ 7:36 AM Permalink
Like I didn't see this coming. Opposition to Ron Paul's Audit the Fed bill is using so-called "prominent economists" to show that auditing the Fed is a bad idea. And who are these "prominent eonomists?"
But far from a broad cross-section, the "prominent economists" lobbying on behalf of the Watt bill are in fact deeply involved with the Federal Reserve. Seven of the eight are either currently on the Fed's payroll or have been in the past.
Remember, back in the day of old-stream media, when they would report on the opposition, but never dig any deeper to find out who was actually funding it? You know, back before the internets?
posted by The Sailor @ 5:54 PM Permalink
Perhaps you've seen the distraction, (ooh look, something shiny!), between Faux News & the White House. What has been lost in the 'analysis' from all the MMM (Millionaire Multi-Media) is the same thing these stenographers always manage to avoid: are the Admin's accusations true?
Is Faux News an arm of the republican party? Are their news division and opinion division intertwined?
(Quick aside: Something that especially offended me was the NYT's headline Behind the War Between White House and Fox You'd think by now they'd know the difference between statements and people dying in a WAR!)
One would think that after all the MMM did to push the Bush WH's completely erroneous message on the need for an Iraq War on the American public, and all they did to promote the Clinton WH 'scandals' we could drop the 'liberal media' canard.
The 'he said/she said' skool of reporting only works if you don't have evidence. I think if you investigate abuse and only one person has scars and bruises you can find the truth. But you have to be willing to look. Maybe, just maybe, reporters do tend to be Democrats, but their editors aren't, their owners aren't and the board of directors of the corporations aren't.
But none of them are proven to be such blatant, top down, regurgitating republican talking points of the republican party as Fox News.
The Balloon Boy story was annoying from the beginnning.
posted by The Vidiot @ 7:51 AM Permalink
I had a girlfriend call me AND email about the dumb story that I thought was ridiculous so I just said "OK, I have no time. Let me know if he dies." Another girl at the office sent a blast email to a bunch of people saying she was a bad mom because when she first heard the story, she laughed. Of course, all those people she sent it to hit "reply all" and so that one email generated about 10 more emails that I didn't care about. I didn't feel like the story was to be believed from the beginning and even if it were true, it was no different then a "kid down a well" story from the 80s and I didn't care about those then.
Public trust in the US media is eroding and increasing numbers of Americans believe news coverage is inaccurate and biased, according to a study released on Monday.
They did it to themselves. They carried water for the power elite and now the proles are pissed at them.
posted by The Vidiot @ 10:42 AM Permalink
or did the Ted Kennedy funeral go on FOREVER?
I swear, every time I clicked on the TV, starting in the morning, there were live pictures of the funeral. This continued on all the way through dinner. Damn thing must've gone on for 12 hours or more.
Last funeral I went to only lasted one hour, and that included a church service.
posted by The Vidiot @ 8:16 AM PermalinkUpdated below by The Sailor.
The Bloggers were right about there being no WMDs in Iraq. The Bloggers were right when they said that the US government had condoned torture. And now we find out that the Bloggers were right when they were screaming that the security threat levels were raised and lowered for political reasons
Ridge says that he fought against changing the terror alert and wondered at the time whether the Ashcroft- and Rumsfeld-backed request was about "security or politics," because while there was "nothing to indicate a specific threat and no reason to cause undue public alarm...Post-election analysis demonstrated a significant increase in the president's approval rating in the days after the raising of the threat level."
and they say Bloggers can't be trusted?? Really?
Update: Tom Ridge, who is now expressing doubts about his role and complicity in the politicization of terrer alerts had this to say at the time:
[...] The AP also reports that Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge "spent a second day Wednesday defending the warnings, which came on the heels of the Democratic National Convention and drew attention from the presidential campaign of nominee John Kerry. 'I categorically state that the none of the terror threats are politically motivated,' Mr. Ridge said." [...] "I regret that there's an inference that this kind of public revelation of information is. . .political. It clearly was not and it never will be." In fact, Ridge didn't discount another terror warning possible between now and the election. Said Ridge, "If we receive that kind of information again, along with other bits and pieces of information, intelligence we have. . .we would do it again. . . . It will be driven by information and intelligence solely."
Hmm, let's see "we would do it again. . . . It will be driven by information political means and [lack of] intelligence solely." There, fixed it.
And continuing Vid's theme, why is it that the folks who were proved wrong and/or hypocritical over and over are still given a national voice while the folks who were proven right over and over are still marginalized? [/rhetorical question]
posted by The Sailor @ 8:37 PM Permalink In the days before cable and network and local blow dried anchors we had Walter Cronkite to tell us what was going on. He wasn't the only one, network news then wasn't supposed to be a profit engine, it was an integral part of what they gave back to the nation in return for their broadcasting licenses. The news division was expected to lose money, but in return they actually did reporting, and reported the truth. It was the networks' version of tithing.
Remembering Walt:
He became one of the top American reporters in World War II, covering battles in North Africa and Europe.[9] He was one of eight journalists selected by the U.S. Army Air Forces to fly bombing raids over Germany in a B-17 Flying Fortress.[14] He also landed in a glider with the 101st Airborne in Operation Market-Garden and covered the Battle of the Bulge. After the war, he covered the Nuremberg trials and served as the United Press main reporter in Moscow for two years.
I only recall one time when he choked on the air. It was while he was watching the confirmation come in on John Kennedy's assassination.
Just as he had said that, the editor handed Cronkite the bulletin. Cronkite stopped speaking, put on his eyeglasses, looked over the bulletin sheet for a moment, took off his glasses, and made the official announcement:
From Dallas, Texas, the flash, apparently official: (reading AP flash) "President Kennedy died at 1 p.m. Central Standard Time." (glancing up at clock) 2 o'clock Eastern Standard Time, some 38 minutes ago.
After making that announcement, Cronkite paused briefly, put his glasses back on and swallowed hard to maintain his composure. There was noticeable emotion in his voice as he intoned the next sentence of the news report:
"Vice President Johnson *cough* has left the hospital in Dallas, but we do not know to where he has proceeded. Presumably, he will be taking the oath of office shortly and become the 36th president of the United States." [...] He then tossed coverage of the events to colleague Charles Collingwood and left the newsroom, but would return several hours later to anchor The CBS Evening News as scheduled.
He was originally for the Vietnam war, but after going there and seeing things for himself he just told the truth as he saw it. When he spoke out against the Vietnam War, President Johnson said "If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost Middle America." Johnson was only partially right, he'd lost middle America when everyone knew someone in their own family or a neighbor's family that had died in the war. Cronkite just gave voice and reported facts to what middle America was feeling.
During the 1968 Democratic convention he called Mayor Daily's free speech repression for what it was "I think we've got a bunch of thugs here, Dan."
Mr. Cronkite loved science and was a big fan of the space program. When Apollo 11 launched, the first mission to land a man on the moon, he shed his studied demeanor and shouted "go baby, go!"
He was on the air for 27 of the 30 hours till Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin touched down safely on the moon. He was awarded an Ambassador of Exploration Award by NASA. The first person to receive the award that wasn't an astronaut or NASA employee.
And he was a great and generous sailor ... after his family convinced him to give up racing cars.
He had a long, full and productive life and I've barely scratched the phenomenal events he reported on.
When I see the news media stars of today, with their carefully coiffed hair and obeisance to power and willingness to relay whatever tripe they were told by 'anonymous' sources as truth, I fear we'll never see his like again.
Thanks Walt, you gave so much more than you got. And what better thing can we say about a fellow human.
1.(sometimes capital letters 'V' and 'S' with no space) a style of writing or saying something using emotion and/or logic and snark, esp. in order to elucidate the obvious while pretending to be objective.
2. anything written by The Vidiot, The Sailor, Mr. Vidiot and anyone else they allow to post on the blog “vidiotspeak”
[Origin: loosely based on new + speak, coined by George Orwell in his novel, 1984 (1949)]
And for godsakes, stay away from FOX, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC.
It's ALL CRAP!!!
Watch the BBC news or ITN news instead.
"POSSE COMITATUS ACT" (18 USC 1385)
A Reconstruction Era criminal law proscribing use of Army (later, Air Force) to "execute the laws" except where expressly authorized by Constitution or Congress. Limit on use of military for civilian law enforcement also applies to Navy by regulation. Dec '81 additional laws were enacted (codified 10 USC 371-78) clarifying permissible military assistance to civilian law enforcement agencies--including the Coast Guard--especially in combating drug smuggling into the United States. Posse Comitatus clarifications emphasize supportive and technical assistance (e.g., use of facilities, vessels, aircraft, intelligence, tech aid, surveillance, etc.) while generally prohibiting direct participation of DoD personnel in law enforcement (e.g., search, seizure, and arrests). For example, Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachments (LEDETS) serve aboard Navy vessels and perform the actual boardings of interdicted suspect drug smuggling vessels and, if needed, arrest their crews). Positive results have been realized especially from Navy ship/aircraft involvement.
