Me: Frank Lynch
Home
(Current
commentary)
These are my mundane daily ramblings.
For something
less spontaneous, I maintain The
Samuel
Johnson Sound Bite Page (over 1,700 Johnson quotes), with a
weekly essay springing from one of
Johnson's quotations.
Bio:
Born 1957, raised in Florida, moved to New York
area in 1982; now live in Brooklyn.
Married, with one kid
unit.
Former marketing research professional. Now drawing no
salary, but working on a book.
Email:
frank
dot
lynch2
at
verizon
dot
net
All stand together! A columnist for
the Palm Beach Post notes that the top 1.3% of Floridians bear
the burden of a portfolio tax — $1 on every $1,000
invested!! and has several ideas for appropriate protest actions,
among them a
Million-Maid March.
Link 8:57 AM
"Some of these battles we've already
lost." The tropical environment of South Florida is quite
pleasant for legal, exotic animals whose owners get bored with
them — to the endangerment of the native species, which
are getting crowded out.
It sometimes takes a death to make you
realize the little ways that people impact you, even when
you've never met them. As a kid, I loved going to Howard
Johnson's for their fried clams. For me, it couldn't get any
better. It didn't occur to me until this morning that it took a
special kind of clam, and it took an entrepreneur to get them to
HoJo. Thomas Soffron has
died at 96, and I have him to thank.
One. Whole. Hour. That's the amount
of time President Bush will spend testifying before the 9/11
commission he set up, according to this report. Let's recall what the President said
when he announced the commission at the beginning: It looks as if the press didn't do so
well in its coverage of Bush's appearance on Meet the Press
earlier this month. When I read the official transcript posted at
whitehouse.org I get a completely different feeling about the
Preznit. It really makes a lot of sense to go back and review
these transcripts and gain new insights.
My Guild guitar is back from the repair
shop, and I'm happy it's home. I've owned it nearly twenty
years now (bought it used in '84), and I guess it's only the
second guitar I've really treasured. The first was a Penco A-13
which I had for about ten years before losing it in a fire; that
guitar had great action and a full sound across all its range. I
like this Guild for many of the same reasons, and it was well
worth having it looked at. It plays a little differently now,
though: I have to calm down while playing or the strings vibrate
against the new frets.
Anti-Semitism, as predicted,
following the release of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the
Christ." Last night on CNN's Newsnight with Aaron Brown, Brown
started a discussion of the movie with
this: It sure didn't take long. The movie was released just
yesterday.
There's ample room to wonder whether
we'll take full advantage of the opportunities for
progress in this country when Rudy Giuliani's credentials for
national office are being questioned over his positions on Gay
rights. In Salon, Eric Boehlert writes that Giuliani will have
difficulty in a 2008 Presidential run as a Republican precisely
for this reason: And though Giuliani is widely believed to be considering a run
for president in 2008, he once again finds himself battling the
perception that as a national candidate he's too moderate for
Republican Party voters. "I just don't see Rudy Giuliani being able to sway
conservatives within the Republican Party," says Michael Long,
chairman of the New York state Conservative Party. "The gay
marriage issue draws a line down the middle of the street, and
Rudy Giuliani is something of a champion of gay rights." "I certainly don't think there is a possibility this year of
somebody with his position [on gay rights] getting on the
national ticket," adds Joseph Mercurio, a New York political
consultant who has worked with both Democrats and Republicans.
"The conservative base would not tolerate it." Some might say that this issue makes Giuliani a
reverse-Joe-Lieberman (a Democrat who might have pulled
significant numbers of Republican voters in November, yet
couldn't attract Democratic voters in the primaries); but that's
merely facile, and ignores the fact that Lieberman was more
conservative than many Democrats on a variety of issues.
Giuliani, on the other hand, was Mr. Post-9/11 to all the media;
his constant presence put such a rosy glow on him that all the
harshness of the preceding years as Mayor was cast aside. This
was the guy who was frequently talked about as being the head of
the Department of Homeland Security prior to the selection of Tom
Ridge. Perhaps the politicos and the consultants will be wrong, but I
really do hope that voters aren't at a point where they would be
turned off of a candidate on the basis of one issue. It doesn't
say good things about the future of our country: each faction
will be digging in its heels more and more over its issue, and
each party will be too afraid of alienating those factions, that
they they kowtow; ...leading of course, to worsening polarization
and intransigence.
John Kerry's defense spending voting
record is something which the Republican party is trying to
use against the Democratic Presidential contender, as I mentioned here earlier this month.
Yesterday Slate's Fred Kaplan put all those votes into
context, pointing out that they happened when the government
wanted to slow down spending post Cold War. There would
have been no "peace benefit" if spending continued; in fact,
these cuts were argued for by Bush I and Cheney, too. Read the whole thing.
SHOOT your employees in their feet! A
Nashville newspaper ran a photo of its
restaurant critic, a decidedly undercover position.
Almost like staring at clouds. Have
you seen Animals on the
Underground? You could never do this so well with the NYC
subway map.
The need for housecleaning,
continued. Thanks to TAPPED, we're alerted
to another bit of truth shading by the Bush Administration. The
Center for American
Progress noted that Department of Homeland Security head Tom
Ridge wants to give credit to President Bush for founding his
department. Sorry, no sale: Bush actually resisted the call for
months. It came from Senators Patrick Leahy and Arlen Specter.
(See The
Daily Howler for more.)
What's a nice Catholic like Mel Gibson
doing serving turkey on Ash Wednesday instead of fish? The
initial word on his movie, The Passion of the
Christ, suggests that he's failed in his major objective,
presenting a realistic depiction of Jesus's last twelve hours.
We're not talking about the opinions of movie reviewers here
(yet), but people who have backgrounds in divinity. The New York
Times obtained reactions from a panel of clergy (Roman
Catholicism, Greek Orthodox, Protestantism, and Judaism), and
while all expected to like the movie, they were roundly
disappointed. A Roman Catholic pastor said, "Mel Gibson says
it's a literal interpretation. It's not. It's Mel Gibson's
interpretation." The Methodist pastor had trouble relating to
Jesus as depicted on the film: "I found myself distanced from
Jesus because of the violence. I could not identify with him."
And, consistent with other reports, anti-Semitism is an
issue: After the film, over plates of cookies at the Methodist
church, Emily D. Soloff, executive director of the Chicago
chapter of the American Jewish Committee, told the gathering that
the way Jews were portrayed in the film "made me squirm." Other Jews and some Christians at the table agreed. They said
they were appalled by scenes of an unruly mob of Jews and by how
the Jewish priests looked like modern-day rabbis in full beards,
some in the blue-striped prayer shawls still worn by Jews. "This movie has the potential for undermining the progress
we've made in relations between Jews and Christians," Ms. Soloff
said. These don't represent the entire spectrum of reactions, of
course. For some time, the claim was made that the Pope watched
it and said "it is as it was" (but this perception/rumor was
corrected by the Vatican), and Billy Graham supposedly wept.
However, rumors such as those spurred by what the Pope may have
said — if they build expectations that this is closer to a
documentary than a movie — do viewers a disservice. Anyone
who compares the four gospel accounts can quickly find
differences between them (and if you want to really spend
some time on this, you might pick up a copy of Raymond Brown's The Death of the Messiah). No matter how hard Gibson
tried to be accurate, the ambiguities in the original histories
doom the effort: Some scholars say even the most widely recognized features of
the crucifixion, such as the shape of the cross and the use of
nails, are open to debate. James F. Strange, professor of religious studies at the
University of South Florida in Tampa, said 1st century historian
Josephus provided only general information, probably because
crucifixion was so common that details seemed superfluous. Crucifixion was first used in the 5th century B.C., and was a
widely used form of execution in Asia, Europe and Africa for the
ensuing eight centuries, said Israeli anthropologist Joe Zias.
Depending on technique, death could be swift or take days. "If you suspended people by their hands and left their feet
free you would kill them within an hour," Zias said. "If you
suspended them in a way they couldn't exhale they'd be dead
within minutes." Zias said the question of whether Jesus was nailed to the
cross or simply tied to it remains a mystery. "There is no
evidence whatsoever that his feet were nailed," he said. "The
Gospels say he was crucified and leave it at that." Zias criticized "The Passion of The Christ" for accepting the
standard version of three nails being used. He said experiments
on cadavers carried out by the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages
have shown that people hanging with nails through their hands
will fall to the ground within a relatively short time, pulled by
gravity. So why, given the difficulty in achieving historicity even,
would this be called a turkey? Because it was doomed to fail on
this account, but proceeded nonetheless. That means it has to
succeed on the merits of either being a movie or a religious
experience. As a movie, critics are saying it's too graphic, and
I can't help but wonder if there isn't an accompanying repulsion
which makes it difficult for any kind of religious experience
beyond sharing Jesus's pain. Frankly, I'm not sure that Gibson
hasn't missed the story.
Tomorrow is Ash Wednesday, the first
day of Lent,
and for the life of me, I can't figure out why someone who tries
as hard to be holy as Mel Gibson seems to be trying would allow
his new movie to be released on Ash Wednesday. I just don't
understand: wouldn't he prefer that his viewers were praying, or
in church, or being contemplative, or something? Why would he
want to interrupt their thinking by asking them to go see one of
his movies, even if it is about Jesus's passion? It makes
no sense to me. But, things being the way they are, if you're looking for
something to give up, you might try this. And if you intend to observe by not eating meat (tomorrow, as
well as Fridays during Lent), you might pick up a copy of James
Peterson's cookbook Fish & Shellfish: The Definitive Cook's Companion. I
think every recipe in it I've tried is a winner — but in a
way, that's
a problem, since Lent should involve sacrifice.
Cheney is out of the loop. Really,
I'm sure it's not intentional when he misrepresents what we know
about Iraq. In yesterday's speech at a Bush-Cheney event, he said: Saddam Hussein clearly did not have the capability which
Cheney refers to, because, at minimum, he lacked the
materials. You can have all the diagrams you want, and all
the intentions, desires, and motivations, but without the
materials you can't do it. It's like saying I can make $32 million in the stock market
this year: I need money to invest which will lead to that
net result. This is pure deception coming from Cheney again.
Your tax dollars are funding the
Bush-Cheney campaign in ways you didn't plan. It's one thing to
check off the box on your tax form for campaign financing, but
right now the White House web site is hosting two speeches which
were inarguably for the campaign. At the White House web page for
Current News,
entries for February 23 include a speech by Bush to the Republican governors, and a speech by Cheney at a Bush-Cheney 04 event. Because Cheney's speech was at a Bush-Cheney event, it doesn't
merit much discussion. But as for Bush's, in order to claim that
it was not a campaign speech, you have to argue that the
following statements were not about the campaign: This is a blatant campaign speech, and it wastes government
money to have it on the White House's servers, or supported by
White House staff. I guess the Administration only starts to
think about wasteful government spending when it comes to issues
like education and the environment. The speech is being
covered as a campaign speech by the press because it
is a
campaign speech. No doubt about it.
Bush's call for a Constitutional
amendment against marriage for gays needs to be seen as the
political ploy which it is. Either that, or he's truly afraid of
the Supreme Court, which would be the final arbiter of existing
laws and confusion. In any case, the primary impact of his
statement today is that he'll be able to use it as a wedge
against any Democrat contender who doesn't step in line, since
the majority of Americans are still against gay marriage. I wonder, though, if there isn't opportunity here... Let's say
a contender favors gay marriage, as another aspect of
civil rights. If the contender is compelling on enough other
issues, taking a pro position is a way of coming across as more
truthful. (Besides, how many Americans will really base their
vote on this issue?)
Is the US Government an alcoholic?
That is, in the sense that it did something which it now knows
was useless, but continues to engage in the same behavior? A
Knight-Ridder report from Saturday suggests we're still funneling
money to the Ahmed Chalabi-led group which gave us misleading
intelligence.
Millions of dollars... WASHINGTON - The Department of Defense is continuing to pay
millions of dollars for information from the former Iraqi
opposition group that produced some of the exaggerated and
fabricated intelligence President Bush used to argue his case for
war. The Pentagon has set aside between $3 million and $4 million
this year for the Information Collection Program of the Iraqi
National Congress, or INC, led by Ahmed Chalabi, said two senior
U.S. officials and a U.S. defense official. (snip) The State Department and the CIA, which soured on Chalabi in
the 1990s, viewed the INC's information as highly unreliable
because it was coming from a source with a strong self-interest
in convincing the United States to topple Saddam. The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has concluded since the
invasion that defectors turned over by the INC provided little
worthwhile information, and that at least one of them, the source
of an allegation that Saddam had mobile biological warfare
laboratories, was a fabricator. A defense official said the INC
did provide some valuable material on Saddam's military and
security apparatus. Your tax dollars at work...
I think WE should determine what's
important to US. That's Ahmed Chalabi, in the Telegraph, on the pre-war
intelligence in Iraq — intelligence which was largely led
by the nose thanks to erroneous reports by defectors. Personally, seeing as how the bill on this war and aftermath
is immense (and comes at the cost of other programs, debt
servicing, and US prosperity), I think it's rather presumptuous
of Chalabi to try and tell us what's important. This is
another exercise in "pay no attention to that man behind the
curtain."
The need for housecleaning. Not all
administration deceptions originate with Bush himself, yet you
can't help but wonder what inspires public servants to deceive
the public. Today's New York Times tells us that the Department
of Health and Human Services now admits that one of their reports
twisted the truth about
the poorer health of minorities. Now, there's just no way
that this specific action (the spin in the original report)
started in the Oval Office; but we don't really hear for Bush
trying to stamp this sort of practice out, now, either, do we? As
a seeker of the truth, Bush comes across as being as inert as a
brick. The Valerie Plame incident is an easy example to cite:
Bush could have found out who on the staff betrayed national
security by outing a CIA operative immediately, but so far
as we can tell he took no action whatsoever. Bush is obviously
not going to read the riot act. He has to go.
In just a couple of hours, the New
York City subway system will undergo a major change in train
lines. For me, it will mean I'll again have quick access to the
Grand Street station (but only on weekdays: on weekends I need to
change trains). One of the two flavors of Q trains which has been
stopping near here is being replaced by something like the old D
train (but they're calling it a B train). (More info is here.) But part of the change is already underway: because the Q
Diamond (express in Brooklyn) never ran on weekends and is being
retired for good, it was officially decommissioned on Friday.
Satan's Laundromat has
pictures of the last ride.
So what? In an earlier
post I wrote about InstaPundit's sanguine conclusion that his
bad data "certainly suggests that the availability of free
downloads doesn't destroy the market for a product." I complained
that it was too soon to say whether or not there was an impact,
because he was working with something which he admitted was not
scientific (and besides, just one book out of a billion potential
products in the market). It's been pointed out to me that
InstaPundit never said there would be no impact, only that
it suggests that free downloads don't destroy the market
for hard products. Yes, that's true, and I should have been more
clear. In fact, setting up a standard of "doesn't destroy" is
further evidence that he used mushy thinking. So far, it appears
that pollution does not destroy the entire human species. Talking in terms of "destroy" is just silly, because it's a
ridiculous standard for action. It is highly unlikely that
any market action will completely destroy a market, so it's
really no criterion at all. If it impacts the market in any way,
we need to make decisions about whether or not the impact is a
good thing. InstaPundit cannot claim that there is no impact. (He
even mentions that his wife is getting enough free donations on
her site where the free download exists as to make it a viable
proposition. Money for those donations has to come from
somewhere: in fact, maybe that is less money available for a
potential republication of his wife's book.) At any rate, for him
to look at the effect of a total of three copies on his wife's
used book is silly: he has no idea whether or not the equilibrium
price has been impacted at all, because he hasn't been monitoring
the traffic (new cases of used copies being made available as
some get bought even on amazon, much less in other used book
outlets.)
I thought Republicans were against big
government? This item from the Guardian re VP Cheney: Now we know how the Administration has been creating jobs, I
guess.
Bad data doesn't suggest anything.
Instapundit notes that used booksellers are selling copies of his
wife's book for $95+, even though it's available as a free
download elsewhere. He writes:
If it's not scientific (which it isn't, and I'll go into that
in a moment), why does it suggest anything at all? The absence of
science means that it's easily refuted, or that there are
unconsidered alternative explanations. If anything, drawing
conclusions (or seeing suggestions such as "doesn't destroy"
instead of "may not destroy") only suggests lazy thinking. If
it's unscientific, ask yourself why, and then qualify your
hypotheses. Here's why it's unscientific, and erroneous to draw any
conclusions. There are a total of three copies of the book
available at the link he provides — hardly anything close
to a market you could generalize from — and we have no idea
how many copies were available prior to the book being available
as a free download. Nor do we know how long it will take
for these three copies to move in the marketplace. If there were
three copies before, and the same three are still available now,
one could easily hypothesize that the availability of the free
download copy has hurt physical sales. As an aside, he notes that the second hand copies used to go
for $100 — that is, the price has come down in this
tiny marketplace — but he doesn't see how downloads have
had any impact on the marketplace. At the end of the day, this is a tiny tiny bit of anecdotal
experience, lacking rigor, and not worth generalizing about.
It suggests nothing, perhaps, beyond wishful thinking on
the part of someone who likes to download.
More on the Museum of the Society of
Illustrators. Yesterday, I wrote that the Kid Unit was
unenthused by the Museum of the Society
of Illustrators. I attributed the bored reaction to the
format (a non-interactive museum) and not the content itself,
which I believe was true. But it would be wrong to leave that
post as it was without commenting on what a splendid little place
it is. The gallery consists of a single open room, with a row or two
of original drawings on its walls. The works were by people whose
work I've seen numerous times in print (such as in The Atlantic
Monthly) or in children's picture books; there were also
illustrations from advertisements and packaging, as well as
graphic novels. All in all, it gave a good representation of the
variety of commercial illustration which is out there. (Perhaps
my mother-in-law would sniff that the illustrations she used to
draw for McCall's patterns should be included somehow, but I
digress.) One thing which was a disappointment for me, visiting
with a child, was that the works were hung at a height that is
difficult for an aspiring child to enjoy. I think most of it was
no lower than 5'6" (about 1.7 meters)... (Now, maybe they get
very few kids in, so it's usually not a problem?) But with only a
row or two of materials rung around the large room, with no
panels in the center of the room, there wasn't that much material
to look at. They could make a visit longer by putting in more
material (more rows on the wall and building a central
panel). This is not to say you don't get your money's worth: the
gallery is completely free (and it's worth paying a few bucks to
get into see). One piece I'd like to mention which really caught my fancy,
and was well understood by the Kid Unit: an eight panel riff on
Magritte's "This is Not a Pipe." The first panel drew Magritte's
original 'this is not a pipe' (in English), followed by pointing
out various world/domestic problems: such as a war ("This is not
an invasion"), belching smokestacks ("This is not pollution"),
and so on, and in the eighth panel a picture of Bush on a
television, saying "so do I have your vote?" I really wish I
could remember the artist's name... I'll have to call the gallery
and see if I can get it. UPDATE: The artist is Peter Kuper, and you can
see it here.
"God bless the Internet." This phrase
comes up pretty frequently on the world wide web (Google
currently has about 4,950 pages in its index that have this specific
sentence.) Why should God bless the Internet? Will this help the
Internet get over a cold, or maybe give it sufficient grace so it
can go to heaven? And, what would the Internet do once it got
there? Of course, when people write/say "God bless the Internet"
they're just using an expression. I don't think they really hope
that God will cure the World Wide Web of some sort of pestilence.
(Am I wrong? Is there some kind of pus on the web which they hope
God will eliminate?) But the expression enables them to be
content with lazy thinking, and not stop to think about why they
are so lucky. These thoughts, such as they are, occurred to me after I
calmed down. You see, I'd just checked my server logs to
see where yesterday's traffic originated, and
one blogger (it's in the February 18 post... scroll down to
"God bless the internet, part XVII") used it to lead into a link
to a page on my Johnson site regarding Johnson's refutation of Bishop Berkely. Now,
I give God full and due credit for having created me, and giving
me my talents and blessings, as well as for having given
scientists the creativity to conceive and develop the Internet;
but as for the Internet, so far as I know it is not a living
thing that creates anything. It is a faceless, inanimate
channel, without a soul, desires, aspirations, and so on. Web sites are not spawned by "the Internet," they are the
result of hard work by individuals and companies. But people
forget that it's hard work — genuine hard work requiring
planning, effort, imagination, diligence, attention to quality (I
could go on). But people take it for granted too often. You can
see it in the things they write when they write "God bless the
Internet." For instance,
this blogger asked God to bless the net because she can pay
her bills online; it does not occur to her (apparently) that
companies expended effort to provide her with this convenience.
And another blogger forgets the information technologists who
created the Internet (as well as his own effort) when asking
blessings for the opportunity to share a picture of a gyro sign. It also comes up on bulletin boards: here, a poster wants God to bless the Internet
because there are work at home opportunities. Let me state the
obvious: it's not enough to send "the Internet" a greeting card
or to ask God to bless it; the Internet didn't do it. The
Internet never has done it, and never will. Thank the people
and companies behind the web sites specifically. If
it's a web site run by an individual that helped you in some way,
put something in the tip
box once in a while. If it's run by a company, say good
things about the company to your friends, or in your blog.
Thank the people and companies. Asking God to bless the
Internet is a cop-out: you have a responsibility to show
gratitude to those who bring you good. End of rant.
Merely an issue of the medium? People
who know us well — friends here in New York, as well as
former au pairs scattered through Europe — know about my
persistent frustrations trying to get the Kid Unit to enjoy
anything approximating a museum. It doesn't seem to have anything
to do with the content as much as the interactive nature. The
other day a trip to the American Museum of Natural History worked
well because it was hosting a traveling exhibit from San
Francisco's exploratorium.
Science is not the Kid Unit's bent, but there was glee all the
time. Today, we visited the Museum of the Society of
Illustrators, and while art is high on the list of hobbies,
this was a dud for her. She could appreciate it, but
seeing the works hanging on a wall didn't involve her in the
least. It was very strange, and she later said she probably would
have enjoyed it a lot more if it was on a web site. So we also
bagged the museum of the Fashion Institute of Technology, even though there have
been mentions of wanting to be a dress designer. We took the
kids' route, and did the Central Park Zoo instead.
The human dimension of the
discriminated. That's Chicago's Mayor Daley, on why he supports
marriage for gays.
Reminiscing about that wonderful vacation
in the veldt? You know, the one where your mother-in-law got
carried off by a pack of lions? Try Afri-cam to revisit the
wildlife.
So Dorothy and Toto were in an ice cream
parlor, surrounded by empty glass bowls coated with the
residue of banana splits and double dips, as well as several
glasses which once held their chocolate milk shakes. Dorothy says
to Toto, "Toto, I've got the feeling we're not in ketosis any
more." And that, my friends, is a stupid joke I made up earlier this
week... Ketosis is that state of metabolism which your body
achieves in a low carb diet plan, where your body burns fat at a
higher rate thanks to the lack of carbs available for burning.
According to today's New York Times, though, carb avoidance is
now going into a broader public, not just
dieters, and the manufacturers are paying attention: I myself have trouble staying in ketosis during these cold
months, because I rely so heavily on outdoor exercise (and with
school out, I also have to coax the young one out), and am in a
plateau. But I am glad to have shed 25 pounds, and am looking
forward to the return of school (as well as warmer weather).
Well, THIS is a surprise. A group of
very well-respected scientists is accusing the White House of distorting scientific
conclusions for the sake of policy. Will wonders never cease? There are some who question the way
White House decisions will impact the national health.
We were just talking about her the other
day... Ab was doing some cleaning or something and I made
reference to Madge, the pitch lady for Palmolive dish detergent.
Well, the actor who played her for 27 years — Jan Miner
— has died. She goes unmentioned at the Colgate-
Palmolive web site, though: a search on "madge" yields no results. (At least deadoraliveinfo.com is up to date.
The most bizarre thing happened on the
computer yesterday. After watching the movie, the kids
started using the computer, and one of them went to a games site
where there was an arcade game simulator, done with java script.
It was a nasty thing, which somehow changed my monitor's images
90 degrees counterclockwise, messed up the trackball performance,
and somehow disabled a lot of my Norton protection. I lost a good
couple hours restoring everything back to normal. It was VERY
scary.
School is out for the week, and
yesterday morning the Kid Unit had a couple friends over to watch
The Fellowship of the Ring. The visiting kids had seen it before,
but not ours: and while the kids were very good about not
revealing what would happen next, they were a little more settled
on the tension and making jokes; I had to enforce complete
silence after Gandalf's death in order for some semblance of
dramatic feeling to be retained. The plan is now that Friday
night our nuclear family will watch part 2 together, and maybe
see Part 3 in the theater over the weekend.
Patriot games? Via Josh Marshall, I just read about a US Assistant
Attorney who is suing Attorney General Ashcroft for meddling in
terrorism cases, mismanagement, etc. But also, apparently, for outing one of his informants (a la the Valerie Plame
case), effectively neutralizing and endangering the informant.
Link 8:39 AM
Link 10:11 AM
September the 11th marked a dividing line in the life of our
nation. The events of a single morning dramatically demonstrated
America's vulnerability to the threats of a new era. Oceans that
separated us from other continents no longer separate us from
danger. America's enemies are still determined to inflict great
harm. We have a duty -- a solemn duty -- to do everything we can
to protect this country.
An hour, an entire hour he'll spend with the commission. Good for
his sense of duty.
Link 1:19 PM
Link 11:54 AM
Link 11:16 AM
Seeing a movie ought not be a test of faith, nor
should writing about one we believe, yet this time it seems both
are true. A critic we invited to the program tonight backed out
late this afternoon after getting literally hundreds of e-mails,
many of them hateful, some anti-Semitic, a few threatening his
life.
Link 12:54 PM
Link 11:28 AM
Link 9:02 AM
Link 5:41 PM
Link 3:29 PM
Link 2:24 PM
Link 9:47 AM
Link 4:10 PM
We now know that Saddam had the capability to produce weapons of
mass destruction. He had the scientists, and he had the
technology he needed. We know that he had the necessary
infrastructure because we found the labs and the dual-use
facilities that could be used to produce chemical and biological
agents. We know that he was developing delivery systems,
ballistic missiles, that the United Nations had prohibited. And
Saddam Hussein had something else -- he had a record of using
weapons of mass destruction against his enemies and against his
own people. There is no question that America did the right thing
in Iraq.
Link 1:05 PM
Link 12:33 PM
Link 11:35 AM
Link 4:22 PM
"As far as we're concerned we've been entirely
successful. That tyrant Saddam is gone and the Americans are in
Baghdad. What was said before is not important. The Bush
administration is looking for a scapegoat. We're ready to fall on
our swords if he wants."
Link 8:49 AM
Link 9:12 AM
Link 10:13 PM
Link 8:46 AM
His staff dwarfs those of his predecessors. Al Gore
had one foreign policy adviser; Mr Cheney has more than a dozen.
Link 10:54 PM
The used price is now $95.24, after being available for download
for over a month, even though there's a comment on the Amazon
page telling people where they can get it for free. I'll grant
that this isn't scientific, but it certainly suggests that the
availability of free downloads doesn't destroy the market for a
product, even at a very high price differential.
Link 10:48 AM
Link 10:23 AM
Link 9:35 AM
Link 10:32 PM
"They're your doctors, your lawyers, your journalists, your
politicians," the mayor said. "They're someone's son or daughter.
They're someone's mother or father. . . . I've seen people of the
same sex adopt children, have families. [They're] great parents."
Link 9:56 AM
Link 9:30 AM
Last month, representatives of 450 companies, including Kraft,
Con- Agra and Wal-Mart, gathered at a two day Low-Carb Summit in
Denver to discuss how to take advantage of what some analysts
predict will be a $25 billion market for low-carb products and
services this year: everything from low-carb pasta to low-carb
European barge cruises and hotel "get a-weighs."
Link 8:52 AM
Dr. Kurt Gottfried, an emeritus professor of physics at Cornell
University who signed the statement and spoke in the conference
call, said the administration had "engaged in practices that are
in conflict with the spirit of science and the scientific
method." Dr. Gottfried asserted that what he called "the cavalier
attitude toward science" could place at risk the basis for the
nation's long-term prosperity, health and military prowess.
Link 3:51 PM
Link 10:47 AM
Link 8:37 AM
Link 8:34 AM
Link 8:17 AM