Recalibrating the Awesomeness Meter

[shereads]

Idea:



A Kerry/Powell ticket. The first two-party ticket in history. The first black vp nominee in history, with the likelihood that he would run for president as an incumbent VP in eight years. Two veterans running against two chicken hawks. And the one Bush/Cheney cabinet member who tried to talk the president out of the Iraq war.

And it would be such FUN! The ultimate FU to GWB!

Bush/Cheney versus Kerry & The Only Member Of Bush's Cabinet Who Knew The Iraq War Would Be A Fiasco.

For the bumper sticker, we might have to shorten it to just Kerry/Powell.



I can dream, can't I?

But I'm serious. I'm at a loss to think of a VP candidate who will get people excited. Putting a woman on the ticket will get Kerry nowhere, because we're in war-mode right now and every man in America would be irate. Not all of you would admit it...



A fellow liberal won't do Kerry any good, either.

McCain insists he won't join Kerry's ticket. Personally, I think he's foolish not to try it. As Kerry's VP, he could not only save the country and from four more years of Bush/Cheney, he could also run for President as an incumbent Republican in eight years.

Plus, there's the chance to close the rift a little. Republicans and Democrats started hating each other with real venom when Ken Starr started frothing at the mouth. The impeachment hearings notched it up to pure loathing, and it's only grown worse since 9/11. I can't imagine anything that will make it better, short of a two-party ticket that draws from both ends of the spectrum.

For me to be in favor of a right-to-lifer on the ticket is an indication of how terrified I am for this country if the current coven of lunatics and vampires continue in power.

 

[cantdog]

Noam Chomsky has asked Nader not to run, because he is convinced that these people are too messianic and fascistic to be allowed to continue. He says that usually, since Clinton, there is so little difference between the parties as to be laughable, unless you are inordinately attached, as Wildcard is, for instance, to a single social issue.

But this time, the one big difference between the two is that Kerry is not a fundamentalist. Let's get this much accomplished this time, he says, and continue with the progressive thing afterward. It's too important.

cantdog

 

[shereads]

Noam Chomsky has asked Nader not to run, because he is convinced that these people are too messianic and fascistic to be allowed to continue. He says that usually, since Clinton, there is so little difference between the parties as to be laughable, unless you are inordinately attached, as Wildcard is, for instance, to a single social issue.

But this time, the one big difference between the two is that Kerry is not a fundamentalist. Let's get this much accomplished this time, he says, and continue with the progressive thing afterward. It's too important.

cantdog

Nader has morphed into an ego shaped like a person. I remember thinking after the election, when GWB justified pulling out of the kyoto treaty by announcing that global warming is "something scientists need to study," that Nader must be learning a bitter lesson. One environmental regulation after another has been toppled; workplace safety, production standards that protected us against contaminated meat, all the things that Nader used to stand for, have been cut to shreds. The world hates us, our credibility with our allies is nonexistent, our civil liberties are being weakened...And all Nader cares about is a symbolic gesture that puts him back in the spotlight.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Idea:



A Kerry/Powell ticket. The first two-party ticket in history. The first black vp nominee in history, with the likelihood that he would run for president as an incumbent VP in eight years. Two veterans running against two chicken hawks. And the one Bush/Cheney cabinet member who tried to talk the president out of the Iraq war.

And it would be such FUN! The ultimate FU to GWB!

Bush/Cheney versus Kerry & The Only Member Of Bush's Cabinet Who Knew The Iraq War Would Be A Fiasco.

For the bumper sticker, we might have to shorten it to just Kerry/Powell.



I can dream, can't I?

But I'm serious. I'm at a loss to think of a VP candidate who will get people excited. Putting a woman on the ticket will get Kerry nowhere, because we're in war-mode right now and every man in America would be irate. Not all of you would admit it...



A fellow liberal won't do Kerry any good, either.

McCain insists he won't join Kerry's ticket. Personally, I think he's foolish not to try it. As Kerry's VP, he could not only save the country and from four more years of Bush/Cheney, he could also run for President as an incumbent Republican in eight years.

Plus, there's the chance to close the rift a little. Republicans and Democrats started hating each other with real venom when Ken Starr started frothing at the mouth. The impeachment hearings notched it up to pure loathing, and it's only grown worse since 9/11. I can't imagine anything that will make it better, short of a two-party ticket that draws from both ends of the spectrum.

For me to be in favor of a right-to-lifer on the ticket is an indication of how terrified I am for this country if the current coven of lunatics and vampires continue in power.

Your best hope is Edwards. he's a Clinton Democrat, so you can hope he can cash in on some of Bill's old supporters. He's from the south and MIGHT convince some southerners to support Kerry although it's doubtful.

Powell is little help for the Dems, you already have the black vote sewen up and including Powell could only serve to further alienate southerners & midwesterners who Kerry is desperatly wooing. There are still a lot of folks who used to be democrats that now vote republican because they see the Dems as the party of thems. Reenforcing that perception isn't going to help.

This election has the fewest number of undecided voters in modern polling history. The Dem's know this and you may see a surprise VP, someone who is tailored to whatever demographics show makes up the biggest segment of undecided voters.

-Colly

 

[cantdog]

Nader has morphed into an ego shaped like a person. I remember thinking after the election, when GWB justified pulling out of the kyoto treaty by announcing that global warming is "something scientists need to study," that Nader must be learning a bitter lesson. One environmental regulation after another has been toppled; workplace safety, production standards that protected us against contaminated meat, all the things that Nader used to stand for, have been cut to shreds. The world hates us, our credibility with our allies is nonexistent, our civil liberties are being weakened...And all Nader cares about is a symbolic gesture that puts him back in the spotlight.

You malign him. Ronnie Dugger maligns him too. Don't vote for him if you don't want to. But what is this? Do you feel better about not voting for someone if you can put him down, also?

"All Nader cares about" is a long list of things, which are in the campaign literature and have been posted by Pure already in another thread. I didn't happen to notice a spotlight thing there. Much of it is important stuff. Much of it finds no support from Kerry or Bush, either one. It's the same as any third-party thing. Except that many of those things are every bit as urgent , every bit as much of an emergency, as getting a Democrat elected might be. People are dying and getting sick from pollution. The corporate armies are killing thousands all over the world. These things are far from trivial. If you feel they have a lower priority than ousting Bush, you may well be right. Dugger and Chomsky think so, and they are not irreflective people.

But these hyperbolic imputations are gratuitous.

 

[Guest]

Cant, you're worrying me. Defend the dude, but why care about personal maligning? They're just opinions, however passionate. P.

 

[cantdog]

Yeah, why care, you're right. I should lighten up.

Ad hominem stuff worries me, that's all. That kind of political discourse obscures the issues and makes it seem that glamor is the first criterion for a poltical aspirant.

cantdog http://no-troy.planetaclix.pt/images/mexico.gif

 

[Guest]

That kind of political discourse obscures the issues and makes it seem that glamor is the first criterion for a poltical aspirant.

Yeah, but you know these people and you know that's not the case. P.

p.s. I like you waving my flag (ooh, sounds naughty).

 

[cantdog]

http://no-troy.planetaclix.pt/images/mexico.gif


It's pretty shameless, but I do like doing it.

 

[Guest]

Ooh, I've got some new lines prepared.

"Show me your flag, mate."

"Let's see you wave that flag."

"Can I touch your flag?"

"What's with your flag at half-mast? Get it up there you unpatriotic dick."

Perdita

 

[cloudy]

"What's with your flag at half-mast? Get it up there you unpatriotic dick."

http://www.addis-welt.de/smilie/smilie/lachen/lachen76.gif

 

[shereads]

Oops. Posted to the wrong thread.

Talk among yourselves. Just came in for coffee.

 

[minsue]

Oops. Posted to the wrong thread.

Talk among yourselves. Just came in for coffee.

 

[shereads]

Poor bastard.

How did he become their designated apologist? Did he lose a bet?

~ ~ ~


washingtonpost.com > Nation > National Security > Intelligence
Powell Calls Report 'A Big Mistake'
State Dept., CIA Probe Terror Study

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, June 14, 2004; Page A13

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said yesterday that a State Department report claiming a global decline in terrorist incidents last year was "a big mistake," but he said there was no intent to "cook the books" for political purposes.

Powell said during appearances on Sunday talk shows that the State Department was working over the weekend with the CIA to determine what went wrong, and he plans to meet with officials on the issue today.

"It's a numbers error," Powell said on ABC's "This Week." "It's not a political judgment that said, 'Let's see if we can cook the books.' We can't get away with that now. Nobody was out to cook the books. Errors crept in."

The "Patterns of Global Terrorism Report," released in April, had said that the number of terrorist incidents worldwide had dropped last year to 190, which would have been the lowest level in more than three decades and a decline of 45 percent since President Bush took office in 2001.

But State Department officials conceded last week that the report was in error, in part because it omitted acts of terrorism after Nov. 11, 2003 -- including a suicide bombing in Istanbul that killed 61 and injured more than 700. The original report's accuracy had been challenged by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), and the Congressional Research Service urged a review of the report's "structure and content."

The complaints about the terrorism report are the latest in a series of controversies over the accuracy of information compiled and distributed by the U.S. intelligence community, including ongoing debate over faulty reports of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Bush administration officials, including Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage, had praised the State Department terrorism report as evidence of the country's progress in the war on terrorism.

Powell indicated yesterday that the information contained in the report was compiled by the Terrorist Threat Integration Center, a newly formed clearinghouse that is run by the CIA. Powell said problems with the data include the November cut-off date -- which officials have previously attributed to a printing deadline -- and differences in the way that "insignificant events" were counted from previous years.

"We are still trying to determine what went wrong with the data and why we didn't catch it in the State Department," Powell said on "This Week," adding: "It's a very big mistake and we are not happy about this mistake."


© 2004 The Washington Post Company


__

 

[Edward Teach]

Poor bastard.

How did he become their designated apologist? Did he lose a bet?

~ ~ ~


washingtonpost.com > Nation > National Security > Intelligence
Powell Calls Report 'A Big Mistake'
State Dept., CIA Probe Terror Study

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, June 14, 2004; Page A13

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said yesterday that a State Department report claiming a global decline in terrorist incidents last year was "a big mistake," but he said there was no intent to "cook the books" for political purposes.

Powell said during appearances on Sunday talk shows that the State Department was working over the weekend with the CIA to determine what went wrong, and he plans to meet with officials on the issue today.

"It's a numbers error," Powell said on ABC's "This Week." "It's not a political judgment that said, 'Let's see if we can cook the books.' We can't get away with that now. Nobody was out to cook the books. Errors crept in."

The "Patterns of Global Terrorism Report," released in April, had said that the number of terrorist incidents worldwide had dropped last year to 190, which would have been the lowest level in more than three decades and a decline of 45 percent since President Bush took office in 2001.

But State Department officials conceded last week that the report was in error, in part because it omitted acts of terrorism after Nov. 11, 2003 -- including a suicide bombing in Istanbul that killed 61 and injured more than 700. The original report's accuracy had been challenged by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), and the Congressional Research Service urged a review of the report's "structure and content."

The complaints about the terrorism report are the latest in a series of controversies over the accuracy of information compiled and distributed by the U.S. intelligence community, including ongoing debate over faulty reports of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Bush administration officials, including Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage, had praised the State Department terrorism report as evidence of the country's progress in the war on terrorism.

Powell indicated yesterday that the information contained in the report was compiled by the Terrorist Threat Integration Center, a newly formed clearinghouse that is run by the CIA. Powell said problems with the data include the November cut-off date -- which officials have previously attributed to a printing deadline -- and differences in the way that "insignificant events" were counted from previous years.

"We are still trying to determine what went wrong with the data and why we didn't catch it in the State Department," Powell said on "This Week," adding: "It's a very big mistake and we are not happy about this mistake."


© 2004 The Washington Post Company


__

Does this mean the Pale Lavender alert is cancelled?

Ed

 

[Guest]

Does this mean the Pale Lavender alert is cancelled?

Ed

The lavender shirt has ben cancelled, yes. (And a damn good thing.)

The alert's still on.

 

[Edward Teach]

Contrasting Current Comments

"We need to argue about who's right and wrong instead of who's good and bad."

Bill Clinton at the unveiling of his and Hillary's portraits
6-14-04

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

C-Span Question: Will Bill Clinton's book tour help or hurt John Kerry?

Caller: How can he help? Bill Clinton was a whoremonger and Kerry is from a queer state.
6-14-04

Ed

 

[Edward Teach]

New Colors

I came in on the end of this on C-Span and didn't get all the details but appartetly some new colors for air travel are being considered.

Red - Not allowed on flight

Yellow - Given extra screening

Green - Given regular screening

Yep, Pale Lavender is just around the corner!!

Ed

 

[cantdog]

Ed

Those air travel codes are so pernicious. Profiling at its starkest. You can't see or challenge the list either.

If you've been singled out not to fly, you will have to deduce it by the way they treat you while they make you miss your flight, and you are not allowed to know the reason or challenge the ruling.

cantdog

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I am going to preface this post with a note that I am not trying to present an opinion here. As I mentioned a couple of days ago I spent some time rereading Ann Coulter's back articles. This one deals with airline profiling. I thought it was pertinent, but I am not expousing the opinions. Please don't take offense to it and assume I back it and take it out on me.


If the Profile Fits ...

January 10, 2002

AN ARAB with a copy of "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes" and a gun boarded an American Airlines plane on Christmas Day claiming to be a Secret Service agent on his way to the president.

There was a problem with his paperwork, and the pilot and flight attendants were concerned. After an hour's negotiation – rudely ignoring the travel needs of the rest of the passengers – they decided to fly without the armed Arab, who caught another flight the next day.

This much is conceded by all parties.

Four months ago, 19 Arab men armed with less ostentatious weapons than guns boarded four commercial aircraft in the United States and as a direct consequence, thousands of Americans are now dead. Hundreds more narrowly averted being blown up midflight last month on an American Airlines flight from Paris involving another Muslim terrorist.

On account of being delayed for a day, the Secret Service agent, Walied Shater, charged that the airline singled him out because he is an Arab. Never mind the gun. Pursuing his paranoid fantasy, he immediately hired a lawyer and is demanding an apology and a pledge that American Airlines crew be subjected to sensitivity training classes. Naturally, he hasn't ruled out monetary damages.

This man should not be allowed near the president with a loaded gun. At the least, he's an immature nut. At worst, he's a ticking time bomb, in a simmering rage at America's supposed mistreatment of Muslims.

These alleged civil liberties concerns have only one purpose: to give Muslims a cushion for another attack on America. There is no principled basis for opposition to using Arab appearance as a factor in airport screening procedures.

Sadly, there is even less reason to believe this is what the airlines do.

In some goo-goo-minded attempt to prove they are not profiling, the airlines make a big show of harassing precisely those passengers they should be ignoring. This ought to warm the hearts of Muslims in Saudi Arabia. Too bad they'll never read about it since their newspapers are too busy polishing the theory that Zionists bombed the World Trade Center.

According to the FAA – the federal agency keeping our airports running like Swiss clocks these days – in November and December alone, 30 airport terminals were entirely evacuated. Passengers on 434 airliners were ordered off for re-screening. Solely because of "security" precautions, 1,180 flights have been delayed, 464 flights have been canceled, and 15 diverted to alternative destinations.

An elderly white congressman was ordered to strip to his underwear because of a steel hip joint. Asian women, elderly black men, stewardesses, toddlers and cowboys are forced to remove their shoes for special screening. Women travelers are being asked to remove their bras and are having their jewelry stolen by thugs in airport security.

Not one of the passengers described above – who were delayed, canceled, evacuated, strip-searched, robbed and humiliated – was attempting to carry a loaded gun on an airplane.

So it's not going to be easy proving Walied was treated worse than the average air traveler. Yet Islamic advocacy groups have identified the incident with the Secret Service agent as "the most extreme example" among "a string of abuses by the airlines."

Even the Supreme Court was never this crazy. To the contrary, in a 1975 case called United States vs. Brignoni-Ponce, the court held that the "Mexican appearance" of a car's occupants could be considered by border police stopping cars near the Mexican border to look for illegal aliens.

This was back in the halcyon days when the court was inventing new and preposterous "rights" every other day. But even that court didn't invent a right not to have one's ethnic appearance considered a factor in creating reasonable suspicion.

Rather, the court noted: "The government has estimated that 85 percent of the aliens illegally in the country are from Mexico." Meanwhile, 100 percent of the successful terrorist attacks on commercial airlines for 20 years have been committed by Arabs.

When there is a 100 percent chance, it ceases to be a profile. It's called a "description of the suspect." This is not a psychological judgment about an ethnic group – it is an all-points bulletin: Warning! The next terrorist to board a commercial flight will be an Arab or Muslim male.

If ethnic appearance can be used as a factor by the police trying to stem the dire threat of one more Mexican raking leaves in Los Angeles, it is logical to conclude that ethnic appearance can also be used to counter the threat of thousands of Americans being killed in a terrorist attack.

Had airport security spent a little less time angrily shaking down every little old lady trying to sneak tweezers onto an airplane, American Airlines might have had sufficient time to attend to Walied's gun paperwork.

-Colly

 

[Edward Teach]

Ed

Those air travel codes are so pernicious. Profiling at its starkest. You can't see or challenge the list either.

If you've been singled out not to fly, you will have to deduce it by the way they treat you while they make you miss your flight, and you are not allowed to know the reason or challenge the ruling.

cantdog

CD, are these codes being implimented?

I just caught the end of the segment and thought it another hairbrained scheme. I should have learned by now not to be surprised at anything this crowd comes up with.

Ed

 

[shereads]

Re: Contrasting Current Comments

C-Span Question: Will Bill Clinton's book tour help or hurt John Kerry?

Caller: How can he help? Bill Clinton was a whoremonger and Kerry is from a queer state.
6-14-04

Uh-oh. Amicus has been using the warden's phone again.

 

[shereads]

CD, are these codes being implimented?

Clumsily, I would imagine. The system will become more streamlined once we receive our forehead tattoos.

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: Contrasting Current Comments

Uh-oh. Amicus has been using the warden's phone again.

Laughing~

 

[cloudy]

Re: Re: Re: Contrasting Current Comments

Laughing~

Got a giggle out of me, as well.

Cloudy ~ retarded cannibal