Benched Man Award

Former CIA Director/Author Tenet deserves another award. Slam Dunk Tenet denies saying that the war would be a slam dunk, his reference was to building a case for the war. "Conservative estimates" mean, not the usual sense that there is evidence for at least some (and an unbelievable amount at that) "chemical and biological" weapons. Sitting behind Secretary of State Colin Powell at the U.N. up to that point was fine, but calling them facts? That crossed a line.

* * *

CONGRATULATIONS TO STEPHANIE MILLER
for covering Don Imus's spot on MSNBC
that may make up for a small fraction of their recent programming flubs regarding the Virginia Tech Cho materials. Just as I was about to make a more conscious choice of the use of my clicker, meaning WELCOME BACK REGIS!, and where is Ted Koppel when we need him and his memorial services during earlier wars, I actually had to dig out a used VHS to tape the 3 AM - 6 AM PST show.

NOTE: Benched Man line unintentionally links the Tenet and Imus as Benched Men, no reference to Miller except that she is the daughter of Barry Goldwater's running mate, William E. Miller

Debate: Take One

Iraq Question
[The Debate]
Rated

Gravel / Kucinich / Richardson

Obama / Dodd / Edwards

Clinton / Biden
These are pretty much the order of my impression on this question as to how they should be listened to on this matter. The three tiers present a bit of a gap on the issue as to their history and their suggestions now.

Other QCON: McCain on Gonzalez And somewhere (WeGotEd) Senator Leahy GO SENATOR! said he is after the puppet master not the puppets, where he places the U.S. Attorney issue above the concern for the disaster which is the Iraq war. That is the proper level of concern.

QCON RETREAD:
GO SENATOR REID: (Follow up comment on Senator Reid on The Ed Schultz Show: On the Supplemental Bill, I would suggest that this was a compromise and that any new bills (DEMO PLAN B) represent more restrictions on the president, but one last compromise that would truly address one of the president's concerns and the only half way legitimate one, is on the domestic "pork". To compromise, simply split the supplemental so that the president may choose to veto them separately.(Military and Domestic) Congress would also have a choice to override them separately or follow up with plan B. That would be the most political thing to do. Politics is not wrong, it is the choice between tyranny and anarchy. It is what happens in a democracy.

My apologies for the loopiness of the last post. It will be the only one that is truly evolving if I return to it. QCON is short for Quick Comment On the News, and/or Questioning the Con. The Retread refers to the GO SENATORS and the WE GOT ED materials and comments.

Local Media [Web Engineering]

{Holding spot: Euphemism for "Under Construction" }
Link Below same as Local Media in Right Column: I will be trying to add more content without getting too loopy.

Pacific Northwest Portal
and progressive focus[See links there]

Two comments here: One, this blog has always been a macrofilter of media and politics that has come to be known as a culture war. Two, there has been so much progress that there are now more investigations into both, than articles of impeachment.

In these investigations it may be worth a look back at my work *,
but things are moving forward on many fronts.

* many of the investigations should have been pursued up to 6 years ago (mark my words) but a recent events paint a more "Rosie" picture.
(see To whom it may concern)

[2:37 PM: On the political front: unread link BREAKING/ less breaking? EARLIER wegoted.com GO SENATOR REID actually hour 3 is not up yet ] [HR 3 Go Reid] [QCON RETREAD] <-- Congress may be stepping it up, rather than leaving it lie. While Cheney aka "Shooter" should be named Miss RepresentTOR. My Bold and Italics may be gratuitous, but nevertheless pointed.
THRU 4:05 PM My latest line: Mythical Engineer I crafted that term and then googled it.]

Mitt "Action" Romney

Mitt Romney on priorities.

FAMILY
GOD
COUNTRY
[in that order]
Recent fund raising successes
have reminded him that he must
now put FRIEND$ up there.

Unable to find that clip, here is some "talk and dithering"
Not one action is noted in this message, unless it is to "free American people" to face it’s problems. Seems like the same old "talk and dithering".

Here I will update my Running List:
Obama
Richardson
Edwards
Dodd
Kucinich
Clark
Clinton
Biden

[4-24-07: sprucing up this post here and there,
with no subsantial change in content, I will note
that the "Running List" is in a particular order,
but unlike in the past I will not note the particulars,
except to say that past positions and current impressions
will play a part but with less explanation.]

Happy Earth Day!

The earth celebrates the 38th Earth Day. As a youth participant of the very first Earth Day 1970, I was out there in front of a local shopping center at a table as part of a class project, educating the public about various aspects of the environment. I was also excited to have been in attendance at a speech by R. Buckminster Fuller.

Today I heard that one of the original co-chairs of that event has finally seen the light and registered as a Democrat. Unfortunately as I am posting this just under the wire, I can not dig up his name. That's my excuse, but I don't know why it is not on the link above.

Also today I would like to note the upcoming 25th anniversary of Newsweek On Air. Today's show was particularly good in contrast to (well it may not be fair to contrast such a weekly collaboration with something else) but the recent "firestorm" of events came to mind.

Lastly I would like to note contrasting links: HorsesAss.org The only local "liberal" talk radio, and Sightline.org a "progressive" think tank. Well, balancing links may be a more proper way of putting them, and the liberal "quotation marks" are his, the "progressive" marks are mine, as just a short hand reference to my original intent to contrast or balance ala The Liaison Report's intent as well.

I hope to get back to improve this post, but may be continuing my sabbatical,it went so well last time...* (April 3rd to April 10th) April 5th was an exception to the ruler.

* [Saved April 3rd, 2007 - not used till post-April 11th.]

To whom it may concern- - The FCC or applicable congressional committee

Regarding a seemingly meaningless spat between Rosie O’Donnell and Bill O’Reilly:

Bill O’Reilly is of the opinion that she should not be free to give her opinions as a "broadcast professional" and I think that it falls into your auspices to determine that. It seems to me that the term either applies to the broadcasting engineers or the terms of an FCC licensee. If there are any standards, as I would have them, Bill O’Reilly and Fox News should lose their licenses. This is no joking matter. While the O'Donnell and The Donald spat may be about ratings and while Rosie may choose to not renew her contract and let the market determine she has an even greater value, again it is hard to stomach the excuses for the airtime wasted by O’Reilly or Fox News if there are any standards. Further, no joking matter, while Rosie’s opinions may be fringe, and O’Reilly truly unreliable, if there is any such ruling that could shut down Rosie and not O‘Reilly, she has demonstrated that she knows what she is talking about in her claim that he is worse than a character from 1984, and that there is a "big brother".

A day of mourning

Shock or respect for the fallen leave me speechless over the flood of dialogue and images that have spilled from this tragedy.

So you don't have to?

Thanks to Stephanie Miller, for listening to Bill O’Reilly "so you don’t have to."

Approximate quote:

Bill O'Reilly * [If there was ever proof that American’s need the right to protect themselves, it was hurricane Katrina.]

Note that I don’t want to read or listen to Bill O’Reilly again ** , to get it straight, but I believe gun rights was the issue. Actually I believe Americans do have the right to protect themselves, just not the tools to do it. Am I agreeing with Bill O’Reilly? Now that is scary, but it doesn’t mean I’m right. It doesn’t even mean you can read me any better than him, but that is not the issue.

Three points here: 1.) It may make more sense to approximate what is said since that may be closer to reality than O’Reilly gets. 2.) We should have the right to protect ourselves. 3.) It is not absolute, but could be if the government does it’s job the way some talk.

This approximation technique really is a problem, as things would be more effective if we could depend on words and filter them properly. But this process was not intended to take the humor out of my original approach which hinged on the line, “so you don’t have to".

Actually there are a lot of fields now where people don’t have the tools to survive where they would have been dependent on their environment more than their government.*** Those fields today or job categories rest on the premise that people are specialized in the name of progress and the economy "so you don’t have to". But they would all not be possible without the changing fabric of society that requires the same (specialization) of others, and would not work without a structure called government to regulate this changing balancing act.

Bottom line...
or punch line: "Run for the hills".

* note that literary licence and formality causes me to note that I have sufficiently noted that I don't use quotation marks here.

** I thought I had a blast for O'Reilly in the past, but here are some from the more recent and yet to be read: sticking to guns on a tragedy to smear [thanks to News Hounds... they "watch FOX", dot, dot, dot]

*** in correcting the tense here, I add the Darwinian metaphor "sink or swim" but think of the music to Jaws.

Virginia Tech Tragedy

Technical difficulties held me up in expressing my sad reaction to the tragedy. Such a delay may be just as well as many from all sides are jumping to judgement as well as their issues.

Words cannot convey adequately the feelings which surround such events. But actions must be considered as well as reactions, and if times of tragedy do not bring issues to light for consideration, less stressful times may let them lay.

Imus, the victim?

There is irony above, for some it is lost in humor, others don't even see the line.
For those that may need a hint, the question mark indicates this is not a charge. The irony may be more clearly hypocrisy. The problem may be that I ask questions, not just answer them.

The problem is really that the market and freedom are not solutions. The bottom line is not just people to step on, the top line is the result. Intentions are the line that some don't see or would stomp on rather than look at or even walk or wake up to. The media, the economy and the government, for that matter, are not the problem or the solution, they are mechanisms that without work on, will get results without consideration for the work or the results,(and)let alone the people.

And below all that and what should be at the top, is not just the people, but justice. Another goal, but also a process, that gets lost by those that only look too high or too low for the line, and even ignore their part in drawing it.

Action/Reaction? Some just see the /. [the slash...or burn? * ] The middle is not the product or the aim, but it can be the result if thinking is only linear or worse, black and white. See? Even that could be a metaphor lost to the culture war.

But in reality, flip-flopping is the way we think, both more and less than the metaphor. However, real light is colors, not just absolutes or not.

* this post is connected if not in line with the previous post, meaning a different shtick and more context to the con-front-lines.[or fire lines]
[4-14-07: links and metaphors related to previous post]

4-11-07 Terrorists Strike Shock Jock and...

"young women" athletes.

Jason Witlock, on TODAY, attacks "opportunists" and "domestic terrorists" Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton for "causing them to receive threats on their lives." While he seems to be placing this in some rational context, he continues they "continue to go light fires around the country". Frank Luntz talks about "words that don't work" also on TODAY.

These clips taken off the Internet are not necessarily in context, but they do afford an opportunity to react. Taken separately they are part of the problem. Individual fires that need to be addressed. But the metaphor of war or fires are mixed metaphors, or are they (?) People are not trees, but fire fighters do light back fires to fight fires, and this is an interesting "firestorm"[Matt Lauer, 2nd clip] For the reaction that these "opportunists" are accused of "causing" are needed, not only to stop the spread of smoldering degradation, but to light the way to more confrontation. If the market is supposed to be what will address this, and supposed to be free, then how can shining light on that market be blamed for correcting it.

More light needs to be focused on the producers of these clips and their overall programming. For the smoke was blown by their presentation and likely lack of confrontation directly, at least as they are spread on the Internet. Matt certainly let this spread without even picking up a shovel, which is what fire fighters (the media) should do, rather than aid the arsonists or real opportunists, like the networks. The real light may be that the market obviously does not work in either focusing light or fighting fires, but more light or more reaction are not the terrorists.

My point is that if September 11th, 2001 changed things, maybe April 11th, 2007(the day MSNBC canned Imus) has changed things, and we will really fight in a new light. Unfortunately light is not new, and fire was a great invention{?), but smoke is only a signal that often is just blown away.

If this is just a media war, it should not evolve to just "star" wars, where personalities rise to the skies and continue to fire from satellites. That product of progress will really shine the light on the intentions(?) of the market and the culture of personalities(Imus) who might step up on the bottom line of all else. If he makes it elsewhere will he change his shtick? So far intentions are really lost in the smoke of slightly longer sound bites, that are just more little fires. Demonstrating that the so-called "opportunists" Witlock "blames" for setting fires are really doing the "hard work" that needs doing.

(apologies that these are only clips and I did not directly address much of either)

[4-17-07 slight punctuation changes and note 3(?):
intentions(?) of the market, invention(?) of fire- and there is more association than I thought of at the time I was just noting the ironies of mixed metaphors (?) ]

Association vs. Responsibility

Free speech: How much is there, if people who want to get their perspective out, have to sacrifice their principles by association with a host to get on the air while those who control the airwaves use free speech to be less responsible for the sake of their principle of the bottom line?

On The Most, a good exchange just occurred that reinforces my earlier joke.

I will close with this commentary/humor: It seems that "the left" is often guilty by association, while "the right" is excused by lack of association with much reality or just passing the buck.

Actually, I guess that "reality" is too harsh, responsibility is what I was stretching for. Also in regards to my definition of "whores" in the earlier post, principles should be called into question. I wonder if generosity or charity by someone who is raking it in is really any way to determine if someone is a "good person"? It is probably something even Imus may be calling into question.

Another comment: What is the attraction of Don Imus, the personality? I am not a regular viewer of any cable shows, but MSNBC seems to have had a better impression than the other cable networks. But I have not been impressed with his casual mumbling approach whose attraction may be that anyone could seem to do his job. His added attraction may be the adolescent attitude that many may wish to have in their 60's.

No Hold's Maher-ed is a very interesting clip. While I agree with some of Maher's comments, I disagree with certain premises. He ackowledges a valid double standard in terms of which race is using which words, but in terms of jobs there is also a valid double standard. I think that Maher and Scarborough should switch jobs. Then the likes* of Scarborough and Imus could use their "free speech" and be guests and face a host who is more up front and humorous about their perspectives.

* the likes: I hope is more sensitive than Scarborough's "people like you" to Joan Walsh. This clip "reflects" that he is on the wrong side of the desk...

Broken News.

Imus is history on MSNBC?
That reminds me of a joke I came up with about those that fail to learn from history, repeating it. President Bush should have repeated English and math as well. OK!
Is humor the topic? Well Imus claimed his context as close to an excuse after being relatively up front in his apology.

I almost feel sorry for Imus, seeing what he has going down the drain. But that is the difference in perspectives. There is free speech and personal conduct, but that does not mean it has a right or need to be distributed and at a profit no less. And there is a difference between having an opinion and using it to describe individuals compared to describing one's perspective on history and raising questions that could and should be addressed.

Maybe advertisers will consider more carefully their own opinion on what controversial means. It seems that advertisers may be slightly disingenuous or just woke up to the idea that there may a problem profiting from controversy, not that there is anything wrong with that.

I will close with this commentary/humor: It seems that "the left" is often guilty by association, while "the right" is excused by lack of association with much reality or just passing the buck.

Media Whores*

Media wars was my first thought for this post. My intended sabbatical, a break from my customary work for other matters, was to be one week. I indicated the difficulty it may be, to not post, and in fact not even work on related stuff, but here is one I noted and saved as a draft:

[* *]
To whom it may concern:(THE FCC?)
Regarding a seemingly meaningless spat between Rosie O’Donnell and Bill O’Reilly:

Bill O’Reilly is of the opinion that she should not be free to give her opinions as a "broadcast professional" and I think that it falls into your auspices to determine that. It seems to me that the term either applies to the broadcasting engineers or the terms of an FCC licensee. If there are any standards, as I would have them, Bill O’Reilly and Fox News should lose their licenses. This is no joking matter. While the O'Donnell and The Donald spat may be about ratings and while Rosie may choose to not renew her contract and let the market determine she has an even greater value, again it is hard to stomach the excuses for the airtime wasted by O’Reilly or Fox News if there are any standards. Further, no joking matter, while Rosie’s opinions may be fringe, and O’Reilly truly unreliable, if there is any such ruling that could shut down Rosie and not O‘Reilly, she has demonstrated that she knows what she is talking about in her claim that he is worse than a character from 1984, and that there is a "big brother".

[The best I can tell the above was written, April 3rd]

Now we have the Don Imus issue. It is too bad that he is the more moderate of a list of disagreeable personalities, who if there were standards may not have the airtime they enjoy. Yet the very idea of standards is also a problem while the idea of the market alone may not be the solution. It is unfortunate that he may end up the scapegoat and a distraction if not a martyr to the cause of those that do not have the guts to face the consequences of their words.

It seems that he has faced his error, yet still seems to be putting it in context. Of course everything is needed to be looked at in context and taking it elsewhere may be unfair, but if Imus is determined to be the problem, broader problems may not be faced.

* whores:
A person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain.

Considerations are twice removed from personal gain: first by the person, then by the principle.

* * [4-17-07: for clarification I must reitterate that "To whom it may concern" was written and saved on April 3rd, 2007]

[4-18-07: Stereotype Threat the cultural impact ignored. Just look at lawyers and politicians and what you expect from them. Not to mention...

Recess War!

While war with Iran is hopefully on a far back burner, Bush has turned up the heat at home on the domestic diplomatic front by appointing Sam Fox, for "voluntary services" as ambassador to Belgium.

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), another member of the Foreign Relations Committee -- one of three '08 presidential contenders on the panel -- made it clear the White House declared war through its recess appointment.

My last post, $hotgun $abbatical refers to a focusing of my scattered thoughts and a breather to focus on more local realities. I even noted it would be hard to hold to, but it seemed appropriate to note some recessed topics.

Here are more links, which I have not filtered, meaning taken more than a glance at:
Since the above quote raised Senator Dodd, in my mind, Edwards should be noted as doing well in my mind. Not as the Right would say "out of sympathy", well actually Edwards said that(they flip-flopped that), which is the point, it is about how he dealt with the media and and now his Efront operations. Not just the money, but the media.
Also sideshow smackdowns are good for the process if they steer debate or even take others from the need to distract. Kerry, The Gingrich Washington Post

IRAN POSTS:
Not the most recent Hersh post: The New Yorker

Who's paranoid and who's out to get whom? SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS

LATE RADAR
War Games: Who will blink, and will it matter? Atlanta Free Press
Is compromise something in anyones deck of cards? Or
can a mad man blink or who should he blink to? Deepjournal

Flip-Flop of the War on Terror. Huffington Post
A cautious horror, the "Samson Option". TPM CAFE

Not exactly beach reading material...
Oh, somewhere up in these links may be the concept that Pakistan has an interesting zone where who knows what is going on. Outsourcing terror or Iran Contra anyone?

$hotgun! $abbatical.

I don't know if I will hold to my own word, but I will put it here:

FROM A SUMMARY EMAIL TITLED "Shotgun! Sabbatical".

Violent metaphor aside, I may have said enough. Time to put down my book(s) and take a breather, as well as deal with some local realities.

Now violence has it's place, "as a last resort" (Bush), but what I suggest is more "hard work" (Byrd). I also suggest that I have had enough words and links, (Byrd/Bush or two?)

But as I tried to reincorporate my lines, a few things popped up.

Was this a March or April Fool. Is this just more hot water? Hotsoup.com
Interesting source/watch though.
Or just Hot Air? [Matthew Dowd: Lost Faith]
And this Unity08 : just more doodoo,
or the voodoo that y$$ do?
Speaking of YOU, the soup's on, or Tag "the hard work" *is on you.

* no apologies needed: this link is to someone else's miss take, but it is too early apparently to find a link to Senator Byrd's words last week. "hard work, hard work, hard work..." Get it? That's what he said, in thanks to the staff, after the Emergency Supplemental passed.

Words of Intelligence

Experts?
"16 words"
THE WORD!

We Knew, They Knew.

I knew, he knew.

No April Fool? Matthew Dowd.

On the political front.

You may notice that most of my stuff is on the political front. But the point is that it is better than many alternatives. Anarchy and Tyranny being just two bad alternatives which it may actually be noticed that Righty Republicans are good [* at] and merging.

But seriously, and here I am being facitious, since it is so serious already, "the political front':

The Emergency Supplemental

The Poiint Blank Dance

If or when Bush vetoes the money for the troops in Iraq and other funding for Katrina recovery and other domestic "emergencies". Congress can either let it stand as a veto and Bush will have taken away the funds from these causes or hold the vote to overturn the veto and see how many Righty Republicans there are.

It is disgusting that Bush is playing the only type of politics he knows and trying to have his way, while threatening the troops to get it.

[Update 8:30AM -- Sometimes politicians are the scum of the earth, and Bush is the cream of the crop, his rhetoric curdles the mind and the heart.]

[Update 8:39AM -- Bump, Bump, Bump? ]

[* 4-17-07: Will Democrats Cave? Ray McGovern feels it is likely. I would note that there is a distinction that Bush will make, if he vetoes the Emergency Supplemental, that he is the one that will be putting the troops in harms way, by rejecting the funding he requested. That a veto can be left as it stands and funding will not have been cut by the Democrats. It seems that the issue that McGovern is concerned about with Senator Levin is a sensible balancing act. His refusal to cut funds in the future is appropriate at this time and unnessecary if Bush vetoes the Supplemental. If there is a veto, there is nothing that says that the president gets a second chance. A veto does not need to be overridden or even a replacement bill produced, and future action will be future action.

HIT AND RUN (QCON)

"HIT AND RUN" is my term for the Righty Republicans. Righty Republican is another running with terms. This blog has been about Running with Rhetoric. Rhetoric, like politics or the law, is not good or bad, but that is another story.

QCON is an acronym, for Quick Comment On the News. It also runs in line with this post. It suffices to stand for Questioning Cons, and that is the link to the Hit and Run. The Hit and Run refers to the crowd, usually the Righty Republicans who would bash the so-called "Liberal" media or press" while running from the questions. Tommy Thompson recently did an amazing "hit and run" on the abortion issue.

Now in these cases of representing such an exchange it may make more sense to skip from the transcript. A closer look may ruin my thesis. But the portion I did hear, had him for making abortion illegal, but sending people to jail was a "liberal" thing. By Jove I believe I did it. A one liner.

But on another track, "liberals" are about running the government, not running from responsibility for their actions or questions, while Righty Republicans are about bashing and running for it.

Search: QCON, Hit and Run
and bonus search: MAD

"we're doing now, what we should have done..."

three years ago."
or four years ago,
five years ago,
six years ago,

seven years ago.

Senators in Iraq...
links later.

[52 minutes later]
Google search finds Atlas Shrugs under : "Senators in Iraq" March 31st NOT! to VLOG HATESLASH/COUNTERHATE