October 31, 2004

Ladies Towers

20041031.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

There are many towers dotting the Broadway section of the Ladies' Mile.

The bin Laden Tape: partisans all a flutter

Who does the bin Laden tape hurt the most? My guess is the guy who directed Gen. Franks to ivade Iraq when we had Osama cornered in Tora Bora, but what the fuck do I know. Editor and Publisher has this to say in an article entitled, bin Laden tape analysis:

  1. 9/11 happened on Bush's watch
  2. Bush has not yet caught Bin Laden perhaps because he
  3. switched his attention to Iraq where
  4. we have contributed to the terrorist threat against us in numerous tragic ways, not to mention suffering more U.S. casualties (dead and injured) than we absorbed in 9/11.

Seems pretty simple to me: bin Laden is still alive because we decided to attack Iraq. End of story, GOTV.

» x « · comments (0)

October 30, 2004

Sliver Building

20041030.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

A sliver building at the edge of Union Square.

October 29, 2004

Peacock

20041029.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

A peacock apparently lives on the grounds of St. John the Divine, New York City. Cross-processed Slide Film. Part of the OpenHousenewyork weekend.

This is the last St. John the Divine Cross-processed shot, I swear.

I pledge allegience...

Apparently to President Bush, and only President Bush:

"I want you to stand, raise your right hands," and recite "the Bush Pledge," said Florida state Sen. Ken Pruitt. The assembled mass of about 2,000 in this Treasure Coast town about an hour north of West Palm Beach dutifully rose, arms aloft, and repeated after Pruitt: "I care about freedom and liberty. I care about my family. I care about my country. Because I care, I promise to work hard to re-elect, re-elect George W. Bush as president of the United States."

I know the Bush-Cheney campaign occasionally requires the people who attend its events to sign loyalty oaths, but this was the first time I have ever seen an audience actually stand and utter one. Maybe they've replaced the written oath with a verbal one.

I thought you pledged only to the country, and to no man? Or have things changed?

» x « · comments (0)

Bush's Folly

So if the U.S. didn't let Bin Laden Escaped at Tora Bora Fight then he wouldn't be able to Release a new "Terror Tape" on Al-Jazeera. No other arguments about whether or not bin Laden supports Kerry matter(why would he want to support a candidate who would actually try to hunt him down?). President Bush failed to capture or kill bin Laden. Period.

» x « · comments (0)

Scare Tacticts

20041029-rncmailer1thumb.jpg

Bush-Cheney 04 has finally hit rock bottom: they are sending out anti-Kerry mailings using images of the burning World Trade Center:

On the front side, the ad asks in red print, "How Can John Kerry Lead America In A Time of War?" It adds three subsequent lines, "Kerry: Changing Positions," "Kerry: Cutting Defense" and "Kerry: Slashing Intelligence."

Following that, there are nine images of the front pages of Sept. 12, 2001 newspapers (shown below), all of which display the smoking towers of the World Trade Center before they collapsed, killing some 2,600 people. One includes the approach of the plane.

While the Bush-Cheney campaign has routinely used 9/11 as a keystone of their campaign, these are the first print advertisements this site is aware of which actually display multiple images of the burning twin towers. The ad states that it was paid for by the Republican National Committee, with the approval of Bush-Cheney ‘04.

But Mr. President, I thought you said:

I have no ambition whatsoever to use [the 9/11 attacks] as a political issue.
President George W. Bush

Notice the words printed on the flier,

Paid for by the Republican National Committee and Authorized by Bush-Cheney '04, Inc.

So this flier comes right from BC04 HQ. Have no decency, Mr. President?

» x « · comments (0)

Ohio Voter Fraud

Don't think that there is a coordinated campaign to suppress the vote? GOTV!

Voter Registration challenged by College Republican
Former SG member Doctashock, a resident of Toledo, Ohio, in Lucas County, has received notice that the validity of his voter registration is being challenged, and that he will have to appear in court this Saturday to answer the challenge or be denied the right to vote.

Who challenged him? One Megan Harrington, President of the College Republicans at the University of Toledo.
Toledo, OH. 29 OCT 2004

Election Board throws out 976 challenges by Republicans Party
The Summit County Board of Elections abruptly threw out 976 challenges of voter eligibility by the Republican Party today after Barbara Miller, the challenger, revealed that she did not have any personal information about the eligibility of any of the challenged voters.

Instead, Miller said that her challenges were based on a list of "undeliverable mail" given to her by the Republican Party. The list was based on a GOP mailing sent to registered voters throughout the state of Ohio.
Akron, OH. 29 OCT 2004

Phony letters tell people they cannot vote
The phony letter says newly registered voters signed up by the Kerry or Capri Cafaro campaigns or the NAACP, their registrations are illegal and they will not be able to vote.

"That was not authorized by the Board of Elections, said Elections Director Jan Clair. "It was not mailed by the Lake County Board of Elections."
WKYC-TV, Painesville, OH. 28 OCT 2004

GOP dirty tricks in Ohio?
Voter registration is exploding in the swing state, but a ruling by the obstructionist Republican secretary of state may result in thousands not voting.
Salon.com, OH. 9 OCT 2004

See more cases of voter fraud and intimidation in Ohio

» x « · comments (0)

October 28, 2004

Sitting Bird

20041028.jpg

» x « · comments (2) | older photos »

Bird Sculpture from the grounds at St. John the Divine, New York City. Cross-processed Slide Film, 1x Close-Up Filter. Part of the OpenHousenewyork weekend.

Video Shows Explosives Went Missing After War

More updates to the missing explosives from al Qa Qaa: Members of the 101st Airborne Division enter al Qa Qaa on 18 APR 2003 on the way toward Bagdad with embedded reporters from KSTP-TV find evidence that explosives went missing after the war:

During that trip, members of the 101st Airborne Division showed the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS news crew bunker after bunker of material labelled "explosives." Usually it took just the snap of a bolt cutter to get into the bunkers and see the material identified by the 101st as detonation cords.

"We can stick it in those and make some good bombs." a soldier told our crew.

Soldiers who took a 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS crew into bunkers on April 18 said some of the boxes uncovered contained proximity fuses.

There were what appeared to be fuses for bombs. They also found bags of material men from the 101st couldn't identify, but box after box was clearly marked "explosive."

In one bunker, there were boxes marked with the name "Al Qaqaa", the munitions plant where tons of explosives allegedly went missing.

Yahoo News also has a similar story. At the same location, the embedded reporters found IAEA seals on bunkers in the al Qa Qaa facility. UPDATE: David Kay confirms white powder was HMX/RDX and the seals were from the IAEA. Additionally, he doesn't say this but it goes unspoken that the Bush Administration knoew about all of the ammo sites, and that by doing nothing to secure the sites, endangered American soldiers.

Game, Set, Match. The Bush Administration left a known cache of high explosives open to the enemy. Remember, one pound of this stuff brought down Flight 103 in Scotland. It doesn't even matter when the explosives went missing, they weren't destroyed by allied bombing, by allied ground forces, nor were they protected. Now they are blowing up our soldiers in the field. But what really gets me angry is that, 1. This happened, 2. The administration is falling all over itself in Keystone Cops fashion to deny, deny, deny facts. Sometimes the facts are anti-Bush. Lastly, I get angry when an Administration surrogate has this to say about our men and women in the armed forces:

The president was cautious the president was prudent the president did what a commander in chief should do. No matter how you try to blame it on the president the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?
Rudi Giuliani, Today Show 28 OCT 2004

Watch it for yourself. (wma) Wasn't it yesterday that the President was alleging that Sen. Kerry was besmirching the honor of our troops in battle? Only in the President's world would questining civilian leadership and decisions would equal dishonoring our troops. And only in the President's world is up is down when someone from his campaign does the exact same thing he accuses Kerry of doing. Well, that is a pretty standard Bush Administration MO

» x « · comments (0)

October 27, 2004

Pulpit Greenery

20041027.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

marble Pulpit greenery at St. John the Divine, New York City. Cross-processed Slide Film, 3x Close-Up Filter. Part of the OpenHousenewyork weekend.

Red Soxs Win

red sox winimage from MLB

Red Sox Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiin!

Red Sox complete sweep, win first Series since 1918

Good for Boston

» x « · comments (1)

Happy Birthday NY Subway

Happy Birthday you great smelly people mover! PLease don't blow your budget on the Centennial Celebration, so you won't raise your fares! Please?

» x « · comments (0)

October 26, 2004

FDNY Memorial

20041026.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

FDNY Memorial at St. John the Divine, New York City. Cross-processed Slide Film. Part of the OpenHousenewyork weekend.

Supreme Angst

Just in case you thought things could get worse, Washington Monthly brings us this gem about the Bush Administration thinking about recess-appointing a successor to Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist:

"Even though the U.S. Supreme Court has said Chief Justice William Rehnquist will return to the bench following cancer surgery, administration officials are quietly considering candidates to replace him and even the possibility of making a recess appointment. The officials said that they do not want to talk about the process publicly in the last week of the presidential campaign. However, one insider said that the West Wing is considering what would happen if the judge left the bench soon and if a close election next Tuesday meant an evenly split 4-4 court was to decide the winner. Such a situation would likely mean that a lower court's ruling on an outcome would be final and officials are worried that it would go against the President."

Well, wouldn't that be nice? I doubt this would happen, not due to the Bush Administration finally finding political ethics, but because Justice Rehnquist wouldn't allow it. It has long been rumored that none of the Justices wished to retire under the Bush Administration's watch. The Justices wanted to avoid any impropriety of an Administration appointing Justices to the Court which had elevated it to the White House. Additionally, Justices are very keen on keeping both their, and the Court's, legacy positive and are very awarre of the lasting effects of Bush v Gore.

Some insight from an actual Supreme Court litigator, SCOTUSblog answers the basic questions:

Q. Could President Bush make a recess appointment even if he were to be defeated on Nov. 2?

A. Yes. His current term is not to end until next January 20, and he would retain the full powers of the office until then, even if he were a "lame duck president." It would be an astonishing thing to do for a defeated President, but he could do it, constitutionally, as long as the Senate is in recess. (Incidentally, the scope of presidential power to make recess appointments to the courts during Senate recesses is at issue in a pair of cases now pending at the Supreme Court. The Court has not yet acted on either of those.)

Q. As a recess appointee, would the new chief justice have the authority to perform the duties of the job?

A. Absolutely; the job would be his (or hers) for the duration of the appointment – that is, until at least the end of next year’s Senate session.

Q. Would Rehnquist be likely to make a deal with the President to step down while the Senate was in recess?

A. Very doubtful. It would reflect badly on Rehnquist and on the Court, and he is keen on maintaining respect for the institution. There is no doubt that any such deal would become known publicly, through leaks. If Bush were to be defeated Nov. 2, the existence of any such deal would look very much like an attempt to highjack the chief justiceship. That would create such a political uproar as to bring partisan gridlock to Washington – and, it very likely would lead to a messy and disruptive lawsuit.

Finally in Supreme Court news, in preparation for this election's Mutual Assured Litigation, I have been reading articles concerning Bush v Gore and its affect on this year's election. A full post later (when I'm not sick and all I can do is read), but here is a gem entitled, Bush V. Gore, Round 2:

The unfortunate result is that every contested election in the country is now vulnerable to being resolved by O'Connor and her colleagues. And the fact that they attempted in Bush v. Gore to deny the obvious implications of their intrusion into the political process only makes their intervention more reckless. Did they really believe they could create a right to political equality without defining it, in an age when society disagrees so vigorously about what equality requires? Did they imagine for a moment that Democrats and Republicans would meekly tug their forelocks rather than use electoral litigation as a partisan tool? And did they think that courts could presume to recast themselves as election supervisors without calling their own impartiality into question?

Whether or not the presidential election of 2004 is close, Bush v. Gore will continue to distort and confuse U.S. elections more aggressively with each passing year. The disastrous consequences of the Court's decision to legalize U.S. politics have only vindicated the fears of Felix Frankfurter, who warned nearly 60 years ago of the dangers of judicial excursions into what he called "the political thicket." "It is hostile to a democratic system to involve the judiciary in the politics of the people," Frankfurter wrote. "And it is not less pernicious if such judicial intervention in an essentially political contest be dressed up in the abstract phrases of the law." Worst of all, having now led us into the political thicket, neither the conservative nor the liberal justices have any way of getting us out.

Suffice to say that I hope Kerry wins, and wins big (311) or it will be a messy November.

» x « · comments (0)

October 25, 2004

Retro Drain

20041025.jpg

» x « · comments (2) | older photos »

Drain at St. John the Divine , New York City. Cross-processed Slide Film - believe it or not, the only thing done to this image was to up the saturation by a few points to counteract the scanner. Part of the OpenHousenewyork weekend.

Race & Politics

Good old Insty, lays down some old fashioned, "Hey race doesn't affect me, therefore it doesn't affect anyone else" smack on us:

Meanwhile, Clarence Page wonders if Bush will surprise people by doing well with black voters. If, as Peter Beinart suggests, race is no longer a big political issue in America, then why not?

Man, it takes a bunch of white boys some guts to state that race is no longer a big political issue. Funny, huh?

» x « · comments (0)

US failed to secure Iraqi explosives (and the cover up)

The NY Times brings us this horror story, Huge Cache of Explosives Vanished From Site in Iraq:

The Iraqi interim government has warned the United States and international nuclear inspectors that nearly 380 tons of powerful conventional explosives - used to demolish buildings, produce missile warheads and detonate nuclear weapons - are missing from one of Iraq's most sensitive former military installations.

The huge facility, called Al Qaqaa, was supposed to be under American military control but is now a no-man's land, still picked over by looters as recently as Saturday. United Nations weapons inspectors had monitored the explosives for many years, but White House and Pentagon officials acknowledge that the explosives vanished after the American invasion last year [...]

American weapons experts say their immediate concern is that the explosives could be used in major bombing attacks against American or Iraqi forces: the explosives, mainly HMX and RDX, could be used to produce bombs strong enough to shatter airplanes or tear apart buildings. The bomb that brought down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 used less than a pound of the material of the type stolen from Al Qaqaa, and somewhat larger amounts were apparently used in the bombing of a housing complex in November 2003 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and the blasts in a Moscow apartment complex in September 1999 that killed nearly 300 people.

The explosives could also be used to trigger a nuclear weapon, which was why international nuclear inspectors had kept a watch on the material. But the other components of an atom bomb - the design and the radioactive fuel - are more difficult to obtain. "This is a high explosives risk, but not necessarily a proliferation risk," one senior Bush administration official said.

The International Atomic Energy Agency publicly warned about the danger of these explosives before the war, and after the invasion it specifically told United States officials about the need to keep the explosives secured, European diplomats said in interviews last week.

So the Bush Administration allowed 380 tons of RDX and HMX to be looted from known locations. To put that in perspective, 1 pound brought down Pan Am Flight 103 - so there is enough high-yield explosives out there to bring down 760,000 Pan Am Flight 103's. Scarry, no? No - the scarry part of this story is that the Bush Administration has known about it for over a year and has been actively obstructing IAEA involvement and public discourse about the incident. Josh Marshall has more:

There are a number of reasons why you can imagine the White House and the civilians at the Pentagon wouldn't want to inform the IAEA. But one pretty clear one is that letting the IAEA find out would pretty clearly mean that the American public would find out what a major league screw-up the president and his advisors had allowed to happen.

Only a couple weeks ago did the Iraqis finally report the theft to the IAEA. And from there it was only a matter of time till the yearlong cover-up started to unravel.

But it didn't even stop there.

As I've noted, the White House and the Pentagon have known for more than a year that this stuff had gone missing. But the White House, according to TPM sources, has known that this story was coming for at least ten days. Again, not just the underlying facts -- that the stuff had been stolen and was being used against American troops (they've known that for more than a year) -- but the fact that this story was going to break in the not too distant future. And they've been going to great lengths to try to push it back until after the election.

As another administration source told Nelson, "What the hell were WE doing in the year and a half from the time we knew the stuff was gone, is obviously a huge question, and you can imagine why no one [in the Administration] wants to face up to it, certainly not before the election."

Conventional wisdom is that it is the coverup that is more damning than the actual act, but this time that wisdom is wrong. This time, explosives from that 380 tons are being used daily to blow up American Troops. How can you let 380 tons of known explosives get away and then cover it up and do nothing about it for a year! How is this protecting American lives, Mr. President? You willfully have put soldiers and civilians into harms way, and you try to cover it up for political purposes thus slowing to capture of these materials? What kind of man are you, Mr. President?

» x « · comments (2)

October 24, 2004

Divine Powers

20041024.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

St. John the Divine , New York City. Cross-processed Slide Film - believe it or not, the only thing done to this image was to up the saturation by a few points to counteract the scanner. Part of the OpenHousenewyork weekend.

October 23, 2004

Tubers

20041023.jpg

» x « · comments (1) | older photos »

Tubers at the local Green Market.

October 22, 2004

Cross-processed Jesus

20041022.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

The Good Shepard, taken from a pulpit at St. John the Divine, New York City. Cross-processed Slide Film. Part of the OpenHousenewyork weekend.

I Wonder Why People think Saddam & 9/11 are Connected, hmmm could it be...

So I am trying to find Bush Administration quotes to see what exactly makes 75% of Bush supporters think Saddam gave material aid to al Qaeda.

Bush also expressed gratitude to Hispanic families that lost loved ones in the wars in Iraq, adding that they died for a noble cause. "I would tell them the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the war against those who caused the deaths on 9/11 is necessary," he said. "The most solemn duty of the president of the United States is to protect the American people. And the biggest danger we have is that a terrorist group obtains weapons that can cause more damage than a few planes."
MSNBC, 22 OCT 2004 (emphasis added)

Vice President Cheney said that Iraq was "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."
MSNBC, 19 NOV 2003

» x « · comments (0) · trackBack (1)

Willful ignorance?

Majority of Bush supporters still haven't got a clue:

Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD or a major program for developing them. Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points.

Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions.
The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters - (pdf) emphasis added

This has gone way past willful ignorance. To whomever still thinks that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11, or had WMD's, or that WMD's have been found, or that Saddam gave material aid to al Qaeda: you are wrong. So wrong that you are not even living in the same reality-based community. So wrong that you again still lucky to have a cervical cortex to allow you to function. I don't know what you need to shatter your false belief, but it must happen in one mighty episode of cognitive dissidence, for all of our sakes. All of the following publications disagree with you, oh 75% of Bush supporters who think Saddam gave material aid to al Qaeda (all Iraq WMD documents & UNMOVIC documents):

» x « · comments (0) · trackBack (2)

October 21, 2004

Stacked Carrots

20041021.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

Stacks of carrots higher than mere mortals at the local Green Market.

Bush calls man of "God" a liar

Everyone remember good old Pat Robertson who said:

And I warned him about this war. I had deep misgivings about this war, deep misgivings. And I was trying to say, 'Mr. President, you had better prepare the American people for casualties.'"
Robertson said the president then told him, "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties.
CNN, 20 OCT 2004

Well, the Bush Administration is fighting back, in an epic Fundamentalist v Fundamentalist attack:

Scott McClellan says Pat Robertson's a liar:

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said, "Of course, the president never made such a comment."

Earlier in the day, Mike McCurry, adviser to the Kerry campaign, said: "We believe President Bush should get the benefit of the doubt here, but he needs to come forward and answer a very simple question — was Pat Robertson telling the truth when he said he didn't think there'd be any casualties or is Pat Robertson lying?"

Karen Hughes calls Pat Robertson a liar:

Hughes: Judy, I cannot imagine that that conversation would ever take place. I've never heard the president say anything of the sort.... So I can't imagine whether he misunderstood, or what happened. But I'm certain that the president did not say that remark.

Woodruff: So Pat Robertson is lying or wrong or something?

Hughes: Well, again, Judy, I don't know. Perhaps he misunderstood.... It just doesn't sound consistent with the facts as I knew them at the time.

This really does put the Bush Administration in a bind. If Robertson really does have a direct link to God, and they are calling him a liar, what does that say about the administration? If Robertson is such a great man of God (he isn't but they think so), then how Christian is it to Bear False Whitness againt your fellow man, especially a man of the cloth (no matter how tattered)? On the other hand, if the administration is right, and Robertson is a liar and not a man of God, then they really just shit on many of their fundamentalist supporters. So either way, one self-described Christian Evengelical Fundamentalist is coming out of this badly.

» x « · comments (1) · trackBack (1)

The Flu and Treatment

So it seems that there is no flu vaccine shortage at Capitol:

While many Americans search in vain for flu shots, members and employees of Congress are able to obtain them quickly and at no charge from the Capitol's attending physician, who has urged all 535 lawmakers to get the vaccines even if they are young and healthy.
MSNBC, 20 OCT 2004

Whatever you may think of our elected leaders, they are the US Government, and therefore should and must gain some preferential treatment in order for the government to function. Do you really want the government to shutdown because of the flu? Luckily Cheney got a flu shot - he is the walking definition of vulnerable to a influenza epidemic. Kerry's criticism of the Administration for its lack of focus (what exactly is their plan to deal with this?) on this issue is valid. If they can't regulate and stockpile flu vaccines, will they be able to mitigate other Biological or Chemical (much less Nuclear) threats? But to point to Cheney as someone who got a flu shot is either dumb or, much more likley, a gambit to force the White House to state that Cheney is (as we know) not in good health.

Luckily, the French have bailed us out (again):

A French pharmaceutical company will supply 2.6 million extra anti-flu shots to help the United States cope with a vaccine shortage that has sparked public concern, a top US health official said on Tuesday.
Business Report, 20 OCT 2004

I sincerely wonder if those politicians who disparaged the French would have some sort of moral crisis if they needed a flu shot. I also wonder if those to the right will continue the France Boycott (which is oh so working), and decline any flu shots on the oft chance they might have come from France?

Freedom Shots for all!

» x « · comments (3)

October 20, 2004

City Tanks

20041020.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

Water tanks in New York City adorn many rooftops.

Compare & Contrast

Without a Doubt:

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality - judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
New York Times Magazine, 17 OCT 2004

Robertson: I warned Bush on Iraq casualties

"And I warned him about this war. I had deep misgivings about this war, deep misgivings. And I was trying to say, 'Mr. President, you had better prepare the American people for casualties.'"

Robertson said the president then told him, "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties."
CNN, 20 OCT 2004

Two separate articles that lend proof that the President of the United States is in his own cocoon, which greatly distorts reality. I could go on and on about how no one in their right mind would ever think that there would be no casualties when you send in the military. But, I am pretty sure the President's remarks stand for themselves.

» x « · comments (1) · trackBack (1)

Baseball has been very, very good to me

So, I am watching the Red Sox v Yankees Game 6, at Yankees stadium, and the crowd is just going crazy! The Yankees fans have been throwing crap on the field anytime a call doesn't go their way. Especially when A-Rod knocked the ball out from the pitchers glove. Nice try, pretty boy.

The great thing about Baseball, is that Umpires outrank Police Officers on the field, but then once the Umpires step off the field, the Police are back in control.

Holy shit - the Police in full riot gear just came out on the field and lined both sides of the field.

UPDATE
Boston Wins!

» x « · comments (2)

October 19, 2004

Spectrum, ADIZ, and preparedness

20050511-wdc_adiz.jpg

So there was an article on slashdot.org about a Distress Signal Emitted By Flat-Screen TV which was picked up by a satellite, leading a search and rescue operation to his apartment in Corvallis, Oregon. What was so interesting about the slashdot article was in the comments there is a great discussion about the different frequencies used for civil aviation. Apparently the international distress frequency is at 121.5Mhz, but this frequency (including 243 MHz) is being changed to 406 MHz due to the spectrum becoming muddled. See this US Coast Guard Advisory and the official NOAA Press Release (pdf) for more information.

Another interesting tidbit is that there is an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) which envelops Washington DC which pilots have to gain clearance in order to breach the zone. Here is a cool aviation map of the ADIZ and here is another Washington D.C. ADIZ Map. This was done (as far as I can tell) as a response to September 11th and the Iraq War. Here is some useful information:

Effective at 6 AM EST on 10 February 2003 and until further notice, all pilots conducting flight operations within the DC ADIZ will file a flight plan with FSS and receive a discrete transponder code prior to flight.

Each pilot will establish two-way radio communications with ATC prior to entering DC ADIZ airspace and will maintain this capability while within DC ADIZ airspace. Failure to do so has dire consequences.

In addition, each pilot will obtain a briefing by FSS just prior to every flight in the DC ADIZ, including obtaining all applicable airspace restriction NOTAMs.

If pilots breach the zone without proper clearance, "Huntress" a plane from Griffis AFB, NY is called out to investigate. Here is an FAA Guide to Plane Interception Procedures, so that you will know what to do next time your plane is intercepted by America's Bravest. Additionally, there is an ADIZ surrounding the US on the Atlantic, Pacific, the Gulf of Mexico, and Mexican border. Curiously, there is no ADIZ bordering Canada. I always suspected there was some sort of holding-pen or area where incoming planes had to declare themselves before entering US airspace. It also seems that there is a full time AWACS fleet patrolling above the Capital in order to help detect any incoming aircraft. What surprises me, is that this sort of airspace monitoring was not done before the September 11th attacks, or if it did, there wasn't an existing ADIZ around Washington. Again, I am a lay person, so I am assuming there was, and I don't know about it.

UPDATE
Because everyone knows that I love maps, here is a great collection of Airport Diagrams

» x « · comments (0)

11222 Voting Guide

I have endeavoured to create a Voting Guide for ZIP Code 11222. It a work in progress because even if "all politics are local," the politicians in my neighborhood are doing a poor job.

» x « · comments (0)

October 18, 2004

October 17, 2004

Week in Review

What will (hopefully) become a weekly event, I have put together a week in review of thinks I think were important for the last week.

» x « · comments (0)

October 15, 2004

Conservative values have a place

So I saw this article entitled, Private enterprise: Conservatism thrives in America. I was at least intrigued by the citizens/subjects dichotomy the author - Mark Steyn - suggests. True conservatism is an interesting idea which I always struggle with the viability and legitimacy of the concept. What gets intertwined with conservatism is state's rights and "smaller government" which sounds good, but no one really wants (and is impossible to implement). Would we really be better with a smaller (or no) Federal government? I think not, but that doesn't mean that I can't be persuaded.

Continue reading "Conservative values have a place"

» x « · comments (0)

October 14, 2004

Frank, John, and George

Wow, the irony. The third, and final, presidential debate was held in the Gammage Auditorium designed by Frank Lloyd Wright in 1959. Gammage apparently was originally intended as an opera house in Baghdad. Here are some photographs.

» x « · comments (0)

Great agitprop

}

Agitprop · by b0

Short, simple, easy to understand. This is great propaganda - in the pure, classical, sense of the word, without evil connotations. Sometimes the facts really are liberal.

» x « · comments (0)

Why Mary Cheney is a Rorschach Test

Andrew Sullivan brings up the Mary Cheney non-issue and makes two great points:

A TYPICAL POINT: Here's an email that makes a point many others have. I cite it because it's representative:

You won't read this or reply, but that's fine. Your support of Kerry's bringing up Mary Cheney in the debate just lost my respect completely. The best analogy I can think of would have been Carter mentioning Betty Ford's addiction or someone mentioning Martha Mitchell's instability and alcoholism in a presidential debate. Just beyond the pale. The young woman, and the family, are entitled to their privacy on private matters.

Notice two things. First, the equation of gayness with some sort of embarrassing problem or, worse, some kind of affliction. For people who believe this, of course Kerry was out of line. That's why Rove's base is so outraged. But if you don't believe this, it's no different than, say, if a candidate were to mention another candidate's son in the Marines. Or if, in a debate on immigration, a pro-immigrant candidate mentioned Kerry's immigrant wife. You have to regard homosexuality as immoral or wrong or shameful to even get to the beginning of the case against Kerry. That's why it's a Rorschach test. Secondly, Mary Cheney isn't private. She ran gay outreach for Coors, for pete's sake. She appears in public with her partner. Her family acknowledges this. She's running her dad's campaign! Whatever else this has to do with - and essentially, it has to do whether you approve of homosexuality or not - privacy is irrelevant.
(emphasis added)

My thoughts exactly.

» x « · comments (0)

Kennedy, Cuba and Cigars

"Pierre, I need some help," he said solemnly.

"I'll be glad to do anything I can Mr. President," I replied.

"I need a lot of cigars."

"How many, Mr. President?"

"About 1,000 Petit Upmanns."

I shuddered a bit, although I kept my reaction to myself. "And, when do you need them, Mr. President?"

"Tomorrow morning."

» x « · comments (0)

Polls: Kerry Won Across the Board

So let's review the polls from last night's debate:

So what's up with that ABC poll? Is it an outlier? Well, no. The reason the ABC snap-poll poll result was Kerry 42% v. Bush 41% is because ABC oversampled Republicans based on Party ID. The Party ID for the poll was:

30% Democrats
38% Republicans
28% Independents/others

This isn't a good reflection of the nation's electorate. Zogby's party ID for the recent presidential elections derived from exit polls are:

YearDemRepInd-Other
199234%34%33%
199639%34%27%
200039%35%26%

Now Zogby does tilt left in its commissioned polls, but these numbers come from direct exit polling, they are pretty unambiguous. I also have seen similar numbers from other pollsters, so I am willing to take Zogby as correct.

So what does this mean? Well, it means that even with a sample that
does not fit the electorate and in fact oversamples Republicans, Kerry still was 1% above the President. ABC even makes this point:

The audience for the third debate was a bit more Republican in its allegiance: Among viewers, 38 percent identified themselves as Republicans, 30 percent as Democrats and 28 percent as independents. That makes the draw more of an accomplishment for Kerry.
emphasis added

There you go. In this case, a tie really is a win.

» x « · comments (1)

The final Presidential Debate

So the final debate was last night, and I thought it was another solid debate between the two opponents. Although, the President kept trying to crack stupid jokes during his response to Senator Kerry - which seemed both dumb and unprofessional. I would say that the debate went to Kerry, only because he was more poised and his handling of the abortion and faith issues seemed more genuine than Bush. Either way, if you say that it was a tie, then Kerry won: ties go to the challenger because the incumbent people already know. Overall, the debates all went to Kerry - he went from 5-12% down (depending on which poll you believe) to even or leading. He has the Big 'Mo going right now, at just the right time.

After the fold is Bush's Osama Lie, homosexuality, abortion talk, and faith.

Continue reading "The final Presidential Debate"

» x « · comments (0)

October 13, 2004

October 12, 2004

October 11, 2004

President playing politics with war

Wow, talk about hypocracy. President Bush constantly talks about Senator Kerry making "political decisions" with regards to matters of war. How about these apples, Major Assaults on Hold Until After U.S. Vote:

The Bush administration will delay major assaults on rebel-held cities in Iraq until after U.S. elections in November, say administration officials, mindful that large-scale military offensives could affect the U.S. presidential race.

..."When this election's over, you'll see us move very vigorously," said one senior administration official involved in strategic planning, speaking on condition of anonymity.

...Any delay in pacifying Iraq's most troublesome cities, however, could alter the dynamics of a different election -- the one in January, when Iraqis are to elect members of a national assembly.

With only four months remaining, U.S. commanders are scrambling to enable voting in as many Iraqi cities as possible to shore up the poll's legitimacy.

U.S. officials point out that there have been no direct orders to commanders in the field to pause operations in the weeks before the Nov. 2 election. Top administration officials in Washington are simply reluctant to sign off on a major offensive in Iraq at the height of the political season.
LA Times 11-OCT-04 (emphasis added)

This pretty much speaks for itself. The President is soft on Terror and the War in Iraq - he won't make the hard decisions which could endanger his political standing. This is moral cowardice if I have ever seen it. What has the PResident to say about thi?

I don't see how you can lead this country in a time of war, in a time of uncertainty, if you change your mind because of politics.
- Presiden George W. Bush

Our thoughts exactly.

» x « · comments (0)

October 10, 2004

President Bush's Has Wood

Did anyone else ask themselves, "what the fuck was Senator Kerry was talking about Presiden't Bush's Timber Business?" But then you probably didn't have time to do that, because then Bush jumped up and asked if anyone, "Wanted some wood?" Here is the exchange:

KERRY: You can't stop all outsourcing, Charlie. I've never promised that. I'm not going to, because that would be pandering. You can't. But what you can do is create a fair playing field, and that's what I'm talking about. But let me just address what the president just said. Ladies and gentlemen, that's just not true what he said. The Wall Street Journal said 96 percent of small businesses are not affected at all by my plan. And you know why he gets that count? The president got $84 from a timber company that owns, and he's counted as a small business. Dick Cheney's counted as a small business. That's how they do things. That's just not right.

BUSH: I own a timber company? That's news to me. Need some wood? Most small businesses are Subchapter S corps. They just are. I met Grant Milliron, Mansfield, Ohio. He's creating jobs. Most small businesses -- 70 percent of the new jobs in America are created by small businesses. Taxes are going up when you run up the top two brackets. It's a fact.

Factcheck.com .org drops some knowledge on us what Kerry was talking about. Read, Are Bush and Cheney "Small Businesses?" Their Ad Counts Them As Such:

President Bush himself would have qualified as a "small business owner" under the Republican definition, based on his 2001 federal income tax returns. He reported $84 of business income from his part ownership of a timber-growing enterprise. However, 99.99% of Bush's total income came from other sources that year. (Bush also qualified as a "small business owner" in 2000 based on $314 of "business income," but not in 2002 and 2003 when he reported his timber income as "royalties" on a different tax schedule.)

(Oct 9; CORRECTION: What we originally reported as a "timber-growing" enterprise is actually described on Bush's tax return as an "oil and gas production" concern, the Lone Star Trust. We were confused because The Lone Star Trust currently owns 50% of another company, "LSTF, LLC", described on Bush’s 2003 financial disclosure forms as a limited-liability company organized "for the purpose of the production of trees for commercial sales." So, Bush does own part interest in a tree-growing company, but the $84 came from an oil and gas company and we should have reported it as such.)

Yes, Mr. President, you are a small business under your definition, and by your own definition you own a timber company. Want some wood? While Kerry's point was a bit convoluted, your response was just plain embarrasing.

» x « · comments (2)

October 8, 2004

Burning Books

Via Matthew, comes wonderful story of a wife of a politician who used her influence to destroy history pamphlets:

The Education Department this summer destroyed more than 300,000 copies of a booklet designed for parents to help their children learn history after the office of Vice President Dick Cheney's wife complained that it mentioned the National Standards for History, which she has long opposed.
LA Times, 8-OCT-04 (emphasis added)

Now imagine this wasn't Eva Braun Cheney, and this was Hillary Clinton. I'm with Matthew on this one: think of what that shitstorm would be like.

» x « · comments (0)

Blame it on the rain

This last month the US created only 96,000 jobs. It takes 150,000 jobs a month just to keep up with population growth. Even the household survey had a net loss of 200,000 jobs! This is really bad news for Americans, and then President Bush. But what is distressing is that Labor Secretary Elaine Chao is blaming the rain for the lost jobs:

...the economy "has been through a great deal lately -- devastating hurricanes and rising oil prices." The new figures show "the strength and resilience of our economy and that the labor market continues to improve." (emphasis mine)

Which is kinda funny, because the Employment Situation Summary by the US DEpartment of Labor, says otherwise:

For weather conditions to reduce the estimate of payroll employment, people have to be off work for an entire pay period and not be paid for the time missed. While some employed persons were off payrolls during the survey reference period because of the hurricane effects, some jobs were added as part of recovery efforts. It is not possible to quantify precisely the net impact of this unusual string of severe weather events on the payroll employment data for September. At the national level, the severe weather appears to have held down employment growth, but not enough to change materially the Bureau's assessment of the employment situation in September. (emphasis mine)

There we go: the hurricanes of course caused a small ripple in local economies, but not enough to cause job growth to fall to 2/3 of what it needs to be to keep up with population and 1/3rd of what the Bush Administration says it should be. Those tax cuts really are working, aren't they? (Answer: no)

» x « · comments (0)

What's up with false, pro-Bush articles?

What the hell is up with news organizations posting false, pro-Bush articles? Yesterday WBAY TV in Green Bay, Wisconsin ran an AP article claiming that:

At this hour, President Bush has won reelection as president by a 47 percent to 43 percent margin in the popular vote nationwide. Ralph Nader has 1 percent of the vote nationwide. That's with 51 percent of the precincts re