Are You Paying Attention?

What's Today? I Forgot.

2010-09-11T07:30:00.004-05:00

In 9 years, I've never understood what this really meant. The 1st anniversary of the tragic events of 9/11 brought on a strange saying in my opinion...."We Shall Never Forget". Doesn't this go without saying? Don't we have a better way, a better phrase, to acknowledge what took place? Wouldn't you have to be in coma, live under a rock or gone senile in the past 9 years to have conveniently forgotten what happened in New York on September 11, 2001?

Maybe I hate that phrase because it was an excuse used by our former President to start a war. Remember that one? Shrub pissed everyone off by using "We Shall Never Forget" (paraphrasing, yet close...) "And those who have committed murder on the US will be brought to justice.....Saddam and his sons were responsible for the tragic events of 9/11". Well, no they weren't. And by the way, Bin Laden is STILL free to this day, 9 years later. I almost see it as an angry war cry - a phrase to stoke your hatred against those who trespassed against us.

But, hey - you can buy a commemorative plate or perhaps a piece of jewelry with the twin towers on it. After all, someone needs to profit from tragedy. Hmmm, interesting how that gets a free pass isn't it?

Sometimes I forget if I took a sinus pill, but I get a headache to remind me. September 11, 2001 I can recall EVERYTHING that happened that morning after Jodi called to tell me to turn on my television at work. I don't need to see countless "views" of the planes slamming into the towers, or New Yorkers running down the streets with dust and debris flying all about them. It will be forever etched in my memory. I didn't need a slogan to remind me that I can't forget what took place that morning.

What I will try to take away from that tragic day - is the days that proceeded it. The feeling (as a nation) we were one. We are Americans. We will help those that needed help.

We collectively mourned the loss of the innocent people who died in the towers the day and the rescue workers who died trying to save them. May you all, rest in peace.

One War Down, One War to Go!

2010-09-06T08:46:00.002-05:00

American deaths in Iraq by state

I'm sure if you go through my archives you will find rant upon rant about our assinine decision as a country to go war with Iraq. After all, Bush and Company never did define a real reason after 7 1/2 years, we just kept changing the "mission" after each reason failed us. WMD? no, that wasn't it - Saddam's link to 9/11? no, that was just an outright lie and with that we settled on spreading "freedom" to the Iraqi people. Really? Freedom? 4,416 Americans gave their lives, to bring "freedom" to the Iraqi people.

I still find myself hard pressed to think otherwise, after 7 1/2 years, this was about oil, revenge and lining the pockets of Bush's friends who stood to profit from the invasion.

I've never found myself angrier at a President until I watched this clip. At this point (2004), about 2,000 Americans had died in Iraq and Bush decided it was a good time to practice some comedy regarding his lies - it's about 5 mins in and the "jokes" about Iraq and reasons for war became an SNL skit. And somehow, someway....he would be voted back IN office for a 2nd term. WOW, talk about head up our collective asses - WHAT was that all about?

As President Obama managed to get the majority of Americans out of Iraq this past week. He was criticized for leaving 50K behind. Sadly enough, once again our memories have failed, not giving credit where credit is due as to who brought us there in the first place.

A little rant from Rachel Maddow as a reminder.

Aerosmith at Fenway 8.14.10 - Dream On baby!

2010-08-15T08:38:00.003-05:00

Proposition 8 Violates the U.S. Constitution

2010-08-05T05:18:00.000-05:00

(CNN) -- Defendants and plaintiffs have until Friday to submit responses to a temporary stay that a California judge granted after striking down the state's ban on same-sex marriage.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco ruled on Wednesday that California's Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution.

He however granted a temporary stay, which stops his decision from taking immediate effect.

Supporters of Proposition 8 argued, prior to Walker's ruling, that same-sex marriages would be performed soon after his decision and could be complicated by rulings and appeals farther down the legal road.

The judge's decision striking down the ban handed supporters of gay rights a major victory in a case that both sides say is sure to wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The 136-page opinion is an initial step in what will likely be a lengthy fight over the proposition, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

At stake in the trial was whether California's ban on same-sex marriage violates gay couples' rights to equal protection and due process, as protected by the U.S. Constitution.

The high-profile case is being watched closely by both supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage, as many say it is destined to make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

If it does, the case could result in a landmark decision on whether people in the United States are allowed to marry people of the same sex.

Same-sex marriage is currently legal in five U.S. states and in the District of Columbia, while civil unions are permitted in New Jersey. The five states are Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Iowa and New Hampshire.

"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples," Walker, who was appointed to the federal bench by former President Ronald Reagan, wrote in his opinion.

"Race restrictions on marital partners were once common in most states but are now seen as archaic, shameful or even bizarre," he added. "Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage; marriage under law is a union of equals."

Elated supporters of same-sex marriage gathered to celebrate the judge's opinion in the Castro district of San Francisco.
After speeches and songs, they began a march to city hall.

People waved rainbow flags and U.S. flags, and carried signs that read, "We all deserve the freedom to marry," and "Separate is Unequal."

Similar rallies unfolded in cities across California -- including Los Angeles and San Diego.

"For our entire lives, our government and the law have treated us as unequal. This decision to ensure that our constitutional rights are as protected as everyone else's makes us incredibly proud of our country," said Kristin Perry, a plaintiff.

Perry and Sandy Stier, along with Jeffrey Zarrillo and Paul Katami, are the two couples at the heart of the case, which if appealed would go next to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Opponents of same-sex marriage have said their best bet lies with higher courts, and vowed to appeal the federal judge's ruling.

In a national survey, conducted by Gallup in May, 53 percent of respondents said same-sex marriages should not be recognized by law, while 44 percent said they should.

Proposition 8 is part of a long line of seesaw rulings, court cases, debates and protests over the controversial issue of same-sex marriage. It passed in California with some 52 percent of the vote in November 2008.

"Big surprise! We expected nothing different from Judge Vaughn Walker, after the biased way he conducted this trial," said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage. "With a stroke of his pen, Judge Walker has overruled the votes and values of 7 million Californians who voted for marriage as one man and one woman."

Dispersants used excessively in Gulf

2010-08-01T06:36:00.000-05:00

This was reported about 2 mns ago on Good Morning America. Now its coming back to light as we see it's effects. Here's the GMA video - below, the story from CNN published today.

By the CNN Wire Staff
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
The dispersants were used to break up oil after the April 20 rig explosion
The EPA ordered the oil giant in May to limit surface application of the chemicals
In rare cases, exemptions to use the chemical could be requested

(CNN) -- New documents released by a congressional subcommittee indicate that Coast Guard officials allowed BP to use excessive amounts of chemical dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico.

BP used the chemicals to break up oil after the April 20 Deepwater Horizon rig explosion sent millions of gallons of crude gushing into the Gulf.

Despite a federal directive restricting their use, the Coast Guard routinely granted exemptions, said Rep. Edward J. Markey, chairman of the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee.

"BP carpet bombed the ocean with these chemicals, and the Coast Guard allowed them to do it," Markey said in a statement Saturday. "After we discovered how toxic these chemicals really are, they had no business being spread across the Gulf in this manner."

The exemptions granted "were in no way rare," Markey said in a letter to retired Adm. Thad Allen, the former commandant of the Coast Guard who is now overseeing the federal response to the oil spill.

The Coast Guard approved more than 74 exemptions in 48 days, Markey said. In one instance, Coast Guard officials allowed the oil giant to use a larger volume of dispersants than it had applied for, he said.

Dispersants are "a toxic stew of chemicals, oil and gas, with impacts that are not well understood," Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts, said in the letter to Allen.

In May, the Environmental Protection Agency, along with the Coast Guard, ordered the oil giant to stop surface application of the chemicals during the oil spill except in rare occasions, according to a House subcommittee on energy and environment.

In rare cases, exemptions had to be requested, documents show.

Markey said the findings are based on an analysis by the Energy and Environment Subcommittee.

Calls to a BP press office and the Joint Information Center were not immediately returned.

The EPA said in May that it believes the oil giant's total use of dispersants can be reduced by as much as 80 percent. While the dispersants were breaking up much of the oil being spilled into the Gulf, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said, "we are making environmental tradeoffs" and are "deeply concerned" about potential side effects.

Markey said the subcommittee also found contradictions on how much chemical dispersant was being used. On other occasions, BP used more than the amount approved by the Coast Guard, Markey said in his letter.

The report brings into question the total amount of dispersants used in the Gulf. BP says it has used 1.8 million gallons to break up oil flowing from the Deepwater Horizon's ruptured well.

"The validity of those numbers are now in question," Markey said.

Man's crack pipe sets prosthetic leg on fire

2010-07-30T05:15:00.000-05:00

A New Mexico man who investigators say set his prosthetic leg on fire with a pocketed crack pipe has been arrested.

Deputies say they found 47-year-old Randy Malone naked along Rt. 70 with his prosthetic right leg in flames on July 5. He was treated for burns to his leg, back and buttocks.

A witness later told authorities that he agreed to give Malone a ride into Las Cruces but dropped him off after the passenger lighted a crack pipe in the vehicle.

Dona Ana County deputy sheriffs arrested Malone on Sunday at his home after the man's brothers tipped investigators. Malone was being sought on a warrant for making a false report.

Brains or Beauty?

2010-07-28T05:20:00.000-05:00

I find Kelly interesting. I always wondered what it would be like to be model beautiful, yet stupid. Watching it unfold on The New York Housewives, well....that's entertainment!

10 Inane Kelly Bensimon Quotes:

Kelly Bensimon recently sat down for an interview with Out to talk about bullying (obvs), sex education, Real Housewives, gay stuff, live streaming, lollipops, and other non sequiturs that make absolutely no sense.

1.) "I was at Mohegan Sun for the opening of their Mohegan Sun Days event, it's their [monthly] GL — GLBT night. I always think that sounds like BLT."

2.) "Mostly I'm just like 'Huh? What?' And then I look like I'm an airhead because I'm not engaging in stuff that I don't understand."

3.) "So then speaking with GMHC about safe sex and also just about bullying, I learned so much about how alternative lifestyles get bullied so much and I was really disturbed by that to be honest with you because I have been a model for a long time and I have had so much respect for people that have alternative lifestyles."

4.) "Why do we have to be all flowers and lollipops. Why can't it be like fighting but we are actually learning. That's called back-door education."

5.) "I mean don't you think America, don't you think all the women in America that are in their forties would want to hear how New York women are dealing with their kids thinking about sex."

6.) "The one reason I would like to do my own show is because I am exposed to so many unbelievable people and so I would use my show as a vehicle to explore all these different people that I know, whether it would be Richard Meier to the man that helps me with my computers."

7.) "It's never really about me. It's always about the other people because that's what I find interesting. I don't really find what I do really interesting."

8.) "[T]hey asked me to be on the show because they wanted me to legitimize the brand and they wanted a real socialite. They wanted a real New Yorker, if you will, on the show. And it was a great opportunity for me because it's obviously got everything that I love, whether it's my safe sex initiative or anti-bullying or working on my jewelry line or just having my books…"

9.) "[E]verybody knows my name so that's a huge honor and I am really grateful to Bravo for exposing me and exploiting my name like that."

10.) "You know, everybody knows the problems — why can't we come up with different solutions? And that's like what I like. I like teaching in a different way and if it doesn't work we can always do something. What's the big deal."

BP CEO to walk away with $18 million

2010-07-26T05:13:00.000-05:00

ARGH! Are you kidding me? Walk away with $18 million?

LONDON (Reuters) - BP Chief Executive Tony Hayward will collect a pay and pension package worth at least 11.8 million pounds ($18.03 million) when he steps down from his role at the company, the Times newspaper reported on Sunday.

The Times said Hayward will be giving up 546,000 share options and a maximum of 2 million shares in the company under a long-term incentive plan, now worth an estimated 8 million pounds.

A BP spokesman dismissed the report as "rumors," adding that Hayward remained chief executive and had full support of the board.

BP has decided Hayward should step down over his handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and his departure could be announced in the next 36 hours, sources close to the company said.

BP's board is due to meet in London tomorrow to discuss a plan for Hayward to step down and be replaced by Bob Dudley, a senior U.S. executive who is currently managing the oil spill response operation, the sources said.

(Reporting by Karolina Tagaris; editing by Diane Craft)

Testing of BP well will go another 24 hours

2010-07-18T07:18:00.000-05:00

OMG! Finally after 89 days, just maybe they have stopped the gushing.

New Orleans, Louisiana (CNN) -- Encouraged by results so far, BP and the government agreed Saturday to another 24 hours of testing of the recently recapped Gulf well.

BP's 48-hour window for pressure testing expired Saturday afternoon with no reports of flowing oil or evidence that the giant sealing cap caused further damage. The testing will now go into Sunday afternoon.

Retired Adm. Thad Allen, the government's response manager, said once testing is eventually stopped "we will immediately return to containment, using the new, tighter sealing cap with both the [vessels] Helix Producer and the Q4000."

Pressure was still rising Saturday though it had slowed considerably as expected, BP Senior Vice President Kent Wells said earlier in the day. Officials are looking at the testing in six-hour windows.

"The longer the test goes the more confidence we have in it," Wells told reporters in a conference call Saturday. "There's no evidence we don't have integrity."

Higher pressure means oil is not leaking out from another source in the well. Lower pressure would indicate otherwise.

A National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration sonar ship has been brought in to monitor the sea floor around the well, Allen said in a statement. "The pressure in the capping stack continues to increase very slowly and we want to continue to monitor this progress."

The latest pressure reading inside the well was 6,745 psi (pounds per square inch), Wells said. That falls short of the optimal 8,000 to 9,000 psi needed in order to conclude without doubt the well is not leaking.

"Based on the data and pressure readings compiled to date, the test has provided us with valuable information which will inform the procedure to kill the well and a better understanding of options for temporary shut-in during a hurricane," Allen said.

Allen said Friday that the rising pressure readings were generally good news.

But he added, "I think we're at a point where there's enough uncertainty about the meaning of the pressure that we're seeing that we have to use due diligence moving forward. We don't want to do harm or create a situation that cannot be reversed."

Reopening the valves would allow oil to once again flow into the Gulf and recovery operations from the surface to resume.

No oil has gushed out since Thursday when BP closed all the valves in a new custom-made cap that was lowered into place earlier in the week. The undersea video images of a quiet ocean sprouted new hope in the hearts of Gulf Coast residents devastated by three months of disaster.

Still, they remained cautiously optimistic, as did officials including Allen and President Barack Obama, until BP is able to announce conclusive test results.

Engineers and scientists intensified monitoring of the well, pouring over images and data collected by robots, sonar scans and seismic and acoustic examinations. A government ship is in the area, fitted with equipment for detecting methane gas, which would be an indication of a leak.

The well integrity test began Thursday after two days of delays, first as government scientists scrutinized testing procedures and then as BP replaced a leaking piece of equipment known as a choke line.

The oil stopped gushing out Thursday afternoon, the first time the energy giant has been able to gain control since the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig exploded April 20 and triggered the catastrophe.

All that was made possible by a new, tightly fitting containment cap.

Meanwhile, BP restarted work on drilling two relief wells. Wells said Saturday that the first relief well is now about five feet away from the ruptured Macondo well and an intersection will occur by the end of July.

BP then plans to pump mud and cement down to kill the ruptured well.

"We are feeling very good at this point on how the well is lining up," Wells said.

When they are ready, mud and cement will be pumped into one of the relief wells to permanently seal BP's crippled well.

In the coming weeks, BP also plans to bring in two more oil collection ships in addition to the two already in the Gulf, bringing containment capacity to 80,000 barrels (about 3.4 million gallons) of oil a day, more than high-end estimates of how much oil had been leaking. But it's possible some oil may be released into the Gulf again, before all the ships are ready.

The skimming vessel "A Whale," which underwent extensive testing, was found unsuited for the task and will not be deployed, Adm. Paul Zukunft said.

President Obama spoke about the developments with a note of caution.

"I think it's important that we don't get ahead of ourselves here," he said. "You know, one of the problems with having this camera down there is that when the oil stops gushing, everybody feels like we're done, and we're not. We won't be done until we actually know that we killed the well and have a permanent solution in place."

The president expects to return to the Gulf Coast in the next few weeks. He took some heat from some corners on Saturday for taking a vacation in Maine instead of heading to revisit oil-affected areas.

First Lady Michelle Obama is slated to return to the region Friday to meet with Coast Guard personnel who've been responding to the oil spill and to christen a Coast Guard cutter named in honor of Dorothy Stratton, the service branch's first female commissioned officer.

Melissa Etheridge Files to End Relationship

2010-07-03T05:04:00.002-05:00

Guess Julie was enough support to pay? Some of the reader comments were brutal, some were spot on.

7/2/2010 4:05 PM PDT by TMZ Staff
TMZ has learned ... Melissa Etheridge has just filed legal documents with the court to formally end her relationship with Tammy Lynn Michaels.

Etheridge filed a document called a Petition for Dissolution of Domestic Partnership in L.A. County Superior Court.

Etheridge and Michaels were registered as domestic partners in California. They had a commitment ceremony back in 2003. There were reports they tried to legally marry in 2008 -- during the time when same-sex marriages were permitted in CA -- but they missed the window.

In the docs, Etheridge cites "irreconcilable differences."

Etheridge is asking for joint custody of the couple's two children. Their twins were born in 2006, after Tammy was artificially inseminated by an anonymous donor.

Ethridge's lawyer, Judy Bogen, is also asking the judge to reject any possible bid by Tammy to get financial support.

There are reports the couple split back in April.

The BEST Night Evah!

2010-06-22T05:57:00.004-05:00

The Gulf Waters

2010-06-17T07:03:00.000-05:00

Delicate patterns in the sea breaking on Orange Beach, Alabama, more than 90 miles from the BP oil spill, cannot distract from the mess four to six inches deep on parts of the shore Photographer: Dave Martin/AP

Six Feet of Jesus in Flames!

2010-06-15T18:16:00.000-05:00

Flames shoot up from the "King of King's" statue of Jesus Christ standing outside of Solid Rock Church in Monroe, Ohio in the early morning hours of Tuesday, June 15, 2010. The six-story-tall statue of Jesus with his arms raised along a highway was struck by lightning in a thunderstorm Monday night, June 14, 2010 around 11:15 p.m. and burned to the ground, police said. (AP Photo/The Dayton Daily News, Tiffani West-May)

6-story Jesus statue in Ohio struck by lightning
MONROE, Ohio (AP) -- A six-story statue of Jesus Christ was struck by lightning and burned to the ground, leaving only a blackened steel skeleton and pieces of foam that were scooped up by curious onlookers Tuesday.

The "King of Kings" statue, one of southwest Ohio's most familiar landmarks, had stood since 2004 at the evangelical Solid Rock Church along Interstate 75 in Monroe, just north of Cincinnati.

The lightning strike set the statue ablaze around 11:15 p.m. Monday, Monroe police dispatchers said.

The sculpture, about 62 feet tall and 40 feet wide at the base, showed Jesus from the torso up and was nicknamed Touchdown Jesus because of the way the arms were raised, similar to a referee signaling a touchdown. It was made of plastic foam and fiberglass over a steel frame, which is all that remained Tuesday.

The nickname is the same used for a famous mural of the resurrected Jesus that overlooks the Notre Dame football stadium.

The fire spread from the statue to an adjacent amphitheater but was confined to the attic area, and no one was injured, police Chief Mark Neu said.

Estimated damage from the fire was set at $700,000 - $300,000 for the statue and $400,000 for the amphitheater, Fire Capt. Richard Mascarella said Tuesday.

The Ohio State Highway Patrol was at the scene Tuesday to prevent traffic jams and potential accidents from motorists stopping along the highway to take photographs.

The patrol began issuing citations about 4 p.m. Tuesday to motorists for stopping on the side of the highway, dispatcher Adam Brown said. The number of gawkers coupled with construction had slowed I-75 traffic in the area to a crawl, the state Highway Patrol said.

Some people were scooping up pieces of the statue's foam from the nearby pond to take home with them, said church co-pastor Darlene Bishop.

"This meant a lot to a lot of people," she said.

Keith Lewis, of nearby Middletown, arrived at the church around 7 a.m. Tuesday to photograph the remains for his wife. Lewis said he had viewed the statue as both an oddity and an inspiration.

Cassie Browning, a church member from Dayton, said she was driving home when she saw smoke and noticed the statue was missing.

Travelers on I-75 often were startled to come upon the huge statue by the roadside, but many said America needs more symbols like it. So many people stopped at the church campus that church officials had to build a walkway to accommodate them.

Bishop said the statue will be rebuilt.

"It will be back, but this time we are going to try for something fireproof," she said.

The 4,000-member, nondenominational church was founded by Bishop and her husband, former horse trader Lawrence Bishop.

Lawrence Bishop said in 2004 he was trying to help people, not impress them, with the statue. He said his wife proposed the Jesus figure as a beacon of hope and salvation.

© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

World's oldest mother, 70, lies dying with baby at her side after risking her life to beat stigma of being barren

2010-06-15T05:29:00.001-05:00

By Mail Foreign Service

The world's oldest mother is dying just 18 months after giving birth at the age of 70.

Rajo Devi Lohan says she is too weak to recover from complications after her IVF pregnancy.

News about her condition came as it emerged that a 66-year-old has become the oldest woman in the world to have triplets.

Some experts fear Bhateri Devi could suffer the same fate as Mrs Lohan.

Both women received IVF treatment at the same controversial clinic in India after being unable to bear children throughout their married lives, which is regarded as a stigma in their culture.

Mrs Lohan, who gave birth to her daughter Naveen in November 2008, is now confined to bed and so frail she cannot lift the little girl.

But she has no regrets, saying: 'I dreamed about having a child all my life. It does not matter to me that I am ill, because at least I lived long enough to become a mother.

'The doctor never warned me it was dangerous to have a baby at my age. But I was healthy before, and now I am very sick.'

Mrs Lohan, now 72, and her husband Balla, 73, are poverty- stricken farmers from the village of Alewa in Haryana state, north of Delhi.

After nearly 54 years of marriage they were desperate to have a child so took out loans to pay for the £2,000 IVF treatment.

They have no understanding of the risks of giving birth so late in life. Mrs Lohan is now in such pain that her sister Omi, 60, has moved in to help look after Naveen.

'Omi brings Naveen to kiss me and I tell her I love her very much,' she said. 'Her first word was "Ma". I was so happy to hear that.'

Mrs Lohan suffered internal bleeding and her womb ruptured after the caesarean birth, but she ignored doctors' orders to rest in bed and instead squatted down every day to milk the family buffalo.

She also needed difficult surgery to remove an ovarian cyst. Her body has not recovered from the two operations and she has to take daily painkillers.

Mrs Lohan's doctor Anurag Bishnoi denied her illness was linked to her pregnancy.

'Even though Rajo's health is deteriorating, at least she will die in peace,' he said. 'She does not have to face the stigma of being barren.'

'She had an ovarian cyst that was causing her problems but that has now been removed. The IVF treatment is completely safe. Rajo is an old woman and her life expectancy was only about five to seven years.'

He stoked controversy by announcing yesterday that triplets had been born to Bhateri Devi at his National Fertility Centre in Hisar, which is also in Haryana.
After nearly 44 years as a childless wife, she gave birth to two dangerously underweight boys and a girl on May 29. The infants, who weighed 2lb 6oz, 2lb 4oz and 1lb 7oz, are in intensive care.

Dr Bishnoi boasted that Mrs Devi's government birth certificate proved she was born on May 21, 1944, making her 66.

'This is authentic and therefore she has become the oldest mother in the world to give birth to triplets,' he said.

'She has become a mother for the first time and conceived only in our third attempt through IVF.

'For the first two attempts, only two embryos were transferred in each cycle. But in the third attempt three embryos were transferred in her uterus, resulting in the birth of three children by caesarean.'

Mrs Devi's delighted husband Deva Singh, 64, brushed aside potential risks, saying: 'She has fulfilledmy dream of having a child and gave my family an heir.

'She was my first wife and after she failed to conceive a child, I married twice but again I did not have any child from my other wives. I am very happy and I will provide all the best facilities to my children in the coming years.'

But a London-based fertility expert questioned the wisdom of helping such old women to give birth.

'Any woman over 70 putting their body through the rigours of birth is endangering themselves,' he said.

'Older mums usually require caesareans, which is obviously dangerous for women, but especially older women who are also prone to blood clots, and complications, such as internal haemorrhaging.'

Massive Flow Of Bullshit Continues To Gush From BP Headquarters

2010-06-08T13:09:00.000-05:00

LONDON—As the crisis in the Gulf of Mexico entered its eighth week Wednesday, fears continued to grow that the massive flow of bullshit still gushing from the headquarters of oil giant BP could prove catastrophic if nothing is done to contain it.

The toxic bullshit, which began to spew from the mouths of BP executives shortly after the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in April, has completely devastated the Gulf region, delaying cleanup efforts, affecting thousands of jobs, and endangering the lives of all nearby wildlife.

"Everything we can see at the moment suggests that the overall environmental impact of this will be very, very modest," said BP CEO Tony Hayward, letting loose a colossal stream of undiluted bullshit. "The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean, and the volume of oil we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total volume of water."

According to sources, the sheer quantity of bullshit pouring out of Hayward is unprecedented, and it has thoroughly drenched the coastlines of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida, with no end in sight.

Though no one knows exactly how much of the dangerous bullshit is currently gushing from BP headquarters, estimates put the number at somewhere between 25,000 and 70,000 words a day.

"We're looking at a truly staggering load of shit here," said Rebecca Palmer, an environmental scientist at the University of Georgia, who claimed that only BP has the ability to stem the flow of bullshit and plug it at its source. "And this is just the beginning—we're only seeing the surface-level bullshit. It could be years before we sift through it all and figure out just how deep this bullshit goes."

Congressional hearings aimed at stopping the bullshit have thus far failed to do so, with officials from BP and its contractors Halliburton and Transocean only adding to the powerful torrents of bullshit by blaming one another for the accident.

Along with the region's wildlife and fragile ecosystem, countless livelihoods have been jeopardized by BP's unchecked flow of corporate shit. Those who depend on fishing or tourism for their income are already feeling the noxious effects of the bullshit firsthand, as out-of-control platitudes begin to reach land and seep ashore.

"This bullshit, it's everywhere," said Louisiana fisherman Doug LaRoux, who lost his house to a tide of government bullshit following Hurricane Katrina. "It reeks. Big buckets of disgusting shit are oozing everywhere you look and I don't know if it's ever going to stop. I feel helpless"

Added LaRoux, "I never thought I'd be the victim of so much bullshit."

Observers have noted that after the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989, corporate bullshit gushed up like a geyser for two decades and didn't wane until the oil company had bullshit its way through an exhaustive process of court appeals that ultimately reduced payouts to victims by 90 percent.

Despite Hayward's denials that BP is at fault for the environmental disaster and his concern that it will result in "illegitimate" American lawsuits, the embattled CEO has still managed to trickle out a few last drips of bullshit sympathy for Gulf Coast residents.

"I'm as devastated as you are by this," Hayward said after a meeting with cleanup crews on Louisiana's Fourchon Beach. "We will clean every last drop up and we will remediate all of the environmental damage."

"There's no one that wants this thing over with more than I do," he added a week later, just absolutely defying belief with the thickest, most dangerous bullshit yet. "I'd like my life back."

Millions of Americans reported feeling ill and disoriented upon contact with that particularly vile plume of bullshit.

Many environmentalists, including Palmer, have called for a boycott of BP until the bullshit stops or is at least under control, but they emphasize that in the long term, Americans will have to change their habits if they wish to avoid future catastrophes.

"We must all work together if we're going to cure our nation of this addiction," Palmer said. "The sad fact is, the United States has been running on bullshit for decades."

The Onion

Tuesday's intriguing people - My boys :-)

2010-06-08T12:08:00.000-05:00

Daryl Hall and John Oates

The Arizona Diamondbacks announced that the most successful duo in rock history has canceled its concert at Chase Field as a protest against Arizona's legislation to fight illegal immigration. USA Today reports that the performance had been scheduled to follow a game against the Dodgers on July 2.

Hall and Oates issued the following statement: "In addition to our personal convictions, we are standing in solidarity with the music community in our boycott of performing in Arizona at this time. We would like to emphasize that this has nothing to do with the management of the Arizona Diamondbacks, who have been professional and cooperative throughout our dealings with them. This is our response to a very specific action of the state."

USA Today: Hall and Oates cancel concert plans in response to Arizona immigration law

BP Chief: We Weren't Prepared for Gulf Spill

2010-06-03T18:01:00.000-05:00

No shit Sherlock - and you still have an F'ing job??? Come on America - wake up and BOYCOTT BP!

BP fumbled its latest underwater experiment with the wild Gulf gusher -- just like every other endeavor the company has tried to fix the nation's worst oil spill and BP's chief executive said the company wasn't fully prepared for the disaster.

PENSACOLA, Fla. -- BP fumbled its latest underwater experiment with the wild Gulf gusher -- just like every other endeavor the company has tried to fix the nation's worst oil spill and BP's chief executive said the company wasn't fully prepared for the disaster.

First, a 100-ton, four-story box couldn't contain the spill because icelike crystals clogged the top. Then, a straw-like device that actually did capture crude was inconsistent at best. The supposed top kill -- shooting heavy mud and junk into the well -- couldn't overcome the pressure of the oil. And the most recent risky gambit ran into trouble a mile under the sea Wednesday when a diamond-tipped saw became stuck after slicing through about half of the blown-out well.

It took BP 12 hours to free the saw, and the company hopes to use giant shears similar to an oversized garden tool to snip off the pipe. However, the cut won't be as clean if successful, and a looser fitting cap will have to be placed over the spill.

No timetable was given for when that might start, a familiar refrain in this six-week-old disaster.

The Financial Times on Thursday quoted BP CEO Tony Hayward as saying it was "entirely fair" to criticize the company's preparations.

The newspaper quoted Hayward as saying: "What is undoubtedly true is that we did not have the tools you would want in your tool kit."

However, Hayward said BP had been successful so far in keeping most of the oil away from the southeastern U.S. coast.

"Considering how big this has been, very little has got away from us," Hayward was quoted as saying.

So far, each novel attempt to stop more oil from spewing into the Gulf has dragged on and misfired. All along, the company has been drilling a relief well, the best option at stopping the gusher -- but it's still two months away.

Since the biggest oil spill in U.S. history began to unfold April 20 with an explosion that killed 11 workers aboard an offshore drilling rig, crude has fouled some 125 miles of Louisiana coastline and washed up in Alabama and Mississippi. The well has leaked anywhere from 21 million to 45 million gallons by the government's estimate.

The latest attempt to stop it, the so-called cut-and-cap method, is considered risky because slicing away a section of the 20-inch-wide riser could remove kinks in the pipe and temporarily increase the flow of oil by as much as 20 percent.

And the situation on the water's surface becomes more dire with each day.

Oil drifted perilously close to the Florida Panhandle's famous sugar-white beaches, and crews on the mainland were doing everything possible to limit the catastrophe. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the nation's point man for the spill, directed BP to pay for five additional sand barrier projects in Louisiana. Boats were also sent packing east, along with four helicopters to help skimmers spot oil threatening Alabama, Mississippi and the Florida coast.

As the edge of the slick drifted within seven miles of Pensacola's beaches, emergency workers rushed to link the last in a miles-long chain of booms designed to fend off the oil. They were slowed by thunderstorms and wind before the weather cleared in the afternoon.

Forecasters said the oil would probably wash up by Friday, threatening a delicate network of islands, bays and white-sand beaches that are a haven for wildlife and a major tourist destination dubbed the Redneck Riviera.

"We are doing what we can do, but we cannot change what has happened," said John Dosh, emergency director for Escambia County, which includes Pensacola.

The effect on wildlife has grown, too.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reported 522 dead birds -- at least 38 of them oiled -- along the Gulf coast states, and more than 80 oiled birds have been rescued. It's not clear exactly how many of the deaths can be attributed to the spill.

Dead birds and animals found during spills are kept as evidence in locked freezers until investigations and damage assessments are complete, according to Teri Frady, a spokeswoman for the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration.

"This includes strict chain-of-custody procedures and long-term locked storage until the investigative and damage assessment phases of the spill are complete," she wrote in an e-mail.

As the oil drifted closer to Florida, beachgoers in Pensacola waded into the gentle waves, cast fishing lines and sunbathed, even as a two-man crew took water samples. One of the men said they were hired by BP to collect samples to be analyzed for tar and other pollutants.

A few feet away, Martha Feinstein, 65, of Milton, Fla., pondered the fate of the beach she has been visiting for years. "You sit on the edge of your seat and you wonder where it's going," she said. "It's the saddest thing."

Officials said the slick sighted offshore consisted in part of "tar mats" about 500 feet by 2,000 feet in size.

County officials set up the booms to block oil from reaching inland waterways but planned to leave beaches unprotected because they are too difficult to defend against the action of the waves and because they are easier to clean up.

"It's inevitable that we will see it on the beaches," said Keith Wilkins, deputy chief of neighborhood and community services for Escambia County.

Florida's beaches play a crucial role in the state's tourism industry. At least 60 percent of vacation spending in the state during 2008 was in beachfront cities. Worried that reports of oil would scare tourists away, state officials are promoting interactive Web maps and Twitter feeds to show travelers -- particularly those from overseas -- how large the state is and how distant their destinations may be from the spill.
Source

Tropical Storm Agatha blows a hole in Guatemala City

2010-06-01T17:30:00.001-05:00

Hundreds dead as torrential rain sweeps Central America. Sinkhole in Guatemala swallows three-storey building.

Tropical Storm Agatha swept across Central America yesterday, bringing torrential rain that killed more than 100 people and opened a 60m-deep sinkhole in Guatemala City which reportedly swallowed up a three-storey building.

The first named storm of the 2010 Pacific season dumped more than a metre of rain in parts of Guatemala, also hitting El Salvador and Honduras. At least 113 people were reported killed, with around 50 missing in Guatemala alone as rescue workers searched through the rubble.

The 30m-diameter sinkhole opened up in a northern district of Guatemala City, with residents blaming the rains and substandard drainage systems. Local reports said one man was killed when the building was swallowed. In 2007, three people died when a similar sinkhole appeared in the same area.

Guatemala was the worst affected country, with a confirmed death toll of 92, although that is likely to rise when rescuers reach remote villages. Almost 100,000 people have been evacuated from their homes. Nine people were confirmed killed in El Salvador and 12 in Honduras.

"I've got no one to help me. I watched the water take everything," Carlota Ramos told Reuters outside her mud-swamped brick house in Amatitlán, a town near the Guatemalan capital.

Feds have launched criminal oil spill investigation, AG says

2010-06-01T17:24:00.000-05:00

(CNN) -- U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday the Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation into the massive oil spill spreading through the Gulf of Mexico.

Holder said the investigation, which began "some weeks ago," would be comprehensive and aggressive. He promised that the federal officials will prosecute anyone who broke the law.

"We have begun both a criminal as well as a civil investigation as is our obligation under the law," Holder said. "We have what we think is a sufficient case to have begun a criminal investigation."

Holder emphasized that the investigation will cover all aspects of the oil spill, including the deaths of 11 workers in the April 20 explosion and fire on the Deepwater Horizon rig that started the leak.

He refused to name any potential targets of the investigation, saying, "I don't want to unnecessarily cast aspersions." However, Holder said "nothing is off the table" in the probe, and he cited false statements as one of several potential targets of criminal charges.

"This disaster is nothing less than a tragedy," Holder said. "As our review expands in the days ahead, we will be meticulous, we will be comprehensive, and we will be aggressive. We will not rest until justice is done."

Holder stressed that "anyone found responsible for this spill (must be) held accountable. That means enforcing the appropriate civil -- and if warranted, criminal -- authorities to the full extent of the law."

Among other things, Holder said Justice Department lawyers are examining possible violations of the Clean Water Act and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. He also said prosecutors are looking into potential violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty and Endangered Species Acts, which provide penalties for injury and death to wildlife.

BP responded in a statement that it "will cooperate with any inquiry the Department of Justice will undertake, just as we are doing in response to the other inquires that are already ongoing."

Holder made the announcement during a visit to the Gulf to survey the BP oil spill and meet with state attorneys general and federal prosecutors from Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi, according to the Justice Department.

Last month, a group of senators -- including Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-California -- sent Holder a letter expressing concerns "about the truthfulness and accuracy of statements submitted by BP to the government in its initial exploration plan for the site." They asked the attorney general to investigate possible criminal and civil wrongdoing.

In a reply to that letter last week, a Justice Department official refused to say whether a criminal investigation had begun.

"The Department of Justice will take all necessary and appropriate steps to ensure that those responsible for this tragic series of events are held fully accountable," Assistant Attorney General Ronald Welch wrote.

Holder said last month the Justice Department would "ensure that BP is held liable."

Boxer issued a statement Monday praising the criminal probe.

"In preparation for the Environment Committee's hearings on the oil spill, it became clear that BP's assurances that they could respond effectively to a serious spill at this site were totally at odds with reality," Boxer said in the statement. "What is happening in the Gulf -- eleven people dead, and an entire ecosystem and the jobs that depend on it at risk -- justifies a thorough criminal investigation."

CNN's Scott Bronstein and Aaron Cooper contributed to this report

Underwater Oil Plumes Disputed By BP CEO Tony Hayward

2010-05-31T06:52:00.003-05:00

Hey @sshole- did you miss the video? Pay Attention!

MATTHEW BROWN | 05/30/10 08:55 PM |
VENICE, La. — Disputing scientists' claims of large oil plumes suspended underwater in the Gulf of Mexico, BP PLC's chief executive on Sunday said the company has largely narrowed the focus of its cleanup to surface slicks rolling into Louisiana's coastal marshes.

During a tour of a BP PLC staging area for cleanup workers, CEO Tony Hayward said the company's sampling showed "no evidence" that oil was suspended in large masses beneath the surface. He didn't elaborate on how the testing was done.

Hayward said that oil's natural tendency is to rise to the surface, and any oil found underwater was in the process of working its way up.

"The oil is on the surface," Hayward said. "There aren't any plumes."

Scientists from several universities have reported plumes of what appears to be oil far from the site of BP's leaking wellhead, which is more than 5,000 beneath the surface.

Those findings – from the University of South Florida, the University of Georgia, Southern Mississippi University and other institutions – were based on video images and initial observations of water samples taken in the Gulf over the last several weeks. They continue to be analyzed.

One researcher said Sunday that their findings are bolstered by the fact that scientists from different institutions have come to similar conclusions after doing separate testing.

"There's been enough evidence from enough different sources," said marine scientist James Cowan of Louisiana State University, who reported finding a plume last of oil last week about 50 miles from the spill site. Cowan said oil reached to depths of at least 400 feet.

An even larger plume – 22 miles long, six miles wide and more than a thousand feet deep – was reported by the University of South Florida.

"We stand behind it," said William Hogarth, dean of the school's College of Marine Science. Hogarth, the former head of the National Marine Fisheries Service, said laboratory results are due this week.

A third scientist, LSU chemist Ed Overton, said simple physics sides with BP's Hayward. Since oil is lighter than water, Overton said it is unlikely to stay below the surface for long.

But Hogarth and Cowan said BP's use of chemical dispersants to break up the oil before it reaches the surface could reduce its buoyancy, keeping it in deeper water.

An estimated 18 to 40 million gallons of oil have been unleashed since BP's Deepwater Horizon platform exploded and sank last month, killing 11. With the undersea leak now expected to continue spewing oil until August, Hayward said the cleanup effort could last for months or even years.

The embattled CEO spent only a few minutes on the subject of plumes on Sunday, concentrating instead on outlining his company's cleanup efforts.

"The fight on this battlefield today is in Louisiana," he said.

Calls to BP seeking more information on how they tested for the underwater plumes weren't immediately returned.

"I would like my life back," Hayward told reporters

2010-05-31T06:34:00.002-05:00

OMG! This guy is a f*cking moron. Seriously, when is he getting fired!

On heels of failure, BP vows to start again -- soon
By the CNN Wire Staff
STORY HIGHLIGHTS

New attempt to stop gushing oil could start early this week
Method involves cutting lower marine riser package and lowering cap
BP's CEO apologizes for "disruption," says BP is boosting effort to contain oil

Spill is in its 42nd day

(CNN) -- BP could try to cap a massive oil gusher again early this week in an attempt to solve what the Obama administration has called "probably the biggest environmental disaster we've ever faced in this country."

As the oil spill entered its 42nd day Monday, efforts to clean up coastal areas and develop a new plan of attack continued.

All previous attempts at containing the crude gushing from BP's undersea well have failed, including a "top kill" approach that many had pinned their hopes on.

BP said Sunday that it would strengthen its efforts to stop the flow and protect the coastline.

"As far as I'm concerned, a cup of oil on the beach is a failure," BP CEO Tony Hayward told reporters in Venice, Louisiana.

Hayward said he was sorry for the spill and the "massive disruption" it has caused the Gulf Coast.

"There's no one who wants this over more than I do. I would like my life back," Hayward told reporters. But he said the company has about 30 aircraft searching for signs of oil and has moved more than 300 people to offshore "floatels" to speed up its response time.

Up to 19,000 barrels (798,000 gallons) of oil a day have been spewing out of a BP-owned undersea well since the late April sinking of the drill rig Deepwater Horizon. BP, rig owner Transocean Ltd. and oilfield services company Halliburton have blamed each other for the disaster, which left 11 workers dead, but BP is responsible for cleanup under federal law.

"We're disappointed the oil is going to flow for a while, and we're going to redouble our efforts to keep it off the beaches," BP Managing Director Robert Dudley said on CNN's "State of the Union."

The most recent setback was the failure of the so-called "top kill" method of pumping mud to plug the leak.

Dudley said the next effort will involve placing a custom-built cap to fit over a piece of equipment called the "lower marine riser package." The process will involve cutting the riser package to create a clean surface to cap, Dudley said, and warm water will be circulated around the cap to prevent the freezing that hindered a previous dome-cap effort.

If successful, the procedure will allow BP to collect most -- but not all -- of the oil spewing from the well. The long-term solution is the drilling of a relief well that will be in place by August.

"If we can contain the flow of the well between now and August and keep it out of the ocean, that's also a good outcome as well," Dudley said. "And then, if we can shut it off completely with a relief well, that's not a bad outcome compared to where we are today."

On Sunday, the Obama Administration questioned BP's oil spill numbers.

On NBC's "Meet the Press," Carol Browner, Obama's assistant on energy and climate change, said BP may have had an ulterior motive for underestimating the amount of oil leaking.

"BP has a financial interest in these numbers. They will pay a penalty based on the number of barrels per day," she said.

BP had originally said about 5,000 barrels of oil per day were leaking.
The latest estimate, Browner said, is between 12,000 and 19,000 barrels per day.

"This is probably the biggest environmental disaster we've ever faced in this country," she said.

More oil is leaking into the Gulf of Mexico than any other spill in U.S. history, including the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska, according to the government.

Many systems are in place to manage and decrease the amount of oil coming on shore, Browner said.

Controlled burns of oil have been effective so far, she said, though they have been limited due to weather conditions.
As a consequence of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, all deepwater operations in the gulf have been shut down for now, including operating wells, Browner said.

"At the end of the day we will make the right decisions ensuring that our environment is protected," she said.

Crystal Bowersox - You Rock!

2010-05-27T04:57:00.000-05:00

Number 2 always does better than the winner. As I watched previous AI winners walk across the stage last night, it's apparent (only two did well) and the rest are like..."What happened to you?" - with that being said, Crystal desevered to win, but will be much better off without the title.

I thought she just nailed this song!

Report: BP had 3 indications of trouble in hour before blast

2010-05-25T18:55:00.001-05:00

May 25th, 2010
07:35 PM ET
CNN

BP had three indications of trouble aboard the doomed drill rig Deepwater Horizon in the hour before the April 20 explosion that sank the offshore platform, congressional investigators reported Tuesday.

Witnesses reported the well was spurting liquid and pressure tests indicated "a very large abnormality" was occurring aboard the rig, according to a memo released by the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Tuesday afternoon.

The memo summarizes preliminary findings of BP's own investigation into the disaster, which left 11 workers dead and uncapped an undersea gusher that has spewed crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico for a month.

The well unexpectedly spouted fluid three times in the 51 minutes before the explosion and pressure on the drill pipe "unexpectedly increased" before the blast, the memo states. In addition, BP's investigation "raised concerns about the maintenance history, modification, inspection, and testing" of blowout preventer, a critical piece of equipment that has failed to shut down the well.

Palin Accuses Obama of Being in Bed with Big Oil -- DOH!

2010-05-23T19:00:00.000-05:00

Can you really be this stupid and have a political career? Nevermind - Shrub's presidency hit me as I wrote that. Anyway, here's the rest.

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Right-wing darling Sarah Palin accused US President Barack Obama on Sunday of leading a lax response to the Gulf of Mexico spill because he is too close to the big oil companies.

The former vice presidential candidate and Alaska governor, who champions off-shore drilling, criticized the media for not drawing the link between Obama and big oil and said if this spill had happened under former Republican president George W. Bush the scrutiny would have been far tougher.

"I don't know why the question isn't asked by the mainstream media and by others if there's any connection with the contributions made to president Obama and his administration and the support by the oil companies to the administration," she told Fox News Sunday.

More than 3.5 million dollars has been given to candidates by BP over the last 20 years, with the largest single donation, 77,051 dollars, going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Palin suggested this close relationship explained why Obama was, "taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in there, and grasp the complexity and the potential tragedy that we are seeing here in the Gulf of Mexico."

The BP-leased Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on April 20, killing 11 workers, and sank two days later. Ever since, hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil, perhaps millions, have been spewing each day into the sea.

The resulting slick, now the size of a small country, threatens to leave Louisiana's fishing and coastal tourism industries in tatters, ruin pristine nature reserves, and cause decades of harm to the ecology of fragile marshes that are a haven for rare wildlife and migratory birds.

The Obama administration has been forced to defend its response to the disaster as some Republicans have sought to portray it as their Katrina, an allusion to president Bush's mishandling of the response to the 2005 hurricane that devastated Louisiana.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs mocked Palin's suggestions that Obama was somehow in bed with big oil because of 2008 presidential campaign contributions.

"Sarah Palin was involved in that election, but I don't think, apparently, was paying a whole lot of attention," Gibbs said.

"I'm almost sure that the oil companies don't consider the Obama administration a huge ally. We proposed a windfall profits tax when they jacked their oil prices up to charge for gasoline.

"My suggestion to Sarah Palin would be to get slightly more informed as to what's going on in and around oil drilling in this country."

However, Gibbs did make it clear that reforms must be carried out to make sure that the incestuous relationship between oil firms and government regulators highlighted by the current disaster ended once and for all.

"BP will pay for every bit of this," he said. "We have to figure out and make sure that the relationship that is had with government and oil companies is not a cozy relationship as the president said.

Gibbs also said there was no comparison with Katrina.

"If you look back at what happened in Katrina, the government wasn't there to respond to what was happening. That quite frankly was the problem.

"I think the difference in this case is we were there immediately. We have been there ever since."

Palin, who quit the Alaska governorship after serving less than half of one term, famously promoted the slogan "Drill, baby, drill!" that rallied supporters while dismissing possible environmental impact of off-shore drilling.

Her detractors switched the line to "Spill, baby, spill!"

by Andrew Gully Andrew Gully

Sun May 23, 4:47 pm ET

Week of May 22nd - Oil Damage Thus Far

2010-05-23T07:58:00.003-05:00

Slideshow Creator Progreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny

2010-05-22T06:29:00.002-05:00

What an ASSHOLE! How does this bozo still have a job?

BP boss admits job on the line over Gulf oil spill
• Under pressure BP boss promises to fix earlier 'bumpy' errors
• 'I will be judged by the response,' says Tony Hayward

Tony Hayward, the beleaguered chief executive of BP, has claimed its oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is "relatively tiny" compared with the "very big ocean".

In an bullish interview with the Guardian at BP's crisis centre in Houston, Hayward insisted that the leaked oil and the estimated 400,000 gallons of dispersant that BP has pumped into the sea to try to tackle the slick should be put in context.

"The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume," he said.

US authorities estimate that about 5,000 barrels of oil a day are leaking from the damaged pipeline lying on the seabed after attempts to stem the flow failed.

The spill began just over three weeks ago when a buildup of gas erupted from a well being drilled by BP in seabed about 1,500 metres (5,000 ft) below sea level. When the gas ignited at the surface, the explosion sunk the rig, the Deepwater Horizon, and 11 workers were killed.

Hayward promised that BP would "fix" the disaster, which is on course to eclipse the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill as the biggest US oil spill in history. "We will fix it. I guarantee it. The only question is we do not know when."

But the BP boss admitted for the first time that his job was on the line because of the Gulf of Mexico disaster. Asked if he felt his job was already under threat, he replied: "I don't at the moment. That of course may change. I will be judged by the nature of the response."

Hayward stressed that BP's efforts to contain the spill had succeeded in dispersing the oil and preventing large amounts reaching the shoreline around the Gulf.

But environmentalists are concerned about the unseen damage being done to marine life by the oil, which is sinking to the seabed.

Hayward said that BP was "increasingly confident" that progress was being made in trying to find ways to seal the faulty blow-out preventer, which failed to shut down the well and stem the flow of oil.

This week, US politicians attacked BP and the other companies involved in the drilling when they gave evidence at Senate hearings into the disaster.

But Hayward insisted that deep-water drilling would continue in the US despite the growing environmental and political backlash against the company.

"Apollo 13 [the unsuccessful third mission to the moon in 1970] did not stop the space race," he said. "Neither did the Air France plane last year coming out of Brazil [which mysteriously crashed] stop the world airline industry flying people around the world. It's the same for the oil industry."

He pointed out that the Gulf of Mexico, much of it in deep waters, represented one-third of the US's oil and gas production.

He insisted that BP was in far better shape to respond to the disaster than it was five years ago under his predecessor, Lord Browne. In 2005, 15 workers died in an explosion at BP's Texas refinery.

BP was then fined a record £53m by the US authorities, who also criticised the company's safety culture. BP also suffered a pipeline leak in Alaska in 2006.

"In the last four or five years we have made major improvements in safety performance. It has made the company much better … Four years ago it could have been very different," Hayward said.

BP's share price has slumped since the disaster. BP told the City yesterday it had now spent $450m (£304m) fighting the oil leak, but some analysts put BP's total bill for the clean-up and damages at $23bn. President Barack Obama has now proposed scrapping a cap on BP's liability for the spill.

Transocean, the world's largest offshore drilling contractor which owned the Deepwater Horizon, filed papers in a Houston court on Thursday seeking to limit its legal liability to $27m.

Hayward said it was "unwise" to speculate about the direct causes of the accident before investigations had been completed. "There is a lot of speculation, red herrings and hearsay." He also admitted that BP had made mistakes in its early response to the crisis. It initially refused to compensate fishermen who were unable to produce written proof of their normal earnings. Most keep no such records.

He also said BP had made a mistake when fishermen signing up to help with the relief effort were required to sign agreements limiting their receipt of any future damages from BP.

"It was a bit bumpy to get it going. We made a few little mistakes early on."

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010

Executives Deflect Blame for Spill at Senate Hearings

2010-05-16T06:26:00.004-05:00

Lawrence Taylor -- I Pleasured Myself, Not Her

2010-05-12T17:32:00.001-05:00

DOH!

Lawrence Taylor -- I Pleasured Myself, Not Her
Sources directly connected with Lawre nce Taylor tell TMZ the NFL legend's defense to rape is masturbation.We're told Lawrence will not deny he was in the same room as the 16-year-old prostitute, but his lawyer will argue Lawrence did not have sexual intercourse -- an element of third degree rape.As one source put it, Lawrence engaged in a "masturbatory act" and that was it.According to New York law, "A person is guilty of rape in the third degree when ... he or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person less than seventeen years old."Interestingly ... in the criminal complaint against the alleged pimp, authorities allege Taylor engaged in "sex acts" but there is not mention of sexual intercourse -- a requirement for 3rd degree rape.As TMZ first reported, a condom was found in Taylor's hotel room, but sources say Taylor's lawyers will argue the condom wasn't his and he didn't use it.Taylor's lawyer, Arthur Aidala, has said flatly, his client did not have sex with the girl.Read more: http://www.tmz.com/#ixzz0nkzxVoWX

2010-05-12T16:51:00.002-05:00

BP releases terrifying photo of oil leak

You can see why BP hasn't got this image of the Deepwater Horizon disaster at the top of its homepage.

From the Houston Chronicle:

BP spokesman Mark Proegler said today that the 5-foot tall containment dome, or top hat, meant to contain the flow of this leak is now sitting on the sea floor as crews continue working on connecting it with a pipe to a surface tanker above.

"It should be in operation by the end of the week," Proegler said.

Spill baby, spill

2010-05-12T16:13:00.002-05:00

So this story continues to piss me off daily.

BP knew of problems hours before blast

By Steve Hargreaves, Senior writerMay 12, 2010: 2:35 PM ET

(CNNMoney.com) -- BP knew of problems with an offshore well hours before it exploded last month, spilling millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, a House committee chairman said Wednesday.

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said the oil company told the Energy and Commerce subcommittee on oversight privately that the well failed a key pressure test just hours before it exploded on April 20.

The test indicated pressure was building up in the well, which could indicate oil or gas was seeping in and could lead to an explosion, said Waxman.

"Yet it appears the companies did not suspend operations, and now 11 workers are dead and the Gulf faces an environmental catastrophe," he said, asking why work wasn't stopped on the well.

Witnesses before the panel, which included executives from the three primary companies working on the well - BP, Transocean, and Halliburton - said the course of events and actions leading up to the explosion is still under investigation, and will come to light over time.

BP's deepwater oil well, 40 miles off the coast of Louisiana, is now leaking some 200,000 gallons of crude a day following theexplosion that claimed 11 lives.

Lawmakers also wanted to know a valve sitting atop the well, known as a blowout preventer, known as a BOP, failed to close and avert the disaster.

"It is far too early to draw conclusions about how the incident occurred," said Jack Moore, president and CEO of Cameron International (CAM, Fortune 500), the company that built the device. "Our BOPs have a very long history of reliable performance, including performance in some of the harshest operating conditions in the world."

Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., said the blowout preventer may have failed for four reasons: Modifications to it may have reduced the number of shears that can close the well; a hydraulic leak may have knocked it out of commission; it may have hit a section of pipe that was too thick to cut; and its battery power may have died.

The executives said the blowout preventer is not designed to handle all situations, especially when it becomes clogged with debris from an actual explosion.

"I would think that your blowout preventer should be designed to handle that," said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas.

Lawmakers also criticized proposed efforts to seal the well by injecting rubber debris down the top, including old golf balls and bits of tires.

"The American people expect a response on par with the Apollo Project, not Project Runway," said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass.

Senate hearings

On Tuesday, hearings in the Senate focused on similar themes: what caused the well to explode, and why the blowout preventer did not work.

Three executives from the three principal companies working on the well all blamed each other.

BP (BP), which owns the well and subcontracted the other companies to work on it, said it was Transocean's job to ensure that the blowout preventer was functioning. Transocean was the owner of the drilling rig that sunk, the Deepwater Horizon, and also owned the blowout preventer.

Transocean (RIG) said the blowout preventer worked just fine in tests, and that it may have gotten jammed with concrete or other well fluids that were injected by a third contractor, causing the well to explode. Either way, argued Transocean's president, it was the faulty well, not the rig or the blowout preventer, that ultimately caused the leak.

Halliburton (HAL, Fortune 500) was the third contractor; it injected cement and other well fluids into the hole before the explosion. But a Halliburton exec said it was only following the orders of BP, which wanted a heavier fluid, known as mud, removed from the well before the well was capped with a concrete plug.

The risks and rewards of offshore drilling

Some senators, citing a Wall Street Journal report, said this process of removing the heavy fluid before the concrete plug is installed is unusual in deep water drilling, and suggested it may have caused the accident by allowing the highly pressurized oil and gas to escape. But Halliburton's executive said the process was not out of the ordinary.

The Minerals Management Service, the federal agency that regulates offshore drilling, has also come under fire in the wake of the spill.

On Tuesday, senators wanted to know why there weren't other back-up systems in place to stop a leak besides the blowout preventer, and questioned why the blowout preventer may not have been able to cut through thicker sections of pipe to pinch it shut and stop a leak. Lawmakers also questioned the agency's relationship with the oil industry, which some have described as cozy.

The Obama administration announced plans Tuesday to split the agency in two, thus removing an apparent conflict of interest between the drive to maximize oil production and efforts to ensure safety, which could slow drilling down.

Under federal law, BP, as the lead project operator, is responsible for all clean-up costs associated with the spill.

While the subcontractors are thought to have some legal indemnification from BP and the federal government, lawyers say they could still be open to lawsuits from fisherman and others affected by the spill.

Ultimately, experts have said the total cost of the spill could range from $2 billion to $14 billion or higher, depending on when the leaking well is closed and where the oil washes ashore.

Senator Is the Centerfold

2010-01-20T07:56:00.003-05:00

He's now holding the "people's seat" in MA. Poor Teddy, I imagine he's rolling over in his grave.

Senator Is the Centerfold

Long before he was a politician, the Republican candidate vying for Ted Kennedy’s U.S. Senate seat posed nude for the centerfold of Cosmo. Scott Brown won our “America’s Sexiest Man” contest and appeared in the June 1982 issue. In those days he was a 22-year-old law student at Boston College who was cramming for finals just days before stripping down for our photographer.

“Here at Cosmo we’ve had bachelors go on to be actors, models, and reality show stars, so we’re thrilled that one has gone on to become a politician,” says Kate White, Cosmo’s editor in chief. Obviously we know how to pick ’em. This particular bachelor has always had political ambitions and even admitted to being “a bit of a patriot” when we interviewed him.

Compared to some men in the GOP, this politician looks pretty damn good for his age. We bet he still has an amazing body underneath his suit and tie. There have been plenty of pics of our president running around without his shirt, so now that a precedent has been set, we’re hoping to see Scott shirtless again.

How to um....lose your pension

2010-01-07T07:23:00.002-05:00

Man pleads no contest for masturbating in Kohl's store
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 3:18 AM

A former Grove City police sergeant will be sentenced March 9 after he pleaded no contest to a public-indecency charge yesterday.

A security officer at the Kohl's store on Morse Road confronted Steven J. Howard on July 2 after someone complained he was masturbating in the store.

Howard, 54, of Zuber Road in Jackson Township, resigned from the police department before he could be investigated. He was a 26-year veteran whose last assignment involved the supervision of a crime-prevention bureau and school resource officers.

Howard declined to comment through his attorney, Mark C. Collins.

By pleading no contest to the misdemeanor charge, he was found guilty without admitting guilt. He could be sentenced to 60 days in jail and fined $500 by Franklin County Municipal Judge James E. Green.

-- Bruce Cadwallader

bcadwallader@dispatch.com

Nuff Said

2010-01-02T08:28:00.002-05:00

2010 starts off with a Rose Bowl with for the Buckeyes!

2010-01-02T07:35:00.002-05:00

A game to remember
Terrelle Pryor, Buckeyes make a statement
Saturday, January 2, 2010 3:13 AM
By Rob Oller

The Columbus Dispatch

PASADENA, Calif. -- Ben Bodie's long solo trip -- 35 hours from Ohio to his seat in the Rose Bowl -- in many ways mirrored the difficult journey traveled by the Dublin resident's favorite team the past three seasons.

Like Bodie, who ran into heavy snow during his 2 1/2 -day drive, the Ohio State Buckeyes faced tough sledding in their past three Bowl Championship Series games, losing all three to collect the unwanted label of "Can't win the big one."

Well, they don't get much bigger than the Rose Bowl, and No. 8-ranked OSU shook the monkey off its back with a 26-17 win against No. 7 Oregon as a crowd of 93,963 witnessed the Granddaddy of all bowl games.

No less inspiring than a golden sunset that turned the surrounding San Gabriel Mountains into a rose-colored postcard, the Buckeyes painted their own pretty picture on the passing of sophomore quarterback Terrelle Pryor and the strength of a defense that handcuffed a high-flying Ducks offense. The result was the offensive player-of-the-game award for Pryor and the Buckeyes' first bowl victory since the 2006 Fiesta Bowl against Notre Dame.

"To win the Rose Bowl is unbelievable," said Ohio State coach Jim Tressel, who improved to 5-4 in bowl games and 4-3 in BCS games.

To win it the way the Buckeyes did -- throwing the ball a season-high 37 times -- was equally unbelievable, considering that Ohio State (11-2) had won its last five games by pounding the ball on the ground.

"This game felt like we needed to come in flinging it around, and (we) felt as long as we were doing it well we had a chance to keep doing it," Tressel said. "I thought T.P. made good decisions."

Pryor showed composure in orchestrating the Buckeyes' last two scoring drives. His 36-yard pass to receiver DeVier Posey set up Ohio State's go-ahead field goal in the third quarter, and he led a 13-play drive in the fourth quarter that covered 81 yards and ended with a 17-yard touchdown pass to Posey with 7:02 to play.

Oregon (10-3) made one last push to close the gap but missed a 44-yard field goal with 5:10 left. The Buckeyes then ran out the clock to win their first Rose Bowl since 1997.

"I'm just so glad to be a part of this team, to come out and win for these seniors," said Pryor, who completed 23 passes -- more than he attempted in his previous three games.

Most of those 19 seniors had not experienced a bowl win, so beating Oregon was the end of a long voyage.

Tressel praised those upperclassmen, then gave a shout out to the 50,000 or so OSU fans who turned the Rose Bowl into the Scarlet Bowl.

"Our fans showed up all the way from home," he said.

Bodie was among them. The 31-year-old paid $145 for his ticket and had hoped to make the trip with friends. But they sold their tickets, leaving him to drive the nearly 2,000 miles alone.

No big deal.

"I love Ohio State football," he said. "We have a great legacy."

That legacy just added another sterling chapter.

roller@dispatch.com

MJ's Explosive Pepsi Shoot Video -- 25 Years Later

2009-07-15T18:54:00.000-05:00

Video from the 1984 Pepsi shoot where Michael Jackson's hair caught fire ... finally released.

The video, obtained by US Magazine, shows exactly what went down when a pyrotechnic mishap ended in Michael's scalp being scorched.

After the accident, Jackson became addicted to painkillers.

R.I.P. Michael

2009-06-26T04:56:00.004-05:00

When I was growing you up you either liked the Jacksons or the Osmonds. I still hear the old Jackson 5 songs, and to me they literally can pull me back in time. Clearly, this is a sad loss for the music world.

Things President's Don't Say.....Until Now

2009-06-05T05:04:00.001-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Dick Cheney Cover Your Ass Tour

2009-06-04T06:08:00.003-05:00

Oh really.... no connection? Blame Tenet? I can't wait for a senate investigation.

Dick Cheney is still making the rounds and last night he was on FOX with Greta only he was accompanied by his outspoken daughter Liz. I wonder if he's been feeding her classified data since she is an expert now on all things secret within the intelligence community? In this short video mash-up, I have video of Cheney repeatedly pushing the notion that Saddam and al-Qaeda were linked up and Iraq had a hand in the 9/11 attacks when he was a frequent guest on Meet The Press during the push for war. It's followed up by his Greta bit where he now says that there was no connection between Saddam---al-Qaeda and 9/11. he also pushed that Saddam had WMD's lest we forget that too.I know he feels that Americans are too stupid to remember his act, but some of us aren't. He's also now blaming ex-CIA leader George Tenet for the mistake.

Raw Story:
On the question of whether or not Iraq was involved in 9-11, there was never any evidence to prove that,” he told the Fox host. “There was “some reporting early on … but that was never borne out… [Former CIA Director] George [Tenet] … did say and did testify that there was an ongoing relationship between al-Qaeda and Iraq, but no proof that Iraq was involved in 9-11.”
Cheney didn't need proof to whip up the American people that has cost the lives of thousands of innocent Iraqis and American troops. In the new Dick Armey book, Armey says that Cheney lied to him about Saddam and al-Qaeda.

The threat Cheney described went far beyond public statements that have been criticized for relying on "cherry-picked" intelligence of unknown reliability. There was no intelligence to support the vice president's private assertions, Gellman reports, and they "crossed so far beyond the known universe of fact that they were simply without foundation.""Did Dick Cheney . . . purposely tell me things he knew to be untrue?" Armey said. "I seriously feel that may be the case. . . . Had I known or believed then what I believe now, I would have publicly opposed [the war] resolution right to the bitter end, and I believe I might have stopped it from happening."

Then of course there was this 2003 Washington Post article that says Cheney was constantly pressuring the CIA to link al-Qaeda to Saddam:
Vice President Cheney and his most senior aide made multiple trips to the CIA over the past year to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which some analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives, according to senior intelligence officials.

With Cheney taking the lead in the administration last August in advocating military action against Iraq by claiming it had weapons of mass destruction, the visits by the vice president and his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, "sent signals, intended or otherwise, that a certain output was desired from here," one senior agency official said yesterday.
He's always been a liar and nothing he says now should be clear him of that. IN 2002 he said that Saddam had WMD's in an effort to scare the American people into supporting the invasion of Iraq.

In a speech to the Nashville convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vice President Dick Cheney says Saddam Hussein will “seek domination of the entire Middle East, take control of a great portion of the world’s energy supplies, directly threaten America’s friends throughout the region, and subject the United States or any other nation to nuclear blackmail.” He also states unequivocally that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.

“Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.… What he wants is time, and more time to husband his resources to invest in his ongoing chemical and biological weapons program, and to gain possession of nuclear weapons.… Deliverable weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a terror network, or a murderous dictator, or the two working together constitutes as grave a threat as can be imagined,” he says.
“The risks of inaction are far greater than the risk of action.… The Iraqi regime has in fact been very busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and biological agents, and they continue to pursue the nuclear program they began so many years ago.”

I guess that's Tenet's fault too along with the aluminum tubes story and I gather that Tenet waterboarded him into making those claims on TV.

Tags: Dick Armey, Dick Cheney, George Tenet, Greta Van Susteren, Iraq, Meet the Press, Saddam Hussein, Washington Post

The East Coast is Going Gay!

2009-06-03T19:03:00.003-05:00

I have a feeling the religious right is freaking out right now. Ner, Ner.

Gay marriage bill signed into law in New Hampshire
By NORMA LOVE, Associated Press Writer Norma Love, Associated Press Writer

CONCORD, N.H. – New Hampshire became the sixth state to legalize gay marriage after the Senate and House passed key language on religious rights and Gov. John Lynch — who personally opposes gay marriage — signed the legislation Wednesday afternoon.

After rallies outside the Statehouse by both sides in the morning, the last of three bills in the package went to the Senate, which approved it 14-10 Wednesday afternoon.

Cheers from the gallery greeted the key vote in the House, which passed it 198-176. Surrounded by gay marriage supporters, Lynch signed the bill about an hour later.

"Today, we are standing up for the liberties of same-sex couples by making clear that they will receive the same rights, responsibilities — and respect — under New Hampshire law," Lynch said.

Lynch, a Democrat, had promised a veto if the law didn't clearly spell out that churches and religious groups would not be forced to officiate at gay marriages or provide other services. Legislators made the changes.

Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont and Iowa already allow gay marriage, though opponents hope to overturn Maine's law with a public vote.

California briefly allowed gay marriage before a public vote banned it; a court ruling grandfathered in couples who were already married.

The New Hampshire law will take effect Jan. 1, exactly two years after the state began recognizing civil unions.

The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, elected in New Hampshire in 2003 as the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church, was among those celebrating the new law.

"It's about being recognized as whole people and whole citizens," Robinson said.

"There are a lot of people standing here who when we grew up could not have imagined this," he said. "You can't imagine something that is simply impossible. It's happened, in our lifetimes."

Opponents, mainly Republicans, objected on grounds including the fragmented process.

"It is no surprise that the Legislature finally passed the last piece to the gay marriage bill today. After all, when you take 12 votes on five iterations of the same issue, you're bound to get it passed sooner or later," said Kevin Smith, executive director of gay marriage opponent Cornerstone Policy Research.

The revised bill added a sentence specifying that all religious organizations, associations or societies have exclusive control over their religious doctrines, policies, teachings and beliefs on marriage.

It also clarified that church-related organizations that serve charitable or educational purposes are exempt from having to provide insurance and other benefits to same-sex spouses of employees.

The House rejected the language Lynch suggested two weeks ago by two votes. Wednesday's vote was on a revised bill negotiated with the Senate.

Supporters had considered Wednesday their last chance to pass a bill this year.

The law will establish civil and religious marriage licenses and allow each party to the marriage to be identified as bride, groom or spouse. Same-sex couples already in civil unions will automatically be assumed to have a "civil marriage."

Churches will be able to decide whether to conduct religious marriages for same-sex couples. Civil marriages would be available to both heterosexual and same-sex couples.

New Hampshire's decision leaves Rhode Island as the only New England state not to allow same-sex marriages. A bill there is expected to fail this year, as similar ones have in previous years.

___

Associated Press Writer David Tirrell-Wysocki in Concord, N.H., contributed to this report.

Wanda Sykes at the 2009 White House Correspondents' Dinner

2009-05-24T07:46:00.001-05:00

As Natalie Cole Undergoes Kidney Transplant, Older Sister Dies

2009-05-24T07:24:00.002-05:00

Natalie Cole has a reason to celebrate -- and mourn.

As the singer was undergoing kidney transplant surgery earlier this week, her older sister, Carole "Cookie" Cole died from cancer, the New York Post reports.

"This is all so surreal, and it is devastating," Natalie's younger sister, Timolin Cole, told the newspaper Thursday.

See photos of stars gone too soon.

"Our sister Cookie hadn't been to a doctor in 30 years, and last week she went in and they found a cancerous spot on her lung," Timolin explained. "They had wanted to start chemo right away, but Cookie said no."

Natalie -- who had been receiving dialysis to treat her Hepatitis C -- was with Cookie when she received a call from doctors that a 22-year-old patient died and directed his or her kidney to her.

"Natalie was there with her at her bedside at 4 in the morning on Monday, and she got a phone call from her doctors that a kidney was ready for her," Timolin said.

"She said, 'What do you mean? I can't deal with that right now! I'm here with my dying sister!' And they said to her, 'No, ma'am. We've got to do it now. You've got to be at Cedars-Sinai in two hours.'"

Check out the day's top news photos.

Timolin urged Natalie: "This is God's gift, and you've got to go now. Cookie would want this for you.'"

Cole finally agreed and rushed to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in L.A. for the surgery, which was a success. She's expected to go home this weekend, and will recover over the next three to four months.

"She's doing well, and she's going to party like a rock star in no time," Timolin said.

A rep for the singer called Natalie's recovery and Cookie's death "a tragic coincidence."

Join Us on Facebook and Twitter for even more up to the minute celebrity news and photos

Obama does Standup at the White House Correspondents Dinner 05/09/09

2009-05-10T15:28:00.002-05:00

Goodbye Allison - You F'ing Rock!

2009-05-10T14:56:00.002-05:00

For 17 years old, she absolutely blows me away. This was my pick to win American Idol.

Obama busted by GOP for "Dijon" Mustard

2009-05-10T06:40:00.001-05:00

Dear god, is this the best the GOP has? I submit this as proof as to why we got stuck with Bush for eight years.

Obama Speech 2.24.09

2009-02-25T05:55:00.000-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Maddow Rendered Speechless from Jindal Response

2009-02-25T05:54:00.002-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The First 30 Days

2009-02-22T07:14:00.001-05:00

She's right - not perfect, but he's certainly trying to get things done.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Maddow Smacks Down (R) Don Manzullo

2009-01-29T06:18:00.003-05:00

WOW! This was riveting. He didn't stand a chance. Then again, he couldn't explain his position, could he?

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Keith Olbermann -"At Last"

2009-01-22T06:55:00.001-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

44 Is Our Lucky Number

2009-01-21T17:44:00.002-05:00

After hearing his speech, it was luckier than before.

Barack Obama has been sworn in as the 44th US president. Here is his inauguration speech in full.

My fellow citizens:

I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and co-operation he has shown throughout this transition.

Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms.

At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because we, the people, have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents.

So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.

Serious challenges

That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.

These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land - a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.

Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America - they will be met.

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

Nation of 'risk-takers'

We remain a young nation, but in the words of scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.

In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted - for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labour, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.

For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and travelled across oceans in search of a new life.

For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and ploughed the hard earth.

For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn.

'Remaking America'

Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.

This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions - that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.

For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act - not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. All this we will do.

Restoring trust

Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions - who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them - that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account - to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.

Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control - that a nation cannot prosper long when it favours only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on the ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart - not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.

'Ready to lead'

As for our common defence, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our founding fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and we are ready to lead once more.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with the sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort - even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the spectre of a warming planet. We will not apologise for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defence, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.

'Era of peace'

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.

'Duties'

As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages. We honour them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And yet, at this moment - a moment that will define a generation - it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.

For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter's courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.

Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends - honesty and hard work, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism - these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths.

What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility - a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.

'Gift of freedom'

This is the price and the promise of citizenship.

This is the source of our confidence - the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.

This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed - why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.

So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have travelled. In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:

"Let it be told to the future world... that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive... that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it]."

America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.

Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America.

Martin Luther King

2009-01-19T17:41:00.003-05:00

Ever since I was kid, MLK has always been one of my heroes. I can't think of an American more brave in the face of hate. On what would have been your 80th birthday, I say thank you and may you rest in peace.

The Big Dick Sleeps

2009-01-18T13:34:00.001-05:00

Sums up my thoughts on a 15 minute parting speech from Bush.

Shrub Eight Years in Eight Minutes

2009-01-18T08:31:00.002-05:00

Keith Olbermann out did himself on this clip. If anyone could sum up my hostility towards Bush and why, this clip covered it.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Chimp's final "prezidential" address

2009-01-16T05:56:00.002-05:00

I've been pissed off at Chris Matthews since the start of the Iraq war, since I felt he was just another media talking head cheerleading for war. I will say, last night -he stunned me with his candor and called it correctly on Shrub's final speech to the public last night.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Angry Chimp's Final Stand - Pt1

2009-01-14T06:53:00.001-05:00

The Angry Chimp's Final Stand - Pt2

2009-01-14T06:51:00.001-05:00

WOW! I'm not convinced the man quit drinking. Something is more "off" than ever in his head.

The Gift of Gab that Keeps on Giving-Palin

2009-01-10T07:15:00.004-05:00

Oddly enough, this "documentary" piece was to "defend" Palin in her own words. Is it me, or does this not just make her sound even more paranoid and ill-informed than ever? I find her beyond entertaining.

King George Still Isn't Done Yet...WHAT a Surprise!

2009-01-07T06:10:00.004-05:00

I just couldn't believe this story. I mean really, can he be any more of a freakin' ahole? 12 days, I can survive 12 more days after enduring the LONGEST 8 years of my life.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Rachel Maddow Awards for '08

2009-01-01T07:58:00.003-05:00

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Happy New Year!

2009-01-01T07:20:00.001-05:00

CNN Poll: Three out of four Americans glad to see Bush go

2008-12-28T14:50:00.000-05:00

Does it get any lower?

(CNN) — As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three out of four Americans feel his departure is coming not a moment too soon.

Seventy-five percent of those questioned in a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday say they're glad President Bush is going, with 23 percent indicating they'll miss him.

"Earlier this year, Bush scored some of the lowest presidential approval ratings we've seen in half a century, so it's understandable that the public is eager for a new president to step in," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

The three-quarters of Americans surveyed who say they won't miss Bush is 24 points higher than the 51 percent who said they wouldn't miss Bill Clinton when he left office in January 2001. Forty-five percent of those questioned at that time said they would miss Clinton.

"As President Bush prepares to leave office, the American public has a parting thought: Good riddance. At least that's the way three-quarters feel," says CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider.

The poll indicates that Bush has been compared poorly to his predecessors, with 28 percent saying that he's the worst ever when compared to other presidents in American history. Forty percent rate Bush as poor and 31 percent feel he's been a good president.

Only a third of those polled want Bush to remain active in public life after he leaves the White House, with two-thirds saying they don't want him to stay active in a public way. That 33 percent figure who want Bush to remain in the public eye is 22 points lower than those questioned in 2001 who wanted Bill Clinton to retain a public role.

"Bush has dropped on a number of measures but possibly the biggest is that only one in five say he inspires confidence. That's an important figure when the country is facing its biggest economic crisis in a generation," says Holland.

When running for the White House in the 2000 presidential campaign, Bush promised to be a uniter, not a divider.

But the poll suggests that 82 percent feel that Bush did not unite the country, with 17 percent saying he did.

"The vast majority of Americans believed he betrayed his promise to unite the country," says Schneider. "He took a country that was divided under President Clinton and he divided it worse."

Only 27 percent of those questioned in the poll approve of the way Bush is handling his job as president, with 72 percent in disapproval. Bush's job approval rating has been at or below freezing since the beginning of the year, says Schneider — one of the lowest ratings for any president, ever.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted December 19-21, with 1,013 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Got Shoes?

2008-12-27T13:36:00.003-05:00

Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out either!

Thank YOU America!

2008-11-05T06:17:00.002-05:00

2012? Heaven Help us!

2008-11-02T14:19:00.003-05:00

McCain Turns to Race Baiting....

2008-10-25T11:57:00.002-05:00

What else if left when your campaign is in the toilet?

McCain Communications Director Gave Reporters Incendiary Version Of "Carved B" Story Before Facts Were Known

By Greg Sargent - October 24, 2008, 5:12PM
John McCain's Pennsylvania communications director told reporters in the state an incendiary version of the hoax story about the attack on a McCain volunteer well before the facts of the case were known or established -- and even told reporters outright that the "B" carved into the victim's cheek stood for "Barack," according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.

John Verrilli, the news director for KDKA in Pittsburgh, told TPM Election Central that McCain's Pennsylvania campaign communications director gave one of his reporters a detailed version of the attack that included a claim that the alleged attacker said, "You're with the McCain campaign? I'm going to teach you a lesson."

Verrilli also told TPM that the McCain spokesperson had claimed that the "B" stood for Barack. According to Verrilli, the spokesperson also told KDKA that Sarah Palin had called the victim of the alleged attack, who has since admitted the story was a hoax.

The KDKA reporter had called McCain's campaign office for details after seeing the story -- sans details -- teased on Drudge.

The McCain spokesperson's claims -- which came in the midst of extraordinary and heated conversations late yesterday between the McCain campaign, local TV stations, and the Obama camp, as the early version of the story rocketed around the political world -- is significant because it reveals a McCain official pushing a version of the story that was far more explosive than the available or confirmed facts permitted at the time.

The claims to KDKA from the McCain campaign were included in an early story that ran late yesterday on KDKA's Web site. The paragraphs containing these assertions were quickly removed from the story after the Obama campaign privately complained that KDKA was letting the McCain campaign spin a racially-charged version of the story before the facts had been established, according to two sources familiar with the discussions.

A source familiar with what happened yesterday confirmed that the unnamed spokesperson was communications director Peter Feldman. Feldman was also quoted yesterday making virtually identical assertions on the Web site of another local TV station, WPXI. But those quotes, which we also preserved here, are also no longer available on WPXI's site, for reasons that are unclear.

This is problematic because the McCain campaign doesn't want to have been perceived as pushing an incendiary story that not only turned out to be a hoax but which police officials said today risked blowing up into a "national incident" and has local police preparing to file charges against the hoaxster.

There's no evidence that anyone from McCain national headquarters put out a version of events like this.

After the story appeared on KDKA's site and this and other pieces in the local press started flying around the political world, an Obama spokesperson in the state angrily insisted to KDKA that it was irresponsible for the station to air the McCain spokesperson's incendiary version of events before the facts were fully known, according to two sources familiar with the discussions.

After that, KDKA went back to McCain's Pennsylvania spokesperson, Feldman, and asked if he stood by the story as he'd earlier told it, but he started backing off the story, a source familiar with the talks says. That prompted KDKA to remove the grafs.

Feldman couldn't immediately be reached, and a McCain HQ spokesperson
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com
/2008/10/mccain_aide_gave_reporters_inc.php

The McCain Campaign Farce

2008-10-25T11:52:00.002-05:00

Rachel Maddow breaks it all down.

The "Fun" of this Election

2008-10-19T12:41:00.004-05:00

This is worth watching. It was fun to see both McCain & Obama poke fun at themselves and this volatile campaign season.

The Palin Song

2008-10-19T11:52:00.002-05:00

I found this on Crooks & Liars and it's very funny. It's worth a minute of your time.

McCain and Women's Health

2008-10-16T17:58:00.003-05:00

Suffice it to say McCranky's statement threw me over the edge last night. I'm glad to see I wasn't the only bothered by his remarks. Obama clearly pointed out the problem with partial birth abortion bill.

Any decent human being is "not for partial birth abortion". Can we just get that off the table? The problem with the bill as it was written was, there was no provision for a woman who could die from carrying out a birth due to complications. THAT is what the issue is/was. McCain's tone as if this didn't matter and mocked it as an excuse....just did not sit well with me one bit.

Here's the clip and commentary from Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow.

More Springsteen from Obama rally in Columbus

2008-10-06T06:06:00.002-05:00

Bruce - Vote For Change....'08

2008-10-06T05:09:00.001-05:00

The following are my comments from the stage at yesterday's Vote For Change rally in Philadelphia:

Hello Philly,

I am glad to be here today for this voter registration drive and for Barack Obama, the next president of the United States.

I've spent 35 years writing about America, its people, and the meaning of the American Promise. The Promise that was handed down to us, right here in this city from our founding fathers, with one instruction: Do your best to make these things real: opportunity, equality, social and economic justice, a fair shake for all of our citizens, the American idea, as a positive influence, around the world for a more just and peaceful existence. These are the things that give our lives hope, shape, and meaning. They are the ties that bind us together and give us faith in our contract with one another.

I've spent most of my creative life measuring the distance between that American promise and American reality. For many Americans, who are today losing their jobs, their homes, seeing their retirement funds disappear, who have no healthcare, or who have been abandoned in our inner cities, the distance between that promise and that reality has never been greater or more painful.

I believe Senator Obama has taken the measure of that distance in his own life and in his work. I believe he understands, in his heart, the cost of that distance, in blood and suffering, in the lives of everyday Americans. I believe as president, he would work to restore that promise to so many of our fellow citizens who have justifiably lost faith in its meaning. After the disastrous administration of the past 8 years, we need someone to lead us in an American reclamation project. In my job, I travel the world, and occasionally play big stadiums, just like Senator Obama. I've continued to find, wherever I go, America remains a repository of people's hopes, possibilities, and desires, and that despite the terrible erosion to our standing around the world, accomplished by our recent administration, we remain, for many, a house of dreams. One thousand George Bushes and one thousand Dick Cheneys will never be able to tear that house down.

They will, however, be leaving office, dropping the national tragedies of Katrina, Iraq, and our financial crisis in our laps. Our sacred house of dreams has been abused, looted, and left in a terrible state of disrepair. It needs care; it needs saving, it needs defending against those who would sell it down the river for power or a quick buck. It needs strong arms, hearts, and minds. It needs someone with Senator Obama's understanding, temperateness, deliberativeness, maturity, compassion, toughness, and faith, to help us rebuild our house once again. But most importantly, it needs us. You and me. To build that house with the generosity that is at the heart of the American spirit. A house that is truer and big enough to contain the hopes and dreams of all of our fellow citizens. That is where our future lies. We will rise or fall as a people by our ability to accomplish this task. Now I don't know about you, but I want that dream back, I want my America back, I want my country back.

So now is the time to stand with Barack Obama and Joe Biden, roll up our sleeves, and come on up for the rising.

SNL Biden/Palin Debate

2008-10-05T06:22:00.001-05:00

Rachel Maddow Breaks Down Palin's Debate Blunders

2008-10-05T06:14:00.001-05:00

McJokster?

2008-09-29T06:03:00.001-05:00

Tina Fey Nails Palin...AGAIN!

2008-09-28T14:21:00.000-05:00

Surprise - Bush war Crimes

2008-09-27T11:00:00.002-05:00

I LOVE Rachel Maddow - at least someone is paying attention to the dirt flying under the radar.

Hockey Mom's and Witchcraft

2008-09-25T18:03:00.002-05:00

Palin Exposed - Pt 2

2008-09-25T18:02:00.002-05:00

Palin Exposed Pt 1

2008-09-25T18:00:00.003-05:00

Interview Pt 1

Free Sarah Palin

2008-09-24T18:24:00.004-05:00

A few weeks ago the McChicken campaign pulled all interviews from CNN when Campbell had the audacity to ask questions about Palin to one of the McChicken advisors. Well...today, Campbell swings back and dead on I might add! Nice to see the press has some ovaries on this one.

Life is Stranger than Fiction

2008-09-23T16:14:00.007-05:00

Time to take a break from my political rantings or whatever we should call them.

So, we moved to MA in 2005. We found the perfect house, it just needed a few things done - a roof being one of them. I had been here a whopping two weeks, having to fire our first roofer in the middle of the job. We were also getting some electrical work done and the electrician suggested we call Scesny Construction. She knew them well (or so thought) and they completed the work that was left undone by the other roofer. A few years go by and lo and behold, here's the news we hear about Alex.

It's taken us about 5mns not to be completely freaked out by all of this. You start recalling every conversation in your head that took place with him. It's still hard to think this guy was here at our house being accused of rape and possibly a serial murderer. I spent an entire week and half with him and his crew. Obviously, I've been thanking god a lot lately. Here's today's news.

Say What God?

2008-09-16T17:15:00.001-05:00

Sarah Palin's Churches and The Third Wave from Bruce Wilson on Vimeo.

McCain's Brain

2008-09-14T07:13:00.002-05:00

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

ENOUGH!

2008-08-30T08:40:00.003-05:00

I had no idea hearing Obama say "Enough" would actually bring me to tears, but I'm not ashamed to tell you, it did.

I was one of the biggest Hillary Clinton supporters out there. It was very hard for me to accept the end result of the primaries. However, I have to say - on the issues, the core issues - I do see Obama being a champion for many of those same core beliefs.

In watching ALL the debates - I would catch myself thinking, they truly are on the same side of the issues , just forced to split hairs on how to acheive the same goals.

Obama's speech brought me full circle.

Go Dennis!

2008-08-28T06:14:00.001-05:00

Hillary Rocks!

2008-08-27T05:03:00.000-05:00

Obama/Biden '08

2008-08-24T09:32:00.002-05:00

Okay - so that takes care of that. I will miss the talking heads picking names out of the hat just to have something to talk about for the past week. It's entertaining watching them grasp for things to say when it's been all said, over and over and over again.

Biden was not my first choice - he's been my 2nd choice to Hillary all along. I'm not crazy about Obama - however, the more I hear him speak, it's obvious he's a very smart man. And quite frankly, the only reason I don't like him is because he took away the chance of having the first woman as a president. So - not a very good reason eh?

Hopefully together, if they should win - we will finally have a clear way out of the mess created by Bush Co called the Iraq War - Operation Freedom - Iraqi Freedom - and my personal favorite - this money pit, cluster fuck we should have never started in the first place.

Trouble the Water

2008-08-22T14:24:00.002-05:00

I had just moved to MA about 2 weeks before Katrina hit. As I was unpacking and painting I had the TV on MSNBC all day long - this would be post Katrina.

Everyday when CA would call to see how things were going at the house - my first response was "What the hell are they waiting for - why aren't we doing something?" I was more than troubled by what I was witnessing by the hour. When Ray Nagin blasted the federal government for not stepping in, he almost put me in tears. Here was an American BEGGING, PLEADING for help to save other American lives and it appeared no one was listening. The stillness of nothing happening was haunting. I could only think, race was playing a factor in our lack of response. I never saw this happen in FLA when brother Jeb needed a helping hand from Uncle Sam.

Never in my wildest dreams, especially after September 11th, would I think our government would be so inept at helping these people. No food, no water, dead bodies floating in the streets. Once again, all of my dreams of what I thought this country stood for were shattered during those four days after Katrina hit.

I caught this trailer the other day - this movie appears to be a riviting view of what happened.

Pay Attention for 9 mins will ya?

2008-08-21T18:46:00.003-05:00

R.I.P. Stephanie

2008-08-20T18:42:00.002-05:00

I had the pleasure of watching her give a speech during Kerry's campaign 4 years ago. The lady could light up a room like no one. As on Ohioian, I KNOW I can say, she will be dearly missed. May you rest in peace Stephanie.

Ohio Rep. Tubbs Jones dies after aneurysm

CNN) -- Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, the first black woman to represent Ohio in the U.S. House of Representatives, died Wednesday after suffering an aneurysm, medical officials said.
Tubbs Jones, who was in her fifth term representing parts of Cleveland and its suburbs, was 58.
She suffered the aneurysm Tuesday evening while driving in her home district in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, a statement from her office said.

She was rushed to East Cleveland's Huron Hospital, where a team of doctors determined Wednesday morning that she had "very limited brain function," said Dr. Gus Kious, the hospital's chief of staff.

Wednesday afternoon, before Tubbs Jones died, Kious said that the aneurysm "an inaccessible part of her brain" and that she was in critical condition.

The congresswoman had a full day of activity Tuesday, according to the statement from her office, "including planning for an upcoming forum on electoral reform, scheduled for September 4, 2008, at Cleveland State University."

Tubbs Jones was a Democratic superdelegate and one of Hillary Clinton's most ardent supporters. She was scheduled to attend the Democratic National Convention next week in Denver, Colorado.

She was an early supporter of Clinton's White House bid but endorsed Barack Obama in June after the New York senator bowed out of the race.

Tubbs Jones, elected to Congress in 1998, would have turned 59 on September 10.
CNN's Alexander Mooney contributed to this report.
All AboutStephanie Tubbs Jones

Seriously Pelosi....IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS!

2008-08-10T10:42:00.001-05:00

I've had it with Nancy Pelosi. What a POS she turned out to be. I tried to remain opened minded during her 60 minutes interview as I about fell off the couch when I heard the line
"Impeachment is off the table".

Here we are again only to find yet another lie, another revelation about our current regime in the US. At what point will our Congress get off it's ass and DO SOMETHING about the crimes of George W Bush and Dick Cheney? Read on Garth!

Tape: Top CIA Official Confesses To 9/11-Iraq War Forgery Came From White House
By: Nicole Belle on Saturday, August 9th, 2008 at 9:00 AM - PDT

A forged letter linking Saddam Hussein to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks was ordered on White House stationery and probably came from the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, according to a new transcript of a conversation with the Central Intelligence Agency’s former Deputy Chief of Clandestine Operations Robert Richer.

The transcript was posted Friday by author Ron Suskind of an interview conducted in June. It comes on the heels of denials by both the White House and Richer of a claim Suskind made in his new book, The Way of The World. The book was leaked to Politico’s Mike Allen on Monday, and released Tuesday.

On Tuesday, the White House released a statement on Richer’s behalf. In it, Richer declared, “I never received direction from George Tenet or anyone else in my chain of command to fabricate a document … as outlined in Mr. Suskind’s book.”

The denial, however, directly contradicts Richer’s own remarks in the transcript.
“Now this is from the Vice President’s Office is how you remembered it–not from the president?” Suskind asked.

“No, no, no,” Richer replied, according to the transcript. “What I remember is George [Tenet] saying, ‘we got this from’–basically, from what George said was ‘downtown.’”

“Which is the White House?” Suskind asked.

“Yes,” Richer said. “But he did not–in my memory–never said president, vice president, or NSC.

Okay? But now–he may have hinted–just by the way he said it, it would have–cause almost all that stuff came from one place only: Scooter Libby and the shop around the vice president.”
“But he didn’t say that specifically,” Richer added. “I would naturally–I would probably stand on my, basically, my reputation and say it came from the vice president.”

“But there wasn’t anything in the writing that you remember saying the vice president,” Suskind continued.

“Nope,” Richer said.

“It just had the White House stationery.”

“Exactly right.”

Later, Richer added, “You know, if you’ve ever seen the vice president’s stationery, it’s on the White House letterhead. It may have said OVP (Office of the Vice President). I don’t remember that, so I don’t want to mislead you.”

Suskind posted the transcript at his blog, saying, “This posting is contrary to my practice across 25 years as a journalist. But the issues, in this matter, are simply too important to stand as discredited in any way.” It was first picked up by ThinkProgress and Congressional Quarterly’s Jeff Stein.

But wait, there’s more…

The bogus memo claimed that 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta had received training in Baghdad but also discussed the arrival of a “shipment” from Niger, which the Administration claimed had supplied Iraq with yellowcake uranium — based on yet another forged document whose source remains uncertain.

The memo subsequently was treated as fact by the British Sunday Telegraph, and cited by William Safire in his New York Times column, providing fodder for Bush’s efforts to take the US to war. [..]

Today, The American Conservative also published a report saying that the forgery was actually produced by then-Defense Undersecretary Douglas Feith’s Office of Special Plans, citing an unnamed intelligence source. The source reportedly added that Suskind’s overall claim “is correct.”

“My source also notes that Dick Cheney, who was behind the forgery, hated and mistrusted the Agency and would not have used it for such a sensitive assignment,” the magazine wrote. “Instead, he went to Doug Feith’s Office of Special Plans and asked them to do the job.

When Will We IMPEACH THIS BASTARD?

2007-09-06T18:59:00.000-05:00

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destructionSalon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.
By Sidney Blumenthal

Sep. 06, 2007 On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.

On April 23, 2006, CBS's "60 Minutes" interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam's foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. "We continued to validate him the whole way through," said Drumheller. "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy."

Now two former senior CIA officers have confirmed Drumheller's account to me and provided the background to the story of how the information that might have stopped the invasion of Iraq was twisted in order to justify it. They described what Tenet said to Bush about the lack of WMD, and how Bush responded, and noted that Tenet never shared Sabri's intelligence with then Secretary of State Colin Powell. According to the former officers, the intelligence was also never shared with the senior military planning the invasion, which required U.S. soldiers to receive medical shots against the ill effects of WMD and to wear protective uniforms in the desert.

Instead, said the former officials, the information was distorted in a report written to fit the preconception that Saddam did have WMD programs. That false and restructured report was passed to Richard Dearlove, chief of the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), who briefed Prime Minister Tony Blair on it as validation of the cause for war.

Secretary of State Powell, in preparation for his presentation of evidence of Saddam's WMD to the United Nations Security Council on Feb. 5, 2003, spent days at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., and had Tenet sit directly behind him as a sign of credibility. But Tenet, according to the sources, never told Powell about existing intelligence that there were no WMD, and Powell's speech was later revealed to be a series of falsehoods.

Both the French intelligence service and the CIA paid Sabri hundreds of thousands of dollars (at least $200,000 in the case of the CIA) to give them documents on Saddam's WMD programs. "The information detailed that Saddam may have wished to have a program, that his engineers had told him they could build a nuclear weapon within two years if they had fissile material, which they didn't, and that they had no chemical or biological weapons," one of the former CIA officers told me.

On the eve of Sabri's appearance at the United Nations in September 2002 to present Saddam's case, the officer in charge of this operation met in New York with a "cutout" who had debriefed Sabri for the CIA. Then the officer flew to Washington, where he met with CIA deputy director John McLaughlin, who was "excited" about the report. Nonetheless, McLaughlin expressed his reservations. He said that Sabri's information was at odds with "our best source." That source was code-named "Curveball," later exposed as a fabricator, con man and former Iraqi taxi driver posing as a chemical engineer.

The next day, Sept. 18, Tenet briefed Bush on Sabri. "Tenet told me he briefed the president personally," said one of the former CIA officers. According to Tenet, Bush's response was to call the information "the same old thing." Bush insisted it was simply what Saddam wanted him to think. "The president had no interest in the intelligence," said the CIA officer. The other officer said, "Bush didn't give a fuck about the intelligence. He had his mind made up."

But the CIA officers working on the Sabri case kept collecting information. "We checked on everything he told us." French intelligence eavesdropped on his telephone conversations and shared them with the CIA. These taps "validated" Sabri's claims, according to one of the CIA officers. The officers brought this material to the attention of the newly formed Iraqi Operations Group within the CIA. But those in charge of the IOG were on a mission to prove that Saddam did have WMD and would not give credit to anything that came from the French. "They kept saying the French were trying to undermine the war," said one of the CIA officers.

The officers continued to insist on the significance of Sabri's information, but one of Tenet's deputies told them, "You haven't figured this out yet. This isn't about intelligence. It's about regime change."

The CIA officers on the case awaited the report they had submitted on Sabri to be circulated back to them, but they never received it. They learned later that a new report had been written. "It was written by someone in the agency, but unclear who or where, it was so tightly controlled. They knew what would please the White House. They knew what the king wanted," one of the officers told me.

That report contained a false preamble stating that Saddam was "aggressively and covertly developing" nuclear weapons and that he already possessed chemical and biological weapons. "Totally out of whack," said one of the CIA officers. "The first [para]graph of an intelligence report is the most important and most read and colors the rest of the report." He pointed out that the case officer who wrote the initial report had not written the preamble and the new memo. "That's not what the original memo said."

The report with the misleading introduction was given to Dearlove of MI6, who briefed the prime minister. "They were given a scaled-down version of the report," said one of the CIA officers. "It was a summary given for liaison, with the sourcing taken out. They showed the British the statement Saddam was pursuing an aggressive program, and rewrote the report to attempt to support that statement. It was insidious. Blair bought it." "Blair was duped," said the other CIA officer. "He was shown the altered report."

The information provided by Sabri was considered so sensitive that it was never shown to those who assembled the NIE on Iraqi WMD. Later revealed to be utterly wrong, the NIE read: "We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade."

In the congressional debate over the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, even those voting against it gave credence to the notion that Saddam possessed WMD. Even a leading opponent such as Sen. Bob Graham, then the Democratic chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who had instigated the production of the NIE, declared in his floor speech on Oct. 12, 2002, "Saddam Hussein's regime has chemical and biological weapons and is trying to get nuclear capacity." Not a single senator contested otherwise. None of them had an inkling of the Sabri intelligence.

The CIA officers assigned to Sabri still argued within the agency that his information must be taken seriously, but instead the administration preferred to rely on Curveball. Drumheller learned from the German intelligence service that held Curveball that it considered him and his claims about WMD to be highly unreliable. But the CIA's Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation, and Arms Control Center (WINPAC) insisted that Curveball was credible because what he said was supposedly congruent with available public information.
For two months, Drumheller fought against the use of Curveball, raising the red flag that he was likely a fraud, as he turned out to be. "Oh, my! I hope that's not true," said Deputy Director McLaughlin, according to Drumheller's book "On the Brink," published in 2006. When Curveball's information was put into Bush's Jan. 28, 2003, State of the Union address, McLaughlin and Tenet allowed it to pass into the speech. "From three Iraqi defectors," Bush declared, "we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs ... Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them." In fact, there was only one Iraqi source -- Curveball -- and there were no labs.
When the mobile weapons labs were inserted into the draft of Powell's United Nations speech, Drumheller strongly objected again and believed that the error had been removed. He was shocked watching Powell's speech. "We have firsthand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails," Powell announced. Without the reference to the mobile weapons labs, there was no image of a threat.

Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Powell's chief of staff, and Powell himself later lamented that they had not been warned about Curveball. And McLaughlin told the Washington Post in 2006, "If someone had made these doubts clear to me, I would not have permitted the reporting to be used in Secretary Powell's speech." But, in fact, Drumheller's caution was ignored.

As war appeared imminent, the CIA officers on the Sabri case tried to arrange his defection in order to demonstrate that he stood by his information. But he would not leave without bringing out his entire family. "He dithered," said one former CIA officer. And the war came before his escape could be handled.

Tellingly, Sabri's picture was never put on the deck of playing cards of former Saddam officials to be hunted down, a tacit acknowledgment of his covert relationship with the CIA. Today, Sabri lives in Qatar.

In 2005, the Silberman-Robb commission investigating intelligence in the Iraq war failed to interview the case officer directly involved with Sabri; instead its report blamed the entire WMD fiasco on "groupthink" at the CIA. "They didn't want to trace this back to the White House," said the officer.

On Feb. 5, 2004, Tenet delivered a speech at Georgetown University that alluded to Sabri and defended his position on the existence of WMD, which, even then, he contended would still be found. "Several sensitive reports crossed my desk from two sources characterized by our foreign partners as established and reliable," he said. "The first from a source who had direct access to Saddam and his inner circle" -- Naji Sabri -- "said Iraq was not in the possession of a nuclear weapon. However, Iraq was aggressively and covertly developing such a weapon."
Then Tenet claimed with assurance, "The same source said that Iraq was stockpiling chemical weapons." He explained that this intelligence had been central to his belief in the reason for war. "As this information and other sensitive information came across my desk, it solidified and reinforced the judgments that we had reached in my own view of the danger posed by Saddam Hussein and I conveyed this view to our nation's leaders." (Tenet doesn't mention Sabri in his recently published memoir, "At the Center of the Storm.")

But where were the WMD? "Now, I'm sure you're all asking, 'Why haven't we found the weapons?' I've told you the search must continue and it will be difficult."

On Sept. 8, 2006, three Republican senators on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence -- Orrin Hatch, Saxby Chambliss and Pat Roberts -- signed a letter attempting to counter Drumheller's revelation about Sabri on "60 Minutes": "All of the information about this case so far indicates that the information from this source was that Iraq did have WMD programs." The Republicans also quoted Tenet, who had testified before the committee in July 2006 that Drumheller had "mischaracterized" the intelligence. Still, Drumheller stuck to his guns, telling Reuters, "We have differing interpretations, and I think mine's right."

One of the former senior CIA officers told me that despite the certitude of the three Republican senators, the Senate committee never had the original memo on Sabri. "The committee never got that report," he said. "The material was hidden or lost, and because it was a restricted case, a lot of it was done in hard copy. The whole thing was fogged up, like Curveball."

While one Iraqi source told the CIA that there were no WMD, information that was true but distorted to prove the opposite, another Iraqi source was a fabricator whose lies were eagerly embraced. "The real tragedy is that they had a good source that they misused," said one of the former CIA officers. "The fact is there was nothing there, no threat. But Bush wanted to hear what he wanted to hear."
-- By Sidney Blumenthal

Senate finds no al-Qaida-Saddam link

2006-09-09T07:12:00.000-05:00

By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer

Saddam Hussein rejected overtures from al-Qaida and believed Islamic extremists were a threat to his regime, a reverse portrait of an Iraq allied with Osama bin Laden painted by the Bush White House, a Senate panel has found.

The administration's version was based in part on intelligence that White House officials knew was flawed, according to Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee, citing newly declassified documents released by the panel.

The report, released Friday, discloses for the first time an October 2005 CIA assessment that prior to the war Saddam's government "did not have a relationship, harbor or turn a blind eye toward" al-Qaida operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi or his associates.

As recently as an Aug. 21 news conference, President Bush said people should "imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein" with the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction and "who had relations with Zarqawi."

Democrats singled out CIA Director George Tenet, saying that during a private meeting in July Tenet told the panel that the White House pressured him and that he agreed to back up the administration's case for war despite his own agents' doubts about the intelligence it was based on.

"Tenet admitted to the Intelligence Committee that the policymakers wanted him to 'say something about not being inconsistent with what the president had said,'" Intelligence Committee member Carl Levin, D-Mich., told reporters Friday.
Tenet also told the committee that complying had been "the wrong thing to do," according to Levin.

"Well, it was much more than that," Levin said. "It was a shocking abdication of a CIA director's duty not to act as a shill for any administration or its policy."

Leaders of both parties accused each other of seeking political gain on the eve of the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Republicans said the document contained little new information about prewar intelligence or postwar findings on Iraq's weapons and connection to terrorist groups.
Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., accused Democrats of trying to "use the committee ... insisting that they were deliberately duped into supporting the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime."

"That is simply not true," Roberts added, "and I believe the American people are smart enough to recognize election-year politicking when they see it."
The report speaks for itself, Democrats said.

The administration "exploited the deep sense of insecurity among Americans in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, leading a large majority of Americans to believe — contrary to the intelligence assessments at the time — that Iraq had a role in the 9/11 attacks," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee.

Still, Democrats were reluctant to say how the administration officials involved should be called to account.

Asked whether the wrongdoing amounted to criminal conduct, Levin and Rockefeller declined to answer. Rockefeller said later he did not believe Bush should be impeached over the matter.
According to the report, postwar findings indicate that Saddam "was distrustful of al-Qaida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime." It quotes an FBI report from June 2004 in which former Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz said in an interview that "Saddam only expressed negative sentiments about bin Laden."

Saddam himself is quoted in an FBI summary as acknowledging that the Iraqi government had met with bin Laden but denying that he had colluded with the al-Qaida leader. Claiming that Iraq opposed only U.S. policies, Saddam said that "if he wanted to cooperate with the enemies of the U.S., he would have allied with North Korea or China," the report quotes the FBI document.
The Democrats said that on Oct. 7, 2002, the day Bush gave a speech speaking of that link, the CIA had sent a declassified letter to the committee saying it would be an "extreme step" for Saddam to assist Islamist terrorists in attacking the United States.

Levin and Rockefeller said Tenet in July acknowledged to the committee that subsequently issuing a statement that there was no inconsistency between the president's speech and the CIA viewpoint had been a mistake.

They also charged Bush with continuing to cite faulty intelligence in his argument for war as recently as last month.

The report said that al-Zarqawi, the al-Qaida leader killed by a U.S. airstrike last June, was in Baghdad from May 2002 until late November 2002. But "postwar information indicates that Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and that the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi."
In June 2004, Bush also defended Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that Saddam had "long-established ties" with al-Qaida. "Zarqawi is the best evidence of connection to al-Qaida affiliates and al-Qaida," the president said.

The report concludes that postwar findings do not support a 2002 intelligence community report that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program, possessed biological weapons or ever developed mobile facilities for producing biological warfare agents.

A second part of the report finds that false information from the Iraqi National Congress, an anti-Saddam group led by then-exile Ahmed Chalabi, was used to support key intelligence community assessments on Iraq.

Kristen Breitsweiser's Response to Ann Coulter

2006-09-07T16:56:00.000-05:00

What a class act. I'll say it again, THANK YOU Kristen, for bringing truth to light.

Kristen Breitweiser
Bio

09.06.2006
Dear Ann,
But for the murder of our husbands on 9/11, we would not have gone to Washington to fight for an independent 9/11 investigation. Our involvement in national security would have begun and ended at the voting booth, like most citizens. But for the initial failure of our leaders and elected officials to create an independent 9/11 Commission to investigate the terrorist attacks, we would not have not been forced to publicly fight for it.

An important part of that fight required us to demand the attention of our elected officials by speaking out in the media. Sadly, in many cases, such public pressure (and its possible effect on Election Day) is needed to inspire elected officials to do the right thing. That is not my opinion. That's reality. Had President Bush and Congress impaneled an independent commission on their own, we would not have needed to lobby Washington. Likewise, had Congress thoroughly investigated the attacks and not limited its investigation into intelligence-only areas, we would not have needed to fight for the 9/11 Commission.

We wanted the 9/11 attacks investigated thoroughly and competently so that fewer terrorist attacks would succeed in the future and more lives would be saved on the day of the next attack. When you study the events of 9/11, you learn that many more lives should have been saved, and many damages and injuries could have been mitigated. We wanted to hold the government accountable so that, going forward, our nation would be better prepared for future attacks and disasters.

Fighting for national security--securing the homeland or wanting to make the nation safe--ought to be an unassailable objective, similar to the Amber Alert, Megan's Law, and providing body armor for the troops. Regardless of who the messenger raising these issues might be, the goals are inarguable because they are pure, true, and right. Will these issues receive more focused attention if the message is delivered by people who speak passionately because they have been personally affected? Yes, absolutely. But it's the issue that is unassailable--not the people espousing that issue. If your conservative Republican friends are on the wrong side of the issues, that's their problem.

Ann, the Jersey Girls are moms. We have children. Perhaps one day if you have a child, you may understand the sense of duty and obligation that parents feel toward their children to provide them with a safe and secure environment, both in the present and the future. There were many, many times when we wanted to give up. We were tired and frustrated. But we didn't. The reason? Our children. We were left as their sole protectors; we wanted them to know that even though their fathers were brutally killed, they could be and would be safer living in America.

You complained to many interviewers that they hadn't taken the time to read your book. But did you take the time to look at the Family Steering Committee Web site (www.911independentcommission.org)? You might discover that we shared some of the same disappointments, concerns, and grievances that you have expressed with regard to the 9/11 Commission. The difference is that we made those concerns known while the Commission was doing its work--that is, when it could have made a difference. Why didn't you?

We could have used some more support back then, when we were fighting against individual commissioners' apparent and very possible conflicts of interest and the need for more hard-hitting hearings. We needed more help in fighting for an extended deadline, so as to remove the Commission's final report from the politics of the 2004 election, and a budgetary increase so the Commission could complete its unfinished work on questions about Able Danger. (You see, I did read your book.)

But frankly, I wonder how much you really know about the 9/11 Commission. You don't seem to understand that President Bush picked Tom Kean to be the chairman--not the "co-chairman." You don't seem to be aware that Philip Zelikow was the Commission's staff director or of why that position was so important. You also seem ignorant of the fact that Zelikow had served previously on the Bush National Security Council transition team and on the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. (Do you even know who the current members of PFIAB are or what PFIAB does? Probably not.) I wonder whether you even know that Zelikow is currently serving as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's Special Counsel.

Finally, and most important, are you aware that the White House exercised the "final edits" on the Commission's report? Tell me, Ann, how does that add up to a Democratic whitewash?Because I was one of twelve family members who lobbied fiercely for an independent commission, I was invited to meetings in the White House and on Capitol Hill. I testified before Congress, as well. I wish you knew about the battle that occurred behind the scenes because then you might not make silly statements such as "nobody could ever debate the Jersey Girls." Ironically, it is because we kept most of those meetings confidential that you probably don't know how nastily certain elected officials behaved behind closed doors. Trust me, we were countered, rebutted, and challenged in almost every meeting we attended. Did we go on the record about those incidents? No. We could have, and I can assure you that some of your conservative Republican friends would not have come off well.

When I kept my mouth shut about the way a certain Republican official spoke to me merely because it would have made people in your party look bad, was I being "political"? I'm sure there are some Democrats who would say yes. Did that mean I was being manipulated by your right-wing friends? No. It meant that I had a job to do and I found no reason to distract attention from our cause by dragging people through the mud. There was plenty that I could have spouted off about then, and there still is to this very day. But I don't--mostly because my mother and father taught me to rise above bullies rather than stoop to their level.

You branded the Jersey Girls media whores, a bunch of celebrity-seeking widows who enjoyed their husbands' deaths. Had your friends--including many elected officials in the Republican Party and conservatives in Washington--not put up a fight, and a very nasty fight, we wouldn't have needed to raise public awareness through the media. So if you want to blame anyone for our appearances on television, you should blame your own coterie, not us. We simply wanted to inform the nation about what needed to be done. And we still intend to do that.

Earlier this year, some of us were invited to appear on television to discuss the verdict in the Zacarias Moussaoui case. We agreed to do that because the U.S. has in custody three individuals with a more direct connection to the 9/11 attacks than Moussaoui. To us, it is important to show the world that we are a nation of laws and that the U.S. can successfully bring terrorists to justice. Does that matter to you, Ann? If so, then you ought to support us in our goal of bringing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, and Khallad bin Attash to trial. Our judicial process should hold these madmen accountable for the deaths of nearly 3,000 innocent people on 9/11.

I am truly puzzled by your accusation that we were operatives of or used by the Democrats. We were never paid for television appearances, we did not drive around in limos, we did not have publicists or PR people, and we wrote all of our own press releases, talking points, letters to the editor, statements, and testimony. (I don't know if the 9/11 family members who chose to support the Republican Party can say the same.) At any rate, your statements are false and defamatory, although that is nothing new for you.

As a public figure I'm in a poor position to hold you legally accountable for your lies. But I will take the time to set the record straight here. The Democrats were nearly the only people in Washington willing to help us. That is not my opinion; it is a fact, notwithstanding a few honorable exceptions, such as Chris Smith and John McCain. We worked with anyone of either party who supported an independent investigation.

For some unknown reason--and as a seasoned right-wing operative maybe you can enlighten us--most Republicans we encountered were completely opposed to learning any lessons from 9/11. It's a shame, too. After all, the Republican Party has been in total control of Washington for the past three years. Had they made true national security a higher priority, perhaps our cities would be better protected against terrorist attacks and disasters. Again, the sorry conditions in our cities and across our nation are a matter of fact, not opinion. Please don't blame me for that failure. Assign the responsibility where it belongs.

Similarly, one of the reasons we are still fighting for national security reforms (and encountered so much resistance in fighting for an independent commission) is that very few people actually read commission reports. They often sit on bookshelves gathering dust. Have you read the 9/11 Commission Report, along with its accompanying footnotes? Have you read the Robb-Silverman report on the Iraq intelligence failures? What about the Joint Inquiry of Congress report on 9/11? How about the Hart-Rudman report? Or even the Bremer report? Probably not. If you haven't, you should, because I think you would find those volumes illuminating.

You have expressed outrage that few of your critics actually read your books. You complain that they merely cherry-pick your most inflammatory comments while missing your overall message. Frustrating, isn't it?You also wrongly accused us of being in the pocket of former president Clinton. The obvious reason for why we always directed our questions and requests to President Bush was simply because Clinton was no longer in office. The former president had no power to commence an investigation into the 9/11 attacks, nor did he have any power to effect change to make the nation safer after 9/11. That power lay in the hands of President Bush--you know, the guy who in your opinion has supreme authority.

Ann, I don't want to get into a debate with you. It's not because I am afraid of you or your nasty bullying tactics. I'm not going to debate you because we have many, many more important issues to deal with in our country right now.But I will leave you with this: We live in America, the world's oldest democracy. Democracy can prevail (is that what you and your friends really fear?), but that requires hard work, as President Bush might say. Every citizen in this country is entitled to his or her beliefs, and every citizen is entitled to participate. We still have the right to speak our minds to effect change (within the parameters of the law, of course). So don't try to silence the voices of victims or anyone else, merely because you disagree with them or feel threatened by their political choices. In my opinion, your method of using intimidation and insults to "win" a debate is truly unpatriotic.

Actually, I expect that you will continue to scream and shout and smear as nastily as you want, so long as you think that that kind of behavior sells books. But we have tackled bigger bullies than you and lived through far worse circumstances than your book tour. We're not intimidated by you. We're not running away.

And under no circumstances will we be silenced by your "godless" rantings and ravings.
Kristen Breitweiser
New York City
June 2006

World's Image of U.S. Slips Further, Survey Shows

2006-06-13T18:46:00.000-05:00

June 13th, 2006 7:15 pmWorld's Image of U.S. Slips Further, Survey Shows
By Brian Knowlton / International Herald Tribune
WASHINGTON, June 13 — As the war in Iraq continues for a fourth year, the global image of America has slipped further, even among people in countries closely allied with the United States, a new global opinion poll has found.

Favorable views of the United States dropped sharply over the past year in Spain, where only 23 percent now say they have a positive opinion, down from 41 percent in 2005, according to the survey, which was carried out in 15 nations this spring by the Pew Research Center.

In Britain, Washington's closest ally in the Iraq war, positive views of America have remained in the mid-50's in the past two years, down sharply from 75 percent in 2002.

Other countries where positive views dropped significantly include India (56 percent, down from 71 percent since 2005); Russia (43 percent, down from 52 percent); and Indonesia (30 percent, down from 38 percent). In Turkey, a NATO ally of the United States, only 12 percent said they held a favorable opinion, down from 23 percent last year.

Declines were less steep in France, Germany and Jordan, while people in China and Pakistan had a slightly more favorable image of the United States this year than last.

The ebbing of positive views of the United States coincides with a spike in feeling that the war in Iraq has made the world a more dangerous place. This perception was shared by majorities in 10 of the countries surveyed, including Britain, where 60 percent said the world had become more dangerous since Saddam Hussein's removal from power in 2003.

Over the past year, support for the American-led fight against terrorism also declined again, Pew found.

The latest declines came after a year in which anti-American sentiment had receded slightly, as feelings were bolstered by United States aid for tsunami victims and some signs of political progress in Iraq.

Many respondents distinguished between their largely negative feelings about President Bush and their feelings about ordinary Americans. Majorities in seven countries polled had favorable views of Americans, led by Japan, at 82 percent, and Britain, at 69 percent.

But only in India and Nigeria did majorities express confidence in Mr. Bush. In Spain, just 1 in 14 respondents registered confidence in him, as did only 1 in 33 in Turkey, an important NATO ally.

After a tumultuous year in both Iraq and Afghanistan, the fight against terrorism is now backed by majorities only in Russia and India, while support has virtually collapsed in Japan, the poll found. In Spain, deeply affected by the March 2004 bombings in Madrid, a scant 2 in 10 people back the American-led fight.

Pessimism about the future of Iraq was widespread. The polling, by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, was conducted in April and May this year — before the completion last week of the new Iraqi government or the killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia.

All groups except Americans and Germans saw the United States presence in Iraq as posing a greater threat to world peace than the threat posed by Iran, which is pursuing a uranium enrichment program that the United States and other Western countries view as a prelude to developing its own nuclear weapons. Russians held that view by a 2-to-1 margin, and even the British did so by a narrow margin.

"Obviously, when you get many more people saying that the U.S. presence in Iraq is a threat to world peace as say that about Iran, it's a measure of how much Iraq is sapping good will to the United States," said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center.

But as the United States and five other leading countries seek ways to contain the Iranian nuclear program, the poll found strong majorities in Western Europe, Japan, and India sharing underlying American concerns. The percentage of people in Britain, France, and Spain who view Tehran as a threat has roughly tripled in three years.

Pew surveyed 16,710 people in Britain, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, Spain, Turkey, and the United States. The polling was conducted from March 31 to May 14.

The Palestinian election victory of Hamas, which the United States and the European Union consider a terrorist group, raised concerns. For the first time, Germans said they sympathized with Israel more than with the Palestinians. Support for Israel rose in France, as well. But in Muslim countries, large majorities supported Hamas's victory.

The poll found people in most of the 15 countries unhappy with national conditions. But in China, amid continued vigorous economic growth, a striking 8 in 10 people said that they were satisfied with the way things were going. Slim majorities in Egypt, Jordan and Spain also expressed satisfaction.

After a year of immigrant riots and job protests in France, people in every country but one — the United States — said that they held dimmer views of the French. The number of Americans favorably impressed by France rose to 52 percent, up from 29 percent in 2003, when the French angered Americans by refusing to back the Bush administration's decision to go to war in Iraq.

Americans' views of several other countries have also improved, perhaps influenced by efforts at reconciliation between the United States and some of its Iraq war critics and by increased cooperation on issues including Iran and North Korea.

"It runs counter to this notion that we've become xenophobic," Mr. Kohut said.

The survey showed considerable agreement on Iran. More than 9 in 10 Americans, Germans, Japanese and French opposed Iran acquiring nuclear arms.

By sizable margins, they deemed President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran to be untrustworthy and said that if Tehran had nuclear weapons it would be likely to share them with terrorists and to attack Israel. Only 1 in 25 Spanish respondents expressed considerable or some confidence in the Iranian leader.

The picture was different in Muslim countries: Pakistanis, who take great pride in their own nuclear program, narrowly favored letting Iran obtain nuclear weapons, and more than 40 percent in Egypt and Jordan agreed. Muslim publics believed that Iran would use a nuclear weapon for defensive purposes.

In other areas, too, regional differences emerged. The Japanese were more than twice as likely to see North Korea as a threat as they were Iran. But in China, which shares a border and economic ties with North Korea, only 1 in 10 saw Pyongyang as a threat.

Despite the toll taken by the Iraq war, Americans appeared to be paying less attention than others around the world to the controversies that the war has caused.

While 3 in 4 Americans said they had heard reports of abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and at the United States naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, substantially more West Europeans and Japanese — 9 in 10 — had heard about them.

Awareness of global warming was uniformly high in the industrialized countries, but concern about its effects was sharpest in Japan and India, with two-thirds of those polled in both countries expressing great concern. Awareness was lowest in the countries that are the greatest emitters of the greenhouse gases linked to warming — China and the United States — and only 2 in 10 people in those countries said they were very concerned about the problem.

Awareness of bird flu was nearly universal. The greatest alarm over the spread of the disease was in Asia, where the avian epidemic began, and in Africa. Only one American in 10 was very worried, and European levels were similarly low.

In a phenomenon troubling to Mr. Bush and his Republican supporters, war worries and high gasoline prices appear to be weighing on Americans' satisfaction ratings, even as many economic indicators have risen. While half of Americans expressed satisfaction with conditions at home in 2003, only 29 percent did so this year.

The Pew survey's margin of error was 2 to 4 percent in every country but Britain and Germany, where it was 6 percent. Mr. Kohut said the 6 percent margin, while high, was still valid in so broad a comparative survey.

Officer at Fort Lewis calls Iraq war illegal, refuses order to go

2006-06-08T06:41:00.000-05:00

By Hal Bernton / Seattle Times
In a rare case of officer dissent, a Fort Lewis Army lieutenant has refused orders to head out to Iraq this month to lead troops in what he believes is an illegal war of occupation.

1st Lt. Ehren Watada was scheduled to make his first deployment to Iraq this month. His refusal to accompany the Stryker brigade troops puts him at risk of court martial and years of prison time.

"I feel that we have been lied to and betrayed by this administration," Watada said Tuesday in a telephone interview from Fort Lewis. "It is the duty, the obligation of every soldier, and specifically the officers, to evaluate the legality, the truth behind every order — including the order to go to war."

In a statement released today, Watada said the "war in Iraq violates our democratic system of checks and balances.

"It usurps international treaties and conventions that by virtue of the Constitution become American law. The wholesale slaughter and mistreatment of the Iraqi people with only limited accountability is not only a terrible moral injustice, but a contradiction to the Army's own Law of Land Warfare. My participation would make me party to war crimes."

In making his decision, Watada has reached out to peace groups, including clergy, students, some veterans opposed to Iraq and others. Some war critics are raising money for his legal defense as they seek to galvanize broader opposition to Bush administration policy in Iraq.
"There has been an outpouring of support in the Puget Sound area," said David Solnit, who works with the anti-war group Courage to Resist. The group and others are helping organize a press conference today in Tacoma to launch the support campaign.

Watada met over the weekend with Olympia peace activists, and had hoped to attend the press conference. But after a Tuesday meeting with an Army colonel, he was given written orders not to attend during duty hours between 6:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. Instead, he expects to offer a video statement.

Watada's actions also may become a lightning rod for others in the debate about the Iraq war.
"He has an obligation to fulfill, and it is not up to the individual officer to decide when he is going to deploy or not deploy," said Jerry Newberry, a Vietnam veteran and director of communications for the Veterans of Foreign Wars. "Some other officer will have to go in his place. He needs to think about that."

Watada, a member of the 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, is unsure what charges he might face. But he is concerned that his decision to go public will cause the Army to pile on numerous offenses, such as disobeying an order, missing a troop movement and unauthorized absence.
"I think they will do their best to make an example of me," Watada said.

Though some U.S. commissioned officers refused to deploy in the Vietnam War and the first Gulf War, it is unclear how many — if any — have balked at deployment in the Iraq war. Pentagon officials said they had no such statistics available.

A Fort Lewis spokesman, Joe Hitt, also had no knowledge of any other commissioned officer refusing to deploy. He declined to comment on Watada.

Among the enlisted ranks at Fort Lewis, Sgt. Kevin Benderman is serving a 15-month sentence at a base correctional facility for refusing a second tour of duty in Iraq. Benderman, an Army mechanic for 10 years, served in Iraq in 2003 but refused to board a plane for a return trip in January 2005.

There is also a much broader category of military personnel who for a wide range of reasons have not fulfilled their service obligations.

Since the beginning of the war, more than 7,900 members of the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force have deserted, a small fraction of the hundreds of thousands who have served. Pentagon statistics indicate that desertions have declined as the war has progressed. They dropped from 3,678 in 2003, the first year of the war, to about 2,000 in 2005. The desertions typically involve enlisted personnel, not officers.

Watada has not deserted, since he remains on post in Fort Lewis.

Watada, 28, is a native of Hawaii, and an Eagle Scout who graduated from Hawaii Pacific University with a finance degree.

His father — Robert Watada, a retired Hawaii state official — was opposed to the war in Vietnam, and was able to do alternative service in the Peace Corps in Peru.

And Robert Watada said he laid out the "pros and cons" of military service as his son considered joining the service in the spring of 2003 as the invasion of Iraq was launched.
"He knew very well of my decision not to go to Vietnam, and he had to make his own decision to join the Army," Robert Watada said. "It was very noble. He felt like he wanted to do his part for his country."

After the younger Watada enlisted, he was sent to officer-training school in Georgia. Watada said he supported the war at that time because he believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

"I had my doubts," he said. "But I felt like the president is our leader, and he won't betray our trust, and he would know what he was talking about, and let's give him the benefit of the doubt." Over the past year, his feeling changed as he read up on the war and became convinced that there was "intentional manipulation of intelligence" by the Bush administration.

In January, Watada told his commanders that he believed that the war was unlawful, and therefore, so were his deployment orders. He did not, however, consider himself a conscientious objector, since he was willing to fight in wars that were justified, legal and in defense of the nation.

Watada was told that he could submit his resignation, but that the Army would recommend disapproval. That resignation was rejected in May, he said.

In a court-martial proceeding, Watada, who has retained civilian counsel, said he would try to mount a case about the legality of the war under international law and American law. But he is aware that a military court might not allow him to make that case.

Peace activists say they hope more military personnel will refuse to go war.
"We plan a national campaign to try to make sure that he is not punished for what he is doing," Solnit said.

Coulter calls 9/11 widows "witches"

2006-06-08T06:37:00.000-05:00

From the right wing media whore:

By Claudia ParsonsWed Jun 7, 6:24 PM ET
Conservative author Ann Coulter sparked a storm on Wednesday after describing a group of September 11 widows who backed the Democratic Party as millionaire "witches" reveling in their status as celebrities.

"I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much," Coulter writes in her book "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," published on Tuesday, referring to four women who headed a campaign that resulted in the creation of the September 11 Commission that investigated the hijacked plane attacks.

Coulter wrote that the women were millionaires as a result of compensation settlements and were "reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis."

A spokeswoman for publisher Crown Forum said it had set a first print run of 1 million copies of "Godless" and there were 1.5 million copies of Coulter's previous four books in print.

The four women, Kristen Breitweiser, Patty Casazza, Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie Van Auken, declined to discuss the book in detail but issued a statement saying they had been slandered.
"There was no joy in watching men that we loved burn alive. There was no happiness in telling our children that their fathers were never coming home again," said the statement signed by the four, along with a fifth woman, Monica Gabrielle.

The four women, who live in or around East Brunswick, New Jersey, became friends after September 11 and formed a group that agitated for the investigation. "Our only motivation ever was to make our nation safer," they said.

Coulter, whose books include the bestseller "How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)," argues in the new book the women she dubs "the Witches of East Brunswick" wanted to blame President George W. Bush for not preventing the attacks.

She criticized them for making a campaign advertisement for Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry in 2004, and added: "By the way, how do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies? Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they'd better hurry up and appear in Playboy."

PERSONAL ATTACKS
Asked by Reuters why she made such personal comments, Coulter said by e-mail, "I am tired of victims being used as billboards for untenable liberal political beliefs."

"A lot of Americans have been seething over the inanities of these professional victims for some time," she added.

Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg (news, bio, voting record) of New Jersey said Coulter's "shameless attack" on the widows sparked disgust. "Her bookselling antics and accompanying vulgarity deserve our deepest contempt," he said in a statement.

The New York Post, owned by Rupert Murdoch's News. Corp., slammed the comments in an article on Wednesday headlined: "Righty writer Coulter hurls nasty gibes at 9/11 gals."

Coulter, a regular television commentator who is hugely popular among some conservatives, was challenged on NBC's "Today" show on Tuesday over what host Matt Lauer called "dramatic" remarks, prompting her to say, "You are getting testy with me."

Coulter is known for a combative column after September 11 saying, "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." In one book, she wrote, "Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do."

Her latest comments were quoted on radio stations in New York on Wednesday and the book was the subject of debate on Web sites such as www.salon.com. The Daily News newspaper's front-page headline was "Coulter the Cruel."

The controversy appeared to be doing no harm to sales of Coulter's latest book, which was listed as the second-best seller of the day at online retailer Amazon.com on Wednesday afternoon.

Was the 2004 Election Stolen?

2006-06-03T17:11:00.000-05:00

Since all this unfolded in my own backyard in Columbus - none of this stunned me - since we had to watch it unfold. However, there is compelling evidence to back up the title to this article. Once again, Shrub takes the cake and the presidency too. Shame on us America.

Republicans prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted -- enough to have put John Kerry in the White House.
BY ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.

The complete article, with Web-only citations, follows. Talk about it in our National Affairs blog, or see exclusive documents, sources, charts and commentary.

Like many Americans, I spent the evening of the 2004 election watching the returns on television and wondering how the exit polls, which predicted an overwhelming victory for John Kerry, had gotten it so wrong. By midnight, the official tallies showed a decisive lead for George Bush -- and the next day, lacking enough legal evidence to contest the results, Kerry conceded. Republicans derided anyone who expressed doubts about Bush's victory as nut cases in ''tinfoil hats,'' while the national media, with few exceptions, did little to question the validity of the election. The Washington Post immediately dismissed allegations of fraud as ''conspiracy theories,''(1) and The New York Times declared that ''there is no evidence of vote theft or errors on a large scale.''(2)

But despite the media blackout, indications continued to emerge that something deeply troubling had taken place in 2004. Nearly half of the 6 million American voters living abroad(3) never received their ballots -- or received them too late to vote(4) -- after the Pentagon unaccountably shut down a state-of-the-art Web site used to file overseas registrations.(5) A consulting firm called Sproul & Associates, which was hired by the Republican National Committee to register voters in six battleground states,(6) was discovered shredding Democratic registrations.(7) In New Mexico, which was decided by 5,988 votes,(8) malfunctioning machines mysteriously failed to properly register a presidential vote on more than 20,000 ballots.(9) Nationwide, according to the federal commission charged with implementing election reforms, as many as 1 million ballots were spoiled by faulty voting equipment -- roughly one for every 100 cast.(10)

The reports were especially disturbing in Ohio, the critical battleground state that clinched Bush's victory in the electoral college. Officials there purged tens of thousands of eligible voters from the rolls, neglected to process registration cards generated by Democratic voter drives, shortchanged Democratic precincts when they allocated voting machines and illegally derailed a recount that could have given Kerry the presidency. A precinct in an evangelical church in Miami County recorded an impossibly high turnout of ninety-eight percent, while a polling place in inner-city Cleveland recorded an equally impossible turnout of only seven percent. In Warren County, GOP election officials even invented a nonexistent terrorist threat to bar the media from monitoring the official vote count.(11)

Any election, of course, will have anomalies. America's voting system is a messy patchwork of polling rules run mostly by county and city officials. ''We didn't have one election for president in 2004,'' says Robert Pastor, who directs the Center for Democracy and Election Management at American University. ''We didn't have fifty elections. We actually had 13,000 elections run by 13,000 independent, quasi-sovereign counties and municipalities.''

But what is most anomalous about the irregularities in 2004 was their decidedly partisan bent: Almost without exception they hurt John Kerry and benefited George Bush. After carefully examining the evidence, I've become convinced that the president's party mounted a massive, coordinated campaign to subvert the will of the people in 2004. Across the country, Republican election officials and party stalwarts employed a wide range of illegal and unethical tactics to fix the election. A review of the available data reveals that in Ohio alone, at least 357,000 voters, the overwhelming majority of them Democratic, were prevented from casting ballots or did not have their votes counted in 2004(12) -- more than enough to shift the results of an election decided by 118,601 votes.(13) (See Ohio's Missing Votes) In what may be the single most astounding fact from the election, one in every four Ohio citizens who registered to vote in 2004 showed up at the polls only to discover that they were not listed on the rolls, thanks to GOP efforts to stem the unprecedented flood of Democrats eager to cast ballots.(14) And that doesn?t even take into account the troubling evidence of outright fraud, which indicates that upwards of 80,000 votes for Kerry were counted instead for Bush. That alone is a swing of more than 160,000 votes -- enough to have put John Kerry in the White House.(15)

''It was terrible,'' says Sen. Christopher Dodd, who helped craft reforms in 2002 that were supposed to prevent such electoral abuses. ''People waiting in line for twelve hours to cast their ballots, people not being allowed to vote because they were in the wrong precinct -- it was an outrage. In Ohio, you had a secretary of state who was determined to guarantee a Republican outcome. I'm terribly disheartened.''

Indeed, the extent of the GOP's effort to rig the vote shocked even the most experienced observers of American elections. ''Ohio was as dirty an election as America has ever seen,'' Lou Harris, the father of modern political polling, told me. ''You look at the turnout and votes in individual precincts, compared to the historic patterns in those counties, and you can tell where the discrepancies are. They stand out like a sore thumb.''

I. The Exit PollsThe first indication that something was gravely amiss on November 2nd, 2004, was the inexplicable discrepancies between exit polls and actual vote counts. Polls in thirty states weren't just off the mark -- they deviated to an extent that cannot be accounted for by their margin of error. In all but four states, the discrepancy favored President Bush.(16)
Over the past decades, exit polling has evolved into an exact science. Indeed, among pollsters and statisticians, such surveys are thought to be the most reliable. Unlike pre-election polls, in which voters are asked to predict their own behavior at some point in the future, exit polls ask voters leaving the voting booth to report an action they just executed. The results are exquisitely accurate: Exit polls in Germany, for example, have never missed the mark by more than three-tenths of one percent.(17) ''Exit polls are almost never wrong,'' Dick Morris, a political consultant who has worked for both Republicans and Democrats, noted after the 2004 vote. Such surveys are ''so reliable,'' he added, ''that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries.''(18) In 2003, vote tampering revealed by exit polling in the Republic of Georgia forced Eduard Shevardnadze to step down.(19) And in November 2004, exit polling in the Ukraine -- paid for by the Bush administration -- exposed election fraud that denied Viktor Yushchenko the presidency.(20)

But that same month, when exit polls revealed disturbing disparities in the U.S. election, the six media organizations that had commissioned the survey treated its very existence as an embarrassment. Instead of treating the discrepancies as a story meriting investigation, the networks scrubbed the offending results from their Web sites and substituted them with ''corrected'' numbers that had been weighted, retroactively, to match the official vote count. Rather than finding fault with the election results, the mainstream media preferred to dismiss the polls as flawed.(21)

''The people who ran the exit polling, and all those of us who were their clients, recognized that it was deeply flawed,'' says Tom Brokaw, who served as anchor for NBC News during the 2004 election. ''They were really screwed up -- the old models just don't work anymore. I would not go on the air with them again.''

In fact, the exit poll created for the 2004 election was designed to be the most reliable voter survey in history. The six news organizations -- running the ideological gamut from CBS to Fox News -- retained Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International,(22) whose principal, Warren Mitofsky, pioneered the exit poll for CBS in 1967(23) and is widely credited with assuring the credibility of Mexico's elections in 1994.(24) For its nationwide poll, Edison/Mitofsky selected a random subsample of 12,219 voters(25) -- approximately six times larger than those normally used in national polls(26) -- driving the margin of error down to approximately plus or minus one percent.(27)

On the evening of the vote, reporters at each of the major networks were briefed by pollsters at 7:54 p.m. Kerry, they were informed, had an insurmountable lead and would win by a rout: at least 309 electoral votes to Bush's 174, with fifty-five too close to call.(28) In London, Prime Minister Tony Blair went to bed contemplating his relationship with President-elect Kerry.(29)
As the last polling stations closed on the West Coast, exit polls showed Kerry ahead in ten of eleven battleground states -- including commanding leads in Ohio and Florida -- and winning by a million and a half votes nationally. The exit polls even showed Kerry breathing down Bush's neck in supposed GOP strongholds Virginia and North Carolina.(30) Against these numbers, the statistical likelihood of Bush winning was less than one in 450,000.(31) ''Either the exit polls, by and large, are completely wrong,'' a Fox News analyst declared, ''or George Bush loses.''(32)
But as the evening progressed, official tallies began to show implausible disparities -- as much as 9.5 percent -- with the exit polls. In ten of the eleven battleground states, the tallied margins departed from what the polls had predicted. In every case, the shift favored Bush. Based on exit polls, CNN had predicted Kerry defeating Bush in Ohio by a margin of 4.2 percentage points. Instead, election results showed Bush winning the state by 2.5 percent. Bush also tallied 6.5 percent more than the polls had predicted in Pennsylvania, and 4.9 percent more in Florida.(33)
According to Steven F. Freeman, a visiting scholar at the University of Pennsylvania who specializes in research methodology, the odds against all three of those shifts occurring in concert are one in 660,000. ''As much as we can say in sound science that something is impossible,'' he says, ''it is impossible that the discrepancies between predicted and actual vote count in the three critical battleground states of the 2004 election could have been due to chance or random error.'' (See The Tale of the Exit Polls)

Puzzled by the discrepancies, Freeman laboriously examined the raw polling data released by Edison/Mitofsky in January 2005. ''I'm not even political -- I despise the Democrats,'' he says. ''I'm a survey expert. I got into this because I was mystified about how the exit polls could have been so wrong.'' In his forthcoming book, Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen? Exit Polls, Election Fraud, and the Official Count, Freeman lays out a statistical analysis of the polls that is deeply troubling.

In its official postmortem report issued two months after the election, Edison/Mitofsky was unable to identify any flaw in its methodology -- so the pollsters, in essence, invented one for the electorate. According to Mitofsky, Bush partisans were simply disinclined to talk to exit pollsters on November 2nd(34) -- displaying a heretofore unknown and undocumented aversion that skewed the polls in Kerry's favor by a margin of 6.5 percent nationwide.(35)
Industry peers didn't buy it. John Zogby, one of the nation's leading pollsters, told me that Mitofsky's ''reluctant responder'' hypothesis is ''preposterous.''(36) Even Mitofsky, in his official report, underscored the hollowness of his theory: ''It is difficult to pinpoint precisely the reasons that, in general, Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polls than Bush voters.''(37)

Now, thanks to careful examination of Mitofsky's own data by Freeman and a team of eight researchers, we can say conclusively that the theory is dead wrong. In fact it was Democrats, not Republicans, who were more disinclined to answer pollsters' questions on Election Day. In Bush strongholds, Freeman and the other researchers found that fifty-six percent of voters completed the exit survey -- compared to only fifty-three percent in Kerry strongholds.(38) ''The data presented to support the claim not only fails to substantiate it,'' observes Freeman, ''but actually contradicts it.''

What's more, Freeman found, the greatest disparities between exit polls and the official vote count came in Republican strongholds. In precincts where Bush received at least eighty percent of the vote, the exit polls were off by an average of ten percent. By contrast, in precincts where Kerry dominated by eighty percent or more, the exit polls were accurate to within three tenths of one percent -- a pattern that suggests Republican election officials stuffed the ballot box in Bush country.(39)

''When you look at the numbers, there is a tremendous amount of data that supports the supposition of election fraud,'' concludes Freeman. ''The discrepancies are higher in battleground states, higher where there were Republican governors, higher in states with greater proportions of African-American communities and higher in states where there were the most Election Day complaints. All these are strong indicators of fraud -- and yet this supposition has been utterly ignored by the press and, oddly, by the Democratic Party.''

The evidence is especially strong in Ohio. In January, a team of mathematicians from the National Election Data Archive, a nonpartisan watchdog group, compared the state's exit polls against the certified vote count in each of the forty-nine precincts polled by Edison/Mitofsky. In twenty-two of those precincts -- nearly half of those polled -- they discovered results that differed widely from the official tally. Once again -- against all odds -- the widespread discrepancies were stacked massively in Bush's favor: In only two of the suspect twenty-two precincts did the disparity benefit Kerry. The wildest discrepancy came from the precinct Mitofsky numbered ''27,'' in order to protect the anonymity of those surveyed. According to the exit poll, Kerry should have received sixty-seven percent of the vote in this precinct. Yet the certified tally gave him only thirty-eight percent. The statistical odds against such a variance are just shy of one in 3 billion.(40)

Such results, according to the archive, provide ''virtually irrefutable evidence of vote miscount.'' The discrepancies, the experts add, ''are consistent with the hypothesis that Kerry would have won Ohio's electoral votes if Ohio's official vote counts had accurately reflected voter intent.''(41) According to Ron Baiman, vice president of the archive and a public policy analyst at Loyola University in Chicago, ''No rigorous statistical explanation'' can explain the ''completely nonrandom'' disparities that almost uniformly benefited Bush. The final results, he adds, are ''completely consistent with election fraud -- specifically vote shifting.''

II. The Partisan OfficialNo state was more important in the 2004 election than Ohio. The state has been key to every Republican presidential victory since Abraham Lincoln's, and both parties overwhelmed the state with television ads, field organizers and volunteers in an effort to register new voters and energize old ones. Bush and Kerry traveled to Ohio a total of forty-nine times during the campaign -- more than to any other state.(42)

But in the battle for Ohio, Republicans had a distinct advantage: The man in charge of the counting was Kenneth Blackwell, the co-chair of President Bush's re-election committee.(43) As Ohio's secretary of state, Blackwell had broad powers to interpret and implement state and federal election laws -- setting standards for everything from the processing of voter registration to the conduct of official recounts.(44) And as Bush's re-election chair in Ohio, he had a powerful motivation to rig the rules for his candidate. Blackwell, in fact, served as the ''principal electoral system adviser'' for Bush during the 2000 recount in Florida,(45) where he witnessed firsthand the success of his counterpart Katherine Harris, the Florida secretary of state who co-chaired Bush's campaign there.(46)

Blackwell -- now the Republican candidate for governor of Ohio(47) -- is well-known in the state as a fierce partisan eager to rise in the GOP. An outspoken leader of Ohio's right-wing fundamentalists, he opposes abortion even in cases of rape(48) and was the chief cheerleader for the anti-gay-marriage amendment that Republicans employed to spark turnout in rural counties(49). He has openly denounced Kerry as ''an unapologetic liberal Democrat,''(50) and during the 2004 election he used his official powers to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Ohio citizens in Democratic strongholds. In a ruling issued two weeks before the election, a federal judge rebuked Blackwell for seeking to ''accomplish the same result in Ohio in 2004 that occurred in Florida in 2000.''(51)

''The secretary of state is supposed to administer elections -- not throw them,'' says Rep. Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat from Cleveland who has dealt with Blackwell for years. ''The election in Ohio in 2004 stands out as an example of how, under color of law, a state election official can frustrate the exercise of the right to vote.''

The most extensive investigation of what happened in Ohio was conducted by Rep. John Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.(52) Frustrated by his party's failure to follow up on the widespread evidence of voter intimidation and fraud, Conyers and the committee's minority staff held public hearings in Ohio, where they looked into more than 50,000 complaints from voters.(53) In January 2005, Conyers issued a detailed report that outlined ''massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio.'' The problems, the report concludes, were ''caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior, much of it involving Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell.''(54)

''Blackwell made Katherine Harris look like a cupcake,'' Conyers told me. ''He saw his role as limiting the participation of Democratic voters. We had hearings in Columbus for two days. We could have stayed two weeks, the level of fury was so high. Thousands of people wanted to testify. Nothing like this had ever happened to them before.''

When ROLLING STONE confronted Blackwell about his overtly partisan attempts to subvert the election, he dismissed any such claim as ''silly on its face.'' Ohio, he insisted in a telephone interview, set a ''gold standard'' for electoral fairness. In fact, his campaign to subvert the will of the voters had begun long before Election Day. Instead of welcoming the avalanche of citizen involvement sparked by the campaign, Blackwell permitted election officials in Cleveland, Cincinnati and Toledo to conduct a massive purge of their voter rolls, summarily expunging the names of more than 300,000 voters who had failed to cast ballots in the previous two national elections.(55) In Cleveland, which went five-to-one for Kerry, nearly one in four voters were wiped from the rolls between 2000 and 2004.(56)

There were legitimate reasons to clean up voting lists: Many of the names undoubtedly belonged to people who had moved or died. But thousands more were duly registered voters who were deprived of their constitutional right to vote -- often without any notification -- simply because they had decided not to go to the polls in prior elections.(57) In Cleveland's precinct 6C, where more than half the voters on the rolls were deleted,(58) turnout was only 7.1 percent(59) -- the lowest in the state.

According to the Conyers report, improper purging ''likely disenfranchised tens of thousands of voters statewide.''(60) If only one in ten of the 300,000 purged voters showed up on Election Day -- a conservative estimate, according to election scholars -- that is 30,000 citizens who were unfairly denied the opportunity to cast ballots.

III. The Strike ForceIn the months leading up to the election, Ohio was in the midst of the biggest registration drive in its history. Tens of thousands of volunteers and paid political operatives from both parties canvassed the state, racing to register new voters in advance of the October 4th deadline. To those on the ground, it was clear that Democrats were outpacing their Republican counterparts: A New York Times analysis before the election found that new registrations in traditional Democratic strongholds were up 250 percent, compared to only twenty-five percent in Republican-leaning counties.(61) ''The Democrats have been beating the pants off us in the air and on the ground,'' a GOP county official in Columbus confessed to The Washington Times.(62)

To stem the tide of new registrations, the Republican National Committee and the Ohio Republican Party attempted to knock tens of thousands of predominantly minority and urban voters off the rolls through illegal mailings known in electioneering jargon as ''caging.'' During the Eighties, after the GOP used such mailings to disenfranchise nearly 76,000 black voters in New Jersey and Louisiana, it was forced to sign two separate court orders agreeing to abstain from caging.(63) But during the summer of 2004, the GOP targeted minority voters in Ohio by zip code, sending registered letters to more than 200,000 newly registered voters(64) in sixty-five counties.(65) On October 22nd, a mere eleven days before the election, Ohio Republican Party Chairman Bob Bennett -- who also chairs the board of elections in Cuyahoga County -- sought to invalidate the registrations of 35,427 voters who had refused to sign for the letters or whose mail came back as undeliverable.(66) Almost half of the challenged voters were from Democratic strongholds in and around Cleveland.(67)

There were plenty of valid reasons that voters had failed to respond to the mailings: The list included people who couldn't sign for the letters because they were serving in the U.S. military, college students whose school and home addresses differed,(68) and more than 1,000 homeless people who had no permanent mailing address.(69) But the undeliverable mail, Bennett claimed, proved the new registrations were fraudulent.

By law, each voter was supposed to receive a hearing before being stricken from the rolls.(70) Instead, in the week before the election, kangaroo courts were rapidly set up across the state at Blackwell's direction that would inevitably disenfranchise thousands of voters at a time(71) -- a process that one Democratic election official in Toledo likened to an ''inquisition.''(72) Not that anyone was given a chance to actually show up and defend their right to vote: Notices to challenged voters were not only sent out impossibly late in the process, they were mailed to the very addresses that the Republicans contended were faulty.(73) Adding to the atmosphere of intimidation, sheriff's detectives in Sandusky County were dispatched to the homes of challenged voters to investigate the GOP's claims of fraud.(74)

''I'm afraid this is going to scare these people half to death, and they are never going to show up on Election Day,'' Barb Tuckerman, director of the Sandusky Board of Elections, told local reporters. ''Many of them are young people who have registered for the first time. I've called some of these people, and they are perfectly legitimate.''(75)

On October 27th, ruling that the effort likely violated both the ''constitutional right to due process and constitutional right to vote,'' U.S. District Judge Susan Dlott put a halt to the GOP challenge(76) -- but not before tens of thousands of new voters received notices claiming they were improperly registered. Some election officials in the state illegally ignored Dlott's ruling, stripping hundreds of voters from the rolls.(77) In Columbus and elsewhere, challenged registrants were never notified that the court had cleared them to vote.
On October 29th, a federal judge found that the Republican Party had violated the court orders from the Eighties that barred it from caging. ''The return of mail does not implicate fraud,'' the court affirmed,(78) and the disenfranchisement effort illegally targeted ''precincts where minority voters predominate, interfering with and discouraging voters from voting in those districts.''(79) Nor were such caging efforts limited to Ohio: The GOP also targeted hundreds of thousands of urban voters in the battleground states of Florida,(80) Pennsylvania(81) and Wisconsin.(82)

Republicans in Ohio also worked to deny the vote to citizens who had served jail time for felonies. Although rehabilitated prisoners are entitled to vote in Ohio, election officials in Cincinnati demanded that former convicts get a judge to sign off before they could register to vote.(83) In case they didn't get the message, Republican operatives turned to intimidation. According to the Conyers report, a team of twenty-five GOP volunteers calling themselves the Mighty Texas Strike Force holed up at the Holiday Inn in Columbus a day before the election, around the corner from the headquarters of the Ohio Republican Party -- which paid for their hotel rooms. The men were overheard by a hotel worker ''using pay phones to make intimidating calls to likely voters'' and threatening former convicts with jail time if they tried to cast ballots.(84)

This was no freelance operation. The Strike Force -- an offshoot of the Republican National Committee(85) -- was part of a team of more than 1,500 volunteers from Texas who were deployed to battleground states, usually in teams of ten. Their leader was Pat Oxford, (86) a Houston lawyer who managed Bush's legal defense team in 2000 in Florida,(87) where he warmly praised the efforts of a mob that stormed the Miami-Dade County election offices and halted the recount. It was later revealed that those involved in the ''Brooks Brothers Riot'' were not angry Floridians but paid GOP staffers, many of them flown in from out of state.(88) Photos of the protest show that one of the ''rioters'' was Joel Kaplan, who has just taken the place of Karl Rove at the White House, where he now directs the president's policy operations.(89)
IV. Barriers to RegistrationTo further monkey-wrench the process he was bound by law to safeguard, Blackwell cited an arcane elections regulation to make it harder to register new voters. In a now-infamous decree, Blackwell announced on September 7th -- less than a month before the filing deadline -- that election officials would process registration forms only if they were printed on eighty-pound unwaxed white paper stock, similar to a typical postcard. Justifying his decision to ROLLING STONE, Blackwell portrayed it as an attempt to protect voters: ''The postal service had recommended to us that we establish a heavy enough paper-weight standard that we not disenfranchise voters by having their registration form damaged by postal equipment.'' Yet Blackwell's order also applied to registrations delivered in person to election offices. He further specified that any valid registration cards printed on lesser paper stock that miraculously survived the shredding gauntlet at the post office were not to be processed; instead, they were to be treated as applications for a registration form, requiring election boards to send out a brand-new card.(90)

Blackwell's directive clearly violated the Voting Rights Act, which stipulates that no one may be denied the right to vote because of a registration error that ''is not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under state law to vote.''(91) The decision immediately threw registration efforts into chaos. Local newspapers that had printed registration forms in their pages saw their efforts invalidated.(92) Delaware County posted a notice online saying it could no longer accept its own registration forms.(93) Even Blackwell couldn't follow the protocol: The Columbus Dispatch reported that his own staff distributed registration forms on lighter-weight paper that was illegal under his rule. Under the threat of court action, Blackwell ultimately revoked his order on September 28th -- six days before the registration deadline.(94)

But by then, the damage was done. Election boards across the state, already understaffed and backlogged with registration forms, were unable to process them all in time. According to a statistical analysis conducted in May by the nonpartisan Greater Cleveland Voter Coalition, 16,000 voters in and around the city were disenfranchised because of data-entry errors by election officials,(95) and another 15,000 lost the right to vote due to largely inconsequential omissions on their registration cards.(96) Statewide, the study concludes, a total of 72,000 voters were disenfranchised through avoidable registration errors -- one percent of all voters in an election decided by barely two percent.(97)

Despite the widespread problems, Blackwell authorized only one investigation of registration errors after the election -- in Toledo -- but the report by his own inspectors offers a disturbing snapshot of the malfeasance and incompetence that plagued the entire state.(98) The top elections official in Toledo was a partisan in the Blackwell mold: Bernadette Noe, who chaired both the county board of elections and the county Republican Party.(99) The GOP post was previously held by her husband, Tom Noe,(100) who currently faces felony charges for embezzling state funds and illegally laundering $45,400 of his own money through intermediaries to the Bush campaign.(101)

State inspectors who investigated the elections operation in Toledo discovered ''areas of grave concern.''(102) With less than a month to go before the election, Bernadette Noe and her board had yet to process 20,000 voter registration cards.(103) Board officials arbitrarily decided that mail-in cards (mostly from the Republican suburbs) would be processed first, while registrations dropped off at the board's office (the fruit of intensive Democratic registration drives in the city) would be processed last.(104) When a grass-roots group called Project Vote delivered a batch of nearly 10,000 cards just before the October 4th deadline, an elections official casually remarked, ''We may not get to them.''(105) The same official then instructed employees to date-stamp an entire box containing thousands of forms, rather than marking each individual card, as required by law.(106) When the box was opened, officials had no way of confirming that the forms were filed prior to the deadline -- an error, state inspectors concluded, that could have disenfranchised ''several thousand'' voters from Democratic strongholds.(107)

The most troubling incident uncovered by the investigation was Noe's decision to allow Republican partisans behind the counter in the board of elections office to make photocopies of postcards sent to confirm voter registrations(108) -- records that could have been used in the GOP's caging efforts. On their second day in the office, the operatives were caught by an elections official tampering with the documents.(109) Investigators slammed the elections board for ''a series of egregious blunders'' that caused ''the destruction, mutilation and damage of public records.''(110)

On Election Day, Noe sent a team of Republican volunteers to the county warehouse where blank ballots were kept out in the open, ''with no security measures in place.''(111) The state's assistant director of elections, who just happened to be observing the ballot distribution, demanded they leave. The GOP operatives refused and ultimately had to be turned away by police.(112)

In April 2005, Noe and the entire Board of Elections were forced to resign. But once again, the damage was done. At a ''Victory 2004'' rally held in Toledo four days before the election, President Bush himself singled out a pair of ''grass-roots'' activists for special praise: ''I want to thank my friends Bernadette Noe and Tom Noe for their leadership in Lucas County.''(113)
V. ''The Wrong Pew''In one of his most effective maneuvers, Blackwell prevented thousands of voters from receiving provisional ballots on Election Day. The fail-safe ballots were mandated in 2002, when Congress passed a package of reforms called the Help America Vote Act. This would prevent a repeat of the most egregious injustice in the 2000 election, when officials in Florida barred thousands of lawfully registered minority voters from the polls because their names didn't appear on flawed precinct rolls. Under the law, would-be voters whose registration is questioned at the polls must be allowed to cast provisional ballots that can be counted after the election if the voter's registration proves valid.(114)

''Provisional ballots were supposed to be this great movement forward,'' says Tova Andrea Wang, an elections expert who served with ex-presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford on the commission that laid the groundwork for the Help America Vote Act. ''But then different states erected barriers, and this new right became totally eviscerated.''

In Ohio, Blackwell worked from the beginning to curtail the availability of provisional ballots. (The ballots are most often used to protect voters in heavily Democratic urban areas who move often, creating more opportunities for data-entry errors by election boards.) Six weeks before the vote, Blackwell illegally decreed that poll workers should make on-the-spot judgments as to whether or not a voter lived in the precinct, and provide provisional ballots only to those deemed eligible.(115) When the ruling was challenged in federal court, Judge James Carr could barely contain his anger. The very purpose of the Help America Vote Act, he ruled, was to make provisional ballots available to voters told by precinct workers that they were ineligible: ''By not even mentioning this group -- the primary beneficiaries of HAVA's provisional-voting provisions -- Blackwell apparently seeks to accomplish the same result in Ohio in 2004 that occurred in Florida in 2000.''(116)

But instead of complying with the judge's order to expand provisional balloting, Blackwell insisted that Carr was usurping his power as secretary of state and made a speech in which he compared himself to Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. and the apostle Paul -- saying that he'd rather go to jail than follow federal law.(117) The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Carr's ruling on October 23rd -- but the confusion over the issue still caused untold numbers of voters across the state to be illegally turned away at the polls on Election Day without being offered provisional ballots.(118) A federal judge also invalidated a decree by Blackwell that denied provisional ballots to absentee voters who were never sent their ballots in the mail. But that ruling did not come down until after 3 p.m. on the day of the election, and likely failed to filter down to the precinct level at all -- denying the franchise to even more eligible voters.(119)
We will never know for certain how many voters in Ohio were denied ballots by Blackwell's two illegal orders. But it is possible to put a fairly precise number on those turned away by his most disastrous directive. Traditionally, anyone in Ohio who reported to a polling station in their county could obtain a provisional ballot. But Blackwell decided to toss out the ballots of anyone who showed up at the wrong precinct -- a move guaranteed to disenfranchise Democrats who live in urban areas crowded with multiple polling places. On October 14th, Judge Carr overruled the order, but Blackwell appealed.(120) In court, he was supported by his friend and campaign contributor Tom Noe, who joined the case as an intervenor on behalf of the secretary of state.(121) He also enjoyed the backing of Attorney General John Ashcroft, who filed an amicus brief in support of Blackwell's position -- marking the first time in American history that the Justice Department had gone to court to block the right of voters to vote.(122) The Sixth Circuit, stacked with four judges appointed by George W. Bush, sided with Blackwell.(123)

Blackwell insists that his decision kept the election clean. ''If we had allowed this notion of ?voters without borders' to exist,'' he says, ''it would have opened the door to massive fraud.'' But even Republicans were shocked by the move. DeForest Soaries, the GOP chairman of the Election Assistance Commission -- the federal agency set up to implement the Help America Vote Act -- upbraided Blackwell, saying that the commission disagreed with his decision to deny ballots to voters who showed up at the wrong precinct. ''The purpose of provisional ballots is to not turn anyone away from the polls,'' Soaries explained. ''We want as many votes to count as possible.''(124)

The decision left hundreds of thousands of voters in predominantly Democratic counties to navigate the state's bewildering array of 11,366 precincts, whose boundaries had been redrawn just prior to the election.(125) To further compound their confusion, the new precinct lines were misidentified on the secretary of state's own Web site, which was months out of date on Election Day. Many voters, out of habit, reported to polling locations that were no longer theirs. Some were mistakenly assured by poll workers on the grounds that they were entitled to cast a provisional ballot at that precinct. Instead, thanks to Blackwell's ruling, at least 10,000 provisional votes were tossed out after Election Day simply because citizens wound up in the wrong line.(126)

In Toledo, Brandi and Brittany Stenson each got in a different line to vote in the gym at St. Elizabeth Seton School. Both of the sisters were registered to vote at the polling place on the city's north side, in the shadow of the giant DaimlerChrysler plant. Both cast ballots. But when the tallies were added up later, the family resemblance came to an abrupt end. Brittany's vote was counted -- but Brandi's wasn't. It wasn't enough that she had voted in the right building. If she wanted her vote to count, according to Blackwell's ruling, she had to choose the line that led to her assigned table. Her ballot -- along with those of her mother, her brother and thirty-seven other voters in the same precinct -- were thrown out(127) simply because they were, in the words of Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio), ''in the right church but the wrong pew.''(128)
All told, the deliberate chaos that resulted from Blackwell's registration barriers did the trick. Black voters in the state -- who went overwhelmingly for Kerry -- were twenty percent more likely than whites to be forced to cast a provisional ballot.(129) In the end, nearly three percent of all voters in Ohio were forced to vote provisionally(130) -- and more than 35,000 of their ballots were ultimately rejected.(131)

VI. Long LinesWhen Election Day dawned on November 2nd, tens of thousands of Ohio voters who had managed to overcome all the obstacles to registration erected by Blackwell discovered that it didn't matter whether they were properly listed on the voting rolls -- because long lines at their precincts prevented them from ever making it to the ballot box. Would-be voters in Dayton and Cincinnati routinely faced waits as long as three hours. Those in inner-city precincts in Columbus, Cleveland and Toledo -- which were voting for Kerry by margins of ninety percent or more -- often waited up to seven hours. At Kenyon College, students were forced to stand in line for eleven hours before being allowed to vote, with the last voters casting their ballots after three in the morning.(132)

A five-month analysis of the Ohio vote conducted by the Democratic National Committee concluded in June 2005 that three percent of all Ohio voters who showed up to vote on Election Day were forced to leave without casting a ballot.(133) That's more than 174,000 voters. ''The vast majority of this lost vote,'' concluded the Conyers report, ''was concentrated in urban, minority and Democratic-leaning areas.''(134) Statewide, African-Americans waited an average of fifty-two minutes to vote, compared to only eighteen minutes for whites.(135)

The long lines were not only foreseeable -- they were actually created by GOP efforts. Republicans in the state legislature, citing new electronic voting machines that were supposed to speed voting, authorized local election boards to reduce the number of precincts across Ohio. In most cases, the new machines never materialized -- but that didn't stop officials in twenty of the state's eighty-eight counties, all of them favorable to Democrats, from slashing the number of precincts by at least twenty percent.(136)
Republican officials also created long lines by failing to distribute enough voting machines to inner-city precincts. After the Florida disaster in 2000, such problems with machines were supposed to be a thing of the past. Under the Help America Vote Act, Ohio received more than $30 million in federal funds to replace its faulty punch-card machines with more reliable systems.(137) But on Election Day, that money was sitting in the bank. Why? Because Ken Blackwell had applied for an extension until 2006, insisting that there was no point in buying electronic machines that would later have to be retrofitted under Ohio law to generate paper ballots.(138)

''No one has ever accused our secretary of state of lacking in ability,'' says Rep. Kucinich. ''He's a rather bright fellow, and he's involved in the most minute details of his office. There's no doubt that he knew the effect of not having enough voting machines in some areas.''

At liberal Kenyon College, where students had registered in record numbers, local election officials provided only two voting machines to handle the anticipated surge of up to 1,300 voters. Meanwhile, fundamentalist students at nearby Mount Vernon Nazarene University had one machine for 100 voters and faced no lines at all.(139) Citing the lines at Kenyon, the Conyers report concluded that the ''misallocation of machines went beyond urban/suburban discrepancies to specifically target Democratic areas.''(140)

In Columbus, which had registered 125,000 new voters(141) -- more than half of them black(142) -- the board of elections estimated that it would need 5,000 machines to handle the huge surge.(143) ''On Election Day, the county experienced an unprecedented turnout that could only be compared to a 500-year flood,'' says Matt Damschroder,(144) chairman of the Franklin County Board of Elections and the former head of the Republican Party in Columbus.(145) But instead of buying more equipment, the Conyers investigation found, Damschroder decided to ''make do'' with 2,741 machines.(146) And to make matters worse, he favored his own party in distributing the equipment. According to The Columbus Dispatch, precincts that had gone seventy percent or more for Al Gore in 2000 were allocated seventeen fewer machines in 2004, while strong GOP precincts received eight additional machines.(147) An analysis by voter advocates found that all but three of the thirty wards with the best voter-to-machine ratios were in Bush strongholds; all but one of the seven with the worst ratios were in Kerry country.(148)

The result was utterly predictable. According to an investigation by the Columbus Free Press, white Republican suburbanites, blessed with a surplus of machines, averaged waits of only twenty-two minutes; black urban Democrats averaged three hours and fifteen minutes.(149) ''The allocation of voting machines in Franklin County was clearly biased against voters in precincts with high proportions of African-Americans,'' concluded Walter Mebane Jr., a government professor at Cornell University who conducted a statistical analysis of the vote in and around Columbus.(150)

By midmorning, when it became clear that voters were dropping out of line rather than braving the wait, precincts appealed for the right to distribute paper ballots to speed the process. Blackwell denied the request, saying it was an invitation to fraud.(151) A lawsuit ensued, and the handwritten affidavits submitted by voters and election officials offer a heart-rending snapshot of an electoral catastrophe in the offing:(152)

From Columbus Precinct 44D:''There are three voting machines at this precinct. I have been informed that in prior elections there were normally four voting machines. At 1:45 p.m. there are approximately eighty-five voters in line. At this time, the line to vote is approximately three hours long. This precinct is largely African-American. I have personally witnessed voters leaving the polling place without voting due to the length of the line.''

From Precinct 40:''I am serving as a presiding judge, a position I have held for some 15+ years in precinct 40. In all my years of service, the lines are by far the longest I have seen, with some waiting as long as four to five hours. I expect the situation to only worsen as the early evening heavy turnout approaches. I have requested additional machines since 6:40 a.m. and no assistance has been offered.''

Precinct 65H:''I observed a broken voting machine that was not in use for approximately two hours. The precinct judge was very diligent but could not get through to the BOE.''
Precinct 18A:''At 4 p.m. the average wait time is about 4.5 hours and continuing to increase?. Voters are continuing to leave without voting.''

As day stretched into evening, U.S. District Judge Algernon Marbley issued a temporary restraining order requiring that voters be offered paper ballots.(153) But it was too late: According to bipartisan estimates published in The Washington Post, as many as 15,000 voters in Columbus had already given up and gone home.(154) When closing time came at the polls, according to the Conyers report, some precinct workers illegally dismissed citizens who had waited for hours in the rain -- in direct violation of Ohio law, which stipulates that those in line at closing time are allowed to remain and vote.(155)

The voters disenfranchised by long lines were overwhelmingly Democrats. Because of the unequal distribution of voting equipment, the median turnout in Franklin County precincts won by Kerry was fifty-one percent, compared to sixty-one percent in those won by Bush. Assuming sixty percent turnout under more equitable conditions, Kerry would have gained an additional 17,000 votes in the county.(156)

In another move certain to add to the traffic jam at the polls, the GOP deployed 3,600 operatives on Election Day to challenge voters in thirty-one counties -- most of them in predominantly black and urban areas.(157) Although it was billed as a means to ''ensure that voters are not disenfranchised by fraud,''(158) Republicans knew that the challengers would inevitably create delays for eligible voters. Even Mark Weaver, the GOP's attorney in Ohio, predicted in late October that the move would ''create chaos, longer lines and frustration.''(159)
The day before the election, Judge Dlott attempted to halt the challengers, ruling that ''there exists an enormous risk of chaos, delay, intimidation and pandemonium inside the polls and in the lines out the doors.'' Dlott was also troubled by the placement of Republican challengers: In Hamilton County, fourteen percent of new voters in white areas would be confronted at the polls, compared to ninety-seven percent of new voters in black areas.(160) But when the case was appealed to the Supreme Court on Election Day, Justice John Paul Stevens allowed the challenges to go forward. ''I have faith,'' he ruled, ''that the elected officials and numerous election volunteers on the ground will carry out their responsibilities in a way that will enable qualified voters to cast their ballots.''(161)

In fact, Blackwell gave Republican challengers unprecedented access to polling stations, where they intimidated voters, worsening delays in Democratic precincts. By the end of the day, thanks to a whirlwind of legal wrangling, the GOP had even gotten permission to use the discredited list of 35,000 names from its illegal caging effort to challenge would-be voters.(162) According to the survey by the DNC, nearly 5,000 voters across the state were turned away at the polls because of registration challenges -- even though federal law required that they be provided with provisional ballots.(163)

VII. Faulty MachinesVoters who managed to make it past the array of hurdles erected by Republican officials found themselves confronted by voting machines that didn't work. Only 800,000 out of the 5.6 million votes in Ohio were cast on electronic voting machines, but they were plagued with errors.(164) In heavily Democratic areas around Youngstown, where nearly 100 voters reported entering ''Kerry'' on the touch screen and watching ''Bush'' light up, at least twenty machines had to be recalibrated in the middle of the voting process for chronically flipping Kerry votes to Bush.(165) (Similar ''vote hopping'' from Kerry to Bush was reported by voters and election officials in other states.)(166) Elsewhere, voters complained in sworn affidavits that they touched Kerry's name on the screen and it lit up, but that the light had gone out by the time they finished their ballot; the Kerry vote faded away.(167) In the state's most notorious incident, an electronic machine at a fundamentalist church in the town of Gahanna recorded a total of 4,258 votes for Bush and 260 votes for Kerry.(168) In that precinct, however, there were only 800 registered voters, of whom 638 showed up.(169) (The error, which was later blamed on a glitchy memory card, was corrected before the certified vote count.)

In addition to problems with electronic machines, Ohio's vote was skewed by old-fashioned punch-card equipment that posed what even Blackwell acknowledged was the risk of a ''Florida-like calamity.''(170) All but twenty of the state's counties relied on antiquated machines that were virtually guaranteed to destroy votes(171) -- many of which were counted by automatic tabulators manufactured by Triad Governmental Systems,(172) the same company that supplied Florida's notorious butterfly ballot in 2000. In fact, some 95,000 ballots in Ohio recorded no vote for president at all -- most of them on punch-card machines. Even accounting for the tiny fraction of voters in each election who decide not to cast votes for president -- generally in the range of half a percent, according to Ohio State law professor and respected elections scholar Dan Tokaji -- that would mean that at least 66,000 votes were invalidated by faulty voting equipment.(173) If counted by hand instead of by automated tabulator, the vast majority of these votes would have been discernable. But thanks to a corrupt recount process, only one county hand-counted its ballots.(174)

Most of the uncounted ballots occurred in Ohio's big cities. In Cleveland, where nearly 13,000 votes were ruined, a New York Times analysis found that black precincts suffered more than twice the rate of spoiled ballots than white districts.(175) In Dayton, Kerry-leaning precincts had nearly twice the number of spoiled ballots as Bush-leaning precincts.(176) Last April, a federal court ruled that Ohio's use of punch-card balloting violated the equal-protection rights of the citizens who voted on them.(177)

In addition to spoiling ballots, the punch-card machines also created bizarre miscounts known as ''ballot crawl.'' In Cleveland Precinct 4F, a heavily African-American precinct, Constitution Party candidate Michael Peroutka was credited with an impressive forty-one percent of the vote. In Precinct 4N, where Al Gore won ninety-eight percent of the vote in 2000, Libertarian Party candidate Michael Badnarik was credited with thirty-three percent of the vote. Badnarik and Peroutka also picked up a sizable portion of the vote in precincts across Cleveland -- 11M, 3B, 8G, 8I, 3I.(178) ''It appears that hundreds, if not thousands, of votes intended to be cast for Senator Kerry were recorded as being for a third-party candidate,'' the Conyers report concludes.(179)

But it's not just third-party candidates: Ballot crawl in Cleveland also shifted votes from Kerry to Bush. In Precinct 13B, where Bush received only six votes in 2000, he was credited with twenty percent of the total in 2004. Same story in 9P, where Bush recorded eighty-seven votes in 2004, compared to his grand total of one in 2000.(180)

VIII. Rural CountiesDespite the well-documented effort that prevented hundreds of thousands of voters in urban and minority precincts from casting ballots, the worst theft in Ohio may have quietly taken place in rural counties. An examination of election data suggests widespread fraud -- and even good old-fashioned stuffing of ballot boxes -- in twelve sparsely populated counties scattered across southern and western Ohio: Auglaize, Brown, Butler, Clermont, Darke, Highland, Mercer, Miami, Putnam, Shelby, Van Wert and Warren. (See The Twelve Suspect Counties) One key indicator of fraud is to look at counties where the presidential vote departs radically from other races on the ballot. By this measure, John Kerry's numbers were suspiciously low in each of the twelve counties -- and George Bush's were unusually high.
Take the case of Ellen Connally, a Democrat who lost her race for chief justice of the state Supreme Court. When the ballots were counted, Kerry should have drawn far more votes than Connally -- a liberal black judge who supports gay rights and campaigned on a shoestring budget. And that's exactly what happened statewide: Kerry tallied 667,000 more votes for president than Connally did for chief justice, outpolling her by a margin of thirty-two percent. Yet in these twelve off-the-radar counties, Connally somehow managed to outperform the best-funded Democrat in history, thumping Kerry by a grand total of 19,621 votes -- a margin of ten percent.(181) The Conyers report -- recognizing that thousands of rural Bush voters were unlikely to have backed a gay-friendly black judge roundly rejected in Democratic precincts -- suggests that ''thousands of votes for Senator Kerry were lost.''(182)

Kucinich, a veteran of elections in the state, puts it even more bluntly. ''Down-ticket candidates shouldn't outperform presidential candidates like that,'' he says. ''That just doesn't happen. The question is: Where did the votes for Kerry go?''

They certainly weren't invalidated by faulty voting equipment: a trifling one percent of presidential ballots in the twelve suspect counties were spoiled. The more likely explanation is that they were fraudulently shifted to Bush. Statewide, the president outpolled Thomas Moyer, the Republican judge who defeated Connally, by twenty-one percent. Yet in the twelve questionable counties, Bush's margin over Moyer was fifty percent -- a strong indication that the president's certified vote total was inflated. If Kerry had maintained his statewide margin over Connally in the twelve suspect counties, as he almost assuredly would have done in a clean election, he would have bested her by 81,260 ballots. That's a swing of 162,520 votes from Kerry to Bush -- more than enough to alter the outcome. (183)

''This is very strong evidence that the count is off in those counties,'' says Freeman, the poll analyst. ''By itself, without anything else, what happened in these twelve counties turns Ohio into a Kerry state. To me, this provides every indication of fraud.''

How might this fraud have been carried out? One way to steal votes is to tamper with individual ballots -- and there is evidence that Republicans did just that. In Clermont County, where optical scanners were used to tabulate votes, sworn affidavits by election observers given to the House Judiciary Committee describe ballots on which marks for Kerry were covered up with white stickers, while marks for Bush were filled in to replace them. Rep. Conyers, in a letter to the FBI, described the testimony as ''strong evidence of vote tampering if not outright fraud.'' (184) In Miami County, where Connally outpaced Kerry, one precinct registered a turnout of 98.55 percent (185) -- meaning that all but ten eligible voters went to the polls on Election Day. An investigation by the Columbus Free Press, however, collected affidavits from twenty-five people who swear they didn't vote. (186)

In addition to altering individual ballots, evidence suggests that Republicans tampered with the software used to tabulate votes. In Auglaize County, where Kerry lost not only to Connally but to two other defeated Democratic judicial candidates, voters cast their ballots on touch-screen machines. (187) Two weeks before the election, an employee of ES&S, the company that manufactures the machines, was observed by a local election official making an unauthorized log-in to the central computer used to compile election results. (188) In Miami County, after 100 percent of precincts had already reported their official results, an additional 18,615 votes were inexplicably added to the final tally. The last-minute alteration awarded 12,000 of the votes to Bush, boosting his margin of victory in the county by nearly 6,000. (189)

The most transparently crooked incident took place in Warren County. In the leadup to the election, Blackwell had illegally sought to keep reporters and election observers at least 100 feet away from the polls. (190) The Sixth Circuit, ruling that the decree represented an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment, noted ominously that ''democracies die behind closed doors.'' But the decision didn't stop officials in Warren County from devising a way to count the vote in secret. Immediately after the polls closed on Election Day, GOP officials -- citing the FBI -- declared that the county was facing a terrorist threat that ranked ten on a scale of one to ten. The county administration building was hastily locked down, allowing election officials to tabulate the results without any reporters present.

In fact, there was no terrorist threat. The FBI declared that it had issued no such warning, and an investigation by The Cincinnati Enquirer unearthed e-mails showing that the Republican plan to declare a terrorist alert had been in the works for eight days prior to the election. Officials had even refined the plot down to the language they used on signs notifying the public of a lockdown. (When ROLLING STONE requested copies of the same e-mails from the county, officials responded that the documents have been destroyed.) (191)

The late-night secrecy in Warren County recalls a classic trick: Results are held back until it's determined how many votes the favored candidate needs to win, and the totals are then adjusted accordingly. When Warren County finally announced its official results -- one of the last counties in the state to do so (192) -- the results departed wildly from statewide patterns. John Kerry received 2,426 fewer votes for president than Ellen Connally, the poorly funded black judge, did for chief justice. (193) As the Conyers report concluded, ''It is impossible to rule out the possibility that some sort of manipulation of the tallies occurred on election night in the locked-down facility.'' (194)

Nor does the electoral tampering appear to have been isolated to these dozen counties. Ohio, like several other states, had an initiative on the ballot in 2004 to outlaw gay marriage. Statewide, the measure proved far more popular than Bush, besting the president by 470,000 votes. But in six of the twelve suspect counties -- as well as in six other small counties in central Ohio -- Bush outpolled the ban on same-sex unions by 16,132 votes. To trust the official tally, in other words, you must believe that thousands of rural Ohioans voted for both President Bush and gay marriage. (195)

IX. Rigging the RecountAfter Kerry conceded the election, his campaign helped the Libertarian and Green parties pay for a recount of all eighty-eight counties in Ohio. Under state law, county boards of election were required to randomly select three percent of their precincts and recount the ballots both by hand and by machine. If the two totals reconciled exactly, a costly hand recount of the remaining votes could be avoided; machines could be used to tally the rest.
But election officials in Ohio worked outside the law to avoid hand recounts. According to charges brought by a special prosecutor in April, election officials in Cleveland fraudulently and secretly pre-counted precincts by hand to identify ones that would match the machine count. They then used these pre-screened precincts to select the ''random'' sample of three percent used for the recount.

''If it didn't balance, they excluded those precincts,'' said the prosecutor, Kevin Baxter, who has filed felony indictments against three election workers in Cleveland. ''They screwed with the process and increased the probability, if not the certainty, that there would not be a full, countywide hand count.'' (196)

Voting machines were also tinkered with prior to the recount. In Hocking County, deputy elections director Sherole Eaton caught an employee of Triad -- which provided the software used to count punch-card ballots in nearly half of Ohio's counties (197) -- making unauthorized modifications to the tabulating computer before the recount. Eaton told the Conyers committee that the same employee also provided county officials with a ''cheat sheet'' so that ''the count would come out perfect and we wouldn't have to do a full hand-recount of the county.'' (198) After Eaton blew the whistle on the illegal tampering, she was fired.

(199) The same Triad employee was dispatched to do the same work in at least five other counties. (200) Company president Tod Rapp -- who contributed to Bush's campaign (201) -- has confirmed that Triad routinely makes such tabulator adjustments to help election officials avoid hand recounts. In the end, every county serviced by Triad failed to conduct full recounts by hand. (202)

Even more troubling, in at least two counties, Fulton and Henry, Triad was able to connect to tabulating computers remotely via a dial-up connection, and reprogram them to recount only the presidential ballots. (203) If that kind of remote tabulator modification is possible for the purposes of the recount, it's no great leap to wonder if such modifications might have helped skew the original vote count. But the window for settling such questions is closing rapidly: On November 2nd of this year, on the second anniversary of the election, state officials will be permitted under Ohio law to shred all ballots from the 2004 election. (204)

X. What's At StakeThe mounting evidence that Republicans employed broad, methodical and illegal tactics in the 2004 election should raise serious alarms among news organizations. But instead of investigating allegations of wrongdoing, the press has simply accepted the result as valid. ''We're in a terrible fix,'' Rep. Conyers told me. ''We've got a media that uses its bullhorn in reverse -- to turn down the volume on this outrage rather than turning it up. That's why our citizens are not up in arms.''

The lone news anchor who seriously questioned the integrity of the 2004 election was Keith Olbermann of MSNBC. I asked him why he stood against the tide. ''I was a sports reporter, so I was used to dealing with numbers,'' he said. ''And the numbers made no sense. Kerry had an insurmountable lead in the exit polls on Election Night -- and then everything flipped.'' Olbermann believes that his journalistic colleagues fell down on the job. ''I was stunned by the lack of interest by investigative reporters,'' he said. ''The Republicans shut down Warren County, allegedly for national security purposes -- and no one covered it. Shouldn't someone have sent a camera and a few reporters out there?''

Olbermann attributes the lack of coverage to self-censorship by journalists. ''You can rock the boat, but you can never say that the entire ocean is in trouble,'' he said. ''You cannot say: By the way, there's something wrong with our electoral system.''

Federal officials charged with safeguarding the vote have also failed to contest the election. ''Congress hasn't investigated this at all,'' says Kucinich. ''There has been no oversight over our nation's most basic right: the right to vote. How can we call ourselves a beacon of democracy abroad when the right to vote hasn't been secured in free and fair elections at home?''
Sen. John Kerry -- in a wide-ranging discussion of ROLLING STONE's investigation -- expressed concern about Republican tactics in 2004, but stopped short of saying the election was stolen. ''Can I draw a conclusion that they played tough games and clearly had an intent to reduce the level of our vote? Yes, absolutely. Can I tell you to a certainty that it made the difference in the election? I can't. There's no way for me to do that. If I could have done that, then obviously I would have found some legal recourse.''

Kerry conceded, however, that the widespread irregularities make it impossible to know for certain that the outcome reflected the will of the voters. ''I think there are clearly states where it is questionable whether everybody's vote is being counted, whether everybody is being given the opportunity to register and to vote,'' he said. ''There are clearly barriers in too many places to the ability of people to exercise their full franchise. For that to be happening in the United States of America today is disgraceful.''

Kerry's comments were echoed by Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee. ''I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided,'' Dean says. ''We know that there was substantial voter suppression, and the machines were not reliable. It should not be a surprise that the Republicans are willing to do things that are unethical to manipulate elections. That's what we suspect has happened, and we'd like to safeguard our elections so that democracy can still be counted on to work.''

To help prevent a repeat of 2004, Kerry has co-sponsored a package of election reforms called the Count Every Vote Act. The measure would increase turnout by allowing voters to register at the polls on Election Day, provide provisional ballots to voters who inadvertently show up at the wrong precinct, require electronic voting machines to produce paper receipts verified by voters, and force election officials like Blackwell to step down if they want to join a campaign. (205) But Kerry says his fellow Democrats have been reluctant to push the reforms, fearing that Republicans would use their majority in Congress to create even more obstacles to voting. ''The real reason there is no appetite up here is that people are afraid the Republicans will amend HAVA and shove something far worse down our throats,'' he told me.

On May 24th, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) tried unsuccessfully to amend the immigration bill to bar anyone who lacks a government-issued photo ID from voting (206) -- a rule that would disenfranchise at least six percent of Americans, the majority of them urban and poor, who lack such identification. (207) The GOP-controlled state legislature in Indiana passed a similar measure, and an ID rule in Georgia was recently struck down as unconstitutional. (208)
''Why erect those kinds of hurdles unless you're afraid of voters?'' asks Ralph Neas, director of People for the American Way. ''The country will be better off if everyone votes -- Democrats and Republicans. But that is not the Blackwell philosophy, that is not the George W. Bush or Jeb Bush philosophy. They want to limit the franchise and go to extraordinary lengths to make it more difficult to vote.''

The issue of what happened in 2004 is not an academic one. For the second election in a row, the president of the United States was selected not by the uncontested will of the people but under a cloud of dirty tricks. Given the scope of the GOP machinations, we simply cannot be certain that the right man now occupies the Oval Office -- which means, in effect, that we have been deprived of our faith in democracy itself.

American history is littered with vote fraud -- but rather than learning from our shameful past and cleaning up the system, we have allowed the problem to grow even worse. If the last two elections have taught us anything, it is this: The single greatest threat to our democracy is the insecurity of our voting system. If people lose faith that their votes are accurately and faithfully recorded, they will abandon the ballot box. Nothing less is at stake here than the entire idea of a government by the people.

Voting, as Thomas Paine said, ''is the right upon which all other rights depend.'' Unless we ensure that right, everything else we hold dear is in jeopardy.
Talk about it in our National Affairs blog, or see exclusive documents, sources, charts and commentary.

Bush Forcefully Attacks Iraq Critics

2005-11-11T18:08:00.000-05:00

November 11th, 2005 2:28 pmBush Forcefully Attacks Iraq Critics
By Deb Riechmann / Associated Press
TOBYHANNA, Pa. - President Bush, in the most forceful defense yet of his Iraq war policy, accused critics Friday of trying to rewrite history and charged that they're undercutting America's forces on the front lines.
"The stakes in the global war on terror are too high and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges," the president said in his combative Veterans Day speech.

"While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began," the president said.

Bush's defense of his policy came at a time of growing doubts and criticism about a war that has claimed the lives of more than 2,050 members of the U.S. military. As casualties have climbed, Bush's popularity has dropped. His approval rating now is at 37 percent in the latest AP-Ipsos poll, an all time low point of his presidency.

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who ran unsuccessfully against Bush last year, quickly challenged the president's charges. "I wish President Bush knew better than to dishonor America's veterans by playing the politics of fear and smear on Veterans Day," said Kerry, who voted in 2002 to give Bush the authority to wage war but later voted against additional funds for Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction. Kerry argued at the time that Bush didn't have a solid plan to restore peace.

"This administration misled a nation into war by cherry-picking intelligence and stretching the truth beyond recognition," Kerry said.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said, "It's deeply regrettable that the president is using Veterans Day as a campaign-like attempt to rebuild his own credibility by tearing down those who seek the truth about the clear manipulation of intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war."

The president spoke at the Tobyhanna Army Depot on a stage decorated with posters that said "Strategy for Victory."

His appearance came as his primary justification for the 2003 invasion — that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction — has come under fresh attack on Capitol Hill. Democrats have seized on the indictment of a now-resigned senior White House aide in the CIA leak case to shine the spotlight on how the president and other officials used intelligence about Iraq in the weeks and months leading up to the war.
A congressional inquiry into the administration's handling of prewar intelligence is pending.

Bush said that foreign intelligence services and Democrats and Republicans alike were convinced at the time that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

"Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and mislead the American people about why we went to war," Bush said.

He said those critics have made those allegations although they know that a Senate investigation "found no evidence" of political pressure to change the intelligence community's assessments related to Saddam's weapons program.

Bush also said they know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing Saddam's development and possession of weapons of mass destruction.

"More than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate who had access to the same intelligence voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power," he said.

Bush did not single out any critics by name but said many of them had supported Kerry. The president said the criticism has taken a toll on U.S. forces.

"These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will," Bush said.

"As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them," the president said. "Our troops deserve to know that this support will remain firm when the going gets tough. And our troops deserve to know that, whatever our differences in Washington, our will is strong, our nation is united and we will settle for nothing less than victory."

"We will never back down. We will never give in. We will never accept anything less than complete victory," Bush declared.

Bush said the United States and its allies are determined to keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of extremists and prevent them from gaining control of any country.

Bush singled out Syria for particular criticism, saying its government had taken "two disturbing steps" in recent days. He cited the arrest of Syria pro-democracy activist Kamal Labwani and a "strident speech" by President Bashar Assad. In that speech, Assad said his government would cooperate with a U.N. investigation that implicated Syrian officials in the killing of a Lebanese leader, but warned he would no longer "play their game" if Syria "is going to be harmed."

Bush said Syria "must stop exporting violence and start importing democracy."

Bush's political adviser Karl Rove, who is still under the cloud of the CIA leak investigation, hopped Air Force One to attend Bush's speech.

The president's appearance came as Vice President Dick Cheney spoke at Arlington National Cemetery, where the president traditionally goes on Veterans Day.

Cheney laid a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns and told a crowd of about 6,000 at the cemetery's Memorial Amphitheater that U.S. forces have toppled two dictatorships and liberated 50 million people.
"Difficult missions are still to come and we cannot know every turn that lies ahead," he said. "Yet we can be certain that by the resolve of our country, by the rightness of our cause...we will prevail."

Long Time No Blog

2005-11-10T13:52:00.000-05:00

It's been forever and a day since I've updated this thing. Since my daily chores are done, I'm feeling like letting the world know what's been happening with me!

I survived my final auction back in May. it was without a few of my dear friends. Zippy left WOSU in January. Little did we know, her final day at work would be Ron's final day on earth. For me personally, that was a life altering moment. I just kept telling myself, you can get through this dammit, so do it! With that and no choice, I buried myself in work. At the end of the tunnel was a good event and an annual trip to the Cape with a decision to move to MA. I know, I can't believe it at times either! The girl from Columbus picked up and moved in with the chick from Jersey!

The summer is not a blur, but I do look back and think, how in the hell did this all get done? I had been settled a mere week before our new house projects started. It was quite fun and similar to auction, but on steroids! During this time the hurricane had hit New Orleans. I had the news up rather loud since I was painting a bathroom adjacent to the TV. I found myself in shock everyday as I watched these helpless people be abandoned by our government. I add this up to the ineffectiveness of GW once again. If at this point every freaking American doesn't get the fact this man is a COMPLETE failure to the country, I don't know what will wake your ass up. Oh, maybe 2,000+ dead soldiers fighting a bogus war may help you see light. Ooooops, I went off on a tangent!

Anyhoo, back to life. CA and I are now settled and very happy in our new Harvest Home. I received my final award from PBS in October. That felt pretty damn good, 9 awards in 13 years of service, you gotta love that! I got lucky and also found my true harvesty job at Tea Forte'. I start my new career soon to add with my new vehicle, new house, new life. It all seems to be falling into place quite nicely.

I intend to start bitching about GW again. The CIA leak and all that should come from it will leave alot of us who tried to put Kerry in office saying "I told you so!". But, no one likes a wise arse right? The Clinton blow job is starting to look like a fly on the wall compared to lying to your country to take them into war. I've always felt the truth has a way of finding its way out, this is no different, so pay attention dammit!