Seething in the Wilderness - an Online Magazine

Only you can prevent Bill Napoli

2006-03-08T18:41:00.000-05:00

Hey, I'm back! Possibly only for tonight, but we'll see. I'm cross-posting this from my writing blog . Please spread the word.

You're probably all aware that the South Dakota legislature has passed a bill banning abortion even in the case of rape and incest. What you may not have heard yet are the remarks of State Senator Bill Napoli, on what kind of rape victim might qualify for an abortion:

A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life.

I have no comment on his remarks, due to the fact that they struck me speechless. But it's good to know that I, as a non-virgin (sorry, Mom!), won't be messed up, physically and psychologically, in the event of a brutal sexual assault.

So the gals at Smart Bitches Who Love Trashy Novels (SBs for short) decided to do to Bill Napoli what columnist Dan Savage did to PA Senator Rick Santorum, which was to redefine his name to mean, er, something nasty.

The SBs are using a Google bomb, which simply involves having tons of sites linking to a desired page using specific anchor text, so that when someone types Bill Napoli into Google's search engine, the page with this new definition comes up.

At last count on Blogsnow, the SB Bill Bill Napoli page was the eighth most-linked-to page on all of the Internets.

I encourage all bloggers reading this to join us in spreading the word about just how vile Bill Napoli and his type really are. Simply link to this page:

http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/billnapoli/

using the words "Bill Napoli" (without the quote marks) as your anchor text. "Anchor text," if you don't know (and I didn't until just now), is the term for the words you highlight before you click on the "make link" button.

BTW, it doesn't really help to type it several times; I only did it to be obnoxious.

Hiatus

2005-08-22T12:23:00.000-04:00

I'm taking a bit of a break from this blog. Why? Not because I've grown jaded or cynical or tired of all the bullshit the Bush administration is passing around like so many cheap hors d'oeuvres, though at least one of those is true.

I've signed a contract to work on a short-term project for an organization which, while expressly allowing political participation by its employees as long as they act as private citizens, doesn't explicitly mention blogging as one of those permissible forms of participation. Though I'd never mention the organization by name here on the blog, if one of my associates or managers there Googled me and discovered I was still spouting my very public opinions while under their employment...eh, I'd be less than comfortable with that.

It's an ostensibly nonpartisan organization, but I've decided to play it safe, more out of concern for the reputation of the person on whose project I'm assisting than any concern for my own employment. So it's not as if my silence has been purchased (although I'm willing to entertain offers--we could use a new washing machine).

I'll still be blogging over at jerismithready.com. Hope to see you there, and back here again in three to six months. Until then, please patronize the fine people on my blogroll to get your daily doses of vitriolic insights. If you only have time for two, check out Shakespeare's Sister for up-to-the-minute rants, and Nero Fiddled for well-researched, incredibly written essays.

Seethe On, my brothers and sisters. Seethe On.

The Refresher that Pauses

2005-08-12T09:29:00.000-04:00

In honor of all the Back-To-School sales (must they start so early? I'm not even in school anymore and I find them depressing), here's a short geopolitical history course on how we got where we are now, with Iraq, al Qaeda, and the "War on Terror*." This comes courtesy of Juan Cole, professor of history at University of Michigan, whose recent articles in Salon and other periodicals have shed lots of light and perspective on our current foreign policy situations.

Don't worry--the lesson has lots of pictures so you won't fall asleep from all the hot-weather learnin'.

*which, in my experience, we've won. I no longer have Terror. I just have Rage. And I didn't get it from no monkey, neither.

Tolerate this

2005-08-10T11:56:00.000-04:00

Don't believe in abortion? Don't understand gay people? Sexuality make you rashy? Think Harry Potter teaches kids evil and witchcraft? Don't marry a sexy gay witch abortionist. But don't you dare, based on your limited understanding of God and life, make laws declaring that I can't.

Once again, Mark Morford says it the way I wish I could, except with longer sentences. In this week's column he discusses why, when push comes to shove comes to legislation, liberals shouldn't tolerate the intolerable.

Shuttle Fixed!

2005-08-03T10:02:00.000-04:00

Astronaut Steve Robinson performed the first-ever in-flight repair to the space shuttle Discovery last night when he peeled off some loose fiber strips from the orbiter's belly. The NASA folks worried that the hanging pieces would make Discovery less aerodynamic on reentry, causing the surface to overheat.

After returning to the shuttle, Robinson sent his bill via satellite to the Johnson Space Flight Center:

Removal of fiber strips: Parts $0, Labor $3.5 million
Oil Change: Parts $1.7 million, Labor $7.24 million -- Buy five and get one free!
Tire Rotation: Parts $0, Labor $9.1 million
Naked Biker Chicks Calendar to hang on outside of Discovery while working: Parts $14.95, Labor $4,005.34

This is not America

2005-08-02T14:30:00.000-04:00

Hmm, in today's Archive Dig results from September 2004, we find a note about CBS covering up a story on the fake "yellowcake" documents, as well as a pre-election EPA gag order on its employees. All of which caused me to declare us Back in the U.S.S.R.

Where it all began

2005-08-01T14:57:00.000-04:00

In honor of this month's recess, I'm dusting off treasures found in the blogging basement. Today's edition: my vewwy first blog post, a recap of the Republican National Convention, submitted and subsequently rejected by a fictional fiction editor. Enjoy.

Recess!

2005-08-01T08:25:00.000-04:00

DING-A-DING-A-DING-A-DING!

For better or for worse, I've lived in the Washington, DC, area most of my life, and worked in that wretched city one summer (1999, the longest summer in history). The August Congressional recess has become a part of my own natural rhythm. Everything grinds to a halt around here. Even businesses that don't do government work seem to kick back and not worry too much about getting things done.

Before the advent of air conditioning, the recess was intended to allow our representatives to escape the Potomac swampland the nation's capital turns into every summer. By August the air is so fetid, breathing itself becomes a matter of luck. It's almost as bad as New York City.

More important, the recess offers everyone a respite from the toxic swamp gas of politics. Though machinations and manipulations continue behind the scenes in Crawford and Kennebunkport (after all, Karl Rove would cease to exist if he weren't planning the demise of a Democrat), the tide of Washington news stories should ebb for the next few weeks.

I've decided to take a recess from all the crap, too. I've been blogging more or less every day for nearly a year, venting my opnions on the outrage of the hour. This Administration provides so much good material, it's hard to stop.

But August is a good time to slow down and reacquaint oneself with the things in life that don't drive us crazy. Embrace the inactivity, the boredom. Have a big glass of lemonade or iced tea, a cold bottle of beer or frozen margarita. At least once a day, eat a snowball, Italian ice, slushy, snow cone--whatever they call it in your parts.

August is the yin to the rest of the year's yang. Revel in it.

Besides, we need time to replenish our Reservoirs of Rancor for the coming year: Supreme Court nominee hearings, Karl Rove's frogwalk, and the continuing Operation Charlie Foxtrot in Iraq (it's too bad war can't take a recess).

Though it's only been a year, I thought it'd be fun to dig into the archives and pull out some tasty bits of 2004. Check back here every day or so for a stumble down Memory Lane. Some politics, some nonsense, some Yankee-bashing...

If you can't get enough o' my love, stop by my personal/writing blog, which I plan to update daily.

Stay cool, Seethers, and I'll see you in September.

Birth control couldn't prevent Rick Santorum

2005-07-29T20:27:00.000-04:00

Of the delights of this world man cares most for sexual intercourse, yet he has left it out of his heaven.
--Mark Twain

This week I've been pretty self-absorbed, posting mainly on my personal/writing blog, not getting too riled up over any one headline enough to blog about it.

That all changed a few minutes ago, when I saw this bit (via Pandagon) about PA Senator Rick Santorum's latest edict on What's Good for Women (since he's the expert and all):

I don't think [birth control] works. I think it's harmful to women, I think it's harmful to our society to have a society that says that sex outside of marriage is something that should be encouraged or tolerated, particularly among the young. I think it has, as we've seen, very harmful long-term consequences for society. So birth control to me enables that and I don't think it's a healthy thing for our country.

Because sex, Ladies and Girls, is a bad, bad thing, and if you do it, you should be made to suffer the curse of babies. Except, we love babies, so sex is a good thing, because it makes babies. Babies are good, but sex is bad. Wait, I've got it: Sex without babies is bad, and sex with babies is good. No, no, that sounds perverted. I'll try again:

People, especially the young ones, shouldn't have sex, unless they're married. So young people should get married as soon as possible so they can have sex and babies. Babies are good for women! The more the better! Because the more babies you have, the less likely you are to have sex. And remember, sex is bad. It's the worst thing that can possibly happen to you.

(If you're Rick Santorum's wife, that is.)

Seriously now. You know what's harmful to women, Rick? Life-hating, self-flagellating Puritanism like yours. The conviction that anything that brings us happiness must also bring us pain. The delusion that God would create earthly pleasures only to make us miserable, to tempt us into defying His will so that He could hurl our souls into the lake of fire for all eternity. Nothing harms women more than living in the Shadow of Eve.

As a gender, we've grown out of that trap, thanks in large part to birth control. Santorum wants us to suffer for sex, the way we did in the good old days, when women would die in childbirth or risky abortion attempts, and then the man could go out and get a brand-new baby vessel--I mean, wife.

Over There

2005-07-29T17:45:00.000-04:00

We watched the pilot of this new dramatic series Wednesday night at 10. Though it didn't go into the politics of the war in Iraq, it didn't need to. Just seeing what the soldiers and their loved ones on the home front have to suffer through should make anyone ask, "Is it worth it?"

If you missed it, FX will rerun the pilot tomorrow (Saturday) at 10PM. FX is a regular cable station (not premium like HBO), so it should be available everywhere.

Some of the war "footage" is pretty grisly (one image in particular will live in your mind forever--you'll know it when you see it), but if you can hack it, I highly recommend this show.

Numbskulls to the North

2005-07-27T08:42:00.000-04:00

It turns out that being Canadian doesn't mean you're not an idiot.

The Rotary Club of Chatham, in Miramichi, New Brunswick, is planning to build a new "eco-centre" to raise environmental awareness. Their fundraiser for this noble project is a raffle.

The raffle prize: a HUMVEE. The Club sees no irony in the fact that anyone with environmental awareness wouldn't be caught dead in a Hummer, unless they were driving it off a cliff to save the world from its emissions.

"It's not any more a gas guzzler than anything that's out on the highway now," [Rotary member Leon] Bremner said. "I've had plenty of people that say they'll get better gas mileage with this Hummer than they will their vehicle."

Well, okay, assuming that this is their current vehicle.

Cross your fingers

2005-07-26T06:54:00.000-04:00

If all goes well, the space shuttle Discovery will launch this morning at 10:39 EDT. Chance of good weather: 80%.

Cross those toes while you're at it. It's good exercise.

A brief bwahaha

2005-07-25T13:11:00.000-04:00

Busy with work. Have headache. Can't blog.

So here's your homework for today, class:

Type "failure" (with or without quotes) into Google's search bar.

Still more Downing Street cartoons

2005-07-22T08:46:00.000-04:00

In honor of tomorrow's three-year anniversary of the original Downing Street Minutes (the first ones that were leaked, at least), we Big Brass Alliance members are making sure people don't forget. As Paul the Spud at Shakespeare's Sister says:

With the Rove Carnival 'o Fun, the Supreme Court Nominee from Mattel, and the second attack in London, there's a lot going on in the news right now. The Memo has been pushed to the end of the line... not forgotten, but definitely edging towards the lip of the memory hole.

All across the nation tomorrow, groups will be holding house parties and rallies to raise awareness and remind people how and why we got into this unnecessary, unjust, and destructive war. The Rove/Plame affair, rather than being a distraction, only serves to remind us how desperate the Administration was to bamboozle the country into believing Saddam posed a serious and imminent threat. Check out AfterDowningStreet.org for events in your area.

With that, I'll fulfill my unofficial role as the BBA 'Toon Scout and dish up some new political funnies. Unfortunately, since the topic has cooled off from the front pages, it's also lost the attention of the cartoonists, but here's a few from late last month.

Hail, Dubyus! at Salon.com takes a look at last month's "Primesident Blush" press conference.

The San Francisco Chronicle's Tom Meyer draws an unlikely parallel between Bush and Michael Jackson.

It's not a cartoon, but Too Stupid to be President gives us the Top 11 Reasons to Ignore the Downing Street Memo.

If you're new here, check out my last segment on Downing Street Minutes cartoons, and the one before that. And get to one of those rallies if you can.

Wait and See

2005-07-21T08:07:00.000-04:00

I try not to be a ditto-head, but several others have already expressed my views on the new nominee for the Supreme Court. In case you care what they are, see this Baltimore Sun editorial, or Kos and Jeralyn's posts from Tuesday night.

The legal arguments he made while working for the Government or as a corporate lawyer may or may not reflect his personal values, or how he would rule as a Supreme Court Justice.

I'd like to know more about him before I make up my mind. I don't think it helps that liberal groups are coming out swinging so soon. It has the appearance that they would oppose anyone Bush would nominate. --Jeralyn, Talk Left

(Thanks to The Impolitic for those last two links.)

Scott Adams, political cartoonist

2005-07-21T08:05:00.000-04:00

He may not realize it, but Dilbert has gone to work at the White House.

Bug me not

2005-07-20T20:34:00.000-04:00

I've never put any stock in the Bush Administration's "flypaper theory"--wherein we "fight the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here."

First of all, I want the government to fight the terrorists here--as in, improve homeland security to prevent another attack.

Second, there are many potential terrorists already living in the U.S., and us bombing Iraq is not going to dissuade them from their mission.

Third, we're creating more terrorists through our war in Iraq.

So I'd like to propose what I call the "Bug Zapper Theory" (Patent pending). Remember those heinous electric contraptions that families--okay, dads--used to hang in the backyard to kill insects? While those gathered on the patio try to enjoy their burgers or roasted marshmallows, every half-minute or so a resounding --ZZZZZZZTT!-- would emanate from the zapper, signaling the death-by-frying of a "bad guy." We'd all feel safer, imagining the roasted critter to be a malaria-wielding mosquito or bubonic plague-toting gnat.

A professor of entomology at Rutgers University notes what we all--except our dads--eventually figured out: the zappers are ineffective and tended to kill mostly harmless bugs:

Scientific studies indicate that mosquitoes make up a very small percentage of bug zapper collections. Comparison trapping has also shown no significant difference in mosquito populations in yards with and without the traps. Biting insects, in general, make up less than 1 percent of the insects killed in zappers. Unfortunately, beneficial insects are usually well represented in an average night's catch. The continued popularity of these traps is probably due to the never-ending sound effects, which remind owners that their investment is working. Most trap operators are unaware that their zappers are killing harmless insects that would otherwise serve as food for wildlife.

Lifetips: The Online Owner's Manual for Your Life describes more fallacies of bug zappers:

Female mosquitos (the ones that bite) are attracted to carbon dioxide and body heat (two indicators of fresh blood), not light, so a zapper won't even address the real problem.
Many of the zapped insects feed on mosquitos.
When zapped, the bugs explode into thousands of tiny particles that may contain bacteria and viruses.

So what it comes down to is this: bug zappers (military invasions) do little to address mosquitos (terrorism) and in fact end up destroying populations that are not only innocent but are also one of the best weapons against the beasts themselves. Not only do zappers not solve the problem, they exacerbate it.

Yet people still buy these products because it makes them feel like they're taking action, like they're fighting them "over there" (near the clothesline) so they don't have to fight them "here" (on the picnic table).

They relish the sounds and sights of death, any death, because in their tiny little minds, all insects are bad. Who cares if a few moths (or a few hundred moths) bite the dust? Collateral damage! Who cares if the kids get sick from breathing fly guts? They knew the risks when they signed up! Who cares if more mosquitos thrive as a result? More mosquitos means more mosquitos to kill! Yeeeeeeeee-haaaaa!

This War on Skeeters is hard work, dangit. We won't let any of those pansy-assed "experts" question our tactics. All Americans need is the sound of exploding bugs to tell us we're on the right track.

POP! CRACKLE! ZZZZZZZTTTT! We're Number One!

Untouchable--I hope

2005-07-20T07:43:00.000-04:00

The Baltimore Sun did a nice feature on Patrick Fitzgerald, the Special Prosecutor in the investigation of the Valerie Plame leak.

"At a certain point, we have to yield to law because if we don't, we're lost," Fitzgerald told a judge this month, on the day New York Times reporter Judith Miller went to jail at his request for refusing to testify about her sources.

Whether you agree with his decision to jail Miller or not, one has to admire his Elliot Ness-esque tenacity and adherence to principle. Fitzgerald indicted Osama bin Laden in 1998 and in 1994 sent New York Mafia boss John Gambino to prison.

People on both sides of the party lines seem to have confidence that he'll get to the bottom of these shenanigans, and that he's of an independent mind. And after all, the Bush Administration is cooperating fully with the ongoing investigation.

Wait--where have I heard that last line?

Bush nominates some guy

2005-07-19T20:49:00.000-04:00

Well, that's what Laura gets for opening her little mouth. Last week she told the press that she hoped he would nominate a woman to the Supreme Court. As recently this morning a female name was being circulated, that of appeals judge Edith Clement. Others hoped he would select a minority candidate.

But just now Bush nominated 50-year-old white guy John G. Roberts Jr. That's right: 50 years old. Practically in diapers. He could be around for the next three decades.

According to this AP article:

Roberts did co-write a brief that stated, "We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled." Pressed during his 2003 confirmation hearing for his own views on the matter, Roberts said: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

So at least when everyone's looking, he's not an anti-choice fetus freak. He's considered one of Bush's "non-controversial" choices. But according to Shakespeare's Sister,

Roberts has quite a significant history in trying to undermine abortion rights, including, under the first Bush administration, co-authoring a Supreme Court brief as Deputy Solicitor General for Rust v. Sullivan which argued for the government’s ability to prohibit doctors in federally-funded family planning programs from discussing abortions with their patients.

Among Roberts’ other writings can be found articles in support of a more expansive reading of the Contracts and Taking clauses of the Constitution, holding positions that would restrict Congress’ means for environmental protection.

As far as Bush and apparently most of the Senate is concerned, as long as a judge isn't personally polluting our rivers with the bodies of dead abortion doctors, he's non-controversial.

Hmm, time to go watch Bush's speech. Or, I could just rip out my toenails one by one with a pair of pliers.

Monday's press briefing

2005-07-18T15:04:00.000-04:00

Again, anything not in brackets is a direct quote:

>>>>>>>

Terence Hunt, Associated Press: The President seemed to raise the bar and add a qualifier today when discussing whether or not anybody would be dismissed for the leak of a CIA officer’s name, in which he said if someone was found to have committed a crime, they would be no longer working in this Administration. That’s never been part of the standard before. Why is that added now?

Scott McClellan: I disagree, Terry. I think the President was stating what is obvious when it comes to people who work in the Administration. When someone commits a crime, they’re not gonna be working any longer in this Administration. Now the President talked about how it’s important for us to learn all the facts. We don’t know all the facts. It’s important that we not pre-judge the outcome of the investigation. We need to let the investigation continue, and the investigators are the ones in the position to gather all the facts and draw the conclusions, and at that point we’ll be more than happy to talk about it as I indicated last week. The President directed the WH to cooperate fully, and that’s what we’ve been doing.

[got tired of typing bullshit here. Sorry.]

TH: You had said that anyone involved in this would no longer be in this Administration. You didn’t say, ‘anybody who had committed a crime.’ You had said Sept 2003 that anyone involved in this would no longer be in this Administration.

SM: [I know what I said. Don’t read into anything more than what the President said.] And I think that’s something you might be trying to do here.

[Ed. Note: OOOOOOH! Scotty, you butch, you!]

NBC (but not David Gregory): Does the President equate the word ‘leaking’ to a crime, as best you know, in his mind? Just the use of the word ‘leaking,’ does he see that as a criminal standard, and is the only threshold for firing someone involved being charged with a crime?

SM: We all serve at the pleasure of the President at this WH. You heard what the President had to say on the matter.

NBC: Is leaking, in your judgment of his interpretation, a crime?

SM: I’ll leave it at what the President said.

Helen Thomas: Two years and he can’t call Rove in and find out what the hell’s going on?

SM: Helen—

HT: Why is it so difficult to find out the facts? It cost thousands, maybe millions of dollars, two years, tied up how many lawyers. All he’s gotta do is call him in.

SM: You just heard the President. He doesn’t know all the facts. I don’t know all the facts.

HT: Why? Why doesn’t he just ask him--

SM: All right, I’ll tell you why. Because there’s an investigation that is continuing at this point, and there are appropriate people to handle these issues are the ones who are overseeing that investigation [blah blah].

HT: You talked about it with reporters.

ABC (but not Terry Moran): We don’t know all the facts, but we know some of the facts. That is, we know that Matthew Cooper did speak to Karl Rove and Lewis Libby about these issues. So given the fact that you had previously stood at that podium and said these men did not discuss Valerie Plame or a CIA agent’s identity in any way. Does the WH have a credibility problem?

SM: No. You just answered your own question when you said we don’t know all the facts. [don’t pre-judge the outcome]

ABC: On the specifics, you made statements that have proven to be untrue.

SM: [same bullshit, but said more forcefully, plus saying that the President has faith in the American people. Gee, thanks.]

Bob Franken, CNN: Given the new formulation that if somebody committed a crime, now would that be a crime as determined by an indictment or a crime as determined by a conviction?

SM: [gets testy, has nothing to add]

BF: The importance is, if it is the latter, the strategy would be to run out the clock.

SM: [we all serve at the pleasure of the President, we’re cooperating with investigators]

April Ryan, American Urban Radio: Going back to the President’s statements from earlier, ‘if someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my Administration,’ it makes me go back to my question last Wednesday: is there regret from this Administration as to what has this done to the Wilson family with the CIA leak? I talked to Mr. Wilson prior to going into the East Room, and he basically said, ‘The American people deserve an apology,’ and that his family is basically collateral damage in a bigger picture.

SM: All these questions are getting into pre-judging the outcome of the investigation, and we’re not gonna do that.

AR: The President acknowledged that there was a problem, and it could be a criminal problem. If he acknowledged that, isn’t there some sort of regret?

SM: It’s a criminal investigation.

AR: Is there regret from this White House that it has caused an American family who works for this government to have—

SM: I’ve heard what you have to say, and I’ve already answered.

Ed Chen, LA Times: The President talked about if a crime were committed, but a year ago and beyond, he denounced leaks out of this executive branch and other parts of Washington, he said, ‘this is wrong.’ If it’s only a leak, will he take some appropriate action?

SM: Look back at what the President said. [etc.]

[Goyal from Asia Times—always good for a change in subject–asks about the Indian PM’s visit]

Carl Cameron, Fox News: You’re telling us that we shouldn’t read anything new into the President’s comments today. Should we then take that to mean that if there was criminal activity that person would be fired, but this does not render inoperative those things that the President has said yes or responded affirmative to in the past when asked for instance if he would fire someone involved in a leak?

SM: I wouldn’t read anything into it beyond what he said.

CC: Do the previous statements remain operative?

SM: [We’ll talk about it after the investigation is over]

Lester Kinsolving, WCBM Baltimore: Jack Kelley in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette notes that the Intelligence Identities Protection Act defines a covert agent as someone working undercover overseas. He notes Valerie Plame has manned a desk at the CIA HQ since 1997. Mark Stein of the Chicago Sun-Times notes that Valerie’s husband conceded on CNN that she is not a clandestine officer and hasn’t been one for six years, so leaking her CIA connection did not endanger her life or comprise her mission. Would you or the President or Karl Rove disagree with these two nationally syndicated columnists?

SM: [I’ve said all there is to say]

LK: 19 members of Congress from seven states have written a letter to the President saying that they are still waiting for an answer to a May 26 question: is the President opposed to contraception? Could they now have an answer to my question, do you regard them, too, not to be dignified with a response?

SM: [We’ve talked about federally funded programs that promote abstinence and how those ought to be funded on at least equal footing with other programs]

David?, from?: Scott, with apologies for coming back to this definitional issue that we seem to be dancing around, what I’m having a hard time with is, you’re telling us that there was nothing new in what the President said today, yet you have said before that the President would fire someone if they were involved in the leak. The President seemed to set a higher bar today, if they were convicted of a criminal act. Those are not the same thing on their face.

SM: [don’t read anything more than what he said]

D: Is the WH standard the one the President enunciated, then?

SM: I think I’ve addressed that question.

Victoria Jones, Talk Radio News Service: Backing up to October 2003, you did assure us that you had talked with Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, and Elliot Abrams, and they all assured you they weren’t involved in any of this. So with regard to Libby and Abrams, do you still stand by that?

SM: [ongoing investigation, can’t comment]

VJ: With regard to that, how concerned is the President and you, notwithstanding that you don’t want to talk about it, that Ken Mehlman and other senior Republicans are all over the airwaves doing just that?

SM: You can direct those questions to the RNC.

----

At this point, my hands started to cramp up, and I have to get my cat to the vet, so I had to stop, but it was basically more of the same after this. I would say at least 75% of the questions asked today had to do with Rove. Whenever Scotty was asked a question on another topic, he rambled on and on to kill time. The entire briefing was only 23 minutes, shorter than the usual half-hour.

UPDATE: The cat is fine.

Schieffer rips Bush a new one

2005-07-18T13:50:00.000-04:00

Bush Administration toady Bob Schieffer of CBS got all uppity yesterday with a statement excoriating the President.

Instead of appointing a special prosecutor, what if the President had just called in his top people in the beginning of all this and said, 'Folks, we have a problem here. I need to know who's been talking to Bob Novak, and I need to know today by the end of business.'

The very idea of Bush doing something like that gives me the giggles. I mean, can you imagine? "I want to know the truth, dangit. We need to be upfront with the American people. Our credibility could be questioned. I vowed to restore decency and integrity to this White House, and that means no lying allowed!"

Yeah, even I don't have that kind of imagination. Anyway, Schieffer talks about how Johnson and Nixon knew what was going on their Administrations.

[T]his White House did what it usually does when challenged: it went into attack mode, called charges that White House officials had leaked the name "ridiculous," and allowed the controversy to boil until a special prosecutor had to be appointed. Now two years and millions of tax dollars later, the President's trusted friend and strategist Karl Rove has emerged as the top suspect, and we're left to wonder: Can anything said from the White House podium be taken at face value, or does the White House just deny automatically anything that reflects badly on it?

In a word: duh.

Thanks to Crooks and Liars for the heads-up and video.

Lest we forget

2005-07-18T08:55:00.000-04:00

Mr. Wilson, his mission to Niger to check out Saddam's supposed attempts to secure uranium that might be used in nuclear weapons and even his wife's outing have as much to do with the real story here as Janet Leigh's theft of office cash has to do with the mayhem that ensues at the Bates Motel in "Psycho."
--Frank Rich, op-editorial, New York Times

Read the rest before it goes yonder beyond the pay-wall. I'm too sleepy to expound much, but Rich reminds us that, just like Watergate was about Nixon, this whole hoo-ha is about the Bush--and most importantly, I would add, about Bush and his stupid, evil, pointless War. The one he thought would give him political capital. The one he lied to drum up support for. The one which, studies show, has created more brand-new terrorists bent on killing Americans and our allies. It wasn't Rove's idea to invade Iraq.

Let's never forget that while Karl Rove may be a cunning, power-hungry weasel, he appears to be completely sane, unlike our President. (Thanks to Noah at Nero Fiddled for that link.)

The Ultimate Question

2005-07-18T08:31:00.000-04:00

...of Life, the Universe, and Everything:

What is Bush's latest approval rating?

A good sign

2005-07-15T17:07:00.000-04:00

Jesus has bad Punctuation and Random Capitalization, so do We.

See, I'm an equal opportunity ridiculer.

It's not the same

2005-07-15T17:01:00.000-04:00

Sorry, I just can't work myself into a frenzy of sardonicism over Trent Duffy, who led today's Press Gaggle aboard Air Force We're-Number-One. The press did ask about Rove but since it was McClellan and not Duffy who repeatedly lied to them about the senior White House official's involvement in the Plame leak, they weren't as deliciously snide this morning. Or maybe the lunch was just extra yummy.

In other news, our dog killed a rabbit last night, the first one in the two years we've lived here that could actually run away from her (plucking nestlings out of a hole like cookies from a jar just doesn't count as hunting in my book). Let's just say there's a reason why she retired early from racing.