If You Can't Say Something Nice...
Say Something Vague

'Cause W Stands For Honesty

From today's Altercation regarding the newly revised terrorism report:

"Anyone who might assert the numbers were intentionally skewed is mistaken," said Brennan, director of the Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC), created by President Bush to produce efficient and comprehensive assessments of domestic and international terrorism.

When the April report was released, Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage said it provided "clear evidence that we are prevailing in the fight." Yesterday, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said Armitage's words were based on incorrect information.

The revised figures show that more people were killed by terrorists last year than at any time since 1998, apart from 2001, when the Sept. 11 hijackings caused 2,973 deaths. Terrorist bombings and shootings left 3,646 people injured around the world -- more than in any year in the past six.

So we just had one of the worst years of terrorism on record when, just a few months ago, the State Department was claiming to have had one of the best. And no, they did not make anything up—just like the Secretary did not make anything up when he said all those things that turned out to be untrue to the U.N. in February 2003. And all those statements by Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rice, Feith, Rumsfeld and Perle were all honest mistakes.

Does anyone in the mainstream media ever wonder why this administration only makes "honest mistakes" in favor of its own arguments?

Sadly, we have very little media responsibility, and God knows that we have no govermental culpability. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that all of their little "mistakes" lead to so much corruption, destruction and death.

One more thing

September 18, 2003 vs. today.

L-I-A-R.

Blog Blog Blog

No, I didn't blog yesterday, and I can't really blog today. I'm busy. Yea!

I've been listening to some dissection of the 9/11 commission's report on Air America (just reading and taking calls on the report). Sickening. Where was the FAA? And GWB's cell phone didn't work so he couldn't issue commands to shoot down the planes?!?! What the !@#$ did they do before cell phones in cases of national emergency? You can't tell me that none of the dozens of security people that attend the president's every move didn't have their own cell phones? Or any other method of getting in touch with the president? OMG. Disgusting.

Separated At Birth?

Scott McClellan, White House Press Secretary for W.

and

Jack Black, actor, half of band Tenacious D. (I know it's not the greatest pic of Jack Black, but I think you get the idea).

Groovin' At The House of Blues

#$%^&*( dentist appointment! If not for my (long and painful) dental appointment this morning, I would have beaten Jenny to posting about our trip to the Disney-rific HOB in Anaheim to see the inimitable Aimee Mann.

If you haven't seen the HOB in Anaheim, it is sort of set up in concentric squares, on two levels, and you stand for the whole show. I found this chairless setup to be barbaric, but maybe that's just me. Anyway, Jenny has stolen much of my thunder by describing some of the more colorful figures that made up the HOB crowd.

Oh, side note: would someone please tell Miss Smith that I am not responsible for the kooky characters that make up the Anaheim-ites just because I live there?? I've lived there less than a year. I tried explaining this already, but to no avail. Okay, back to the show. Since Jenny described some of the characters, I'll describe the band and show to the best of my (admittedly limited) ability.

First off, I would describe the band as sort of nouveau hippie. Aimee Mann has long hair that she seems to like in her face. She was wearing jeans, a loose shirt and a very large powder blue tie. Why? I just don't know. To her right, one of the guitar guys was the spitting image of Topher Grace on That '70s show (especially the hair). He had on a velvety looking jacket and apparently some really fantastic shoes, but we couldn't see them from our location at the back of the HOB. (At one point, Aimee couldn't concentrate on the song because of his shoes; instead she started to just make up a song about his shoes and how they made her think of hot tubs and gold chains in the Valley.) The drummer looked like Michael Chicklis.

The other guitar guy was the obnoxious opening guy that Jenny aptly describes (although she forgot to mention his crazy quasi-fro hair). He wanted so badly to be an innovative and cool solo musician. He fell far short of the mark. There were moments when his singing was okay, but they--sadly--did not last long. But he was good in the band. And then there was the keyboard player. This individual was of indeterminate gender (although I think Jenny and I ultimately determined that it was probably a guy) and also sported the wacky frizzy-headed look. He/she appeared to be really...um...moved by the music that she/he was playing. The ecstatic look on his/her face was kinda disturbing, to be honest with you. Bad-Opener-Guy and Strangely-Orgasmic-Keyboard-She-male were both decked out in peasant-style tops; very Woodstock-like.

The music, however, was just fantastic. I don't really like to see bands live most of the time because I always end up disappointed--they never sound anything near as good as on their albums. But Aimee Mann is an exception. She was just as good live, if not better. Live you really get the soulful and playful quality of her singing. She is incredibly talented with music that adroitly walks the line between rock and folk. She's not afraid to incorporate electric guitar and heavy drums, but they somehow never manage to overshadow The Voice that is Aimee Mann. On the other hand, many of her songs rely on an acoustic guitar and very muted accompaniment. She really was great.

Well, I'm a little partial. I've really liked her since I first heard her song Amateur on the soundtrack for the movie Sliding Doors. I loved the song so much I went out and bought her Collection CD and I've been hooked ever since. I would even characterize her performance at HOB as sublime, knowing full well that this could draw accusations of exaggeration. But I truly don't believe that's the case.

Isn't It Interesting

GWB can remember his precise words to the administration telling them to conform to international treaties, but he can't recall seeing any documents from anybody re: the treatment of prisoners? (shades of Reagan...)

Of course, GWB has never shown much regard for international treaties to begin with, so it's interesting that now that he's being called to question on the torture issue, he's such a strong advocate of them!

Crass Exploitation Is The Name Of The Game!

As is quite often the case, Josh Marshall calls it like it is. This administration is so pathetically grasping at straws. Mwahahahaha Mwahahahaha!

I've been really irritated lately about the Reagan propaganda because it is diverting public attention from some really important issues. Did you know that W consulted independent counsel re: the upcoming grand jury investigation into the Valerie Plame CIA identity leak? That's HUUUUGE. Or that John Ashcroft refused to turn over to Congress the documents indicating the White House's stand on torture?!

These are both tremendously important issues/events, and have been greatly overshadowed by the image of Reagan's casket in the Capitol rotunda and interviews with every single person in line. I mean, I understand that he was a president and is entitled to a state funeral. But the so-called liberal media is seriously falling down on the job here! Not that that's anything new since W took over. But that's a tirade for another day...

Just My Two Cents

Amanda has posted such a good blog re: the whole Reagan quasi-canonization issue that I won't try to rephrase it. Instead I'll make a feeble attempt to enhance her message with this excellent political cartoon.

And a little bit of soothsaying from Eric Alterman here.

And, finally...once again the Bush administration will capitalize on the deaths of others in order to pick up their (seriously) flagging ratings.

And Now For Something Completely Different

In a massive detour from yesterday's post, I wanted to take a moment and explain why I want to add a section called MY LIST to this blog. You know how sometimes when someone ticks you off you say, 'well, so and so is on my list now'? That's MY LIST.

So, my geeky computer friends (who I respect tremendously), how can I create a list in my sidebar of what is on MY LIST and link each item to the blog posting where I rant about it?

Here's the first one, today I was driving back from picking up my lunch at Chipotle (mmmm), and I was at a light, in the right-most lane that goes straight. Next to me was a car in a right turn only lane. The car in that lane was supposed to cross the intersection and get onto the on-ramp for the 405S. Instead, the !@#$%^&*()_+ guy driving the Silver Acura TSX, license plate # 1QKTSX, cut me off and got into my lane, just BARELY missing hitting me while moving!!!!! I was so mad. If you are ever driving in Orange County, CA, watch out for that jerk!

Is My God More Worthy of Funding Than Your God?

I have some questions/issues with the 'faith-based initiatives' so dear to Bush's heart. I know that there is a likely risk of angering or offending some of my Christian/religious friends, so I just ask that you hear me out (or read me out, I suppose) before you get too upset with me re: this post.

Okay, faith-based initiatives. When I first heard about these I thought that they seemed like a pretty good idea. Fund churches and other organizations so that they can further their humanitarian projects. And, in theory, this may even work. But, as with most things, theory and practice are often vastly different. In fact, the more I learn, the more I think government should get its mitts off my faith (and everyone else's).

First, I am an ardent supporter of separation of church and state. This isn't because I'm anti-faith at all. It's because I don't think the two mix well together. It's because the government was divided into three branches to ensure checks and balances of power. And none of those branches was 'Religiosity'. In fact, dictatorships and violent militant regimes have long embraced the idea of state-mandated faith to humankind's great detriment.

The first problem that strikes me is that a government that gets to decide what is/not a legitimate faith-based program is likely to exclude (i.e.: discriminate against) certain other faiths. For example, how many of these dollars earmarked for 'faith-based programs' do you suppose are going to be given to Muslim organizations? Another problem I see is that once they start engaging with the government, some churches are going to be conflicted about their earthly loyalties. Don't you think that there would be certain pressures to support the administration that has given them thousands or millions of dollars? A third--more practical--problem is that a partnership such as this may begin to look more like a corporation, and less like a church-based organization, and may later be denied the tax-exempt status currently bestowed on most faith organizations.

I am following a proposal to what I see as its natural, negative conclusions. I don't think churches or church-based organizations should ever become (or be seen to become) the mouthpiece of the government. Once they do, get ready to bow down to your dictator-king. This country was NOT founded to be a theocracy or an oligarchy. I see governmental support of faith organizations as one step on the path to ensuring that kind of extremely dangerous rule of the land.

Our founding fathers were very clear about separating out the powers of God (whom- or whatever He/She may be to you, as an individual) and the powers of government. This is yet another reason why I cringe when I hear W referring to himself as an agent of God, doing the Lord's work. I think our leaders should indeed by moral and do their absolute best to honor good, sound principles for governing. But I do not agree that our leader should proclaim his right by divinity. To paraphrase (atrociously), pray in private when you need the strength, but don't be boastful and showy with your prayers. Our leaders need to lead based on what is best for ALL people; not just those whom are affiliated with the same church or faith. When W claims to be God's right-hand man, or decides to fund those churches and organizations that he sees as directly supporting his personal vision of good, he is overstepping his bounds.

I fear that taxpayer support of faith-organizations sets a dangerous precedent and sends a bad message. A dangerous precedent, because what other things are going to slowly and insidiously became overshadowed by one man's (or one faith's) version of right and wrong? And a bad message because what happens to all those whose 'faith' organization (which is so loosely defined as to leave all manner of loopholes for the arbiters of the national checkbook) is declined government funds? We've seen what happens when people are isolated for religious reasons, and it's not pretty.

This situation also underscores the point I've mentioned above, and that's that our president is (at least meant to be) an elected official, appointed by a democratic voting system. Our president is not chosen by a beam of light shining down from heaven or a smoke signal, like the Pope. Western innovations and lifestyles are already globally pervasive and have lead to a lot of ugliness throughout the world (i.e.: terrorism and all that entails). How much more do you think this would increase if the US was seen not only to be forcing its rule of government, but it's national religion (whatever that may ultimately be) onto other countries?

What Is Your Knitter's Geek Code?

According to Knitty, I am (give or take a bit) a KER++ Exp SPM- Skacel++ Bam+ Syn Nov+ Stash Fin+ Scale+ Ent? Circ++DPN-Swatch---Blog++SNB+++ FO3WIP2 GaugeSW+DK++

Countdown: 2 days to HP3!!

Can't Blog

Too caught up in my new book, The Time Traveler's Wife. I've been waiting ages for the paperback to come out, and saw it at a bookstore on Friday after seeing Shrek 2 at Downtown Disney. So good. Must go read more.

In the meantime, this is a real tribute to the fallen for Memorial Day. Not the farce perpetrated on the U.S. yesterday at Arlington by the prez and his cronies.