So who is our

Himmler? Our "Minister of Propaganda"? Scott McClellan? Tony Snow (does his name making anyone else think of the term "Snow Job"? Is that indicative of the Republican Agenda?)? I don't think so, both of them are "too public".

Anyone ever see "Wag the Dog"? Remember how Conrad Brean (played by Robert De Niro) made Stanley Motss (Dustin Hoffman) "disappear" at the end of the movie when he threatened to go public?

The Legality of US Propaganda

Now granted this is just a blog summary, but if the government is planting news stories to try to "direct" our thinking, can we really trust conventional media sources?

One part of it sounds so funny. "It appears that our government may be in direct violation of the law and federal authorities are currently investigating the allegations:" This isn't new news, they seem to have been engaged in illegal activities for some time now. They keep getting caught out and all they can say is "War on Terror, War on Terror".

And I've been thinking about the furor that Congress is up in arms about regarding the searching of Representative Jefferson's office. While I think that so many of them are crooks and could stand a little "Light of Justice", I do listen to what the other side is saying. And it strikes me as definately odd that the Justice Department had to search his office at midnight and it took 18 hours to finish. And they refused to let the House legal authority to be present at the search.

So I guess we can't find anything in this deal that doesn't stink!

More tragic?

By now everyone has seen the news about the CBS reporters who were killed in Iraq. I don't recall what it was but something on the NPR reporting of it this morning pissed me off. About how dangerous it was.

Hello!, it's a war zone? What did you think was going on there? Did you think your "Press" flak jacket would miracuously render you immune to bomb blasts and shrapnel? That the insurgents would care if they shot at a journalist? (actually I would think they might target journalists for the added publicity)

I think I recall what it was that pissed me off, comparisons between how dangerous reporting is now in Iraq compaired to Vietnam. This comparison is just as pointless, just as stupid and just as wildly inaccurate as any of the other comparisons between the two conflicts.

Granted it's tragic and I mourn for the fallen and their families. But ... well I could go on but I suspect that will just piss me off more. Going to that place where I was when I heard about how "tragic" it was when Christa MacAullif died in the Challenger accident (more tragic than any of the rest of them? just because she was a teacher? a civilian? she volunteered for that shit too!).

If you're worried about how dangerous your job is (when you're job involves a war zone) then perhaps you should change careers! You volunteered for this, just like the troops did. And when you get injured it's just as tragic. But hell, you had helmets, flak jackets and eye protection. I'd bet that none of the six civilians injured in that blast had any of that gear.

Leaving the show

You know I've watched a few shows over my tv-watching "career". I've loved some of them and I've hated ... well when I hate them I just stop watching (or don't start - I can't really stand the few things I've seen Steve Carroll in so I never watched "The Office" except by accident and I turn it off as quick as the buttons will depress).

But when a loved character leaves a show, for whatever reason, I mourne. When they ("Those bastards") killed off Janet Frazier on "Stargate SG-1" I hated them. Granted it was a fabulous two part episode, very well written and acted. But still ...

And while "NCIS" isn't great, I do enjoy watching it, mostly because of Mark Harmon, Lauren Holly (now) and Pauley Perrette. But her (Pauley's) blog makes me think.

Pauley's Blog

And I know Donald P. Bellasario has made a ton of shows and a lot of them pretty damn good. He's in the background so I don't know a lot about him but it still strikes me as pretty damn callous to be harping and harping on and on about someone leaving "NCIS" and making all the actors wonder if it's them. I mean to me it's just a tv show. If I like it I'll feel sad or mad or something but it won't really affect my life in a dramatic way. But for the actors it's the job and in short it sounds like he's firing someone. Which is a lame ass way of handling that. Now I know that most of them will move on to some other project, a movie, a play or more tv but still. Making fun of it and freaking people out. Lame ass, Donald P! Lame.

An interesting academic

debate. This idea of our responsibility to people around us.

Who's responsibility is it?

However I don't see the issue, I see it as our obligation as "civilized" beings. The obligation of having opposible thumbs and a mind.

I wasn't going

to harp on the fact that Lay and Skilling had been found guilty. It seemed it should have been sufficient to know that they couldn't hookwink everyone and someone was going to call them on their crap.

Then I saw this ...

Guilty Verdict For Former Enron Execs
on BlogHer. Not Ms Vest's summary but the third one down by "Right Thinking Girl". The idea that they *shouldn't* be found guilty if they "intentionally avoided knowing what was going on.". They were in freaking CHARGE, not only should they KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, but they are ultimately RESPONSIBLE for all of it! However I (seem to) tend to get emotional about this sort of thing and my ideas of responsibility are heavily flavored by my military experience. And I don't particularily hide behind excuses when things go south, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. If something doesn't go as planned, consider what happened, review your decisions and the facts they were based on and try your best not to let it happen again. And quick as it was, even the collapse of Enron wasn't a one-event, snap-of-the-fingers sort of thing, there was some small period of time when they could have done something about it. That is something other than to try to hide things with wonky accounting tricks.

It does see regrettable that, given the nature of Lay's family, that they're going to be suffering for his actions. However that should have weighed on his mind when he allowed those things to happen. And I find myself insensed about the controversy hereabouts.

Lay Alma Mater Rebuffs Endowment Request

It seems some seven years ago Mister Lay donated a million dollars to the University of Missouri for the funding of a chair in international economics to be named after him. Now they want to keep the money but not the name. Given that it was implicit in the donation, I see it in black and white terms. He's not a good example for our students or a fair indication of the ethics and morals of our faculty so the money should be given back and his picture taken down. That they're slow in deciding strikes me as bald face money grubbing. The University's position seems much more carefully worded however ...

A Statement from the University of Missouri regarding Kenneth L. Lay Chair in Economics

And I wonder if posting on this subject at all is a wise thing ...

Above the law?

I ask this question (should members of Congress be above - or immune - from the law) not from the position I appear to have made so many other of my political rants. Convinced I know what's right.

I ask from a curiosity point of view. Should members of Congress not be subject to searches? I believe the law enforcement officers should have a warrant, which require convincing a judge that you have enough evidence to believe that there will be something related to the case in question there (not in legalese as Andy might have put it). And I'm fairly certain that if we formalize the position that members of Congress are above, or immune from, the law we're only going to see more and more scandals and bribery cases, but I'm willing to listen to other points of view (if presented calmly, whoever replied that if the rape victim at Duke was lying I should have my wang cut off can still go to hell).

House Leaders Question FBI Search

I will point out that if he had given up the documents subpoenaed then they might not have searched his office. But then they might have proven his guilt. And given that he was accused of lobbying violations himself, I don't think Rep Boehner has much room to speak. The whole "black_pot == black_kettle;" thing.

Congressman Jefferson at the Center of a Political Storm

Lawmakers Question Legality of Rep. Jefferson Office Search

Search of Capitol Hill office creates another storm

Should I point out now that if you don't take bribes then you really don't have to worry about this?

There they are

I knew the Dems weren't a great deal better than the Republicans. I knew there had to be scandals with their names on them.

Troubled congressman keeps his cool

After all, when the Republicans took congress 10 years ago they used the exact same phrase the Dems are throwing around now, a "culture of corruption". What we seem to presume is that they're honest when they imply that it's the other side and not Washington as a whole to which it applies.

It seems to be the first time ever that a Congressional office was searched. However to be fair, Louisana has a long history of crooked politics, if I recall correctly. Not quite so bad as Chicago but still ...

---

I heard that new hurrican evacuation plans now must include pets and service animals. Now service animals I can see, they prove essential to well being in most cases and I can see being broken up if your beloved pet is in danger or lost, but be real if the dog dies it's not YOUR life (even if you might feel like it). But if you want to stay behind and die with your pet I think you should have that right. You shouldn't be protected from yourself against your will (or at our cost).

---

Runaway killer bus
How can this be considered a prank? Dipping hair in ink or hiding frogs in lunch boxes are pranks. Releasing the emergency brake is not a prank, it's a dangerous stunt which might get (oh, guess what, it DID!) someone killed. Now I don't think an 8 year old boy should be tried as a felon, and I don't think the driver was at fault, or the grandmother for falling asleep. It seems a tragic series of events, but still ... she's dead and her 11 year old brother had to watch!

---

Hmmm,
Teen blog watch is on
Those of us in the tech field have known about blogs for awhile and some of us learned early on that blogging about work could have unfortunate consequences. No one I know was fired but management was unhappy about some things a guy I know put in his blog. [whispers]Now I may agree with some of what he said,[/off] but it wasn't necessarily the smartest thing to do (and that guy has learned his lesson and doesn't write about work anymore - we just go to lunch and bitch about it).

But to be held accountable may chance the face of blogging. Anonomity may be a slowly disappearing thing. On one other blog I read, the writer has changed his/her deal so that things (s)he writes don't follow him/her and cause difficulty getting a new job.

I think management (in general) just needs to lighten up and learn not to be assholes.

But on this I don't know what to think. One parent stipulates that it's an invasion of privacy (what kind of privacy do you expect if you freaking post it to the freaking WEB???), that it's her job to monitor her son/daughter's online activity. Bad example for a true statement (privacy isn't the term you should have used but it is your job to monitor that). The school district has said they won't go trolling for violations but they will look when tipped off. Great, while I think whistle blowers are fine (and perhaps necessary), I fear that the whistle blowing is going to be ridiculous.

---

And lastly I heard something on NPR this morning (or perhaps yesterday morning) that lead me to an interesting thought. I don't recall exactly what it was and I can't find it now (I never seem to be able to), but it concerned pain. I got the impression that Americans would do nearly anything to avoid pain. And I wondered if we as a people were slowing losing our ability to endure pain what that would entail for us. To what lengths will people go to avoid pain? What will that mean?

Okay, time to go

check the voting records. I want to know if Senators Talent and Bond voted against this!

US Senate votes for English

And for those senators who did vote against English as our national language, I have one question, "What language do you want to be ours?".

Patriots vs Cowboys

No, it's not the first football entry I have in here.

Today (well perhaps yesterday late since Ryan keeps odd hours) Ryan posted something interesting to his blog (which he calls a "blop").

i'm going to need a flare gun and ice. lots of ice...

He has some interesting things to say when comparing President Carter with president Bush.

Let me add that Carter studied Nuclear Physics, served in the Navy (in submarines) and won a Nobel Peace Prize. Compared to studying ... well what did Bush study in college (except cocaine and drinking? oh wait, that was his minor), ducking out of a National Guard job as a (freaking) pilot (to avoid serving in Vietnam apparently) and ... well I guess he hasn't won much of anything yet (including the war he got us in), he did drive an oil company to bankrupcy, does that count?

source: Jimmy Carter
Overall a pretty impressive individual (even if he is somewhat naive).

Oh and dr. ackula, he got filmed over by Doctor Kelso smashing the Janitor's truck. Sorry! :(

When will they wake up?

Not only is it frightening to think that the government can listen in on our phone calls and read our emails, now they're targeting journalist to whom whistle blowers intent on leaking illegal government activity may contact.

The Patriot Act vs. The First Amendment
She points out that in any given conflict between a law and the Constitution, the Constitution will win. But the question becomes how soon will the agrieved parties (the journalist and their organizations) bring suit? And how soon will the public at large wake up to the fact that the government of the people, for the people and by the people couldn't care less about the people? My fear is that the answer is "too late". At least for someone (or perhaps someones).

Let me quote

our esteemed forefather, Benjamin Franklin (goes off to get the verbiage of the quote he has in mind and make sure it was Franklin who said it) ...

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
Benjamin Franklin

Report on NSA Datamining has Blogosphere Buzzing

Bush sidesteps question on phone records

The question I have is "why should be believe you, Mister President?".

Save the Internet

I've been watching the news on the "Net Neutrality" lately. It has be as scared as most people who have a bit of knowledge about what the ISPs are trying to do. Fearful that whatever I do on the interent won't work as fast because the sites aren't owned by big companies that can afford the higher (faster) tier of service.

But a piece this morning on NPR gave me a little hope (since the ISPs are pouring tons of lobbying money at the ethicsless - is that a word? - politicians - perhaps a more PC term is "ethically impaired").
...
Damnit I hate it when I hear something on NPR and then can't find the link to it on their website. I think it was a comentary or opinion piece and the focal point was "why would large content providers want to pay more for fast access for their customers" (unless they could somehow pass on the costs). And it seemed to indicate that these companies were pouring as much lobby money into the mess as the ISPs and Telecom providers were.

Note: I talked to a friend about this and he tells me that the large content provider's lobby isn't nearly as big as the telecom lobby so fear is firmly seated again. Fear and the trust that in any given choice Congress will do the worst possible thing.

Dogged

An interesting word. And this piece

Portents: The coming end of the CIA

uses it at least once and has some interesting phrases.

"... whose main purpose was to purge senior officers whose loyalty to their tradecraft appeared greater than to the policy priorities of the Bush administration ..." (in reference to the "Gosslings" that Porter Goss brought with him to the CIA).

Which seems to indicate that competancy is valued less than loyality. And this

"... particularly by a president who has proved dogged in retaining loyal servants despite strong evidence of their incompetence ..." (in reference to the "firing" of Porter Goss).

a few paragraphs before reinforces that perception. Hmm, 16 senior officers with a combined total of 300 years of intelligence experience had "fled" Goss's "management" of the Agency. Links reaching as far up as Goss's #3 man to congressional bribery scandals?

However the fact that the neo-cons fear Hayden's appointment bodes well for us. On the other side of that coin is my fear that his main focus won't be security or intelligence gathering but the ongoing "turf war" between Rummy and Negropointe over intelligence assets and missions. However the whole thing could simply be a move on Negropointe's part to dismantle the CIA. I would say "interesting" if it weren't so scary what might happen to us while these bozos are fighting over who's ball it is.

How do you spell ...

"da da dah"!?

I'm talking about the phrase that Carlos Mencia uses on his show when referring to people who either a) have no brain or b) don't use the one they have.

I had meant to point out a silly phrase that BBC News used in one of their piece about Bush's appointment for director of the CIA. (Profile: Michael V Hayden) They said "... voiced concern about Gen Hayden being a general with close ties to the military ...". (Which brings to mind the question Can you be an Air Force general without having close ties to the military?)

But not knowing how Carlos *spelled* that phrase I went to his website to see if he had a list or something which had is spelled out. I found his piece about why illegal immigration is a problem. He's got a bit in there asking how bad your interview went if you're the American and you lost the job to Julio just in from Nicaragua.

Hmmm

This one

Stakes high in battle between Rumsfeld, generals

has some interesting things to say about the Generals. To everyone who cried out "why didn't they speak out then or quit in protest" it seems that a number of them did. One was offered command of a Corps (the next job up from Division Commander) and refused so he could retire. One Marine was fast-tracked to become the Commandant of the Marine Corps but instead he retired, obstensibly so he could speak out. So ha!.

And the journalist presents a list of points of contention and then addresses each one, providing his rationale and facts supporting it. Very well done. (his facts still need to be confirmed by another source but more actual reporting than I've seen in forever)

Give it a read but be warned it's long. And not very flattering for Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld.

Supporting the troops?

Letter: Empty words for U.S. troops
(apologies if you can't get to the article without being asked to register, I used Google News to get there and that worked. I find it in the list of opinion pieces but it asks me to register when I click on it)

This woman (and I've no idea what a spriter is) seems to believe that although the administration has talked the talk, they didn't seem to walk the walk.

And I know from personal experience that there are two things that you don't mess with. You can mostly dish out anything else and they'll take it and still get the job done. Sure they'll bitch but then if they didn't then thinks would be really bad. At least they'll go through hell if you a) give then (at least) half way decent food and b) never, ever, ever mess with their pay. So cutting combat pay and separation allowance is a Very Bad Thing(tm).

"Rogue Thunderstorms"

Hmm, what exactly do they mean (and by they I mean Darren Hellwege) by "rogue thunderstorms"? Unsanctioned by the government? Let's look at the words individually ...

==========
thun·der·storm Audio pronunciation of "thunderstorm" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (thndr-stôrm)
n.

A transient, sometimes violent storm of thunder and lightning, often accompanied by rain and sometimes hail.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

thunderstorm

n : a storm resulting from strong rising air currents; heavy rain or hail along with thunder and lightning [syn: electrical storm, electric storm]

Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
==========
[D&D and online game references removed]
rogue Audio pronunciation of "rogue" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rg)
n.

1. An unprincipled, deceitful, and unreliable person; a scoundrel or rascal.
2. One who is playfully mischievous; a scamp.
3. A wandering beggar; a vagrant.
4. A vicious and solitary animal, especially an elephant that has separated itself from its herd.
5. An organism, especially a plant, that shows an undesirable variation from a standard.

adj.

1. Vicious and solitary. Used of an animal, especially an elephant.
2. Large, destructive, and anomalous or unpredictable: a rogue wave; a rogue tornado.
3. Operating outside normal or desirable controls: “How could a single rogue trader bring down an otherwise profitable and well-regarded institution?” (Saul Hansell).

v. rogued, rogu·ing, rogues
v. tr.

1. To defraud.
2. To remove (diseased or abnormal specimens) from a group of plants of the same variety.

v. intr.

To remove diseased or abnormal plants.

[Origin unknown.]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

rogue

n : a deceitful and unreliable scoundrel [syn: knave, rascal, rapscallion, scalawag, scallywag, varlet]

Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
==========

Well, discounting plant and human definitions it seems to be either a deceitful storm or a large/destructive and unpredictable storm. Okay that one makes a bit more sense, a large, destructive, unpredictable thunderstorm.

But today the phrase he used for the storm we might have is "popup". Let's see what that one might mean.
==========
pop-up (ppp)
adj.

1. Emerging quickly from a recessed or concealed position when activated: pop-up gun emplacements.
2. Rising to form a three-dimensional structure when a page is opened: pop-up illustrations in a children's book.

n.

1. A device or illustration that pops up.
2. Baseball. See pop fly.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
==========
Discounting baseball and book references it seems to mean it's emerging quickly from a concealed position. Now where the hell do you hide something as large as a thunderstorm? That one seems to be a bit far-fetched.

(definitions provided by dictionary.com)

They want to

take their ball and go home. Except that the "ball" is the internet as a whole and "they" are the big telecoms (telecommunications companies like AT&T ... well I wanted to list more but can't find reference to any other big telecoms). A lot of the blogs I read have been proclaiming how it's going to squeeze out the little guy. Small startups won't be able to foot the extra cost of paying the telecoms for fast connections and thus will get squeezed out by the big corporations that can afford it (or have the capital to fund the frontside and then pass the costs on to us).

NET Neutrality in the News
But as this site points out, companies already pay for their bandwidth. If they use more they pay more. And what it seems like the telecoms want to do is make a sliding scale so that if you use more you pay extra for that more. That hardly seems fair. They've got a pretty good analogy ...

'Let's say you're a SBC telephone customer. You pick up the phone to call a local business. After you dial the number, you get a message that says, "You have chosen to call a number that uses GTE as it's local phone service. We are unable to connect this call between the peak hours of nine AM to five PM. If you wish to connect to this business during non-peak hours, you must pay an additional service charge."

So, let's say you're lucky, and the business remains open until 5:30 PM. Now, when you call, you get this message: "To connect to this number with a low-quality connection at the rate of twenty-five cents a minute, please press 'one' now. To connect to this number with a regular, high quality connection at fifty cents per minute, please press 'two' now."

Do you think you'd like a phone service that operates like that? If not, then why would you want a tiered Internet that works like that?'

I know if the phone company did that to me (on either side) I'd be outta there in a second.

But the Republicans (I wonder how much money the telecoms donate to them?) keep trying to pull any teeth out of the legislation which are meant to keep the internet free (not meaning you don't pay for it but that providers can't dictitate or control content).

Net Neutrality Counterattacks
This one has some interesting things to say and it appears that we may be reversing the initial setback. However if the telecoms insist that big consumers (Google, eBay and Skype) aren't contributing to the maintenance of the infrastructure, is that their (the consumers) fault that the telecoms can't set up a business model which will fund infrastructure improvements? It almost screams to me that they're saying to Congress "help us, we're incompetant and have to have you protect us from ourselves", something that pisses me off when other people need to be protected from themselves (let them step in front of the bus and get killed, the gene pool will be improved).

No love for network neutrality in the Senate
This one stipulates a bit about what will happen. Extra pricing for bandwidth speeds above 200kbps. And you can be damn sure that the costs on the companies part will appear on your (my) Mediacom bill (I'm already paying nearly $100 a month for cable, expanded cable - so I get Sci Fi & FoodTV, and my cable modem). Great. A $100 for gas and then an extra charge on my cable bill. Thanks my faithful elected representatives, Mister Talent, Mister Bond and Mister Hulshof. You can be damned sure I'll make note of your position on this matter and vote according when the time comes.

Sign the petition
Find out more