The continuing debacle in Washington, DC

Congress: P2P networks harm national security

I saw this over on C/Net. P2P networks are peer-to-peer networks, which basically allow people to trade or share files over the Internet. In order for this to happen, you have to install software and then tell that software which files you want to share. The government apparently wants to place restrictions on this type of software because they view it as a potential national security risk.

An easier solution would be not installing the software on computers which have classified information. Problem solved. I find it hard to believe that the people in charge of making legislation regarding technology know so little about it - actually, I don't, which is even sadder. And sadder still, the only way I can possibly attribute the slightest glimmer of intelligence to these people is by assuming they're in bed with the recording and motion picture industries, and this is simply a ploy to assuage piracy concerns. While I don't condone piracy eliminating useful technology simply because one possible use is sharing copyrighted materials is shortsighted to say the least.

C/Net is conducting a single question poll, Is Congress clueless about P2P and national security? You can follow the link and vote if you'd like - when I entered my "yes" vote there was a total of 764 votes, and the results were 97.8% "yes" versus 2.2% "no". The people have spoken!

Clash of the Titans

I'm not posting this because it's funny - it is - but because it's just plain sad. It's sad that this is what passes for news nowadays. This is the cream of the crop at Fox News.

I suppose it's not really fair to single out Fox when you can find this kind of garbage on just about any of the mainstream news channels. I do think Fox is one of the worst but maybe that's my political axe grinding. What really bothers me is that this (Fox, CNN, etc.) is where so many people get the majority of their news.

There's only one solution as I see it: someone needs to start a 24-hour wrestling channel, so the people who are attracted to this stuff are sufficiently distracted, and go back to just not watching the news, because it's boring.

It just might save America...

Impeach

A new poll indicates 45 percent of Americans want Congress to begin impeachment proceedings against George Bush, and 54 percent want the same for Cheney:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070706/ts_alt_afp/uspoliticsbush;_ylt=AqvIh3ewseSqsHzUUC7PEoGs0NUE

While I doubt anything will come of this at least it's a sign that the brainwashing appears to be wearing off...

Scooter goes free

Just when you think you've seen it all - just when you think George Bush and his evil minions have said and done everything in their power to spit their corruption in America's face - somehow, someway they hatch a plan to take it one step further. I'm talking about the release of Scooter Libby. Libby was convicted of obstruction of justice in the Valerie Plame case, in which two members of the current administration (my money's on Karl Rove and Dick Cheney) made public the fact that Plame was an undercover CIA operative to cover one of their many lies (Saddam tried to buy uranium) in the buildup to the war in Iraq.

Let's do the math: Scooter was convicted of obstruction of justice in a case involving treason at the highest levels of government. Bush let's him go free. Bill Clinton is convicted of obstruction of justice in a case involving a blowjob. The Republicans vote to impeach him.

I've decided I'd like to balance that equation, because frankly I've had enough. So when a friend of mine sent me a petition yesterday urging Congress to impeach Dick Cheney if he fails to comply with the law in yet another case, this one involving illegal wiretapping, I signed it, and I urge you to do the same.

Follow this link and sign the petition:
http://pol.moveon.org/subpoena/?r_by=10714-6850409-KmP2Hr&rc=confemail

We have our Ross Perot!

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg has apparently switched his political affiliation from Republican to unaffiliated, leading to speculation that he's considering a run for the Presidency in 2008 as an independent. I gotta say I love the idea of Bloomberg entering the race. The possibilities are endless and intriguing! How about Bloomberg vs. Guiliani vs. Hillary? I'd vote for Bloomberg in that match up. Bill Bradley for veep? Or how about Ron Paul? Or, crazy but I think it might grow on me: John Edwards. I could even see a Bloomberg candidacy relegate the Republicans to a third place finish - now that would shake up the political landscape!

I like Bloomberg. I think he's done a better job as mayor than Guiliani. He's liberal on social issues and the environment, fiscally conservative and supports stem cell research. He has enough money to finance his own campaign so I don't think he'll be in any one's pocket. Best of all, he's clearly not a Perot-style wacko. I think he's credible and could do well, and that being the case he represents an opportunity to demonstrate that there is an alternative to our current corrupt two party system.

Maybe things are starting to get interesting...

I love this guy!

Ron Paul - he won't back off, and he's right. Doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell, but...

Rethinking Al Gore

I'm beginning to wonder if a reassessment of my opinion of Al Gore is in order. I'm basing this partly on his recent appearance on The Daily Show but mainly on a profile in The New York Times Magazine.

I'm willing to put aside all of the commentary about whether he's a hypocrite because his home apparently consumes a lot of electricity. It is apparent he is passionate about this cause because he championed it years ago and was labeled a crackpot by many for doing so. He's also probably done more than any other individual on the planet to increase public awareness. So I think he's earned a few carbon credits...

The Gore I saw on television was very different from the Gore I remembered from the 2000 campaign. Maybe this was a result of the success of An Inconvenient Truth, but whatever the reason he seems more off the cuff, more willing to speak his mind rather than politically appease. He even, apparently, has a sense of humor, something which I had heard rumors of but never experienced first hand.

I like the thesis of his new book, The Assault on Reason, which the Times article described as "a learned screed on the demise of public discourse and the "meritocracy of ideas"". I'll reserve judgement on the book until I've actually read it, and I will should he choose to run. And I think he should run, at the very least as an attempt to add some intellectual honesty to the debate. The profile of Hillary Clinton in this weeks magazine was so rife with tortured rationalizations I put it down in disgust. Ron Paul nearly being shouted off the stage at the Republican debate was equally disheartening. Imagine a Giuliani vs. Clinton race for the presidency - imagine what spewing that level of bullshit would do to the environment...

I'm not saying I'd actually vote for Al Gore. That decision won't be made for a long time. I do think he can provide a much needed spark - can you imagine how much soul-searching the guy must have gone through after throwing away the presidency in 2000 by trying to play it safe? By all accounts he is, at the very least, a thoughtful, intelligent man. How would you feel if your failure put Bush in the White House, paving the way for all the misery that followed?

Personally, I think America is ready for some truth, and I think Al Gore is ready to speak some. I also think he would mop the floor with any of the Republican hopefuls. So c'mon Al - please, why not make this thing interesting?

Six of one...

I had lunch with an old friend today. The conversation turned to politics and he told me that he really couldn't wait for the Bush presidency to end, likening it to "senior-itis", that period near the end of high school when everything is essentially said and done and you're in that state of limbo, waiting to move on with your life. Formerly a staunch republican, he's now considering changing his voting registration to independent. Contemplating some recent well-publicized corporate scandals as well as his own experience working for a corporation, he remarked, somewhat horrified, that he thought he might be turning into a liberal. It's a condition afflicting many of my thoughtful conservative friends. These people I once turned to for a good-natured (if sometimes heated) argument seem to have the wind taken from their sails. The best I can get is half-hearted and that's really no fun. Far from claiming victory I credit those friends now willing to take their lumps, because in my mind they're the victims of betrayal.

It's not all rosy on the other side. I like the recent strong stand by the Congress but I know which way the political winds are blowing and there is no doubt in my mind that when it changes course it's all going to fall apart again. Hillary won't go away as a candidate. Like George Bush, I'm sure she has an agenda and one which we won't have an inkling of until the day she assumes office. I'll credit her for sticking to her position on the war when so many others have done a politically motivated about face. It's just too bad that position is the same one that ensures GW's legacy as the worst president in American history. The irony is that she is probably the candidate most hated by those on the right. If she gets the nod it's gonna be ugly. Given the democrats proven ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory I'd have to call her the current favorite.

Sadly I don't see any candidates on either side that inspire. It's so bad that I've heard people calling for Al Gore to make another run (although he's gotten a bit puffy - maybe we shouldn't ask for more than a brisk walk). Barrack seems kind of hip and groovy but, as the folks at Fox News have repeatedly asked, is America ready for a president who's middle name is "Hussein"? (Yes, they really did ask that). Personally I'd like to see Bill Bradley throw his hat in the ring but I get the impression he's just as disgusted by the state of things as I am.

So I'd just like to let all my conservative friends know that this lefty is now a registered independent as well. Maybe we can all get together and ignore the neo-nazis and the dirty hippies and the one-issue voters and the sound-bite quoters. Maybe we can fend off the influence of the lobbyists and the Hollywood elite and Karl Rove, whichever campaign he should happen to infest. Maybe we can demand leadership, accountability and a government that governs instead of campaigning. Maybe we can get Ross Perot to jump in, so at the very least this thing is entertaining. Because I've got the senior-itis too, and it would be really nice to look forward to something good.

Sorry for ranting...

Bill gets his butt kicked...

There are few people I dislike more than Bill O'Reilly. He's pompous, arrogant, and just plain stupid. O'Reilly never addresses the point, just dances around it in search of an ad hominem attack. His influence on American political debate is overwhelmingly negative. He represents that faction of the Republican party that cares only for their own self interest, at the active expense of everyone who disagrees with their position.

A good friend recently posted an anti-O'Reilly blog with a link to a YouTube video. Initially, I resisted following that link, because frankly I've heard quite enough from Bill. But in responding I felt it incumbent to address what he had to say. This lead me to some other O'Reilly fuck-ups on YouTube that I thought I'd share with you:

O'Reilly gets the crap kicked out of him from the left AND the right (by a Democratic party strategist and a FOX NEWS analyst - it wouldn't surprise me if this guy lost his job for this because he really helps put O'Reilly on the ropes):



Phil Donahue goes into Satan's lair and kicks his ass! Phil is one of the few capable of talking loudly over O'Reilly's blather. I'm not always a big fan of Phil but he performs admirably here:



Keith Olbermann smacks down Bill. Highlight - Stewie from "Family Guy" does the intro! Quite honestly this illustrates more than anything else the evil that is Bill O'Reilly:



My personal favorite. I liked what David Letterman had to say to O'Reilly. I wish I could find the entire interview. I can't, but I think what I was able to find sums this up quite well:



I wish someone would say this to our president...

My Dad used to work with his Dad...

This was kind of unbelievable, given the frequency with which John McCain has appeared as a guest on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. But here it is: John McCain was the guest, and Jon Stewart ripped him to shreds.

I once had some respect for McCain, but his commencement address at Falwell's Liberty University destroyed that for me. It was clear to me that McCain was no more noble than any of the other vote-seeking republican shills. He panders to anyone he thinks might advance his political career. As a politician professing to offer "straight talk" John McCain is a horrible disappointment.

Okay, as a disclaimer I'll reveal that my dad and Jon's used to work together. I've never met either one, but I'm a big fan of Jon. Just watch the video (on your computer, because it's TV Turnoff Week)...

Part One:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jhtml?ml_video=85762&ml_collection=&ml_gateway=&ml_gateway_id=&ml_comedian=&ml_runtime=&ml_context=show&ml_origin_url=%2Fshows%2Fthe_daily_show%2Fvideos%2Fmost_recent%2Findex.jhtml&ml_playlist=&lnk=&is_large=true

Part Two:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jhtml?ml_video=85843&ml_collection=&ml_gateway=&ml_gateway_id=&ml_comedian=&ml_runtime=&ml_context=show&ml_origin_url=%2Fshows%2Fthe_daily_show%2Fvideos%2Fmost_recent%2Findex.jhtml&ml_playlist=&lnk=&is_large=true

Bush lies again

This story isn't getting a lot of coverage - in fact, it's getting no coverage. As it turns out, all that "we'll step down when they step up" bullshit the Bush administration is pushing as a strategy in Iraq is yet another lie. As it turns out the latest "strategery" has been abandoned and a new one is in place, but the neocon talking points haven't quite caught up yet.

It seems the powers that be have decided that the only way to achieve victory is to beat the insurgents. Aside from the fact that this is historically impossible, it's going to require a lot more troops than those provided for the "surge". It would also require a lengthy occupation.

So once again we have shifted to a position more idiotic than the previous. More people will die as a result. Bush won't look any better but he may be able to dump all of his fuck-ups on the next president (most likely a democrat - kudos to Karl Rove).

The fact is there were no WMDs (Bush conservatives, look away from your computer screen right now - what follows may burn your eyes). We weren't greeted as liberators. We have exasperated the terrorist threat. We have destroyed our military. Most of the world regards us in much the same way they once regarded the Soviet Union. We have spent most of the Bush administration destroying America to the point I'm fearful about the possibility of recovery.

So they lied to you again. I'm sure at some point, if the press ever gets off their fat asses and follows this story, the Bush administration will spin the shit out of it. Just remember you heard about it before the spin started, when they were still spinning the previous, outdated line of crap. They're counting on the fact that you're stupid and you have a short memory.

Read more about it here:
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/17104704.html