RSS feed for InstantSpot site The Wichita Voice

Fallen Heroes

Wed, 27 Jun 2007 12:14:37 GMT

I'd like to take a moment to pause this morning and acknowledge Charles W. Lindberg, last of the men who were involved raising the flag on Iwo Jima (recently renamed Iwo To). Charles W. Lindberg died on Sunday, June 24th 2007 at the age of 86.

Lindberg was involved in the raising of the first flag atop Suribachi, the highest point on Iwo To. Once the commander from the Marine beach head saw how tiny the flag was, he ordered a larger flag from one of the ships sent up the hill to replace it. The second flag and it's placement has been recorded in history as a symbol of the war in the Pacific.

It saddens me to see these people disappearing so rapidly. I can only imagine how it must have felt for my grandfather, a military veteran as well, to have experienced the death of the last Civil War veterans in his youth. My father seeing most of the WWI veterans pass away. Unfortunately for them, there was no way to collectively and massively put their memories to paper (or e-paper, as it were). The sad part about today is that we have the ability to record these stories, record their heroic moments, document their trials and tribulations...but so few people today seem interested. So few people seem to realiize we're losing a national treasure right before our very eyes. Most veterans of WWII are at least 85 years old...many (that are still alive, anyway) are in their 90s. We are facing an extinction in the next few years and it is something we will NEVER get back. Once they're gone, all our children will have is OUR memories....which too will fade into obscurity in the next generation.

~Dubya

Environmentalists against H2O?

Wed, 13 Jun 2007 13:45:12 GMT

[youtube yi3erdgVVTw]

Isn't it funny how the collective mind works sometimes? We studied the collective, hive, or mob mind in school, but to actually see it in action always facinates me.

These people are all at an environmental rally, all have the mindset of saving the trees, down with Government...and will blindly sign anything anyone puts in front of them.

I'm with Penn...the next time you're asked to join in on something, remember to investigate what you're getting into. These people are trying to do their best to go against the grain, not be the sheep to "The Man's" wolf...yet, they still follow the crowd like the best of the sheep.

~Dubya

Anti-war mom Cindy Sheehan gives up her protest

Tue, 29 May 2007 12:52:20 GMT

Well, I can't say that I'm sad to see her go, but Cindy Sheehan is hanging up her protesters belt. Her protest against her sons death because a twisted, bitter rant against anyone who did not share her skewed view of the world...including former allies and friends. She ruined her health, ruined her marriage, and is now nearly capsized in debt because of her 3-year tirade against the government.

Even in her exit letter, appropriately titled "Good Riddance Attention Whore" (no kidding, that's really the title), she still fired a parting shot at the Bush administration stating that her son did indeed "die for nothing". She even takes a stab at the democrats and the public, specifically stating that the county is more concerned about who the next American Idol will be than the death of her son.

That is sad to me. I have lost two friends now, a third is an amputee and none of their parents feel as though they died (or were wounded) for "nothing". Their deaths were horrible events in their lives, but they know that their sons died fighting for a cause they personally believed in.

I don't want to come across as though I'm fully supporting the way with which this crisis has been handled, but the men on the ground do see they are making a difference, despite the media's attention to only the violence. It is sad to me that Sheehan will go to her grave not seeing that...blinded her tunnel vision of a war without meaning.

I don't want this war, but I can see it does have meaning to those people who are able to make a difference. I can see that it will help the Middle East IF we can improve management of the situation (Iraqi, Afghani and Coalition). Afghanistan has regular education again with women actually being able to learn to read and write. I can see that despite the awful toll of American deaths (3400+), we are doing a great deal more than we have ever been able to in order to protect our soldiers. More people will die from cigarettes in the US over the next few days than we've lost to enemy fire in 4 years in Iraq.

Your son didn't "die for nothing", Cindy. He died for a cause he believed in. He died doing what he believed was the right thing. Remember him as a hero, not a victim.

~Dubya

California to Paris...

Tue, 08 May 2007 13:15:03 GMT

What a LOSER! Paris Hilton and fans have been petitioning anyone who will listen, including California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, to let her out of prison claiming that the sentence and her treatment were entirely too harse for her crime. WHAT? She was over twice the legal limit when she was pulled over...not to mention driving on a suspended license.

"Paris Hilton's fans have started a petition to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to free the Hollywood Boulevard blonde, declaring that “Paris deserves a second chance like many other great Americans."

The Hilton heiress herself posted a blog on her official MySpace page thanking everyone for their “kind words of love and support.” She also stated that this was her “first blog with many more to come. I love you all.”

Perhaps Paris is finally recognizing that she lives in a real world with real people. She even took time out to proclaim her innocence to the paparazzi over the weekend, telling them that she doesn’t deserve such a severe sentence and that she was treated cruelly." - Fox News, 2007

It just facinates me to see all of these idiot famous people who honestly believe they are above the law. Perhaps Paris should watch a few episodes of COPS to see how a lot of drunk drivers behave and are treated accordingly. I'm sure she was treated swimmingly by comparison.

I know I'm only perpetuating the attention this idiot is receiving, but I'm only trying to use her as an example of all the idiocy that seems to be getting a lot of exposure recently....Paris, Lindsey Lohan, David Hasslehoff, Ty Pennington....All exceptional role models.

-----

Speaking of Media Circus, did anyone see that GWB is going to be in Greensburg tomorrow to survey the damage? I sincerely hope the media blitz and "tragedy of the week" syndrome dies away soon so these people can get down to the business of repair and recovery. All of the attention (and scandal) have made it so honest, hard-working, and good-intentioned Kansans can't even go out there to lend a hand.

...anyway, I'm ranting now, so we'll end it there.

~Dubya

NM Unit Ordered to Strip

Wed, 02 May 2007 14:06:35 GMT

Associated Press | April 27, 2007

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - The commander of New Mexico's National Guard is demanding an apology from the Army brass after dozens of his Soldiers in a mostly Hispanic unit were ordered to strip to their gym shorts and searched for gang tattoos while on duty in Kuwait.

Army officials said the searches last May of 58 New Mexico National Guardsmen in a unit called Task Force Cobra were proper and legal.

But Brig. Gen. Kenny Montoya, head of the state National Guard, said he believes ethnicity played a role in the episode - the unit is 55 percent Hispanic.

"I said something wrong was done there, and it was because of race, and I want to make sure it will not happen again," Montoya said.

The search was prompted by an unsubstantiated allegation from a Soldier in another unit who complained about gang activity among Soldiers in Kuwait. The Soldier claimed to have seen gang tattoos among members of Task Force Cobra's parent unit.

The search, conducted by an agent with the Army Criminal Investigation Division, turned up no gang tattoos. The Army forbids extremist, racist, sexist or vulgar tattoos and prohibits membership in any extremist organization, though the regulations do not specifically mention gangs.

After the incident, the Army recommended discipline against three New Mexico Soldiers who objected to the searches. Maj. Kenneth Nava, a spokesman for the New Mexico Guard, said those three were counseled but not otherwise punished.

After the Albuquerque Journal reported the incident this week, New Mexico's congressional delegation demanded a full investigation from the Army. Gov. Bill Richardson, the nation's only Hispanic governor and a Democratic presidential hopeful, said he supports an investigation into the "degrading searches."

The New Mexico chapter of the League of United Latin American Citizens also expressed outrage.

"This is no way to treat our troops that are sacrificing their lives for the cost of our freedom. Racial profiling is reprehensible and should not be condoned," said Paul A. Martinez, the group's executive director.

Maj. Anne Edgecomb, an Army spokeswoman at the Pentagon, said in an e-mail Wednesday to The Associated Press that the Army had just received the call for a full investigation and had yet to respond.

"The U.S. Army, one of the most ethnically diverse organizations in our nation, provides equal opportunity to all our Soldiers regardless of race, ethnicity or gender," she said.

The military previously looked into the incident and cleared the Army of any wrongdoing. It said that before the searches were conducted, the Army was advised by a military attorney that having Soldiers remove their shirts to check them for gang tattoos would be legal.

One officer who knew the search was going to be conducted, Lt. Col. Broc Perkuchin, told investigators he thought agents would investigate individuals, not the entire unit.

US to try youngest person ever for War Crimes

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 11:42:26 GMT

Omar Khadr was just 15 when he was captured by US forces in July of 2002. He was shot three times, including one shot that nearly blinded him. Since then he has been at Guantanamo Bay in the prison camp.

Before you start feeling too sorry for this young man, he did kill one Green Beret, SGT Christopher Speer, and wounded another soldier, hitting both with a single grenade.

He is being tried for murder, attempted murder, contributing to terror, conspiracy, spying, and, I believe a few other choice items. Apparently a few of the conspiracy charge was for acts committed before he was 10?

Given the fact that we now have this and footage of a 12 year old cutting the head off of a Taliban "traitor", plus the multitudes of images of boys with guns, mock-suicide vests, etc. I guess my question or comment on this trial is:

"How accountable are these youth?"

15 Years Old is just old enough to know that what you are doing is probably wrong under normal circumstances, but more than likely, Omar had never experienced anything BUT violence for the majority of his life....

Thoughts?

~Dubya

So many topics...

Mon, 23 Apr 2007 09:15:21 GMT

There are so many things to write about this morning its rather difficult to choose! The Baghdad Wall, VT Students offered a "free semester", Rove...existing, just so many things.

If I have to limit it to just one topic this morning, I think I'm going to have to go with WHY CELEBRITIES SHOULD STAY THE HECK AWAY FROM POLITICS! Nothing was more frustrating for me in the last election than people who ACT for a living jumping on the political bandwagon. If anything it made me respect the politicians AND the actors both less. It was a pitiful display of actors thinking they possessed actual substance and political prowess because they are popular in Hollywood and on the Silver Screen.

The politicians are no better, sinking to new lows by snagging up any ACTOR (key word) who would use their name and "support" in the same sentence. Politics has turned into a popularity contest with corruption replacing integrity, trendy buzz words replacing substance. It is so frustrating that these people use their fame and presence in front of so many people to spout rhetoric.

The Dixie Chicks? Natalie Maines has two years of higher education at Texas A&M...that doesn't sound like the type of person who should be imposing her political solutions upon millions of people. Do to the 'Chicks have a right to their opinion? Of course! Everyone does! It just seems like abuse of power for these people to get in front of millions of people at a time based on their talent for singing, acting, juggling, whatever....and then switch gears into politics (something many of the "talking heads" seem to know nothing about anyway!), especially when they KNOW people who already adore them will listen without thinking twice!!

Anyway, after that little rant, my case and point (and topic) for today is Sheryl Crow. Beautiful, talented, cancer survivor, who sold her soul to Clairol (or something equally ridiculous) recently in some silly commercial about her "hair tour"....who knows. ANYWAY, our esteemed and apparent "Green Expert" now has a total solution for saving the planet!!! Read on and tell us what YOU think:

"Now, I don't want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required," - Sheryl Crow...

That's right...Save the Square, Save the World!

It's not at all that I disagree with the fact that saving toilet paper would indeed save paper and thus trees....but come on. What can you do with one 4" by 4" piece of Charmin double-ply?

~Dubya

Hookie Hope

Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:50:11 GMT

Today is Hookie Hope Day, according to the Virginia governor. For mourners of the VT tradgedy, orange and maroon is the color of the day. Apparently VT officials sent around a memo yesterday stating students did not have to participate. So what, right?

Well today, parents and Alumni groups are "outraged" now because of VT's memo they claim discourages people from mourning.

What?

Do people honestly have nothing else to do but FIND fault, find a fight, find something to complain about? This was intended to be a day of support, solidarity, and mourning for the victims, friends, and family. Does that mean that everyone HAS to wear orange and maroon? The faculty was obviously letting kids know that if they were uncomfortable participating, it wasn't mandatory.

Free Speech is extremely important (in fact, it's what keeps people coming back to my blog..haha), but does every Tom, Dick, and Harry really need to behave as though their world is ending based on the behavior of others? We can disagree all we want; our opinions are just as valid as the next person...but stop and THINK about what people intended to say, or actually have said before we blow up and turn things like a positive attempt at beginning the healing process, into a media circus all because of some ridiculous statement that has NOTHING to do with your personal choice to mourn the victims of this tragedy.

People never cease to amaze me at the lengths they will go to just to end up looking like an idiot.

~Dubya

Cho Seung-Hui, a name that will live in infamy

Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:54:35 GMT

This is Cho Seung-Hui, the VT shooter who killed 32 people. The shooter who then like a true coward hiding behind a gun, took his own life rather than facing judgement for his atrocity.

A South Korean exchange student armed with a 9mm and a .22 caliber pistol was able to walk around campus for over 2 hours after starting his killing spree at 7:15 in the morning at the dorms on the complete opposite side of campus. When reports started coming in regarding this killing spree, I assumed he was a madman with some sort of assault rifle, something that would prevent people from engaging him due to the extreme visciousness of the weapon...not two side-arms, weapons that are relatively difficult to reload quickly and hold rather small magazines, and are rather inaccurate at any big distance. What I am trying to get at is that it is absolutely astounding this went on as long as it did. Were there NO campus police? Were there no former/off-duty police or prior service military or anyone with a modicum of courage who said to themselves, "THIS IS INSANE! When he goes to reload...." THIRTY TWO PEOPLE shot and killed with a semi-automatic weapon. Absolutely unacceptable.

I do not mean to trod over the memory of these victims by even hinting that it was their responsibility to confront a crazed gunman...merely that I find it very difficult to believe in a post-911 America neither the police, nor some would-be hero stopped this maniac before he could do so much damage.

Again, I'm on a rant....this makes me so mad, furious even. I can't understand why people do the things they do sometimes. Mass-murder, torture, suicide bombing...I just don't understand the mentality and it is extremely frustrating sometimes. My apologies if I have offended.

~Dubya

Blame It on the Democrats

Fri, 06 Apr 2007 13:17:02 GMT

Submitted by Steve Davis
ByDan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Wednesday, April 4, 2007; 1:32 PM

"President Bush's Iraq strategy may be coming straight from Vice President Cheney, but his political attacks on Democrats who dare to demand a pullout are pure Karl Rove.

When the president is on the defensive, Rove's signature move is to disdain the quaint constraints of reality and attack the critics where they are strongest -- ideally, by tarring them with Bush's own weakness.

The ultimate example, of course, came during the 2004 campaign when Rove was marketing a man who had ducked service in Vietnam against a war hero. Somehow, Rove managed to make John Kerry look like the guy with the problem.

Rove's approach was very much on display yesterday at Bush's Rose Garden news conference.

"The president's current weakness is profound. His war in Iraq appears to be a colossal failure, and as a result the public has turned against him and wants the troops home and safe.

"But to hear Bush talk, it's the Democrats who are the party of failure. It's the Democrats who are defying the will of the people. And in the latest, truly dazzling talking point unveiled by the president yesterday, it's the Democrats who would keep the troops in harm's way.

What Rove can still count on, in spite of everything, is that the president's assertions make it into the headlines no matter how dubious they may be -- and that all too many reporters prefer uncritical transcription to the kind of tough but fair analysis that would be required to put what the president says in context."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

What happened to good reporting? Why must the MSM always be Rove & Bush's willing accessory to crimes and corruption? This is a very troubling situation. The Danster was cooking on this day - check it out. What about "context" - Nathan and Hank?

I recall not long ago, that KSfarmgrrl was making these very points.

Mission Accomplished?

Thu, 05 Apr 2007 13:43:43 GMT

Submitted by WSClark

Some will take exception to my comments, but I truly want an answer. I want an answer from the right wingers. I want an answer from the conservatives. I want an answer from the Bush lovers.

In March of 2003, you called me a traitor. You called me un-American. You called me a coward. You said that I was appeasing terrorists. You said I was betraying my country. You told me to leave America.

Now, the War on Iraq is not going like you said it would. Your "Mission was not Accomplished." The civil war I predicted has become reality. You have created more terrorists and made America less safe. There were no Weapons of Mass Destruction. There was no link between Saddam and 9/11. Iraq was not a supporter of terrorism.

You lied to us.

Now the right wing expects us to fall in line and support the war that we have always been against. Now they want us to be good little American. Now they want us to resist the temptation to protest. Now they want us to follow the right wing course and forget that we told you so.

Now you want us to shut up and not ask questions.

So tell me – why should I shut up now? Why should my voice be silenced now? If I was un-American then, what are you now?

Why should I forgive your accusations of treason now?

Tell me why.

Please.

Crime and Justice

Tue, 03 Apr 2007 11:56:31 GMT

Submitted by Danny R.

One of the points of Justice is to provide an appropriate punishment so as to deter crime. However, what is an appropriate punishment and further, if a particular punishment deters crime when would it be cruel and unusual? Both questions have what at first appear to be simple answers, however the application of the simple answer is difficult.

When looking and asking what an appropriate punishment is, one comes to the answer of: a punishment that stops or deters the crime in question. So lets pick on rape. We know rape occurs, and at first appearances, seems to be on the rise(though some of this could be attributed to an increase in reporting of the crime as women become more confident in reporting it). So, if rapes are increasing in number then does this mean the current punishment of a rather small jail sentence is the appropriate punishment? I'd argue no. So what if a rapist were to be castrated? If no lesser punishment worked to deter rape, would this then be cruel and unusual?

In defining cruel and unusual, one must understand that cruel and unusual has the general meaning of stating, anything that goes beyond what is necessary to deter or prevent a crime from happening. An argument often used though, is what does victim facilitation play in this? Should the punishment be less of the victim helped to facilitate the crime? For instance, should it be a felony charge for stealing a car if the victim started the car, left it unlocked and running in his or her driveway? Or in the case of our rapist above, if the woman being raped was out selling her sexual related services?

So lets argue about castration to solve our problem regarding rape. Since it has an appearance that rape isn't being stopped or deterred through jail time. Should a more "cruel and unusual" punishment take place? In this case, lets say it were proven that castration were to reduce the number of rape cases? When no other lesser punishment did, would castration at this point be cruel and unusual? Should castration take place on the first occurrence of the crime or should it be a three strikes and now we get lop off Mr. Happy? In this particular case, I'd argue that the castration, if no other lesser punishment deters the crime of rape wouldn't be cruel or unusual. However, courts state that this is cruel and unusual because the rapist in question would no longer be able to have children of his own in the future. But would this not lead to men thinking twice before they go and exert their power and control over the females in question?

For further thought, some would argue that if we can't control the crime anyway, why not make it legal(as in the case of drugs and drug use). Well, lets examine this also, we have laws against murder, however, murder doesn't stop because of laws against it, or because the death penalty doesn't entirely prevent it, so should we make murder legal? The answer is no. Some would argue that the drug addict doesn't hurt anyone but him or herself. Does he really not hurt anyone else? When looking at the family structure of the truly addicted drug addict, we find dysfunctional families, many of whom break down or fall apart and left hurting without a dad or a mom, or a lost sister or brother when the sibling is killed in a gang related shooting over where drugs were obtained.

The real questions lie here, the ultimate answers are not so easy to come by. I didn't provide to many of my own thoughts on this, primarily for the purpose of discussion.

Pat Tillman

Mon, 02 Apr 2007 13:28:52 GMT

Submitted by WSClark

A young, handsome, driven football player turns down a multi-million dollar contract to join the Army Rangers after 9/11. Our country rightfully celebrates his patriotism, courage and selflessness as he goes from training camp to boot camp. He was the epitome of the American ideal – personal sacrifice for the common good.

Pat Tillman and his brother joined the Rangers and volunteered for duty in the war on terror(ism.) What was not widely reported in those days of jingoistic fervor was that Pat Tillman considered the War on Iraq to be illegal. He was also an atheist and by most accounts a liberal in his thinking.

After a tour of duty in Iraq, Pat and his brother were sent to Afghanistan. In an unfortunate series of events, Pat was killed by friendly fire during a patrol in the rugged mountainous area of Afghanistan near the Pakistani border. The initial reports, however, did not mention that Corporal Tillman was most likely accidentally killed by his own platoon. Pat Tillman was awarded a Silver Star posthumously. The Bush Administration used the death of Cpl. Tillman for public relations purposes, showing the handsome football player as an example of all that was good about the war effort.

It was not until weeks later that the truth came out. Even after the Army knew the circumstances of his death, the Bush PR machine still pushed the story, much as they had done with the saga of Private Jessica Lynch. It was a full month after the facts were known that the family of Pat Tillman was finally informed of the truth of his death.

Pat Tillman remains an American hero – the circumstances of his death in no way minimize his sacrifice.

The fact remains, however, that the Bush Administration continually attempts to feed the American public propaganda, just as the Soviets and Nazis feed propaganda to their people.

We deserve better. The memory of Pat Tillman deserves better. Do we have to wait until January of 2009 for this madness to end?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17877488/

Speaking of Molesting.....

Fri, 30 Mar 2007 18:17:44 GMT

The subject of Jesus and him being made out of milk chocolate quickly led to the discussion regarding Catholic Priests and the molestation of children, particularly young boys.

As if there hasn't already been enough of this crap going on, along with the media's fanatical sick need to cover it in every minute detail...now we have a CONFESSED pedophile on the Internet with a virtual HOW-TO book for men interested in "observing" young girls. Specifically young girls ages 3-11.

That's right.

Jack McClellan in Seattle, WA is a self-confessed pedophile; but he insists it isn't a bad thing. He equates his obsession with young girls to "bird watching". He merely enjoys it as he would any other "hobby".

Apparently he's not officially doing anything illegal because his actions do not involve sexual acts nor do they contain any sexually explicit material. What the website DOES contain, however is instructions on the best places to watch little girls, how to avoid detection, and how far you can go (including "hugging" and "cuddling") before legal action can be taken. Likewise, the website does contain pictures of little girls (unaware they were being photographed) at places like parks, plays, and other public venues.

Of particular note is where McClellan says that it's perfectly OK to look, but not OK to touch because there are laws in place to prevent that...NOT "it's sick and morally abhorrent", just that he doesn't because the law is stopping him.

Just when you step out and think "I can't possibly see anything worse in the world today..."

This guy needs to be permanently shut-down. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go take a shower to get this stench off me:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,262700,00.html

~Dubya

My Sweet Lord

Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:10:48 GMT

"This is one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities ever," said Bill Donohue, head of the watchdog Catholic League.

Really? Ever?

With everything else going on in the World, is this REALLY something to be "outraged" about?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,262602,00.html

~Dubya

NPR on Alberto Gonzales

Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:34:49 GMT

Submitted by Darwinsdisciple

This audio file is kind of a sweet (sometimes too sweet) history on the rise of Alberto Gonzales. In this NPR piece they describe the AG's fierce loyalty and his reputation for finding useful loopholes for his clients.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9075923

CF, is excused from the above homework assignment... :-)

This story from Slate describes one of the more stunning examples of the AG's skill in finding ways around pesky international law - a relevant quote:

"Curiously, it was in his role as legal counsel to then-Gov. Bush that Gonzales penned yet another memo pertaining to international law, only in that case his advice was designed not to avoid death sentences, but rather to expedite them on Texas' heavily populated death row. On June 16, 1997, Gonzales first showcased his proclivity for torturing international law when he sent a letter to the U.S. State Department in which he argued that, "Since the State of Texas is not a signatory to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, we believe it is inappropriate to ask Texas to determine whether a breach … occurred in connection with the arrest and conviction" of a Mexican national. Or, put another way, he asserted that an international treaty just didn't apply to Texas.

"The Mexican in question, Irineo Tristan Montoya, was a fisherman convicted of brutally stabbing and murdering John Kilheffer in Brownsville, Texas, in 1985. Tristan, who insisted he was innocent, was executed two days after Gonzales sent his memo to State, despite protests from the Mexican government. Mexico alleged that Texas had violated Tristan's rights under the Vienna Convention because it had failed to inform the Mexican consulate at the time of his arrest."

Whole story here:

http://www.slate.com/id/2102416/

I know it is supposed to be a "whole 'nother country" down there, but isn't this going a little far?

"Demented" Research Chief Isolates Agency

Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:32:48 GMT

Submitted by Dan

NORMALLY, I'd ask that you submit your own entry based on the article or topic you'd like to discuss. However, I'll make an exception today :)

The Congressional Research Service is well known in policy circles -- especially defense policy circles -- for writing some of the smartest, sanest analyses you could ever hope to get in Washington. Their reports are non-partisan. They present dissenting points of view. And they are unclassified -- meaning, everyone is allowed to read them.

Or so you'd think.

But, in practice, taxpayers are prevented from seeing the work of these taxpayer-funded researchers. CRS' database of reports has been kept from public view -- although "members of the press, other researchers, and other government officials to request specific" documents, Secrecy News notes. While CRS fights the Internet age, a few organizations, like the Center for Democracy and Technology and the Federation of American Scientists and the State Department, have built up online catalogs of the Service's reports.

Now, however, "in what is being characterized by subordinates as an act of 'managerial dementia,' the Director of the Congressional Research Service [Daniel Mulhollan] this week prohibited all public distribution of CRS products without prior approval from senior agency officials," Secrecy News says.

The new policy demonstrates that "this is an organization in freefall," according to one CRS analyst. "We are now indeed working for Captain Queeg."

"We're all sort of shaking," another CRS staffer told Secrecy News. "I can't do my work."

"There's not a day that goes by that I don't talk to someone in another agency, another organization, or someone else outside of Congress and we share information," the staffer said. "Now I can't do that?"

Mulhollan's choice is going to make executive branch policy decisions dumber and slower (since they rely on the CRS reports, too). It's going to make Congressional decisions dumber and slower (since information-swapping will become that much more difficult). It's going to make our government function less efficiently. And it's going to put the public further in the dark.

Nice going, Mulhollan.

Posted by Noah Shachtman 12:06:28 PM in Secret Squirrel

GOD TUBE?

Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:57:18 GMT

OK. Religion, by my definition is a means with which people before the days of mass communication were able to transmit values and morals to a broad audience. In addition, it was a means with which to explain the unexplainable; the sun rising, the moon, the stars, lightning, life, death, etc. It gives people a reason not to fear death (in SOME places in the world these days, it almost seems to ENCOURAGE people to meet an early end......).

It is useful today as a means of bringing a community together, of teaching those same morals and values. In illiterata areas of the world is still serves its function VERY WELL and people with the "wrong" message (i.e. Extremists) can still easily get their message out and influence the way people conduct themselves......

However, after living in Texas for a while, I discovered that religion is not just an idea or a belief; it's also BIG BUSINESS. Churches with DVDs of the sermons, celebrity guests, stadium seating, franchises (believe me, they're there), Church CEOs and CFOs....it's Religion gone Corporate.

I think a good exclamation point on that statement can be found on our new friend: www.godtube.com If you think for one minute this is some way to modernize religion for the sake of religion, I would suggest you ask about the revenue they're generating from their Google ads and other traffic....

Here's a rather amusing example of one of the videos I found posted:

http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=c5280214e0486b273a5f

~Dubya

Iraq Spending Bill

Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:36:02 GMT

Submitted by CF

"When it comes to the supplemental Iraq spending bill being voted on in the
House on Thursday, is the liberal / progressive wing of the Democratic Party
letting the perfect be the enemy of the good?

According to Greg Sargent at Talking Points Memo Election Central,
progressives and the liberal wing won't vote for the bill because it
contains no mechanism for cutting off funding if benchmarks aren't met.
Here's what Sargent has to say.

"* The House Dem leadership has simply ceased reaching out to three of the
leading liberals opposed to the bill -- Reps. Lynne Woolsey, Barbara Lee,
and Maxine Waters. "There's been no interaction for days," one Hill source
confides. Another source suggests it's "because they're lost causes."
Meanwhile, Reps. Dennis Kucinich and John Lewis, the Civil Rights icon, are
"beyond gone," a third source says, meaning there's no hope of winning them
over.

* These key liberals, for their part, have stopped reaching out to the Dem
leadership, too -- infuriating people in favor of passing the legislation
who insist that a deal would have been possible with a little more
flexibility on their part. Sources complain that none of these liberals --
who say the bill lacks a real mechanism for forcing withdrawal -- is willing
to reach out to the leadership because none wants to look prepared to
compromise with the leadership.

"None of them wants to be the one making a deal with 'the man,'" one source
says ruefully. "None of them wants to be outflanked on the left. None of
them wants to be 'outprincipled' -- being seen as the one who is willing to
compromise."

Despite all this, House Dem leaders are predicting that the bill will pass
by a razor-thin margin. Tune in tomorrow."

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/mar/21/behind_the_scenes_tensions_among_house_dems_at_fever_pitch_over_iraq_vote

So what do folks think: are the liberals right to stand on principle, or are
they hamstringing the effort to draw down the war? And if they are standing
in Pelosi's way, what should she do in response?

Bearing the Burden

Tue, 20 Mar 2007 20:27:20 GMT

Submitted by WSClark

An American soldier has received a ten year sentence for negligent homicide in the deaths of three Iraqis. Staff Sgt. Ray Girouard could have been sentenced to 21 years. His defense team had argued for a reduced sentence of just one year. In arguing for a longer sentence, one of the prosecutors, Capt. William Fischbach, made the following statement: "Girouard has obliterated the good deeds of every other soldier that follows him. He wants you to think he's a good soldier, a Christian, a hero. He's none of the above."

I have very mixed feeling on this subject. While I am fully cognizant that atrocities have been committed in Iraq by US personnel, I am of the opinion that the blame lies much, much higher up the chain of command. I am not excusing Girouard, but his crimes pale in comparison to those of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bremer.

Lt. William Calley became the face of American atrocities during the Vietnam War for his actions at My Lai. While he was obviously guilty, the entire blame was placed on his shoulders and little was directed up the line. His CO, Captain Medina, was charged but acquitted. Interestingly enough, part of the My Lai cover up was the responsibility of a then Major Colin Powell.

In my view, young American servicemen and women are bearing the burden for the situation in Iraq, when in truth the blame lies with their superiors. Jailing a few soldiers does not come close to addressing the entirety of the problem.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17692739/