|
Monday, July 07, 2003
|
|
MSNBC just wouldn't listen to us legions of homos who pled, threatened boycotts, and simply demanded that the racist, homophobic, misogynistic radio hatemonger known as Michael Weiner (pseudonym: Michael Savage) get the boot.
Until he told a caller:
"Oh, you're one of the sodomites!
You should only get AIDS and die, you pig!"
My only regret is that MSNBC let it go this far. Of course, with Weiner's record, they never should have hired him in the first place.
See, corporate suits? You should have listened to us in the first place.
Related articles & sites:
MSNBC and the Anti-Gay 'Savage'
GLAAD
SavageStupidity.com
GE, Microsoft Bring Bigotry to Life: Hate-talk host Michael Savage hired by MSNBC
Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR), February 12, 2003
Shock Radio/TV Host Michael Savage Sues Online Critics
Democracy Now!, June 11, 2003
Savage Weinermobile & Lyin' Ollie GONE!
doublethink, June 6, 2003
Big-Mouth Michael Savage Can't Stand One Ounce of Criticism
morons.org, June 18, 2003
Ruling: Anti-Savage Web Site URL Can Remain
NBC-11, June 30, 2003
Michael Savage's cable TV show pulled off the air
The Advocate, July 7, 2003
What Savage said
TV Barn Ticker, July 7, 2003
MSNBC fires Michael Savage
MSNBC, July 7, 2003
Posted 7:01:53 PM  Send comment
|
|
Come 'n' listen to a story 'bout a man named Jed
Also known as Buddy Ebsen and I'm sorry, but he's dead
He danced and he acted with a folksy kinda touch
I know he's an icon, but I didn't like him much
Conservative, ya see
Right-winger
Republican
In '84 his co-star we all loved, Miss Hathaway
Said she's gonna run for Congress (Didja know that she was gay?)
So Buddy, former friend and homophobe, he sure saw red
He attacked her on TV, endorsed the other guy instead
Smear campaign
Dirty trick
Miss Jane lost
Cue Flat & Scruggs...
Posted 11:08:31 AM Send comment
|
|
Solid majorities of the public now believe that the administration's claims about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and alleged links to Al Qaeda amounted either to ''stretching the truth'' or deliberate falsehoods, according to a detailed survey carried out by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA). ...
A second poll published by USA Today, CNN, and Gallup found that 56 percent of the public still considers that Iraq was worth going to war over. But that number represented a sharp decline of 17 percentage points from a high of 73 percent in mid-April. ...
The same poll found that Bush's overall job rating has declined ten points from six weeks ago -- from 71 to a still comfortable 61 percent.
While Bush presently holds a commanding lead over any declared Democratic challenger, his father, who emerged from the first Gulf War in the spring of 1991 with approval ratings approaching 90 percent, was handily defeated just 18 months later by the governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton, a relative unknown at a comparable time in the election cycle.
Whatever political benefits Bush may have accrued from the war, according to Kull, he may already have reaped them. ...
Credibility of Administration Iraq Policy Substantially Eroded, Polls Find
OneWorld.net via Common Dreams
July 2, 2003
"Solid majorities of the public." What a nice phrase indeed. Now let's just keep the pressure on to increase those majorities. Keep hammering, bloggers and e-mail-forwarders; you don't even realize the influence you're having on the American psyche. But you are. You're waking people up.
After that, all we need to do is figure out how to translate the people's newfound understanding of BushCo's lack of integrity into votes (for, of course, anyone but Bush).
Incidentally -- and this is especially for my fellow bloggers -- a thought from the above article leapt off the screen at me:
"I don't see anything on the horizon that will make the public want to withdraw," said Stephen Kull, PIPA's director, who added one caveat. ''If the perception emerged that Iraqi people wanted us to leave, this could change very quickly.''
The kicker is this: The Iraqi people do want the U.S. to leave, and they want us to leave now. The way I read it, if the American people finally get it that the Iraqis don't want us there, then the American people will start making much bigger noises about withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq.
I suppose that's because a lot of Yanks would be be outraged by the perceived "ingratitude" of the Iraqis, and say, "Fine! Clean up the mess yourselves!" Perhaps a good many more will feel relieved at receiving the Iraqis' "permission" to pull out.
As it stands, I don't think it will be all that difficult to put that final piece in place for our fellow Yanks. People (and I mean longtime Bushies, too) are mighty disillusioned about the so-called "post-war" situation in Iraq, especially with our soldiers getting picked off at an average rate of one day, plenty more getting wounded, and the rest scared, exhausted, and swimming in their own sweat, desperate for more than one lousy bottle of water per diem.
The public knows that Iraq is turning into a replay of Vietnam (there's a reason you've seen the word "quagmire" so often lately* and it's not that nasty ol' "vast liberal media conspiracy").
So just keep reminding Joe Sixpack that the Iraqi people are not happy with us, and want U.S. troops out of Iraq even more than ol' Joe himself does. And almost as much as the soldiers and their families do.
* Is this a quagmire? ... It appears we have all the makings of a first-class quagmire ... The ongoing presence in Iraq looks to be a political and military quagmire; it reminds me of Vietnam when and where policy and presence had relegated us to be "the unwilling doing the unwanted for the ungrateful." ... Betty Nordgren, of Durham, N.H., told the senator that getting America out of the Iraq "quagmire" was the most important thing on her mind. ... The Bush administration is desperate to avoid the image of an Iraqi population in general revolt against the occupation. Words such as "quagmire," "guerrilla war" and comparisons to the Vietnam War have been vehemently rejected ... Rumsfeld chafes at any comparison between the situation in Iraq and the quagmire of the Vietnam War. ... Rumsfeld rebuffed Tuesday reports Iraq was becoming a quagmire ... We're not in a quagmire in Iraq. Just like Donald Rumsfeld is not a horse's ass. ... At some point, however, the administration must stop alienating Iraqi citizenry. If not, the epithets for the occupation Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been trying to reject—"quagmire," "guerrilla war" and "Vietnam"—will become reality. ... The British foreign secretary also played down concerns that the US-led occupation risks descending into a Vietnam-style quagmire ... Quagmire. There's only one cure. No occupation of Iraq. Bring home the troops. Leave Iraqi oil to the Iraqis. Let a neutral, third force rebuild this devastated land. ... "When it comes to the essential instruments for avoiding chaos or quagmire once the fighting stops -- trade, aid, peacekeeping, international monitoring and multilateral diplomacy -- Europe remains indispensable." ... Rumsfeld became irritated when a reporter mentioned Vietnam as an example of a quagmire. ... Despite his reassurances, every day has seen several attacks on US troops and some observers are worrying that a Vietnam-style political and military quagmire could be developing. ... "Vietnamization" may be too overstretched a concept - at least not before the real force and extent of Saddam's announced intifada for the end of the month is revealed. But "quagmire" is now a more than realistic scenario. ... That's led some to worry that Iraq could turn into a Vietnam-style political and military quagmire. ... The Vietnam analogy is not exact, of course. But more and more, it looks like the U.S. ... is now in a 'Nam-like quagmire in Iraq. ... One may add that the situation is dangerous for any other troops that step into the Iraqi quagmire. ... It's official. The "Q" word -- quagmire -- is back. And this time it's brought a friend: Vietnam, the "V" word. ... The dreaded "quagmire" has also been voiced. ... 30 years ago during another stupid and entirely unnecessary U.S. military intervention in a place called Vietnam, the buzzword of the day was quagmire. ... Comparisons with Vietnam have been made so often over the years that I hesitate to draw another. However, the similarities are striking: for example, the return of expressions such as “sucked into a quagmire”. ... Elder added that the current occupation of Iraq is taking on the appearance of "a quagmire that greatly mimics the Vietnam quagmire" of a generation ago. ... This has rapidly turned into a quagmire for which young American soldiers are paying the ultimate price. ... Tony Blair yesterday faced cross-party pressure to map out an "exit strategy" from Iraq, to ensure that British troops do not become engulfed in a Vietnam-style quagmire. ... Washington had to face the so-called Vietnam syndrome: the fear that conflict in a foreign country will lead to quagmire ... "Without UN legitimacy -- forget it, never work, Vietnam quagmire next stop." ... That hubris may also be driving the United States in the direction of a quagmire. ... What they told me, in a series of extraordinary interviews, will make uncomfortable reading for US and British politicians and senior military staff desperate to prevent the liberation of Iraq turning into a quagmire of Vietnam proportions, where the behaviour of troops feeds the hatred of an occupied people. ... In late June, a clear signal came that the U.S. was getting closer to falling into a Vietnam-like quagmire. ... British casualties... may also reinforce the resistance of British military chiefs to sending more troops, as requested by Washington, into what British officers believe may be a quagmire. ... We are displaying the same arrogance of power we once taunted on the road to our quagmire in Vietnam. ... Such feelings are reviving another awful phrase of the Vietnam era: "quagmire."... "We are determined with God's help to give the ultimate defeat to those aggressors," he said. "And with each day, the Americans, Britain wade into a quagmire, and the losses increase for those two outlaws." ... It's that shadow of a potential quagmire that must scare American military planners today. ... We would do well to keep in mind that even if combat is no longer a quagmire for the United States, the war is actually not over — and the quagmire is just beginning. ... You twist around looking for a way out, and every direction looks the same. Desolate ground. Quagmire. ... Don't call it a quagmire. Yet.
Posted 10:26:13 AM Send comment
|
|
Stop being so paranoid. The United States does not kill witnesses to events of national or global significance. That is illegal, immoral, and unethical. We do not do that sort of thing. Josh Speer simply died in an auto wreck. That's ALL.
That's all.
So, you just get any thoughts of James Forrestal, John F. Kennedy, Lee Harvey Oswald, Marilyn Monroe, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Robert F. Kennedy, Hale Boggs, Dorothy Hunt, Paul Wilcher, John Tower, William Colby, William Casey, Amaro da Costa, Mel Carnahan, Bob Stevens, Salem bin Laden, John O'Neill, Katherine Smith, Cliff Baxter, Charles Rice, James Watkins, James Hatfield, or Paul Wellstone right out of that head of yours, you hear?
And don't you dare Google any of those names, or, worse, go prowling around that awful Bush Body Count site.
You're just thinking ridiculous, conspiracy-minded, out-of-the-question, crazy thoughts.
You hear me?
Posted 2:01:56 AM Send comment
|
|
Happy, Georgie? Freaking HAPPY?
Attacks Kill 3 U.S. Soldiers in Baghdad. Two American soldiers were killed in separate attacks on their convoys in the Iraqi capital, the military said Monday, and a third U.S. soldier was fatally shot while waiting to buy a soft drink at Baghdad University. [AP, July 6, 2003]
What are we up to now, Georgie Boy? Sixty-eight U.S. troops mouldering in body bags since you declared our oh-so-glorious victory on May 1st? Two hundred and... and... Damn, George, I need a freaking slide rule to keep up with all the needless deaths you're responsible for.
How the hell can you sleep at night, George?
Posted 1:13:26 AM Send comment
|
|
SelectSmart has a nifty 2004 American Presidential Candidate Selector, which takes your input on 17 different issues, and spits out the 2004 presidential candidates whose platforms most closely match your political attitudes. It was pretty darned accurate for me. Take it, and see what you think.
Without telling you my answers to the 17 questions, I'll share my results with you:
1. Kucinich, Cong. Dennis, OH - Democrat (83%)
2. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (74%)
3. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (72%)
4. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (68%)
5. Gephardt, Cong. Dick, MO - Democrat (59%)
6. Lieberman Senator Joe CT - Democrat (58%)
7. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (58%)
8. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol IL - Democrat (53%)
9. Graham, Senator Bob, FL - Democrat (46%)
10. Libertarian Candidate (33%)
11. Bush, George W. - US President (5%)
12. Phillips, Howard - Constitution (-1%)
13. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat
I must admit, that comes pretty close to my conscious preferences.
Of course, in an ideal world, Shrubya wouldn't even be on the bloody list. If you took away the other 12 candidates above, leaving only Dubs, I'd still vote instead for a houseplant. Or a shoebox. Or a bunion on somebody's foot. Or a box of rocks.
In other words: In the end, I'll vote for...
ANYONE BUT BUSH.
Posted 12:29:27 AM Send comment
|
|
Now, don't laugh. This is serious stuff. We're talking global warming here. Greenhouse emissions. And the nasty stuff that comes out of the south end of a northbound cow.
Yeah, I just about busted a gut reading this one all the way through (and I'm still trying to stop laughing as I type), but I guess if I lived right underneath the biggest hole in the earth's ozone layer, I'd be concerned about... well... cow farts, too.
There's merit to each side's arguments. I'm glad the Kiwi farmers at least have a sense of humor about it, even if they seem completely unconcerned by a very real problem, and somewhat uninformed about a federal government's right to sign international treaties on behalf of its citizens:
Controversial plans by New Zealand's government to charge a tax on flatulence released by livestock have run into trouble, with some farmers threatening a rebellion.
The proposals, first announced last month, form part of the government's efforts to meet New Zealand's obligations under the Kyoto Protocol to reduce the emission of "greenhouse gases."
In most developed nations these pollutants, which some scientists hold responsible for global warming, are caused by heavy industry and transport, but New Zealand's sheep and cows produce more than 40 percent of the country's total greenhouse gases.
The center-left Labor government of Prime Minister Helen Clark wants to charge farmers a fee based on the size of their flocks and herds, saying it will use the $5 million raised each year to fund research into ways of minimizing the emissions.
Experts say New Zealand dairy cattle release more gas than those in many other countries, in part because of their diet.
As the animals belch and emit wind, they release methane, while nitrous oxide is released from their waste.
The government has begun to hold consultation meetings with farmers across the country, and already the level of opposition has taken officials aback.
At a public meeting in the south of the country's North Island, noisy farmers made it clear to officials from two government ministries that they had no intention of paying the tax.
Other threats made included withholding information of their livestock numbers, which could sabotage attempts to calculate levies.
Some also suggested a campaign of civil disobedience, including disrupting traffic in the capital, Wellington, with large convoys of tractors and other farm vehicles.
The peculiar target of the tax has provided critics with plenty of ammunition.
Signs held by some of the farmers at the meeting declared: "Fight Against Ridiculous Taxes," with the first letters of each word highlighted to spell out their view on the entire subject.
"I'd like to see a resolution moved to get the wind out of the politicians first," one participating farmer was quoted as telling the gathering. ...
In line with the Kyoto Protocol, New Zealand and other developed nations have agreed to reduce their greenhouse gas emission to 1990 levels, by 2008-2012. ...
"New Zealand farmers did not sign the [Kyoto] protocol - the government signed it for the public good, so the public good should have to fund the consequences," they said. ...
Many farmers are not opposed to the research per se, but say that the government signed the Kyoto Protocol and so it should pay for the research. ...
Asked to explain the flatulence issue, researcher Dr. Ian Lean of the Australia-based Strategic Bovine Services said all ruminants are a significant source of methane, which is "a byproduct of their digestion."
As more digestible feeds are used, he said, the amount of methane emitted for every unit of milk, meat or wool produced, decreases.
"New Zealand has a beautiful pastoral environment, but levels of production are low, consequently methane production is relatively high."
He said that some feed additives, such as one called Rumensin widely used in U.S. beef cattle, reduce the production of methane markedly.
Other research in this field had seen scientists trying to vaccinate animals against the bugs that produce methane, but there had been no documented success to date, Lean said.
CNSNews.com
July 3, 2003
Posted 12:17:25 AM Send comment
|
|
WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio, July 4 — President Bush delivered an impassioned Fourth of July defense of war in Iraq, declaring that the United States is "on the offensive against terrorists and all who support them."
Celebrating Independence Day at this midwestern military base along with thousands of Air Force families and other spectators, the president said Friday that the nation had learned plenty from the pain of the deadly Sept. 11 terror attacks.
"Since that September day," he said, "we made our own intentions clear to them: The United States will not stand by and wait for another attack or trust in the restraint and good intentions of evil men."
Citing 9/11, Bush defends Iraq war
MSNBC
July 4, 2003
Made "our intentions clear to" whom? Who's "them"?
Repeat after me:
Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with September 11th. Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. Fifteen of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian. Saudi Arabia funds and supports terrorists. Osama bin Laden is still at large. Bush ignored the Clinton administration's intelligence on Osama bin Laden. Bush ignored warnings in July, 2001, of an imminent terrorist attack on U.S. soil. September 11th was Bush's "trifecta." ... Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with September 11th. Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. Fifteen of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian. Saudi Arabia funds and supports terrorists. Osama bin Laden is still at large. Bush ignored the Clinton administration's intelligence on Osama bin Laden. Bush ignored warnings in July, 2001, of an imminent terrorist attack on U.S. soil. September 11th was Bush's "trifecta." ... Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with September 11th. Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. Fifteen of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian. Saudi Arabia funds and supports terrorists. Osama bin Laden is still at large. Bush ignored the Clinton administration's intelligence on Osama bin Laden. Bush ignored warnings in July, 2001, of an imminent terrorist attack on U.S. soil. September 11th was Bush's "trifecta." ... Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with September 11th. Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. Fifteen of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian. Saudi Arabia funds and supports terrorists. Osama bin Laden is still at large. Bush ignored the Clinton administration's intelligence on Osama bin Laden. Bush ignored warnings in July, 2001, of an imminent terrorist attack on U.S. soil. September 11th was Bush's "trifecta." ... Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with September 11th. Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. Fifteen of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian. Saudi Arabia funds and supports terrorists. Osama bin Laden is still at large. Bush ignored the Clinton administration's intelligence on Osama bin Laden. Bush ignored warnings in July, 2001, of an imminent terrorist attack on U.S. soil. September 11th was Bush's "trifecta." ... Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with September 11th. Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. Fifteen of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian. Saudi Arabia funds and supports terrorists. Osama bin Laden is still at large. Bush ignored the Clinton administration's intelligence on Osama bin Laden. Bush ignored warnings in July, 2001, of an imminent terrorist attack on U.S. soil. September 11th was Bush's "trifecta." ...
Posted 12:10:55 AM Send comment
|
|
Like Me? Please Link Me!
If you find Doublethink informative and useful, you would be doing me a great honor (and favor) if you would add a permanent link to Doublethink on your own blog or Web site. Just click inside the text box below, hit "Highlight All," then copy the text, and paste it into your Web page to give me a link. Thank you very much!
|
© Copyright 2003 doublethink.
Last update: 12/10/03; 11:21:18 PM.
|
|
![www.iraqbodycount.org](http://www.iraqbodycount.net/counters/ibc_b.gif"){kind=small}