Sunday, March 28, 2010
Iraq elections
Friday, the world found out otherwise. According to the electoral commission's count (which still needs certifcation by the country's Supreme Court), Ayad Allawi's political party was the big winner. No sooner were the results declared than, Rod Nordland and Timothy Williams (New York Times) reported, drama queen Nouri went on "national television" and decreed, "No way we will accept these results." Little Nouri who fancied himself the new Saddam is not taking the news that he might not be prime minister well. In fact, outside of the evil queen in Snow White, we're having a difficult time thinking of anyone who's ever behaved in this manner. Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) reported yesterday:
Yet the Maliki government is being even more brazen than this, it would seem, as reports have emerged out of Diyala Province that four Sunni MP-elects from Allawi’s bloc are being targeted by security forces. One has already been captured and is being held incommunicado by the Maliki government, two others have gone into hiding, and the fourth is nowhere to be found.
What's going to happen next?
We have no idea and have no problem stating that.
If Quil Lawrence and his cohorts could learn that phrase, we'd probably have a stronger media system than we currently do. For three weeks, they gas-bagged that Nouri was the winner. And the votes revealed, woops, not so. There's a lesson there for them if they'll pay attention to it.
Steamrolled
The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is supposed to protect American's rights when the government engages in a range of counterterrorism activities. At least the board would that if it had any members. The board was created under President Bush at the recommendation of the 9/11 commission, but if fell apart a few years ago. Now, privacy advocates want President Obama to revive the board. NPR's Ari Shapiro reports.
Earlier this month, Senator Patrick Leahy's office issued the following press release:
Leahy Urges President To Make Privacy Board Nominations
March 9, 2010
WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) yesterday sent a letter to the White House, urging President Obama to make nominations to the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board.
Leahy first wrote to the President about reconstituting the Board in April 2009. The Board, which was established by Congress at the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission, is charged with ensuring that privacy and civil liberties concerns are considered in the development of national security and counterterrorism policies.
“Having a fully functional Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is a key step in protecting the privacy and civil liberties of all Americans,” Leahy wrote. “Given the many pressing privacy and civil liberties issues facing our Nation, including timely issues related to counterterrorism and cybersecurity policies, this vital Board has remained vacant for far too long.”
The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board was first constituted in 2005 and is comprised of five members. The terms of the Board’s first members lapsed in January 2008, and the Bush administration delayed in announcing new nominations to the Board. Last year, Leahy worked to secure funding in the omnibus appropriations bill to reconstitute the Board. In 2007, Leahy championed reforms to the Board, including the establishment of annual reporting requirements, and a requirement that all Board members be confirmed by the Senate.
The full text of Leahy’s letter to President Obama follows. A PDF is available online. A PDF of the letter Leahy sent with Senator Arlen Specter in April 2009 is also available online.
# # # # #
March 8, 2010
The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
In April, Senator Specter and I wrote to urge you to promptly reconstitute the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (“Board”). I write again to encourage you to nominate qualified individuals to the Board at the earliest opportunity.
The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is an integral component of our counterterrorism policies established by Congress to ensure that privacy and civil liberties concerns are appropriately considered in developing and implementing these measures. At the recommendation of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (9/11 Commission), Congress created the Board as an agency within the Executive Office of the President in 2004. During the 110th Congress, I worked with many others in the Senate to reform and reconstitute the Board, to give it more independence.
Having a fully functional Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is a key step in protecting the privacy and civil liberties of all Americans. Given the many pressing privacy and civil liberties issues facing our Nation, including timely issues related to counterterrorism and cybersecurity policies, this vital Board has remained vacant for far too long.
I look forward to working with you on this important issue.
Respectfully,
PATRICK LEAHY
Chairman
About that 'amazing' ObamaCare
But help us out, if it's so wonderful and amazing, why was one group of the population so worried that they needed assurances in writing?
You probably think we mean Bart Stupak and the other anti-choice Democrats. We don't. Little noted but last week the House Veterans Affairs' Subcommittee on Disability had a hearing and, in his opening remarks, Subcommittee Chair John Hall declared:
In a rare Sunday session, Congress passed and the President signed the sweeping health care reform package and I'm pleased that [VA] Secretary Eric Schinseki as well as the Chairman of the full VA Committee (US House Rep Bob Filner] and the full Armed Services Committee [US House Rep Ike Skelton] have signed a letter and sent it to the VSOs stating unequivocally that Tri-Care and VA care will not be effected by the health care legislation.
Tri-Care and VA won't be effected. And that needed to be put in writing. But ObamaCare's cause for celebration?
only if you weren't paying attention.
ObamaCare
Editorial
US needs more than Obama’s health changes
Barack Obama’s health bill is the biggest welfare reform in the US since the 1960s. Another 32 million people will have health insurance.
This is a step forward – and it’s good to see the Republicans defeated – but what is really shocking is how modest the changes are.
The Medicare scheme which offers health care to retired people was introduced in 1965 on the back of a wave of social discontent. But Obama’s reforms are a compromise designed to avoid upsetting the medical insurance companies.
About 23 million Americans will still have no health cover. Ordinary people will continue to pay crippling insurance premiums.
Insurers will no longer be allowed to exclude people for pre-existing medical conditions, but care will depend on what you can afford.
The scheme will subsidise insurance premiums for people who can’t pay. When they come in during 2014 the reforms will cost $940 billion (£624 billion).
So the government will fund the profits of the profiteering insurance companies, and the Republicans will blame reform for the increased costs.
The reforms will not set up any publicly run health scheme – even one that competes with the private companies. Any talk of change that would make the system efficient is dismissed as extremism.
Its frightening that the political consensus in Britain is to make our system ever more like the US.
© Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original.
Share this story on:
Delicious | Digg | reddit | Facebook | StumbleUpon
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by » making a donation.
» comment on article | » email article | » printable version
Laura Lying Flanders
Laura Lying Flanders
Friday and the topic tonight is Laura Lying Flanders.
There's no one uglier than Laura the self-loathing lesbian who's apparently back in the closet. Laura has a need to hide a lot of things. She can never stop lying. All through 2004 and election night and the day after, she said on air that she was supporting John Kerry. But, in 2008, we learned she didn't vote for him. Despite doing the overnight Air America 2004 coverage and telling people that they would get through it together and they were all disappointed.
She always lies. She can't help herself. If she's telling you what happened, she's got to lie to make it 'better.' You can't trust her.
She proves that today at CounterPunch -- and that's my last link to that piece of trash outlet ever.
Whora Flanders (who 'joked' about Hillary's "cackle" even after Chris Matthews had stopped) writes:
So, the New York Times finally ran a correction. But after six weeks of "considering" the errors in its own reporting, the Times’ correction of its misleading ACORN story, came way, way, WAY to late.
The correction ran the same day that the anti-poverty group ACORN called it quits, after a year under attack -- and a day after the paper's public editor wrote that yes indeed, the paper has "mistakenly reinforced falsehoods" from right wing activists against the group.
The Dirty Whore notes the 'costumes' and then launches into other things. Here are the next three paragraphs included under fair use and as a warning to the general public:When right-wing journo-hucksters released videos appearing to show ACORN workers offering advice to people posing as a pimp and a prostitute, the Times fell for an editing trick. The videos gave the impression that two hucksters were dressed in outlandish costumes when they visited ACORN offices. They weren't.
Video transcripts also contradicted what the video makers claimed, namely that ACORN staffers appeared to endorse talk of using underage girls as prostitutes. The Times also fell for that. In fact, the transcript reveals that ACORN staffers believed they were discussing a plan to protect two girls.
Responding to a complaint from the media critics at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, Hoyt said Sunday that the paper's editors were "considering issuing a correction."
What did the Times issue a correction on? From the above (and the rest of the article), they issued a huge number of corrections. But Laura's lying. Laura Flanders is always lying. She's a whore, just like her uncles and the rest of her crazy ass family. Here is the entire correction from the New York Times:Several articles since September about the troubles of the community organizing group Acorn referred incorrectly or imprecisely to one aspect of videotaped encounters between Acorn workers and two conservative activists that contributed to the group’s problems.
In the encounters, the activists posed as a prostitute and a pimp and discussed prostitution with the workers. But while footage shot away from the offices shows one activist, James O’Keefe, in a flamboyant pimp costume, there is no indication that he was wearing the costume while talking to the Acorn workers.
The errors occurred in articles on Sept. 16 and Sept. 19, 2009, and on Jan. 31 of this year. Because of an editing error, the mistake was repeated in an article in some copies on Saturday. (Go to Article)
Get it? They only retracted that James O'Keefe was wearing a pimp costume. All the other stuff Lying Laura's going on about? More lies from her trashy ass mouth. We don't need her on the left. She's lying and people are going to believe her. She hurts the cause. She either learns to tell the truth or she goes over to the right-wing where her trashy ass belongs anyway.Laura lies. She can't stop lying. Even her claim that the paper said the two didn't wear costumes is a lie. They only say O'Keefe didn't wear a pimp costume.
Laura also claims that Clark Hoyt (public editor of NYT) finally got honest but he's saying what the correction says: Only that the pimp costume was not worn. From Hoyt's article:
Acorn’s supporters appear to hope that the whole story will fall apart over the issue of what O’Keefe wore: if that was wrong, everything else must be wrong. The record does not support them. If O’Keefe did not dress as a pimp, he clearly presented himself as one: a fellow trying to set up a woman — sometimes along with under-age girls — in a house where they would work as prostitutes. In Washington, he said the prostitution was to finance his future in politics. A worker for Acorn Housing, an allied group, warned him to stay away from the brothel lest someone “get wind that you got a house and that your girlfriend is over there running a house of women of the night. You will not have a career.”
FAIR said that in Brooklyn, O’Keefe and Giles seemed to be telling Acorn staffers that “they are attempting to buy a house to protect child prostitutes from an abusive pimp.” That’s right, but FAIR left out the part about their clear intention to operate a brothel, which the Acorn workers seemed to take in stride, with one warning: “Don’t get caught, ’cause it is against the law.”
The videos were heavily edited. The sequence of some conversations was changed. Some workers seemed concerned for Giles, one advising her to get legal help. In two cities, Acorn workers called the police. But the most damning words match the transcripts and the audio, and do not seem out of context. Harshbarger’s report to Acorn found no “pattern of illegal conduct” by its employees. But, he told me: “They said what they said. There’s no way to make this look good.”
"FAIR left out the part . . ." Don't you love that. We know FAIR as the liar supreme. Ava and C.I. deconstructed that trashy group in 2008. They lie all the damn time. They once had ethics but they whored that out too. Now they're almost as big a whore as Laura Flanders.
This doesn't help the left and anyone who applauds Laura Flanders is as much a liar as she is.
It's time we took back the left from these liars. It's time those of us with ethics, those who didn't whore themselves out, make it clear that Laura Flanders and her ilk are nothing but the faux left. We can win it because we have truth on our side.
Highlights
"I Hate The War" -- Most popular highlight of the week. Many of you guessed that Ava and C.I. would be doing a radio program this week and you were right.
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The nail biter" -- The backstory? You've got a painted in wording for part of the comic. Isaiah did the comic last week and was convinced ObamaCare would fail. It didn't. He had already left DC when the vote was taken and C.I. and Wally worked up a new line (just one sentence) to add to the comic and make it work.
"Iraq snapshot," "Iraq snapshot," "Iraq snapshot" and "Iraq snapshot" -- C.I. reports on Congressional hearings.
"You Keep Me Hangin' On," "Silly," "Silly," "american pie," "Venus," "I Believe (When I Fall In Love It Will Be Forever)," "Erotic City," "Wishes," "What Have They Done To The Rain?"and
"What's my age again?" -- Theme post on music.
"THIS JUST IN! THE PRIVATE DANCER!" and "Let me loosen up your collar . . ." -- Wally and Cedric on Barry's Stupak lap dance.
"Freudian Slip wht World's Waiting On" -- Isaiah dips into the archives.
"Gumbo in the Kitchen" -- Trina covers cooking and the economy.
"Robert Mitchum" -- Ann on acting.
"Excuse me?" -- Betty asks the questions.
"book 'em friday" and "Oscar Micheaux" -- Rebecca and Marcia's book posts.
"Who is he working for?" -- We don't know.
"Surprises" -- Kat's musing post.
"Ever After" -- Stan's Friday night movie post.
"Alex Cockburn the Global Warming Denier" & "Laura Lying Flanders" -- Elaine and Mike take on the Crazy Cockburn family.
"Gearing up for Iowa" and "THIS JUST IN! ROAD SHOW!" -- Cedric and Wally on the never ending campaign.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Truest statement of the week
-- Senator Carl Levin, at the US Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Don't Ask, Don't Tell Thursday (Levin is the Chair of the Committee).
Truest statement of the week II
-- Lt Dan Choi, as quoted in Brian Montopoli (CBS News) report.