Pay very close attention --
Awhile back I linked to an item about postponing elections in the event of a terrorist attack. Perhaps Soaries was truly concerned that his fears were not being taken seriously. Or perhaps it was a scheduled "float," coming a week before the increasingly mockable bimonthly Terror Alert, with its ominous warning that this attack would be planned to disrupt US elections. Whatever the case, the idea is being explored more seriously, now.
(The BBC's version here.) I'm not feeling as "level-headed" about this as Matthew Yglesias. Mainly because this administration and its strongmen on the hill have demonstrated that they will stop at nothing to achieve the "electoral" results they desire - whether by tampering with elections, bribing members of Congress, or hijacking legislative procedure. Count on citizen watchdogs? A frightened American public failed to recognize or protest the obvious dangers of the PATRIOT ACT. I hope we're all paying very close attention as this "doomsday scenario" is defined.
Speaking of influencing elections --
Doonesbury yesterday.
Mind the gap --
That is, the gaping chasm between "values" and "ethics" - at least as practiced by the White House and certain senior leaders of the GOP. I was going to refer you to this story on DeLay's looming legal issues. But Daily Kos has that story and more.
Conservatives are unhappy --
According to this, Mr. Bush has some unhappy conservatives to pander to. Better toss them something tasty.
Hussein refused inspections? --
Bush is on the warpath again, so to speak, restating his most treasured-but-thoroughly debunked reasons for attacking Iraq. According to this WaPo summary of his speech, Bush again asserted that Hussein refused weapons inspections. Maybe he hasn't seen this government web site detailing inspections? Maybe he's not familiar with Hans Blix? Anyway, after I read that story this morning, I saw that Eschaton has done some fact-checking. Apparently Bush didn't say that today -- but he did on many other occasions.
And about that report --
Via Josh Marshall, a searchable version of the intelligence report, at least the parts that weren't redacted.
Awhile back I linked to an item about postponing elections in the event of a terrorist attack. Perhaps Soaries was truly concerned that his fears were not being taken seriously. Or perhaps it was a scheduled "float," coming a week before the increasingly mockable bimonthly Terror Alert, with its ominous warning that this attack would be planned to disrupt US elections. Whatever the case, the idea is being explored more seriously, now.
(The BBC's version here.) I'm not feeling as "level-headed" about this as Matthew Yglesias. Mainly because this administration and its strongmen on the hill have demonstrated that they will stop at nothing to achieve the "electoral" results they desire - whether by tampering with elections, bribing members of Congress, or hijacking legislative procedure. Count on citizen watchdogs? A frightened American public failed to recognize or protest the obvious dangers of the PATRIOT ACT. I hope we're all paying very close attention as this "doomsday scenario" is defined.
Speaking of influencing elections --
Doonesbury yesterday.
Mind the gap --
That is, the gaping chasm between "values" and "ethics" - at least as practiced by the White House and certain senior leaders of the GOP. I was going to refer you to this story on DeLay's looming legal issues. But Daily Kos has that story and more.
Conservatives are unhappy --
According to this, Mr. Bush has some unhappy conservatives to pander to. Better toss them something tasty.
Hussein refused inspections? --
Bush is on the warpath again, so to speak, restating his most treasured-but-thoroughly debunked reasons for attacking Iraq. According to this WaPo summary of his speech, Bush again asserted that Hussein refused weapons inspections. Maybe he hasn't seen this government web site detailing inspections? Maybe he's not familiar with Hans Blix? Anyway, after I read that story this morning, I saw that Eschaton has done some fact-checking. Apparently Bush didn't say that today -- but he did on many other occasions.
And about that report --
Via Josh Marshall, a searchable version of the intelligence report, at least the parts that weren't redacted.
posted by mizm at
8:41 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home