The Escapist - OMG Girlz Don?t Exist on teh Intarweb!!!!1

Comes from a progressive gamer's site. You've got to read this at least through case 4. I'm going to use this in my Tech/Values class.

The Escapist - OMG Girlz Don?t Exist on teh Intarweb!!!!1: "I am a girl on the internet. Yes, I said it. A girl on the internet. There really are quite a few of us. I can type. I can play games with the best of you. And you, my friend, are about to get owned by a girl."

Sectarian Fighting Breaks Out North of Baghdad - New York Times

Sectarian Fighting Breaks Out North of Baghdad - New York Times:

"BAGHDAD, Iraq, June 29 ? Intense clashes erupted today between Shiite and Sunni Arab fighters in a village north of Baghdad, highlighting the sectarian violence that is fracturing Iraq. American soldiers also took part in the battles, but it was unclear exactly what role they played."

Fox News having a bad year so far...

"Fox News Chairment Roger Ailes is on the warpath following his network?s recent ratings slump, and he won?t hesitate to clean house to turn things around.

So far during the second quarter, the No. 1 cable news channel?s primetime schedule has dropped 22% in its core 25-54 demo and 8% in total viewers. The first quarter was even worse.

Chief rival CNN has also dipped in recent weeks, but less dramatically, off 18% in the demo and 2% in total viewers."

CNN Transcript vis Eschaton

I promise, enough with the journalist/politico performance stuff (for awhile). But I just had to posit something that hawkish Biden said in response to a typical cable news media question this morning.

[Voice over] DICK CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The worst possible thing we could do is what the Democrats are suggesting, and no matter how you carve it, you can call it anything you want, but basically, it is packing it in, going home, persuading and convincing and validating the theory that the Americans don't have the stomach for this fight.

BLITZER: All right. You want to respond to the vice president, Senator Biden?

BIDEN: No, I don't want to respond to him. He's at 20 percent in the polls. No one listens to him. He has no credibility. It's ridiculous."

Think Progress

I've been thinking alot about the professional self-understandings of journalists over the last several months, and Gitlin's review of Lapdogs has sparked it recently.

Check out this exchange between White House PR guy Dan Bartlett and NBC's Matt Lauer..the fucking morning yak guy. Have you ever heard a mainstream journalist respond in this way since 2000?



Dan BARTLETT: "It is important to have members of the United States Congress who will not wave the white flag of surrender in this war on terror."

LAUER: The white flag of surrender ? that?s a very dramatic and harsh expression to use against the Democrats. Have you heard any Democrats calling for the white flag of surrender?"

BluegrassReport.org Being BLOCKED By State Government

In light of the discussion of blogs, I thought I'd note this recent story about the Govenor of Kentucky's move to block access to a popular blog critical of his administration from all state office computers.

BluegrassReport.org:

"I'm getting flooded with e-mails and a couple of phone calls from readers in other cabinets -- and other elected constitutional offices -- that the site has been blocked. But what's interesting is there's no problem allowing state workers to access the Republican Party of Kentucky or Fox News or Drudge Report or at least one conservative Kentucky blog."


UPDATE 3/22: The state breaucracy has responded to the charges stating that the evening and morning of the 21st they installed new web software designed to block access to whole categories of websites that department officials determined to be outside the bounds of work (this did NOT include news websites mind you). And as for why some rightist political blogs could be accessed and not particular leftist blogs like BluegrassReport, well the claim is that "their internet filtering service Webwatcher is to blame for that, not the governor's office."

House Judiciary Committee unexpectedly passes resolution demanding NSA telecom requests

Raw Story:

"The House Judiciary Committee unexpectedly passed a Democratic resolution Wednesday morning calling on the Justice Department to turn over all requests made by the National Security Agency and other federal agencies to telephone service providers to obtain information without a warrant.

The measure was passed by a voice vote Wednesday morning with support of Republican Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI). It was introduced by Florida Democrat Robert Wexler.

Sensenbrenner told the Committee he would bring the measure to the full House floor for a vote if the Justice Department did not comply with his earlier requests for information about the program.

The resolution is not a subpoena. It would have to pass the full House before it had the effect of law."

Stress in Iraq

Leaked Memo Reveals Plight of Iraqis

The original memo is listed second here. An interesting snapshot of how mundane life is increasingly strained (i.e. dress codes, checkpoint relations, etc).

Leaked Memo Reveals Plight of Iraqis:
By Patrick Cockburn
The Independent UK

Tuesday 20 June 2006

A leaked cable from the US embassy in Baghdad signed by the ambassador paints a grim picture of Iraq as a country disintegrating in which the real rulers are the militias, and the central government counts for nothing.

posted by fungua mlango at 5:50 PM | "

NY Observer - "Rove Case Lawyer Blackberries Karl":


Rove's lawyer spills the beans on who Karl's real enemies are.

"Actually, it's the media?not the prosecutor's office?that he's angry at, and especially the bloggers. Mr. Luskin was eager to portray the suffering of his client as a function of media attention and speculation, rather than real danger of a conviction.

Mr. Rove, Mr. Luskin said, had fallen victim to partisans and?more importantly?the bloggers who became their enablers."

Ever think about just how quickly blogs achieved a real political significance? Ten years ago, hell five years ago, no public official uttered the word, much less could they speak of them as a significant agent without causing all in the room to snicker. Within five years of the introduction of the term into the English language, they have become entities so potentially powerful as to qualify as the MOST important domestic enemy turdblossm has; or at least sufficiently enough to allow him to pursue the strategy of saying this and not have it sound too much like claiming martians or fleas were his worst enemies.

(I guess he did have his lawyer drop the quote for him, so perhaps it is still the case that no self-respecting powerplayer in Washington can refer publically to blogs as their scapegoats, even as it has become acceptable -- in fact, apparently unquestionable -- to make use of this strategy through transparent mediators.)

And just like that this most incredible experiment in human communication heretofore attempted, this interglobalnet if you will, shows itself to be its fucking opposite: a prominent political institution with absolutely no real political power since its only public function is to serve as a repository of blanket redemption for all strawman arguments provided by a public official.

Media Matters - Borger on media's coverage of Bush's Iraq trip: "I think we are suckers"

Just in case it needed more support, here is further evidence that there is absolutely nothing mystical whatsoever about how ideology operates...

Media Matters - Borger on media's coverage of Bush's Iraq trip: "I think we are suckers":

From the June 18 edition of CNN's Reliable Sources:

KURTZ: Gloria Borger, are journalists suckers for this kind of secret trip to Baghdad stuff? I mean, Bush was there less than six hours but got an avalanche of mostly positive coverage.

BORGER: I think we are suckers. Particularly if you're the one who gets to go on the pool, Howie, and gets to travel with the president on a secret trip to Baghdad. We do like these secret trips.

Believe it or not, we kind of like to be surprised, but I think if you're a bureau chief in Washington, you may be asking, 'Gee, why didn't we have more information?' And when you ask that question, the answer you always get from the White House is, 'Because this has to be shrouded in secrecy because this is a matter of presidential security. So we can't tell you more about this in advance.' So you know you're being used, but in a way you kind of like it because it's good pictures.

KURTZ: You enjoy it."

Pardon talk for Libby begins -- Newsday.com

Newsday re-reposits something we reposited in March

Pardon talk for Libby begins -- Newsday.com:

"WASHINGTON -- Now that top White House aide Karl Rove is off the hook in the CIA leak probe, President George W. Bush must weigh whether to pardon former vice presidential aide I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, the only one indicted in the three-year investigation.

Speculation about a pardon began in late October, soon after Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald unsealed the perjury indictment of Libby, and it continued last week after Fitzgerald chose not to charge Rove."

So long as oil is not priced in it...

From the Financial Times again

US drops opposition to Asian currency unit

The signal was given by Tim Adams, the under-secretary for international affairs at the US Treasury, in a closed session of the World Economic Forum in Tokyo.

While Mr Adams spoke in general terms, a copy of his prepared remarks, which has been obtained by the Financial Times, spells out clearly the US position on the Asian currency unit. The remarks say the US believes there has been ?some confusion? about its attitude on the ACU. They say ?we do not see the ACU as a competitor to the dollar.?

They say the US is ?open minded? and adds ?we view proposals for Asian currency co-operation with interest.? Mr Adams presented his remarks as a clarification rather than a shift in US policy. US officials admit the US is seen in Asia as being hostile to regional monetary and financial integration in principle, and wants to change that view.

And the real problem is....

"Indecency." Pander to the base. Pander to the base. Pander to the base.

Bush Signs Broadcast Decency Law

By NEDRA PICKLER
The Associated Press
Thursday, June 15, 2006; 1:03 PM

WASHINGTON -- President Bush signed legislation Thursday that will cost broadcasters dearly when raunchy programming exceeds "the bounds of decency."

At a signing ceremony for the new law increasing by tenfold the maximum fine for indecency, Bush said that it will force industry figures to "take seriously their duty to keep the public airwaves free of obscene, profane and indecent material."

Truthout's Latest Statement on Rove's (Non?) Indictment

I'm not sure what 'standing down' means here, especially given the particularly sarcastic attack on the mainstream media's reporting on the issue. While I agree that the reports yesterday were nothing more than reiterations of statements from Luskin, can one really stand down and still ask the mainstream media and Rove's attorney to reveal their sources even while claiming that they will not reveal their sources?

Also, what does this mean for Leopold's claim that he will reveal sources if Rove isn't indicted as well as the reportage that Joe Wilson is Leopold's source on this?

Standing Down on the Rove Matter

By Marc Ash,

Wed Jun 14th, 2006 at 06:52:40 PM EDT :: Fitzgerald Investigation
Yesterday, most Mainstream Media organizations published reports about a letter supposedly received by Karl Rove's attorney Robert Luskin. As an example of the supposed letter's contents, TIME Magazine stated that, "Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald said or wrote, 'Absent any unexpected developments, he does not anticipate seeking any criminal charges against Rove.'"

Truthout of course published an article on May 13 which reported that Karl Rove had in fact already been indicted. Obviously there is a major contradiction between our version of the story and what was reported yesterday. As such, we are going to stand down on the Rove matter at this time. We defer instead to the nation's leading publications.

In that Mr. Luskin has chosen the commercial press as his oracle - and they have accepted - we call upon those publications to make known the contents of the communiqué which Luskin holds at the center of his assertions. Quoting only those snippets that Mr. Luskin chooses to characterize in his statements is not enough. If Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald has chosen to exonerate Mr. Rove, let his words - in their entirety - be made public.

Reporter Jason Leopold

Mr. Leopold did not act alone in his reporting of this matter. His work, sources and conclusions were reviewed carefully at each step of the process. There is no indication that Mr. Leopold acted unethically.

Please keep in mind that over the years we have reported on many examples of individuals being scapegoated in crisis situations by superiors seeking cover from controversy. Truthout, however, does not do scapegoats. And we stand firmly behind Jason Leopold.

The Confidentiality of Our Sources

As journalists, nothing is more critical to being able to report guarded facts than the guarantee of confidentiality we provide to our sources. Truthout has never compromised the ident[it]y of a confidential source. We will protect our sources on this story, as we have on every other story we have ever published.

Expect a more comprehensive accounting of this matter on Monday, June 19.

Marc Ash
Executive Director - Truthout
director@truthout.org

Financial Times: Rove Won't be Indicted

In an article that admitedly only recycles statements from Luskin, Rove's attorney, the Financial Times is claiming that Rove won't be indicted.

Mr Rove?s attorney said on Tuesday that Patrick Fitzgerald, the special counsel in charge of the investigation, had told him ?he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove?.

?In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation,? Robert Luskin said. ?We believe that the Special Counsel?s decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr Rove?s conduct.?

No Permanent Bases

No Permanent Bases: Passed Both Houses, Removed in Conference Committee

"'With no opposition' voiced by any members, both houses of Congress have passed 'similar but not identical bills' with portions forbidding the funding of permanent military bases in Iraq?'the prospect of which is among the causes of anti-American unrest.' But the conference committee that would normally reconcile the differences of the two versions instead, 'behind closed doors this week, resolved that non-difference by deleting it.'

This would appear to be a blatant violation of the rules of Congress and an unconstitutional voiding of the will of the people as expressed by their representatives and senators. But it can't appear that way to a people that knows nothing about it. And it does not appear that way at all to the journalists who inform the public of its government's doings.... The newspapers are full of stories about things the conference committee did yesterday. None of the stories that I've seen mention the removal of the language about permanent bases."

SOA Watch

An important action alert:

SOA Watch: "This week, the week of June 5, Congress will vote on an amendment to close the SOA/ WHINSEC! Rep. McGovern (MA) will introduce an amendment to the Foreign Operations appropriations bill to cut funding for the SOA/ WHINSEC.

We expect a close vote and need as many people as possible flooding the offices of the House of Representatives with calls in support of a YES vote on the amendment. "

American Bar Association to Review Bush's Ignoring of 750 Laws

American Bar Association to Review Bush's Ignoring of 750 Laws: " Washington - The board of governors of the American Bar Association voted unanimously yesterday to investigate whether President Bush has exceeded his constitutional authority in reserving the right to ignore more than 750 laws that have been enacted since he took office."

Repost: Seriously, read this: "On Simple Human Decency"

Is it ok to ask the question, "is it ok to ask the question whether one should k(98r3)iolll el 5pr4954es92i2si24deaent" and then mail it?

From Ben Metcalf in Harper's.

35% of all people could tell you that

Robert Kennedy jr. writes a lengthy cover-story detailing and sourcing many of the most obnoxious examples of fraud in Ohio and other places...

Rolling Stone : Was the 2004 Election Stolen?: "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?"


Some choice selections from his discussion of the 2004 Exit polls that were jointly commisioned by the major six networks:

"The results are [always] exquisitely accurate: Exit polls in Germany, for example, have never missed the mark by more than three-tenths of one percent.(17) ''Exit polls are almost never wrong,'' Dick Morris, a political consultant who has worked for both Republicans and Democrats, noted after the 2004 vote. Such surveys are ''so reliable,'' he added, ''that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries.''(18)

[snip]

"On the evening of the vote, reporters at each of the major networks were briefed by pollsters at 7:54 p.m. Kerry, they were informed, had an insurmountable lead and would win by a rout: at least 309 electoral votes to Bush's 174, with fifty-five too close to call.(28)"

[snip]

Against these numbers, the statistical likelihood of Bush winning was less than one in 450,000.(31)

In ten of the eleven battleground states, the tallied margins departed from what the polls had predicted. In every case, the shift favored Bush. Based on exit polls, CNN had predicted Kerry defeating Bush in Ohio by a margin of 4.2 percentage points. Instead, election results showed Bush winning the state by 2.5 percent. Bush also tallied 6.5 percent more than the polls had predicted in Pennsylvania, and 4.9 percent more in Florida.(33)

"According to Steven F. Freeman, a visiting scholar at the University of Pennsylvania who specializes in research methodology, the odds against all three of those shifts occurring in concert are one in 660,000. ''As much as we can say in sound science that something is impossible,'' he says, ''it is impossible that the discrepancies between predicted and actual vote count in the three critical battleground states of the 2004 election could have been due to chance or random error."

[snip]

"What's more, Freeman found, the greatest disparities between exit polls and the official vote count came in Republican strongholds. In precincts where Bush received at least eighty percent of the vote, the exit polls were off by an average of ten percent. By contrast, in precincts where Kerry dominated by eighty percent or more, the exit polls were accurate to within three tenths of one percent -- a pattern that suggests Republican election officials stuffed the ballot box in Bush country."(39)

[snip]

The wildest discrepancy came from the precinct Mitofsky numbered ''27,'' in order to protect the anonymity of those surveyed. According to the exit poll, Kerry should have received sixty-seven percent of the vote in this precinct. Yet the certified tally gave him only thirty-eight percent. The statistical odds against such a variance are just shy of one in 3 billion."(40)

No Umbrella: Election Day in the City

Has anyone see this? Apparently a Sundance 2006 selection about 2004 Ohio election from the point of view of an inner city polling place.

No Umbrella: Election Day in the City