Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/10/2004 08:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Another one was reported and even BIGGER. Magnitude 7.1, same location, NEAR THE COAST OF NICARAGUA 'A major earthquake occurred at 21:26:56 (UTC) on Saturday, October 9, 2004.'
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/10/2004 14:34 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The 7.1 is the same earthquake as the 6.9... It was upgraded..
UNIONS could be introduced at small and medium-sized companies as part of efforts to improve working conditions, it has been revealed. The idea is to raise standards to make jobs more attractive to Bahrainis. Foreign workers in small companies, which have up to 10 employees, outnumber Bahrainis by seven to one, according to Labour and Social Affairs Ministry employment bureau head Mohammed Deeto. In addition, expats now account for 60 per cent of the workforce across both small and medium enterprises.
Do Bahraini men have the same problem Soodi men have in lifting anything heavier than their wallets?
"The number of foreign workers in small and medium establishments has reached around 86,000, which is around 60pc of the overall number of foreign workers registered with Gosi," he said. "One of our most prominent problems in the local market is the low number of Bahrainis working in these establishments." Mr Deeto said it is necessary to introduce labour unions in small and medium companies to fight for improved working conditions and wage increases. "Once the circumstances of workers in these establishments are improved more Bahrainis will seek jobs there, which will lower the number of foreign workers," he said. Mr Deeto's comments were made in a presentation which addressed the relationship between the labour market and government, employers and workers. The presentation was given at a monthly meeting about the labour market and labour unions, which took place at the ministry, in Isa Town. He urged all parties to work together for the development of the country's labour market. "What we really need is for all parties to stick to their commitments to ensure the success of dialogues and their continuity in order to reach suitable solutions to develop the labour market," he said.
Keeping one's word in an Arab society? What a novel idea.
Meanwhile, Labour and Social Affairs Minister Dr Majeed Al Alawi said the country is moving ahead with labour reforms. "The ministry will make available all the appropriate opportunities for upgrading unions in Bahrain and help them play their part in this operation," he said. Present at the meeting were ministry officials including Under-Secretary Shaikh Abdulrahman bin Abdulla Al Khalifa, Assistant Under-Secretary for Training Abdulellah Al Qassimi, managers, department heads and some invited guests.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/10/2004 12:16:48 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
A gunbattle broke out between U.N. peacekeepers and supporters of ousted Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide on Saturday, wounding a peacekeeper for the first time in the force's 4-month-old mission. The clashes, which Haitian police said also left one officer wounded, came as protesters in the northwestern city of Gonaives crowded outside a Mass for flood victims accusing Haiti's interim president and prime minister — who were attending — of not doing enough to help hungry survivors three weeks after Tropical Storm Jeanne. Heavy gunfire erupted in the capital of Port-au-Prince after about 150 Brazilian troops using armored vehicles and 150 Haitian police in trucks rolled into the volatile slum of Bel Air, where armed young men have been demanding the return of Aristide from exile, Brazilian Lt. Col. Ezequiel Izaias said. Peacekeepers "came under heavy fire and they returned fire," said U.N. spokesman Toussaint Kongo-Doudou. The Brazilian soldier was wounded in the foot — the first casualty among some 3,000 peacekeepers, Kongo-Doudou said. He also said it appeared some of the gunmen were wounded, but it was unclear how many.
Kongo-Doudou said troops and police arrested more than 60 people suspected of attacking them. Police were seen detaining some men, holding them to the ground at gunpoint and tying their hands with rope. The clashes came a day after the beheaded bodies of a father and son were found in another Port-au-Prince slum of La Saline.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/10/2004 12:11:06 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That tears it. The UN will retreat now, while demanding that the US provide better security.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/10/2004 0:15 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Must be a mistake,since when do UN Peacekeepers fught back?
Russians are dying in numbers and at ages that seem impossible to believe. Heart disease, alcohol consumption, and tuberculosis are epidemic. So is addiction to nicotine. You won't see many pregnant women on the streets; Russia has one of the lowest peacetime birth rates in modern history.Long life is one of the central characteristics of an advanced society; in Russia, men often die too young to collect a pension. In the United States, even during the Great Depression mortality rates continued to drop, and the same has been true for all other developed countries. Except Russia. In the past decade, life expectancy has fallen so drastically that a boy born in Russia today can expect to live just to the age of fifty-eight, younger than if he were born in Bangladesh. No other educated, industrialized nation ever has suffered such a prolonged, catastrophic growth in death rates.
In 1991, on the day the Soviet Union was dissolved, Russia's population stood at a hundred and forty-nine million. Without the huge wave of immigration from the former Soviet republics which followed, the country would have lost nearly a million people each year since then. If Russia is lucky, by 2050 the population will have fallen by only a third, to a hundred million. That is the most optimistic government scenario. More realistic predictions suggest that the number will be closer to seventy-five or eighty million—a little more than half the current population.
#1
I guess that means everyone will get a bigger apartment, and the country will make billions from the sale of carbon credits under the Kyoto Treaty. Almost as profitable as oil, and no effort to get it out from the ground.
/shallow shortsightedness
So, the Chinese will continue settling population in the border areas, and lots of them will be thrilled to get older Russians as wives. And in the end the Russian oil fields will fulfill Chinese needs rather than Europe's, while the children will have an adorable mixture of Slavic and Oriental characteristics. Hmmm....
#2
The demographic collapse west of the Urals is a major source of current and especially future instability. Add in massive industrial pollution in many parts of the country (with associated birth defects) and a rising Aids crisis.
It's not hard to imagine that the trend some see towards autocracy will accelerate over the next decade or so. I hope not, but ...
Oh yes, the fastest rising demographic, east of the Urals, is ethnic Chinese.
#3
Russia will likely devolve into a much smaller, Europeanized, reasonably well-governed and demographically stable western-oriented state with only a loose attachment to a set of de facto Chinese puppet regimes covering the Far East and the Siberian regions north and east of Novosibirsk.
Russia will never be both democratic and geographically vast. A smaller Russian Federation would allow for a better-governed, more democratic Russian entity stretching roughly from St Petersburg to Novosibirsk.
France's President Jacques Chirac declared the Chinese Army's massacre of Tiananmen democracy demonstrators an event in the past as he began a visit here designed to reap lucrative contracts for France's financially pressed state industrial enterprises.
The massacre in 1989 was "another time" he said during an interview with the Chinese Government news agency Xinhua, explaining his call for a lifting of the European Union's arms export embargo on China, imposed after Tiananmen.
The remark brought immediate protests. The New York-based group Human Rights in China, founded by exiles from the suppressed 1980s democracy movement, said that "15 short years" was not long enough to erase a major crime against humanity.
"President Chirac's remarks also profoundly dishonour the many Chinese people who continue to call for accountability for Tiananmen Square," it said in a statement, mentioning the retired army doctor Jiang Yanyong, the thousands of Chinese intellectuals who had signed petitions, and the "Tiananmen mothers" of victims still calling for a reassessment of the official line that the protests were a "counter-revolutionary riot".
Mr Chirac was unabashed as he stood next to the Chinese President, Hu Jintao, for a 21-gun salute from the People's Liberation Army in Tiananmen Square on Saturday before entering talks aimed at cementing what both leaders call a "strategic partnership".
The arms embargo had "no use at all" he told reporters later.
"It was an expedient measure adopted at that time. It was mainly derived from animosity towards China. The European Union has a ban on North Korea. That indicates that this ban is not logical."
The lifting of the embargo has been strenuously opposed by the United States, which fears it could lead to European weapons systems being used against its forces in any conflict over Taiwan, which the US is obliged by one of its own laws to defend.
Mr Chirac said France "completely understands" China's position on Taiwan and was worried tensions between the mainland and the island were worsening.
"Any challenge to the balance in the Taiwan Strait region will be very dangerous and detrimental for everyone," he said.
At an earlier stop in the Western Chinese industrial centre of Chengdu, Mr Chirac declared China a vital front for France in the "global economic battle", with big contracts being sought for the aircraft manufacturer Airbus, the car maker Renault, the fast train maker Alstom and the nuclear power plant firms Electricite de France, Framatome, and Areva.
But France faces stiff competition from US, Japanese and other European nations. Its trade with China, valued at $US13.4 billion ($18 billion) last year, is behind that of Germany and Britain, and some of the new contracts may be won on political rather than technical grounds.
Chinese officials have indicated they might chose Alstom's high-speed train over Japan's bullet train for a new high-speed link between Beijing and Shanghai because of lingering war animosity.
Mr Hu indicated that a Chinese goal in the "strategic partnership" with France was to resist US "unilateralism" and restore the United Nations Security Council as the forum for dealing with world crises.
China has not so much joined the world economy as crashed into it. The daily headlines about U.S. companies ''outsourcing'' to China tell only part of the story. The other part is that China is beset with problems. While many pundits fret that the Chinese economy threatens the United States, China's continued move to a market economy, which will require solving those problems, should benefit the United States.
On the one hand, China's much-heralded economic growth during the last quarter century is unprecedented in world history. Annual incomes of the Chinese have more than quadrupled, from about $1,000 per capita to more than $4,000. At the same time, China is plagued by massive internal migration, officially disclaimed unemployment and an economically crippled and crippling collection of state-owned enterprises. An estimated 10 million people each year leave China's farms for its cities. This migration poses huge social and economic problems. And, with well over half of China's population still living in rural areas, there is no end in sight.
While Chinese officials claim low unemployment rates, the country's population of 1.3 billion belies the significance of this claim. At the end of 2000, the official estimate of the unemployment rate stood at slightly more than 3 percent. While this may seem low by Western standards, it translates into more than 20 million unemployed. Most observers believe the official statistics understate the extent of unemployment. According to the Chinese newspaper People's Daily, in the last six years China's state-owned enterprises, which still account for about 60 percent of output, laid off more than 28 million workers. To put these numbers in perspective, overall employment in goods-producing industries in the United States has declined by about 3 million workers since its peak of 25 million in 1973.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/10/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Awwwwwwww
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/10/2004 0:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Aspects of this situation actually play to the advantage of U.S. companies. For China's transition to a market economy to be politically acceptable, the rate at which state-owned enterprises are restructured must keep pace with the rate at which new private-sector jobs are created. Foreign direct investment has been the major source of jobs for former employees of state-owned enterprises and displaced migrants from the countryside."
Which is why an invasion of Taiwan with an immediate resultant embargo of all trade with the US is sucide for the Chinese economy, instant vast unemployment without sustainable safety nets, and social disruption. Things a central control/management system can not quickly solve. Throw in the extent of corruption still operating in the system and you invite the historical Chinese cycle of revolt and fragmentation.
Posted by: Don ||
10/10/2004 8:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The company I work for sells control systems for the power, water and waste water industries. We are about to reach a milestone. Within the year, half of all our installed systems will be in China. If the Chinese market were to dry up, my company would be in for tough times. Thus, do not underestimate the power of the Chinese in negotiations with the US. If China were to threaten to close the market to us and give it to our European competitors because of our support for Taiwan, my company's president would be on the phone, in a heart beat, to any politician he can reach saying cut Taiwan off at the knees. He could care less about communism. My prez only cares about sales. Quote he on our Asian strategy, "China, there is nothing else." Even Bush had to pull Taiwan's chain a while back, telling them to knock off the independence chatter. It is my belief that China is ultimately going to have its way with Taiwan with a wink and a nod from us. The customer is always right. Look for more conciliatory speeches from Taiwan.
#4
Zpaz: I don't see any way the Chinese could close the market to us that wouldn't risk a similar backlash here.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
10/10/2004 13:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
one big caveat is China's propensity for reverse-engineering technology and producing it themselves with no respect for patents or copyrights. Nobody can trust them with technology imports for longer than it takes to R-E the stuff. Just ask Pfizer
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/10/2004 14:13 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Frank, oddly enough, they have not reverse engineered our stuff...yet. We actually have been expecting it, but nothing yet. One explanation is that our stuff is not a commodity yet. There is simply much more than a hunk of software in getting and keeping a power plant online. Also, I suspect the Chinese like having a $50 billion a year company as their supplier. It gives them a voice in Congress. That is the only way I can explain the non-emergence of a Chinese competitor. It will happen in time though. There is simply too much cheap talent in China.
Phil, in our case they do not have to close the market. They simply stop buying from us and start buying Siemens. Nothing overt. Just across the board drying up of contracts in many industries. I doubt there will be any backlash. Wal-mart needs their cheap supplies. We simply do not own our customers. It is the American way. That gives them power.
Trying to sort out who is dependent on who is a difficult and pointless task. We are simply interdependent.
Keep this in mind. There are 1.2 billion customers in China. There are 22 million customers in Taiwan. Which commands more respect from the American business community? Outright confrontation with China is a lose-lose for us and them.
#8
Economically, we and the Chinese are joined at the hip. This will be a difficult relationship to manage, but China is not more dangerous to us or our interests than the Soviets were, or the jihadists and their state sponsors are.
#9
Despite all said about getting along, a thug is a thug. The Chinese government needs to back the hell off Taiwan and get the hell out of Tibet to boot. I'll take their money, I won't take their shit.
#10
and there needs to be a cost to their adventurism...next time they take down a plane, sell a shitload of defensive weapons to teh Taiwanese. Status quo is they stay put
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/10/2004 17:02 Comments ||
Top||
#11
With 1.3 billion Chineese, if they only buy 10 ounces of kilowatt hours/yr then we will get rich! rich! rich I tells ya!
#4
Oh, come on folks. This is classic Chirac looking for allies to take on American culture, economic dominance, technical superiority and military strength. He ain't interested in anything else than building up a counter weight to our influence in the world. Interestingly, we still have profound influence even though we are so despised, exactly for the reasons stated above. The Axis of Overt Evil is now in danger of being replaced by the Axis of Evil Intent - France, China and Germany. Russia will never join an alliance that has China in it - so this may be the weakest part of Chirac's plan and it could do danger to any European hegemony on the issues of defense and security.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
10/10/2004 9:59 Comments ||
Top||
#5
But only if the Chinese learn French, n'est ce pas?
The Escambia County Republican Party would not normally be considered a high-risk tenant. But in this bitter campaign season, politics can be risky business. Between 7 and 9:30 a.m. Saturday, one or more vandals threw rocks at the Republicans' county headquarters on Creighton Road, breaking the outer panes of three large plate-glass windows, said Alan Levy, a member of the party's executive committee. Last week, the landlord replaced two similar windows, which were broken at the front of the building shortly before the office officially opened Oct. 2, Levy said. "This is not the way we do politics in this country," he said. "It's ridiculous. It's absurd. It wasn't like this four years ago." The same windows broken out Saturday morning had been spattered with luminous pink paint the day before, said Laura Tkach, a party volunteer. "It's outrageous," she said.
Levy reported the Saturday incident to the Escambia County Sheriff's Office. Sheriff's spokesman Sgt. Ted Roy said there are no suspects. Local law enforcement agencies do not keep statistics on politically related vandalism. But judging from anecdotes, this presidential campaign has generated more criminal mischief than most, both Republican and Democratic activists say. Supporters of Democratic Sen. John Kerry have complained for months about what they call widespread efforts to steal or deface their signs. Ron Melton, who chairs the Escambia County Democratic Party, said he has a hard time keeping a Kerry-Edwards sign up for more than 24 hours at a time in front of his computer business on Navy Boulevard. "We've had more signs stolen, run down and spray painted," Melton said Saturday. "It's getting pretty feverish."
Levy said entire streets were cleared of Bush-Cheney signs the day after the party passed out a large number last weekend.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/10/2004 10:07:52 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This may explain why I have seen so few Bush-Cheney signs in yards and so many Kerry-Edwards signs. This is Republican country too.
Michigan Democrats' lawsuit against the state elections office is an unsavory bit of political gamesmanship that should be quickly dispatched by the courts. The suit, filed in the federal district court in Bay County, challenges the state's balloting rules, specifically demanding that people who show up at the wrong polling place, without proof of registration or valid personal identification, be allowed to vote anyway and have their vote counted.
This would open the door to voter fraud and vote counting nightmares. Michigan already has generous policies to assure that it is as easy as possible to vote. Those rules were approved by the U.S. Justice Department and signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm. Currently, voters who show up at the wrong precinct are directed to the right polling place by election workers equipped with the state's qualified voter file. If their name is not on the state list, they are still allowed to vote, but their ballot is placed in an envelope and the voters have six days to prove they are registered. Likewise, if they arrive at the polling place without ID or a voter card, they can vote, and their ballot will be counted if they produce identification within six days.
The lawsuit, if successful, would eliminate those safeguards and make it easier for voters to cast ballots in more than one precinct. Chris Thomas, Michigan's director of elections, says the state's rules were carefully crafted to meet federal guidelines. He says vote counting will be difficult if the Democrats get what they're asking for. He also said that any change in rules this close to Nov. 2 would create chaos on Election Day. If the election is close, that could put Michigan in the position Florida was in after the 2000 vote. And that may be the real motive behind the lawsuit. Similar suits have been filed in Florida, Missouri, Ohio and Colorado, all battleground states where the margin of victory is expected to be narrow. Having a pool of ballots that could be contested in those states paves the way for a post-election legal challenge. A federal judge in Florida tossed out the lawsuit in that state Friday, saying the changes it demanded would violate federal law. The court in Michigan should do the same.
Michigan does an admirable job of helping its votes cast their ballots. Precinct locations are mailed to voters, are printed on the voter registration card, can be found on the Internet or obtained by calling the city clerk. There's really no excuse for a voter to show up at the wrong precinct. Or to show up without identification. Some measure of personal responsibility should be expected of the voters themselves.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/10/2004 9:57:00 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This Authentiseal.org site is pretty intense. It is amazing how many people, many of them professional and educated would make a flase claim to be a SEAL.
The article about John Kerry's service and the implications of his prefidy is pretty stark and damning.
It's a shame politics will prevent Kerry from accounting for his crimes, but maybe politics can give salve to those who did serve and did hold the line in Viet Nam, that at long last his crimes are revealed to the nation.
#2
The article about John Kerry's service and the implications of his prefidy is pretty stark and damning.
I heard of suspicions about Kerry's record for sometime now. Seems hard to establish what his record really is--other than his Viet protests and treachery. His Senate record is more transparent.
Took a look at the Seal site. It is disturbing that people would lie about military service. This is seriously wrong. It wrongs those who have served so gallantly.
Posted by: A. Bungfodder ||
10/10/2004 23:44 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I wonder what will happen to military recruitment and retention rates if Kerry gets elected. My hunch is, it won't be pretty.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
10/10/2004 23:48 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Dave, recruitment and retention will probably head south. I think it would be difficult to be in the military under Kerry. Probably won't be pretty. Clinton said he "loathed" the military. Doesn't seem like Kerry likes the military all that much either other than for what he can try to play it for. I think the military is on to him from what military polls I have seen.
Posted by: A. Bungfodder ||
10/10/2004 23:54 Comments ||
Top||
Fights over a political party's future are common after the party loses a big election. But John Kerry figures to face a fight over control of the party from fellow Democrats even if he beats George W. Bush on Nov. 2. *snip*
Whether they succeed in electing Kerry or not, key leaders see the newfound unity among these groups as a first step toward building the kind of political movement any president, whatever his party, must heed. *snip*
With Bush vanquished, the Democrats' internal battles will begin.
"We're going to celebrate with John Kerry the night of Nov. 2. But the morning of Nov. 3, we're going to start organizing to take the party away from him, Not very far away, as far as I can tell. You'll just be more open about your plans to damage America by turning it into a Tranzi paradise. For the Islamonazis to destroy.
because we have serious disagreements about what the party should stand for and where this country needs to go," Not as serious as the disagreements the majority of Americans - the normal people - have with YOU, Big Bertha.
said one activist at the "What We Stand For" conference, Bertha Lewis, co-chair of the Working Families Party in New York state and a leader in the grassroots election fraud antipoverty group, ACORN.
"In 2004, we have to elect anyone but Bush," OK, I can go with that. Let's elect Cheney!
said a veteran labor strategist working to link unions with other progressive groups. "But if we keep working and build on the lessons learned and the partnerships we're forging during this fight against Bush, we can elect somebody we really like four or eight years from now." Who? Nader? Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? That must make sKerry feel warm all over.
All this signals a historic shift in the American left's approach to national politics. In the past, left-wing groups and individuals would moan about a Democratic nominee's perceived deficiencies and defect to a protest candidate, such as Ralph Nader or Jesse Jackson.
By contrast, the Beat Bush Brigades are showing a new patience and maturity. Which makes them very dangerous to our country's future.
They are working in the short term to elect a Democrat they see as imperfect in order to build their movement's strength over the long term. *snip*
If Bush wins on Nov. 2, the battle for control of the Democratic Party will probably come quickly. Dibbs on the popcorn concession! :-D
Leftists will argue that Kerry and the centrists forfeit any right to leadership if they cannot defeat the most vulnerable incumbent since Jimmy Carter. Nope, no bias there.
If Bush is defeated, Bite your tongue!
the battle will unfold more gradually. The left will probably cooperate with Kerry on some issues and fight him on others, while it focuses on building the media, research and grassroots institutions that can swing the party in its direction. Building? Hell, they've already got the "media institutions that can swing the party in its direction." Like ABCNBCCBSCNNLATNYTWaPo, et al.
Read it all at the link. Normal Democrats, watch out. You'll soon have no party left. This is your last chance to take the party of Truman and Kennedy back; it may already be too late.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/10/2004 2:12:36 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, hell - I see Dave D beat me to it. Sorry, Dave, didn't see yours.
Editors, please delete mine.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/10/2004 14:14 Comments ||
Top||
#2
This is interesting. Doctrinally, JK is *the* most left of the lefties. So what are the radicals *really* proposing? In other words, are they willing to abandon socialism for what amounts to anarchy? That is, whoever can stimulate the herd to stampede in whatever direction is the new leader, until they run into an obstacle. At this point, the cease to be a political party, except clenching the bones of the old organization. Something has to give: they have lost the Presidency, the Congress, the Governorships, and even the State houses. Except for pockets of the bureaucracy from which they are being excised like little planar warts, they have nothing left.
#3
So stupid, really: a hawkish centrist or even a hawkish liberal would win this election easily. Kerry could have trounced Bush merely by running to Bush's RIGHT on Iraq, Iran, the jihadists, because at bottom this is a war to defend liberal wesetern civilization against a fascist enemy. Hitchens, Paul Berman and a handful of others get it, but the vast majority of the Deanie/Mikey/Jimmah idiotarians do not.
A leftist Dem party would be a permanent minority party commanding maybe 25% of the national vote and dominant only along four narrow axes: Cambridge-NYC-DC, LA/SF, Chicago-Detroit and Portland-Seattle. A party symbolized by Mikey Moore, Nancy Pelosi, Jimmah and Howard Dean would not be capable of winning single state house or senate seat between the Hudson River and the Sierra Nevadas.
In other words, the Dems would be most competitive in the states that are LOSING POPULATION, and increasingly less competitive in the states that are gaining population, electoral votes and congressional seats. These states are the bellwethers for America's political future: Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, Florida, Texas.
Absolutely insane to argue that a party dominated by government employee unions, a demented Wall Street billionaire and a crackpot conspiracy-monger can win over a majority of voters in the high-growth, suburbanized, increasingly yuppie and anti-government core states.
#4
It would be nice if some grown-ups took over the Democratic party. I rather like the idea of having a functional two (or more) party system.
Of course, I must admit I would enjoy the hideous spectacle of the Dems running Al Sharpton for President. Not sure who they could chose as V.P for 'balance', though. Pelosi? Boxer?
#6
'Opie' Edwards was being interviewed on the Fox News Sunday show.
He was not laughing non-stop and treating everything as a joke, in fact seemed really fed up with being put on the carpet by Fox's Chris Wallace, who did not back down on the issue of the 'entire' the new WMD report, which Opie tried to duck.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/10/2004 18:00 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The far left Monied MoonBats can try. They have the $$$ and more than a few Dems are seasoned Political Whores. Who'll hike up their skirts and lie back. While others in fly-over states defect to the Republican party.
Jack.
Posted by: Jack Deth ||
10/10/2004 19:01 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I thought the Democratic Party was taken over by the leftwing wingnuts long ago. What would a further left party look like. I mean to the left of Kerry, Kennedy, and Clinton. That is pretty weird to think about. Members will be channeling Jim Jones or Charlie Manson???
Posted by: A. Bungfodder ||
10/10/2004 23:29 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Dave D. ||
10/10/2004 11:51 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Influential figures on the party's left wing are planning a long-term campaign to move the Democrats to the left [after the election]...If the left's campaign is successful, it could transform the political landscape of the United States...
Yeah, by handing the government over to the Republicans for the next 50 years.
Don't miss the cabinet post for Howard Dean, plus the "right-wing media infrastructure".
Thus the threat of four more years of Bush may end up calling forth a genuine American left for the first time in a generation -- an ironic accomplishment for this most right-wing of presidents.
Uh huh. Look, you guys lose because Americans, generally speaking, hate your ideas. And when they don't hate your ideas, they hate you. They hate the pink-painted, Bushitler-shouting, dangly-bit-exhibiting, pot-smoking, tree-hugging, polyamorous moonbats sashaying up and down the streets of Berkeley. If you want to win, you've got to keep those folks under a blanket. It may not be faaaaaiiirrr, but it's true.
If, on the other hand, you figure this would compromise your iron integrity, I salute you. Just get used to losing.
#2
Allow me to introduce you to an historical figure that pretty much sums up what is about to befall the democratic party when they lose big in November:
#3
Clue No. 1 to Donks - you can only get close in elections when you lie and obscure your parties' leftist ideals and tax and spend mania. Kerry will be haunted by his pledge not to raise taxes
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/10/2004 13:52 Comments ||
Top||
#4
polyamorous moonbats sashaying up and down the streets of Berkeley
#5
This is the central question nagging the Democrats: do they lose elections because they've wandered too far into the fever swamps of the Left? Or do they lose elections because they've become, as the author of this article apparently believes, "too much like Republicans"?
Sometimes I wonder if the "real" purpose of the Clinton impeachment was to drive the Democrats insane so they would start doing crazy shit that would cost them elections; if so, the tactic has succeeded (with a little help from the 2000 election fiasco) beyond anyone's wildest dreams.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
10/10/2004 14:22 Comments ||
Top||
#6
A leftist Dem party would be a permanent minority party commanding maybe 25% of the national vote and dominant only along four narrow axes: Cambridge-NYC-DC, LA/SF, Chicago-Detroit and Portland-Seattle. A party symbolized by Mikey Moore, Nancy Pelosi, Jimmah and Howard Dean would not be capable of winning single state house or senate seat between the Hudson River and the Sierra Nevadas.
In other words, the Dems would be most competitive in the states that are LOSING POPULATION, and increasingly less competitive in the states that are gaining population, electoral votes and congressional seats. These states are the bellwethers for America's political future: Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, Florida, Texas.
Absolutely insane to argue that a party dominated by government employee unions, a demented Wall Street billionaire and a crackpot conspiracy-monger can win over a majority of voters in the high-growth, suburbanized, increasingly yuppie and anti-government core states.
#7
Bush/Rove should get to work Nov 3 to set about a serious immigration reform policy that could win over both hispanics and lower-income whites in the core high-growth border and western states mentioned above--esp Texas Calif and Florida, also CO AZ NV NM.
Anyone who can lock up these states' votes will have a lock on the White House and Congress for another quarter century.
I, personally, have nothing much against polyamorous moonbats as long as 1) they do their polyamorizing indoors, 2) they don't expect me to join in, and 3) I don't have to pay for their offspring.
But most people aren't as tolerant as I am, and if, when they think Democrat, they think "nekkid weirdos on parade", the Democrats are doomed.
It needn't be this way. The Republicans have a couple of weird cousins in their closets, too, but they do a better job of keeping them there. In fact, I'd say the Republicans have done a good job of alienating their weirder cousins, while the Democrats embrace theirs.
That's very loving and tolerant, I suppose. And the kiss of death. I say this as someone who has, over the years, voted Democrat over Republican at a rate of about 9:1.
#9
Angie - you forgot "and don't frighten the horses." ;-)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/10/2004 16:22 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Ladies, you are positively poetic today. That image is going to wander through my nightmares and daydreams at least until the election.
And just think: with the way the kids as a group are heading rightward, some years from now we may see yard signs in Berkeley that say, "pink-painted, dangly-bit-exhibiting, pot-smoking, tree-hugging, sashaying polyamorous moonbats who try not to scare the horses FOR CONDI"
If I have to dream about it, I'm going to dream it my way!
Hat Tip Drudge-
(Canyon News) Being a standard coward, Mark Halperin memo is sent on Friday, just before the debate, in the hope that the stink blows over by Monday, in case of discovery. Those of us "pajama-wearers" here of the great unwashed and unenlightened masses will not let it be so. ABCNEWS POLITICAL DIRECTOR MEMO SPARKS CONTROVERSY: BOTH SIDES NOT 'EQUALLY ACCOUNTABLE'
**Exclusive**
An internal memo written by ABCNEWS Political Director Mark Halperin admonishes ABC staff: During coverage of Democrat Kerry and Republican Bush not to "reflexively and artificially hold both sides 'equally' accountable." I'm an ass and I admit it!
The controversial internal memo obtained by DRUDGE, captures Halperin stating how "Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win." And As a disconnected leftist, I am so arrogant that I believe even if this gets out, no one will care.
But Halperin claims that Bush is hoping to "win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions." Seems to me Kerry is doing a pretty good job of that himself without any help from the president, you SCUMBAG.
"The current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done," Halperin writes. But of course Halperin won't talk about whether Kerry is more like Walter Mitty or Baron von Munchausen in his storytelling...
Halperin's claim that ABCNEWS will not "reflexively and artificially hold both sides 'equally' accountable" set off sparks in St. Louis where media players gathered to cover the second presidential debate. And prompted the loaded question at the end of the about admitting "mistakes" to be selected by Carley Gibson, who must have gotten an attaboy call from Snake Halperin. I can hear the snake to Charley now, "We'll get him next time dammit"
Halperin states the responsibilities of the ABCNEWS staff have "become quite grave." The longevity of his job may become "quite grave" if we can get enough Disney stockholders angry.
In August, Halperin declared online: "This is now John Kerry's contest to lose."
DROOL, DROOL
x x x x x
Halperin Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004
It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave
I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion. If you don't answer right, I know whose contract not to renew.
The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win. I guess the Snake thinks stories about the lucky hat are not indicative of anything.
We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that. The "public" has an "interest" in actually seeing this come out. Here it proves he has joined Dan Rather and Mary Mapes as unpaid staff in the Kerry-Edwards campaign.
I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions. Stepped up efforts to expose truth, SNAKE.
It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right. It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But we can give him a boost with impunity and no longer pretend to be fair.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Filed By Matt Drudge
Posted by: BigEd ||
10/10/2004 5:27:03 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
I had to read the whole memo five times to get an idea of what it means. When you think of it, it's a masterful achievement to write a memo of a few hundred words and say virtually nothing, but hint at so much. The guy has really mastered the gobbledygook of propaganda masquerading as responsible journalism.
So I thought I'd try to translate the memo into simple English:
These two guys both lie and fabricate, but their guy does it much better than our guy, and is using it against our guy. In fact, their guy could win if we don't support and push our guy. I know I don't have to tell you who our guy is. So go for it.
(I pasted in this comment from yesterday's article, because I think it still applies).
#3
"Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win."
Not "central to his efforts to win"??? They're the ENTIRETY of his efforts to win. Were it not for massive, non-stop lying and distortions, Kerry would be unable to make even the weakest case for electing him President.
I haven't heard an honest word out of a Democrat's mouth, other than Zell Miller and occasionally Joe Lieberman, in at least six years; and it's why I'm no longer a Democrat after having been one for three decades.
As for the rhetorical gymnastics in Halperin's memo, this is just the usual fare of leftist logic, as with the "all animals are equal, some are more equal than others" line in Animal Farm. Leftist logic can justify ANYTHING.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
10/10/2004 9:36 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Halperin's also marginally literate. Not only is the memo devoid of logic; it's riddled with dumb grammatical mistakes and non-sequiturs.
More evidence of what we already knew: to be an MSM journalist or producer requires no real talent or training or professional commitment.
Screw these jokers. Smash the MSM. Let a thousand blogs contend.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/10/2004 11:02 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
should've gone on Pg 2 - my bad
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/10/2004 11:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
From the article:
The official pointed to a report of those comments published in August in Kenya's daily Standard newspaper, in which Ms Maathai was quoted as saying that HIV/AIDS was created by scientists for the purpose of mass extermination.
And here all this time I thought it was AKs and machetes doing all the killing
#3
Absofuckinglutely looney tunes. IIRC the oldest known case of an HIV death that can be proven is the Englishman from the late 50s early 60s who is thought to of gotten it in North Africa. Could any one of possibly assembled HIV then. I suspect that HIV has been around a lot longer than we think. Its just that most of the victims when they got sick jsut died much quicker simply because they did not have the medical care available we do today. As to the spread of HIV in Africa today, there is one simple rule to protecting yourself from HIV. Don't fuck around. The sexual oractices of some African cultures is helping spread HIV much quicker than it would in a more restained shall we say population. Some of these practices such as sharing the wife with the guest have been around a long time and the cultural resistance to change is a big factor. I am not making a moral judgement on these pracices it is just that if the practices of your culture is helping cause its death it is time to change your culture
Scientists have pinpointed what is believed to be the earliest known case of AIDS, a discovery that suggests that the multitude of global AIDS viruses all shared a common African ancestor only 40 or 50 years ago.
http://www.aegis.com/news/sfe/1998/SE980201.html While the modern world rocked to Elvis Presley and Chuck Berry, an African tribesman died of a mysterious disease in 1959 in a clinic in Leopoldville, Belgian Congo - what is now Kinshasa, Republic of Congo, Dr. Toufu Zhu of the University of Washington in Seattle reports in the Feb. 5 issue of the journal Nature.
Posted by: ed ||
10/10/2004 12:03 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Terrific. It is a joy to see the transnational progressives who award the prize have their own shit blown back in their faces. It properly reflects on many of the selections made in recent years. Jimmah, where are you on this one boy?
#8
The gal won a Nobel PEACE Prize. This has nothing to do with biology. She is an ecologist, true, but that is a long, long way from virology and molecular biology.
Like someone said, you don't need facts to have an opinion.
#9
Ah, excellent. When we read of the prize the other day, I wondered where the "kick in the leg" was. She didn't seem to have the looney toons quality so necessary for your modern peace laureates. I'm glad to know the Nobel committee is not slipping.
It is a joy to see the transnational progressives who award the prize have their own shit blown back in their faces.
You're dreaming. The TP lap this crap up. After all, if AIDS was created, You Know Who has to be behind it.
#10
Well given the fact that Hans Blix and Baradei were seen to be most likely to receive the prize I guess we should not complain.
But we really need to hear the "Nobel" Peace Prize Owner Yasser on that issue. Does anyone doubt that HIV was created in a Zionist lab to kill... ummm... black Palestinians?
#11
Bonkers Babe Award 2004. There are some Bonker Boy Awards also: UN (2001), Kofi Annan (2001), Yassar Arafat (1994)--[trying to motivate him to quit his terrorist ways]--probably keeps him from being assassinated. There have been some legitimate Peace Awards (in my humble opinion). Other Nobel Peace Prize Winners Link (hope I got the html right): Nobel Peace Prize Winners
Posted by: John Q (Citizen) aka John QC aka JQC ||
10/10/2004 13:11 Comments ||
Top||
#12
..Well, take a look and see who swept the Science and Physics prizes this year, and you get the feeling they HAD to come up with a Barking Moonbat(TM) for the Peace Prize.
One more like this, and I think ol' Al will come back from the grave and start throwing his invention at the judges.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
10/10/2004 15:04 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The Nobel committee had to throw the 3rd world a bone so they gave this brain damaged Kenyan the Peace prize. Can't have all pale white people up on the stage. With a sprinkling of Asians.
Kofi Annan can win it next. Another one short in the IQ department.
#17
This is the normal result of an "international" committee of individuals picked not on the basis of knowledge but on the basis of diversity. The very kind of group (U.N. or E.U.) that Skerry would look to when some major decision needs to be made.
Khartoum students burned down a university building in protest at high residence hall fees and armed police fired tear gas to disperse the demonstration, students and witnesses said. One student said others had been locked out of their halls after failing to pay the fees demanded by the administration. "They locked the doors but all our clothes and belongings were still inside and we have nowhere else to sleep," said 21-year-old student Badr al-Din from White Nile state, who asked that his full name not be published. "So the students got angry and set fire to the offices of the student support fund," he said on Saturday. Muhammad, a student who also declined to give his family name, said between 50 and 100 armed police had fired tear gas into the crowd and beaten students with sticks to disperse the demonstration. Police at the scene said no one was hurt in the disturbance, which began at about 1400 GMT.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/10/2004 9:21:37 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The Escambia County Republican Party would not normally be considered a high-risk tenant. But in this bitter campaign season, politics can be risky business. Between 7 and 9:30 a.m. Saturday, one or more vandals threw rocks at the Republicans' county headquarters on Creighton Road, breaking the outer panes of three large plate-glass windows, said Alan Levy, a member of the party's executive committee. Last week, the landlord replaced two similar windows, which were broken at the front of the building shortly before the office officially opened Oct. 2, Levy said. "This is not the way we do politics in this country," he said. "It's ridiculous. It's absurd. It wasn't like this four years ago." The same windows broken out Saturday morning had been spattered with luminous pink paint the day before, said Laura Tkach, a party volunteer. "It's outrageous," she said.
