Letters to the Editor
-
Margalis..
It's worse than that..
In two entirely separate events over a month apart Bush has said he saw the first plane hit the first tower on live TV.
http://tinyurl.com/27m6k4
http://tinyurl.com/28x4mp
Note that the links above are to official White House transcripts.
-
In the face of such idiocy...
In the face of such idiocy the only thing one can do (if one cannot volunteer) is to make a monetary contribution to the Edwards campaign. Which I have done, and I hope others here will do too!
-
All the politicized minds
Boys - Criticize Noonan all you want, but her column this time is on the money.
-
-- leetravers
Well gosh. Are you always so convincing and full of facts and explanations?
-
M.J. Rosenberg on why the Times is hiring Bloody Kristol
because Norman Podhoretz said, "no."
-
RMP
What is wrong with this scenario?
Two planes have just slammed into the WTC in what is obviously an air attack on the USA.
The professional paranoids of the Secret Service sit with their thumbs up their collective butts and leave Bush in a location totally unsecured against air attack for at least half an hour.
-
Which is it?
1) It’s becoming a crystallized fact that desperate newspapers will take attention any way they can get it.
2) The media conglomerates have won the battle and hire those who will best achieve their aims.
-
HRH
Maybe Cheney was contemplating the consequences of whether he could get more done being the puppet master or emerging from the dark. I think he much prefers the dark. So he opted to give the kid a safe ride in the air.
-
Bad Hair Day
I so HATE to continue the role of dumb female here, because I'm not. But I just watched the YouTube John Edwards video and I cannot believe all the fuss and negative comments about him:
John needed a haircut, people!, Apparently there wasn't time for one that day. And, I am NOT being facetitious now, just pointing out the obvious as follows:
(Some of you may want to stop reading now if a post about truth in hair and grooming is too mundane to be beared...)
Apparently, John Edwards has a problem with strong forward growth to his hairline that was causing his overly-longish hair to fall into his eyes that day. The reason I can say this with some assurance is that I have the same type of hair and the same problem. We both have a lot of fine, but straight hair that tends to grow forward rather than in a normal fashion. The weight of this type hair is hard to manage after it gets to a certain length. He probably didn't want it falling in his eyes during his interview as this is annoying and potentially distracting. Such a simple truth, seems pretty obvious to me so, why all the denigrating comments, PEOPLE??!!
If you watch what happens after each time he combs, it is obvious that his hair kept falling down toward his brows. The long attempt at combing it back was in effort to keep it out of his eyes, and no amount of hairspray was going to help him (as evidenced by the number of attempts to comb and spray it back).
If you have read this far, I also report that I finally understand why specialized haircuts for John Edwards have been necessary. I can empathize with his need for $400 haircuts -- a good cut is mandatory to keep this type of hair under control! Again, he was Simply Grooming Difficult Hair when captured on video...the poor guy!!
Sorry if this post seems anti-intellectual, and I really hate posting something so obviously mundane on Glenn's blog, but that's truly all there is to ALL this fuss about the video from YouTube, folks. Edwards last motion on the video to the person spraying his hair indicated that he gave up. It was a facial expression that said "it would have to do" whether in his eyes or not as there was obviously nothing else to be done after all that time combing and spraying...
****************
If you've felt a sneer coming on reading this post, so be it. I am here mainly to read news reported in a way that makes sense to me. Also, to support Glenn as I find Glenn's writing has the fantastic ability to almost always sit well on my heart and in my mind. I, for one, was VERY glad Glenn didn't report on Bhutto. My sense is that in the end, there will be much to report on this subject. When hard evidence comes out, Glenn will do what he does best -- uncover the truth.
Glenn's work is so necessary to balance the deception and spinning in other reporting. I admire his keen ability to go straight to the heart of any matter. As I have said many times, GO GLENN -- we all need you!!
(And Glenn, if in the effort to uncover and report a truth I have dumbed down this thread, I apologize. Just felt that I should point out what is so obvious to me in Edwards defense...his critics have been pretty harsh today, IMHO...)
-
Pocket Veto
http://nytimes.com/2007/12/29/washington/29bush.htm
In Surprise Step, Bush Vows Veto of Military Bill
By STEVEN LEE MYERS and DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
Published: December 29, 2007CRAWFORD, Tex. — For months President Bush harangued Democrats in Congress for not moving quickly enough to support the troops and for bogging down military bills with unrelated issues. And then on Friday, with no warning, a vacationing Mr. Bush announced that he was vetoing a sweeping military policy bill [...]
[...] “Only George Bush could be for supporting the troops before he was against it,” Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said [...]
[...] It was Mr. Bush’s eighth veto [...] Because he used a pocket veto — allowing the legislation to expire 10 days after it was passed by the House — his decision cannot be overridden. [...]
- - New York Times, Saturday, December 29, 2007
Is a pocket veto legal when the Senate isn't in recess?
-
RMP
I really expected a bit better from you.
I'm serious, what is wrong with the scenario?
Unambiguously confirmed air attack, SS leaves president in place unsecured against air attack.
Don't look at it with hindsight, look at it as if you were the SS agent in charge that day.
What would you personally have done?