Regular readers may notice the new newsweekly-ish banner at the top right of our main page. We are proud to have it there and it will remain until it comes true or is no longer feasible.
The banner is also a link, and if you hit it, you'll be able to see Standing Eight's first publicity on the web, viz. our inclusion on the (very very long,) list of blogs sporting the banner. We've just taken our first step into a larger world.
31 December 2005
30 December 2005
Why 'Family' is a Dirty Word
The WaPo finally got around to explaining exactly why Leader DeLay is such a dirty dirty little boy, (See It Now) basically recapping what Al Franken has been saying since his show went on the air. Franken fans know that DeLay called Marianas Islands sweatshop owners, who were basically slave traders and pimps, (See It Now) fine examples of American ingenuity and "a shining light for what is happening to the Republican Party, and you represent everything that is good about what we are trying to do in America and leading the world in the free-market system"
(For those who didn't know, the Marianas Islands are an "American Protectorate" which means that clothes made there can carry the Made in the USA label even though the workers are not afforded the same protections you have in your job. Or any protections, for that matter. Abramoff and DeLay made a lot of money fighting to keep it that way.)
There's enough stink to go around on this one that we will not dig any deeper into it here, (the WaPo article is well worth a read,) but the WaPo did note something that conforms to a prejudice we've held for a long time:
Political organizations with the words "Family" and/or "Values" in their names are evil.
DeLay "had close ties" to the "US Family Network", which purported to be a nationwide grassroots organization, but was actually funded entirely by corporations "linked to" Abramoff. (Interesting Tidbit: fake grassroots organizations that are actually funded by one or two rich jerks are known as "Astroturfing" organizations, a new piece of jargon that deserves a late-entry Standy.) And of course James Dobson's "American Family Association" would be more appropriately named "Queerbashers Less-than-Anonymous" or what have you. And we were particularly struck when in the heat of the campaign last year, the "Traditional Values Council" started propagating the story of some democrat circulating an anti-Bush flyer that was also an anti-special-Olympian flyer, which story was revealed to be not just a hoax, but a republican dirty trick (no one believed us then, but we have it solid now.)
We are willing to be proved wrong on our "Family" and "Values" thesis, but we doubt you can name three undeniably good organizations using those words. And don't try The Family Circus, because those ghosts the kids see are definitely satanic icons.
(For those who didn't know, the Marianas Islands are an "American Protectorate" which means that clothes made there can carry the Made in the USA label even though the workers are not afforded the same protections you have in your job. Or any protections, for that matter. Abramoff and DeLay made a lot of money fighting to keep it that way.)
There's enough stink to go around on this one that we will not dig any deeper into it here, (the WaPo article is well worth a read,) but the WaPo did note something that conforms to a prejudice we've held for a long time:
Political organizations with the words "Family" and/or "Values" in their names are evil.
DeLay "had close ties" to the "US Family Network", which purported to be a nationwide grassroots organization, but was actually funded entirely by corporations "linked to" Abramoff. (Interesting Tidbit: fake grassroots organizations that are actually funded by one or two rich jerks are known as "Astroturfing" organizations, a new piece of jargon that deserves a late-entry Standy.) And of course James Dobson's "American Family Association" would be more appropriately named "Queerbashers Less-than-Anonymous" or what have you. And we were particularly struck when in the heat of the campaign last year, the "Traditional Values Council" started propagating the story of some democrat circulating an anti-Bush flyer that was also an anti-special-Olympian flyer, which story was revealed to be not just a hoax, but a republican dirty trick (no one believed us then, but we have it solid now.)
We are willing to be proved wrong on our "Family" and "Values" thesis, but we doubt you can name three undeniably good organizations using those words. And don't try The Family Circus, because those ghosts the kids see are definitely satanic icons.
23 December 2005
If We're Friends Like This, Who Needs to Make us Enemies?
Our allies, the Italians, just won't play fair. All we tried to do was run a little tiny CIA black-bag op where we 'kidnapped' a 'suspected terrorist' off the Italian streets and 'rendered' him to an unknown locale where 'extraordinary measures' can be used by our 'surrogates' in 'interrogation', and now the Italians want to arrest all 22 of our operatives involved. Poor CIA, we only ever get to hear about their massive screw-ups, never the (alleged,) successes. See It Now.
C'mon Italy, be a pal. What if we promise to never do it again?
C'mon Italy, be a pal. What if we promise to never do it again?
A Prayer for James Dungy (and his family)
The news of (Indianapolis Colts' Head Coach,) Tony Dungy's son's suicide has splashed everywhere, so you may not be learning about it here. But if you're like most people you learned about it on Sportcenter, where they did a whitewash on the lad's personal history.
We understand that when someone dies it is customary and appropriate to focus on the positive (Nixon's funeral was an obvious example,) but the picture of a boy who "goes to church on Wednesday, twice on Sunday," and was in all respects perfect and pure does not mesh with our idea of what kind of person could kill himself in the 10 late-night minutes that his girlfriend went for a walk. So we did about thirty seconds of research and it turns out that there were two sides to the lad, and one, whether the dominant one or not, was quite dark. See It Now.
This does not mean James' death is not terrible, it clearly is. We cried when we learned. Tony has been one of our favorite figures in the NFL since his final game as Bucs Head Coach, when he coached a hell of a game, was robbed by the refs in the last seconds, but handled it all with unparalleled class. Our hearts go out to him, and though we don't pray often, we know the Dungys do, so our prayers are with them, too.
But tragedy is no reason to lie. This kind of (supposedly,) benevolent lying is how the Pat Tilman and Jessica Lynch stories got ruined.
(It is our further hope that this issue (lying, not suicide,) may spur some conversation among you Eighters out there.)
We understand that when someone dies it is customary and appropriate to focus on the positive (Nixon's funeral was an obvious example,) but the picture of a boy who "goes to church on Wednesday, twice on Sunday," and was in all respects perfect and pure does not mesh with our idea of what kind of person could kill himself in the 10 late-night minutes that his girlfriend went for a walk. So we did about thirty seconds of research and it turns out that there were two sides to the lad, and one, whether the dominant one or not, was quite dark. See It Now.
This does not mean James' death is not terrible, it clearly is. We cried when we learned. Tony has been one of our favorite figures in the NFL since his final game as Bucs Head Coach, when he coached a hell of a game, was robbed by the refs in the last seconds, but handled it all with unparalleled class. Our hearts go out to him, and though we don't pray often, we know the Dungys do, so our prayers are with them, too.
But tragedy is no reason to lie. This kind of (supposedly,) benevolent lying is how the Pat Tilman and Jessica Lynch stories got ruined.
(It is our further hope that this issue (lying, not suicide,) may spur some conversation among you Eighters out there.)
22 December 2005
The Standys (tm) Calendar-Replacement-Time Recognitions!
Please note that the Standy is not a year-end award. We would never do anything so tacky.
And the Standy goes to:
Best Remora on the Media Shark: Ken Auletta's pre-mortem on the NY Times' worst century yet. See It Now.
Exemplary CYA (Democrat Division): Senator Rockefeller in his secret letter to Cheney re the President's Program: "I am retaining a copy of this letter in a sealed envelope in the secure spaces of the Senate Intelligence Committee to ensure that I have a record of this communication."
Exemplary CYA (Republican Division): Too easy.
Best Impression of A Democrat: Senator Feingold
Best Impression of a Republican: Senator Lieberman
Best New Face: The lady in France with the new face.
Best Resignation in Protest: Judge James Robertson, formerly of the FISA court.
Best Book to Inspire a George Clooney Movie: 'See No Evil' by Bob Baer
Best George Clooney Movie: Good Night and Good Luck
Funniest Movie On Purpose: The 40-Year-Old Virgin ("Yeah, and sarcasm is like a second language to me, so I am right there with you.")
Funniest Movie Not On Purpose: Brokeback Mountain (Those two dudes totally make out.)
Reporters of the Year: Risen and Lichtblau (mainstream) JM Marshall and Jason Leopold (blog)
And the Standy goes to:
Best Remora on the Media Shark: Ken Auletta's pre-mortem on the NY Times' worst century yet. See It Now.
Exemplary CYA (Democrat Division): Senator Rockefeller in his secret letter to Cheney re the President's Program: "I am retaining a copy of this letter in a sealed envelope in the secure spaces of the Senate Intelligence Committee to ensure that I have a record of this communication."
Exemplary CYA (Republican Division): Too easy.
Best Impression of A Democrat: Senator Feingold
Best Impression of a Republican: Senator Lieberman
Best New Face: The lady in France with the new face.
Best Resignation in Protest: Judge James Robertson, formerly of the FISA court.
Best Book to Inspire a George Clooney Movie: 'See No Evil' by Bob Baer
Best George Clooney Movie: Good Night and Good Luck
Funniest Movie On Purpose: The 40-Year-Old Virgin ("Yeah, and sarcasm is like a second language to me, so I am right there with you.")
Funniest Movie Not On Purpose: Brokeback Mountain (Those two dudes totally make out.)
Reporters of the Year: Risen and Lichtblau (mainstream) JM Marshall and Jason Leopold (blog)
21 December 2005
Hate Crime or Botched Terrorism? You, The Jury, Decide.
(Actually, it's a hate crime. Sorry if the tease dragged you in.) Explosions at a Cincinnati Mosque, a couple hours after evening prayers. See It Now.
Since no one was hurt, we feel reasonably justifed in finding this quote hilarious (italics ours):
"As of right now, we can't make any comment on the size or the type of explosive," Brooks said. He also said authorities wouldn't speculate on why the buildings, both used as mosques, were targeted.
Gee, what would they be speculating if they would speculate?
We do so wonder.
Remember you heard it here first. Unless you didn't.
Since no one was hurt, we feel reasonably justifed in finding this quote hilarious (italics ours):
"As of right now, we can't make any comment on the size or the type of explosive," Brooks said. He also said authorities wouldn't speculate on why the buildings, both used as mosques, were targeted.
Gee, what would they be speculating if they would speculate?
We do so wonder.
Remember you heard it here first. Unless you didn't.
20 December 2005
We love 'the protest quit'
A few readers have asked The Eight why we haven't bit on this 'NSA story' much or at all, (Hint: it's not an NSA story, it's a White House story.) Frankly we consider it dog-bites-man news. We would more or less have assumed that Bush had been spying on us since September 11 if not before. We were more amused by the feigned shock and outrage on the left (and in the middle,) than by BushCo's thin excuses (which were also amusing.)
It maybe bears repeating that: 1) We are devoted Orwellians here at The Eight, and so not at all surprised to learn that 'the big ear' has turned inward, as executive power expands, as we move slowly but unceasingly to the state of permanent war that Cheney has always desired. And also: 2) Personal notions of, and eventually functional definitions of, 'privacy' are going to change a lot in the next 50 years. It's unavoidable (see David Brin's "Earth" for more.) For those two and other subordinate reasons, Standing Eight would have persisted in saying that 'the NSA story' is a non-story, until we saw this: See It Now.
A judge of the newly famous FISA court has resigned in protest over 'the President's Program.' (Or is it his pogrom?) Standing Eight are longtime fans of, participants in and advocates for the 'protest quit' of all stripes, and this is a big one. It will make it very difficult for the administration to continue to play the law-abiding tough guys, (the Pat Fitzgeralds of domestic eavesdropping, if you will,) and may (partially,) paint them into a corner as to which defenses are available to them.
We still don't think this will 'bring down' the prez or anyone else, and we won't be surprised if somehow he skates right past it and comes out clean on the other side. But big-ups nonetheless to Judge James Robertson. Keep your eyes peeled, JR, you just might be in line for a Standy Calendar-Replacement-Time Recognition
(Coming soon to Standing Eight: The 'Standys' Calendar-Replacement-Time Recognitions, which are in no way similar to year-end awards, so don't lump us in with those losers.)
It maybe bears repeating that: 1) We are devoted Orwellians here at The Eight, and so not at all surprised to learn that 'the big ear' has turned inward, as executive power expands, as we move slowly but unceasingly to the state of permanent war that Cheney has always desired. And also: 2) Personal notions of, and eventually functional definitions of, 'privacy' are going to change a lot in the next 50 years. It's unavoidable (see David Brin's "Earth" for more.) For those two and other subordinate reasons, Standing Eight would have persisted in saying that 'the NSA story' is a non-story, until we saw this: See It Now.
A judge of the newly famous FISA court has resigned in protest over 'the President's Program.' (Or is it his pogrom?) Standing Eight are longtime fans of, participants in and advocates for the 'protest quit' of all stripes, and this is a big one. It will make it very difficult for the administration to continue to play the law-abiding tough guys, (the Pat Fitzgeralds of domestic eavesdropping, if you will,) and may (partially,) paint them into a corner as to which defenses are available to them.
We still don't think this will 'bring down' the prez or anyone else, and we won't be surprised if somehow he skates right past it and comes out clean on the other side. But big-ups nonetheless to Judge James Robertson. Keep your eyes peeled, JR, you just might be in line for a Standy Calendar-Replacement-Time Recognition
(Coming soon to Standing Eight: The 'Standys' Calendar-Replacement-Time Recognitions, which are in no way similar to year-end awards, so don't lump us in with those losers.)
People riding in a hole in the ground temporarily suspended
We'll put our dollars against your doughnuts (if you promise not to tell,) that O'Reilly calls the transit strike in NYC, "part of a coordinated campaign by these liberal, secular ACLU wackos, to obliterate our holy feast of Christmas. Jesus Christ I hate these god-damned liberals." (Sorry language police, that's O'Reilly talking, not us.)
We will not, however, monitor O'Reilly to see if these predictions come to pass. And he may be off for vacation, vigilantly observing the birth of our lord. We can just see the look on his face as he opens up his new loofah.
And what a stupid way to spell O'Riley, are we right folks? (My spellchecker calls him oriole behind his back. Snicker snicker.)
We will not, however, monitor O'Reilly to see if these predictions come to pass. And he may be off for vacation, vigilantly observing the birth of our lord. We can just see the look on his face as he opens up his new loofah.
And what a stupid way to spell O'Riley, are we right folks? (My spellchecker calls him oriole behind his back. Snicker snicker.)
Hello to the NSA agent who's job requires that he read Standing Eight Count
And our apologies. No one should be compelled to read anything after high school.
And hello to the rest of you. Did you hear yet, through your own intelligence agencies that the NSA case is about "more than wiretapping"? Our informant Kevin Drum has the skinny: See It Now. What's that? No intelligence agency? Why they're the hottest thing for Holiday, and they're easier to get a hold of than the Xbox 360. Standing Eight just opened it's spy agency in [DATE EXPUNGED] and it already rivals the Mossad.
How long will it take for this angle to end up in the 'mainstream' press? Our odds makers place the over-under at Friday. (And just kidding, Mossad, lighten up.)
And hello to the rest of you. Did you hear yet, through your own intelligence agencies that the NSA case is about "more than wiretapping"? Our informant Kevin Drum has the skinny: See It Now. What's that? No intelligence agency? Why they're the hottest thing for Holiday, and they're easier to get a hold of than the Xbox 360. Standing Eight just opened it's spy agency in [DATE EXPUNGED] and it already rivals the Mossad.
How long will it take for this angle to end up in the 'mainstream' press? Our odds makers place the over-under at Friday. (And just kidding, Mossad, lighten up.)
11 December 2005
Novak and Luskin and Rove (oh my!)
Here's the long awaited 1st-person piece by Viveca Novak on what she told Fitzy. It's more or less what the scuttlebutt had said it would be, viz. ambiguous enough to keep both sides hopeful. It's not great for those rooting for more indictments, but if Fitz is 75% as suspicious of Rove as we are (which he's almost got to be, it is his job, and he does seem to be good at it and quite dogged,) then it shouldn't be entirely exculpatory. It's more likely that Rove/Luskin's cover story is just that, cover. Of vital importance now are the phone logs in Rove's office, and the Ralston angle. Now another longish wait begins to see what will be Fitzy's next move. We are lead to believe that he will be presenting the V. Novak deposition to the grand jury; from there your guess is as good as anyone else's, including Novak and Luskin and Rove (and Ralston and Hadley and Bush, and Libby and Cheney and Bob, oh my oh my oh my.) The 'Bob' there being Woodward or Novak, take your pick if you can tell them apart anymore.
The Time article notes dryly that "by mutual agreement," V. Novak is on a leave of absence.
The Time article notes dryly that "by mutual agreement," V. Novak is on a leave of absence.
10 December 2005
Corporate Punishment (or: traum arbeit no longer frei)
According to Jayson Blair and Judy Miller's former employer, Paramount (i.e. Viacom,) is going to buy Dreamworks. Wasn't it just 6 or 7 years ago that S. Spielberg and his cohorts (K and G,) founded Dreamworks to get away from the big studio thing, strike out on their own? Ah well, that's fine. Maybe flying solo wasn't the great lifelong artistic satisfaction they had hoped. Maybe they want to work for the same corporate bosses as Letterman and Imus. Maybe they want to go from being just obscenely wealthy to Scrooge MacDuck, drowning-in-krugerands wealthy. That's all right. We don't care.
American Beauty sure was a good movie, though.
Actually, perhaps we at Standing Eight will follow their lead. It's not much fun out here in the cyber-boonies being read only by a bunch of college friends and future in-laws (whazzup!!!) Maybe we'll enter negotiations to become the official leftish blog of the General Electric Corporation. (Slate is faux-left. Corporate left, if you will.)
We're sorry. We said some things in the heat of the moment that we didn't really mean. It's plenty o' fun out here in the boonies, and we love our readership. Forgive us?
American Beauty sure was a good movie, though.
Actually, perhaps we at Standing Eight will follow their lead. It's not much fun out here in the cyber-boonies being read only by a bunch of college friends and future in-laws (whazzup!!!) Maybe we'll enter negotiations to become the official leftish blog of the General Electric Corporation. (Slate is faux-left. Corporate left, if you will.)
We're sorry. We said some things in the heat of the moment that we didn't really mean. It's plenty o' fun out here in the boonies, and we love our readership. Forgive us?
09 December 2005
Feed Bag
Two-point-five items we'll just lead you to the water of today. Seeing as Standing Eight is a Utilitarian website, the choice to drink (or not,) is yours.
1) News From the Non-Integrating Gap (Know what that is?)
DATELINE IRAN -- Attention Holocaust Deniers: Iran's new whackjob president is one of you. That must make you feel good inside. See It Now. Technically most of what's quoted in this article would fall in Bradlee's "non-denial denial" category, but Standing Eight doesn't get caught in wringers about semantic hairsplitting when it comes to the Final Solution.
Also on the Iran front, (no prophecy intended,) turns out most (78) of the people who died in that plane crash a couple days ago were journalists, either going to or coming from some sort of military action/training/show. Nothing at all fishy about that. See It Now.
2) News from the Functioning Core (ID these references for a free steak dinner.)
DATELINE THE OTHER KANSAS CITY-- A kid at an "alternative high school" (read, "school for the 'bad kids'," if Kansas is anything like Texas,) was over-disciplined for the high crime of speaking Spanish... in the hall... between classes. His two word response, ("No problema,") to a friend's query, "Me prestas un dolar?" ['Will you lend me a dollar?'] apparently in Kansas City KS translates to a one-and-a-half day suspension. See It Now.
(Disclaimers: Yes, we realize that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not a whackjob, and that we'd probably be better off if he was. We further realize that a two day break from a Kansas alternative high school is something to be prayed for rather than feared. Does that invalidate the points we wish to emphasize here? We respectfully think not.)
And lest you start to think it's all bad news, from our Spoonful Of Sugar Department, here's a pretty picture of a rainbow. (Photo Credit: Standing Eight Count)
1) News From the Non-Integrating Gap (Know what that is?)
DATELINE IRAN -- Attention Holocaust Deniers: Iran's new whackjob president is one of you. That must make you feel good inside. See It Now. Technically most of what's quoted in this article would fall in Bradlee's "non-denial denial" category, but Standing Eight doesn't get caught in wringers about semantic hairsplitting when it comes to the Final Solution.
Also on the Iran front, (no prophecy intended,) turns out most (78) of the people who died in that plane crash a couple days ago were journalists, either going to or coming from some sort of military action/training/show. Nothing at all fishy about that. See It Now.
2) News from the Functioning Core (ID these references for a free steak dinner.)
DATELINE THE OTHER KANSAS CITY-- A kid at an "alternative high school" (read, "school for the 'bad kids'," if Kansas is anything like Texas,) was over-disciplined for the high crime of speaking Spanish... in the hall... between classes. His two word response, ("No problema,") to a friend's query, "Me prestas un dolar?" ['Will you lend me a dollar?'] apparently in Kansas City KS translates to a one-and-a-half day suspension. See It Now.
(Disclaimers: Yes, we realize that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not a whackjob, and that we'd probably be better off if he was. We further realize that a two day break from a Kansas alternative high school is something to be prayed for rather than feared. Does that invalidate the points we wish to emphasize here? We respectfully think not.)
And lest you start to think it's all bad news, from our Spoonful Of Sugar Department, here's a pretty picture of a rainbow. (Photo Credit: Standing Eight Count)
05 December 2005
George Washington made War on Christmas
We were frankly confused by all this hubbub about a war on Christmas, and amused by the Big Giant Head's assertion that the ACLU is anti-Christmas, (since they are after all there to protect our liberties, and what could be a more American exercise of liberty than Christmas?) But this article, (See It Now) or rather it's headline, "Ads Portray Nominee as Defender of Christmas" snapped it all into perspective. The "War on Christmas" is a subplot meant to preemptively frame the debate about Alito on issues where Alito's view is more "mainstream." Preempting and debate-framing of course are the only two rhetorical tools in the Bush shed, so it's perfect. Let's not talk about whether Mary would have had to inform Joseph (or God,) before attempting to abort the immaculate conception, let's talk about the manger scene on the City Hall lawn. Ignore the judge trying to turn the American Worker into Bob Cratchett, and concentrate on the long-awaited goose that symbolizes equally the never-arriving telos of the free market and Old Scrooge's deus ex machina change of heart.
And lest the administration catch wind of the goings on here at Standing Eight and call us commies, or libero-fascists, or purple people eaters, please let it be known that Standing Eight would like forevermore to be "portrayed as defenders of baseball, apple pie, and capitalism." But not George Will, Martha Stewart, or Leo Strauss.
Vanity Fair's Walcott has an interesting alternate take on the War on Christmas (we always call him VF's Walcott b/c it's an easy and cheap way of associating him with vanity, which we feel is appropriate. See It Now.)
.
And lest the administration catch wind of the goings on here at Standing Eight and call us commies, or libero-fascists, or purple people eaters, please let it be known that Standing Eight would like forevermore to be "portrayed as defenders of baseball, apple pie, and capitalism." But not George Will, Martha Stewart, or Leo Strauss.
Vanity Fair's Walcott has an interesting alternate take on the War on Christmas (we always call him VF's Walcott b/c it's an easy and cheap way of associating him with vanity, which we feel is appropriate. See It Now.)
.
"Literally the least we could do"
Below is a link to an E-Z online letter that will automatically go to your rep and senators urging them to support the McCain torture amendment with no exceptions or reservations. It's as easy as: 1)auto-fill 2)send, unless you're one of those crazy types that has to 3)read the things you attach your name to.
See It Now
See It Now
29 November 2005
Dare We Even Think It?
Looks like a certain semi-famous semi-fat semi-hairless longtime mentor and political advisor to a certain United States President may be going down, and soon, by way of plea or indictment, Q.V. two respectable-and-generally-well-
sourced-if-undeniably-biased blogosphere posts:
Washington Monthly: See It Now.
Raw Story (Source for above, but check out both if you're interested in how the gossip is separated from, and then folded back into the story:) See It Now.
Standing Eight is not in the business of playing "telephone" so may we suggest that you read the above posts and see if they don't, in your own (clearly quite facile,) mind, cut the legs out from yesterday's lede (yes that's how we spell it,) on this story, viz. that whatever Ms. Novak had to say would tend to exonerate "Official A". (We seriously can't bring ourselves to put his name here for fear of breaking the spell.)
As Drudge says: --developing--
sourced-if-undeniably-biased blogosphere posts:
Washington Monthly: See It Now.
Raw Story (Source for above, but check out both if you're interested in how the gossip is separated from, and then folded back into the story:) See It Now.
Standing Eight is not in the business of playing "telephone" so may we suggest that you read the above posts and see if they don't, in your own (clearly quite facile,) mind, cut the legs out from yesterday's lede (yes that's how we spell it,) on this story, viz. that whatever Ms. Novak had to say would tend to exonerate "Official A". (We seriously can't bring ourselves to put his name here for fear of breaking the spell.)
As Drudge says: --developing--
27 November 2005
Thanksgiving Leftovers
Standing Eight had some unexpected guests sleeping in our offices this weekend, so we could not make our usual 2am runs to the keyboard as insight hit us. Here are a few brief items from the long weekend. As you probably know, nothing much happens in DC over turkey day, since the turkeys have all gone home to roost with their constituents. Nonetheless:
Abramoff: The first rule of blogging about the Abramoff case is: Don't. Because anyone who cares about it gets plenty of info from many sources and it's hard to add anything new, and those who don't care will think you a wingnut for attempting to bring the scandal (and it is a scandal,) some small notice. That said, it's hard to deny that it exploded over the past week. On Saturday in the WaPo, under the headline "Lawmakers Under Scrutiny in Probe of Lobbyist" Schmidt and Grimaldi feel confident to report that, "...prosecutors on the Abramoff case are focused on at least half a dozen members of Congress." (See It Now) But by late Sunday US News was telling a different, or bigger story. In a story dated 12/5/05 (explain that to us for a free steak dinner,) Silla Brush reports that, "the conduct of at least a dozen representatives and senators is now being scrutinized by a small army of federal prosecutors and FBI agents." (See It Now) Granted that these two statements are not exclusive. Focus and Scrutiny are not the same word, and "at least" means "at least," but we would still point out that the bigger number of paramecia under the microscope came with the later reporting.
The Pie-Eyed Innocence of Frank Rich: Standing Eight rule of 21st Century politics #1A, (The Franking Privilege): If it is of genuine import to the reality-based community, it will end up in Frank Rich's column. That said, we think he's being a bit wishful with this closing sentence:
That's why it's Mr. Cheney's and the president's own words that are being thrown back now - not to rewrite history but to reveal it for the first time to an angry country that has learned the hard way that it can no longer afford to be without the truth. (See It Now)
Italics ours, but does the eminent Mr. Rich really believe that the country has learned anything, or that it will be that much harder to defraud the American public the next time a president needs to? Standing Eight believes rather that the single shining lesson of everything that's happened since, oh, pick an arbitrary date, say, 11 September 2001, is that we are very dupe-able, we will exchange Eastasia for Eurasia instantly, and not just in our words, in our very hearts, as a people, if the guy at the megaphone is megalomaniacal enough to convince, (which they always are,) and if supposedly good men stand silent, or worse yet, willingly participate in the Two Minutes Hate despite the questions and doubts that we can't stop our brains from nagging us with. (Little flowery on the prose there, we have been hosting the whole fam-damily, but the point remains.)
Rolling Stone Does News?: Again, we've had guests and hosting responsibilities, so we must confess that we have not yet absorbed the Very Important article by James Bamford about the selling of the war in RS this week. But you don't have to wait for our biased synopsis! You can See It Now.
Abramoff: The first rule of blogging about the Abramoff case is: Don't. Because anyone who cares about it gets plenty of info from many sources and it's hard to add anything new, and those who don't care will think you a wingnut for attempting to bring the scandal (and it is a scandal,) some small notice. That said, it's hard to deny that it exploded over the past week. On Saturday in the WaPo, under the headline "Lawmakers Under Scrutiny in Probe of Lobbyist" Schmidt and Grimaldi feel confident to report that, "...prosecutors on the Abramoff case are focused on at least half a dozen members of Congress." (See It Now) But by late Sunday US News was telling a different, or bigger story. In a story dated 12/5/05 (explain that to us for a free steak dinner,) Silla Brush reports that, "the conduct of at least a dozen representatives and senators is now being scrutinized by a small army of federal prosecutors and FBI agents." (See It Now) Granted that these two statements are not exclusive. Focus and Scrutiny are not the same word, and "at least" means "at least," but we would still point out that the bigger number of paramecia under the microscope came with the later reporting.
The Pie-Eyed Innocence of Frank Rich: Standing Eight rule of 21st Century politics #1A, (The Franking Privilege): If it is of genuine import to the reality-based community, it will end up in Frank Rich's column. That said, we think he's being a bit wishful with this closing sentence:
That's why it's Mr. Cheney's and the president's own words that are being thrown back now - not to rewrite history but to reveal it for the first time to an angry country that has learned the hard way that it can no longer afford to be without the truth. (See It Now)
Italics ours, but does the eminent Mr. Rich really believe that the country has learned anything, or that it will be that much harder to defraud the American public the next time a president needs to? Standing Eight believes rather that the single shining lesson of everything that's happened since, oh, pick an arbitrary date, say, 11 September 2001, is that we are very dupe-able, we will exchange Eastasia for Eurasia instantly, and not just in our words, in our very hearts, as a people, if the guy at the megaphone is megalomaniacal enough to convince, (which they always are,) and if supposedly good men stand silent, or worse yet, willingly participate in the Two Minutes Hate despite the questions and doubts that we can't stop our brains from nagging us with. (Little flowery on the prose there, we have been hosting the whole fam-damily, but the point remains.)
Rolling Stone Does News?: Again, we've had guests and hosting responsibilities, so we must confess that we have not yet absorbed the Very Important article by James Bamford about the selling of the war in RS this week. But you don't have to wait for our biased synopsis! You can See It Now.
21 November 2005
What Could Be Verse?
The First Meeting of the White House Iraq Group as Transcribed by Ogden Nash
(With apologies to Nash, Cagney as Cohan as FDR, and Calvin Trillan, but not George Bush.)
BUSH:
"To fight them there instead of here, we have to go to desert war.
Trust our good intel (wink,) but trust we'd dearly like to tell you more.
If it weren't such a no-brainer, it'd be a tough decision I'd abhor,
But a smoking gun's not the kind-of-a-thing a mushroom cloud's good for.
And that's (cha cha cha,) on the record." [Exit Bush.]
CHENEY:
"Tell our friend, reporter Judy, on deep background
Of the mass-destructin' booty to be found
Apres our bold and fearless and preemptive ground attack,
Among the old bombed out fields and towns of the new democratic Iraq.
Make sure it hits the streets in Sunday's Times.
Then amplify this pro-us news in all the big metropoli,
Abuse and deplete our strategic stockpile of Russerts and Stephanopoli,
Pump up our trumped-up evidence and play down my own bald ego.
To the Sunday morning chat shows' vaunted echo chamber boldly we go.
Be careful though, in a DemAdmin these acts would constitute war crimes."
[All chuckle sinisterly.]
LIBBY:
"Our bread of war remains unleavened, one lynchpin that we still lack
Is a definite connection between nine-eleven and Iraq.
Let's cherry pick that Prague report. Hadley! Matalin! Write a retort
To the few remaining vigilant reporters' questions as to just what sort
Of burden of proof we put on ourselves, our reasons and our rhymes.
To which reporters should we leak? It would be impolitic to overlap.
I'll spoon-feed Judy WMD's and Steve says Woodward owes him a good turn, so we've got the Times and the Post on tap.
An added plus, they're so power-hungry they'll embargo the secretest stuff long-term,
Like, until we've revealed that, 'we never concealed Iraq's total lack of nuke, chem and germ.'
And by then we'll be off to more pleasant, or at least more Syrian climes." [Bush re-enters, all stand.]
BUSH:
"Ain't y'all done yet? Geez, it's late.
My steaks won't wait, Laura's irate.
Tell you what, put down your pens and papers, go from here with what you've got.
Unless the Dems take back one house of Congress we will not get caught.
And our presents, (then our pasts,) will stay uncheckered."
(With apologies to Nash, Cagney as Cohan as FDR, and Calvin Trillan, but not George Bush.)
BUSH:
"To fight them there instead of here, we have to go to desert war.
Trust our good intel (wink,) but trust we'd dearly like to tell you more.
If it weren't such a no-brainer, it'd be a tough decision I'd abhor,
But a smoking gun's not the kind-of-a-thing a mushroom cloud's good for.
And that's (cha cha cha,) on the record." [Exit Bush.]
CHENEY:
"Tell our friend, reporter Judy, on deep background
Of the mass-destructin' booty to be found
Apres our bold and fearless and preemptive ground attack,
Among the old bombed out fields and towns of the new democratic Iraq.
Make sure it hits the streets in Sunday's Times.
Then amplify this pro-us news in all the big metropoli,
Abuse and deplete our strategic stockpile of Russerts and Stephanopoli,
Pump up our trumped-up evidence and play down my own bald ego.
To the Sunday morning chat shows' vaunted echo chamber boldly we go.
Be careful though, in a DemAdmin these acts would constitute war crimes."
[All chuckle sinisterly.]
LIBBY:
"Our bread of war remains unleavened, one lynchpin that we still lack
Is a definite connection between nine-eleven and Iraq.
Let's cherry pick that Prague report. Hadley! Matalin! Write a retort
To the few remaining vigilant reporters' questions as to just what sort
Of burden of proof we put on ourselves, our reasons and our rhymes.
To which reporters should we leak? It would be impolitic to overlap.
I'll spoon-feed Judy WMD's and Steve says Woodward owes him a good turn, so we've got the Times and the Post on tap.
An added plus, they're so power-hungry they'll embargo the secretest stuff long-term,
Like, until we've revealed that, 'we never concealed Iraq's total lack of nuke, chem and germ.'
And by then we'll be off to more pleasant, or at least more Syrian climes." [Bush re-enters, all stand.]
BUSH:
"Ain't y'all done yet? Geez, it's late.
My steaks won't wait, Laura's irate.
Tell you what, put down your pens and papers, go from here with what you've got.
Unless the Dems take back one house of Congress we will not get caught.
And our presents, (then our pasts,) will stay uncheckered."
10 November 2005
Memory Hole Alert #2
Fresh from their much-ballyhoo'd refresher ethics classes, your friends at the White House fundamentally altered a McClellan statement from the Oct. 31 briefing when they posted the briefing transcript online, sliding another one down the memory hole while you weren't looking (unless you were.)
David Gregory basically said we know Rove and Libby were involved with the leak whether or not there was any illegality. At this point McClellan responded, (and as attendees if not graduates of a very fine J-school, we stake our entire quoting ability and credibility on this,) McClellan said, "That's accurate." But the transcript says he said, "I don't think that's accurate," which is somewhat different.
Don't trust J-School drop-outs? We don't blame you, but this is not a right-wing site where you'd be asked to just take our word for it. The video is available online, and you can See It Now. There is no mumbling or half-uttered, "I don't think that's..." nothing remotely like it. The transcript is a lie. In fact Standing Eight predicts that within a day or two they'll have had to "correct" or "retract" the incorrect transcript, at which point they will pull it offline entirely, as they always do with Bush's flubs or any unorthodoxy that slips through the suffocating grip of their Message Control. Luckily, you are smart enough to read Standing Eight, so you won't be fooled (again.)
David Gregory basically said we know Rove and Libby were involved with the leak whether or not there was any illegality. At this point McClellan responded, (and as attendees if not graduates of a very fine J-school, we stake our entire quoting ability and credibility on this,) McClellan said, "That's accurate." But the transcript says he said, "I don't think that's accurate," which is somewhat different.
Don't trust J-School drop-outs? We don't blame you, but this is not a right-wing site where you'd be asked to just take our word for it. The video is available online, and you can See It Now. There is no mumbling or half-uttered, "I don't think that's..." nothing remotely like it. The transcript is a lie. In fact Standing Eight predicts that within a day or two they'll have had to "correct" or "retract" the incorrect transcript, at which point they will pull it offline entirely, as they always do with Bush's flubs or any unorthodoxy that slips through the suffocating grip of their Message Control. Luckily, you are smart enough to read Standing Eight, so you won't be fooled (again.)
Retail Politics
John Stewart "reported" Wednesday night that the 2 candidates for N.J. Governor spent a combined 70 million dollars in the race that ended in Snotty Billionaire John Corzine's victory over Snotty Billionaire Doug Forrester. That may sound like peanuts compared to the presidential campaign "budgets" we became so familiar with last year, but consider this: only 2.12 Million people voted in NJ yesterday (2,124,756, in fact.) Two things: a) that's less than or very near 25% turnout, but much more importantly b) it means the two candidates spent $32.94496 on every individual vote cast. And if we remember our high-school physics lesson on significant digits and rounding, that rounds up to $32.95 per vote. If Kerry and Bush had spent $32.95 per vote they'd have combined to spend (we didn't believe it 'til we checked our math,) 3.99 Billion-with-a-"B" dollars, and that is retail politics, and it is coming down the road, let no Standing Eight readers claim or feign surprise.
But wait there's more! If you break down the NJ race by assuming each candidate spent half of the 70 mil (they didn't become rich by outspending each other,) it turns out Corzine spent $29.92 for every vote for him, while Forrester spent a whopping $36.66 on each of his votes (we did not massage those numbers to make 666 appear, either.) That's right, proof positive that losing is expensive.
But wait there's more! If you break down the NJ race by assuming each candidate spent half of the 70 mil (they didn't become rich by outspending each other,) it turns out Corzine spent $29.92 for every vote for him, while Forrester spent a whopping $36.66 on each of his votes (we did not massage those numbers to make 666 appear, either.) That's right, proof positive that losing is expensive.
07 November 2005
You say Eastasia, I say Eurasia. (Let's call the whole thing Orwell.)
You may have seen this, it made the rounds a couple of days ago. It's pretty much the history of the Iraq War told entirely in official lies. Very entertaining. See It Now. Compiled and composed by Sam Smith at Harper's, the Official Print Role Model of Standing Eight.
03 November 2005
The P no longer stands for "Propaganda"
The schmuck who tried to turn PBS and NPR into FoxNews "resigned ahead of," a CPB report that basically painted him a criminal.
See It Now
By the way, Standing Eight has no theoretical problem with the existence of FoxNews, it's just that we've already got one, and they don't need to annex Jim Lehrer. That said, Standing Eight is 100 percent behind any politician who wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, which Reagan tossed overboard back in his dismantlin' days, and which if reinstated would basically necessitate the immediate cessation of all FoxNews broadcasting in this country. That would merely be a pleasant by-product, however, of a very sound political and long-term- public-weal-type decision. Like the sound of a livable environment for the next couple hundred years? Like the sound of a better educated populace better able to compete in the dawning century? Fix your TV news first, and the rest will follow.
See It Now
By the way, Standing Eight has no theoretical problem with the existence of FoxNews, it's just that we've already got one, and they don't need to annex Jim Lehrer. That said, Standing Eight is 100 percent behind any politician who wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, which Reagan tossed overboard back in his dismantlin' days, and which if reinstated would basically necessitate the immediate cessation of all FoxNews broadcasting in this country. That would merely be a pleasant by-product, however, of a very sound political and long-term- public-weal-type decision. Like the sound of a livable environment for the next couple hundred years? Like the sound of a better educated populace better able to compete in the dawning century? Fix your TV news first, and the rest will follow.
Those Wacky Catholics
Under the headline "Vatican: Faithful Should Listen to Science":
See It Now
Please know that we include this in our green-in-at-least-two-ways pages in an almost entirely "'A' for effort", "Thanks for trying", "Better late than never" sort of spirit. Standing Eight has a soft spot for the Catholic Church (ouch,) and wants to see it do well. But we did note with a lapsed chuckle the following graf (yes that's how we spell it in journalism,):
"The Vatican project was inspired by Pope John Paul II's 1992 declaration that the church's 17th-century denunciation of Galileo was an error resulting from "tragic mutual incomprehension." Galileo was condemned for supporting Nicolaus Copernicus' discovery that the Earth revolved around the sun; church teaching at the time placed Earth at the center of the universe." (Italics property of Standing Eight.)
"Tragic mutual incomprehension," meaning that Galileo was every bit as uncomprehending and as culpable as the pontiff. Well done JP II, tres diplomatique. And by the way, theoretical readers: if a pope now or in the future should ever offer to apologize to Standing Eight, please remind us to simply say "Grazie, ma no grazie." (Seriously, don't steal our italics.)
See It Now
Please know that we include this in our green-in-at-least-two-ways pages in an almost entirely "'A' for effort", "Thanks for trying", "Better late than never" sort of spirit. Standing Eight has a soft spot for the Catholic Church (ouch,) and wants to see it do well. But we did note with a lapsed chuckle the following graf (yes that's how we spell it in journalism,):
"The Vatican project was inspired by Pope John Paul II's 1992 declaration that the church's 17th-century denunciation of Galileo was an error resulting from "tragic mutual incomprehension." Galileo was condemned for supporting Nicolaus Copernicus' discovery that the Earth revolved around the sun; church teaching at the time placed Earth at the center of the universe." (Italics property of Standing Eight.)
"Tragic mutual incomprehension," meaning that Galileo was every bit as uncomprehending and as culpable as the pontiff. Well done JP II, tres diplomatique. And by the way, theoretical readers: if a pope now or in the future should ever offer to apologize to Standing Eight, please remind us to simply say "Grazie, ma no grazie." (Seriously, don't steal our italics.)
31 October 2005
Is he related to Judge Lance Ito?
So it looks like it's going to be Alito, and if you haven't been keeping track of the bench, here's a good overview from law.com. Especially noteworthy: He was the lone dissenter in the 3rd Circuit in the Casey case, which you'll remember was much discussed in the John Roberts hearing. Casey concerned a Pennsylvania law that required women to notify their husbands when seeking abortions. The 3rd circuit struck down the law, but Alito thought it was a good idea, q.v. his obviously disingenuous logic here, saying in effect that b/c the law could have served an interest in some few (and odd,) cases, the state was justified in applying this barbaric restraint to not all, but all married women:
"The Pennsylvania Legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands' knowledge because of perceived problems -- such as economic constraints, future plans or the husbands' previously expressed opposition -- that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion."
Could have believed? Some women? May be obviated? Lotta holes in that net. Plus wouldn't it create an undue division among women, depriving the married ones of a right that is granted single ones? In fact, isn't the Casey law one of the rare instances of our government showing a predjudice against marriage? While the 3rd had only a lone dissenter, Mr. Alito, Casey went eventually to the Supremes, where Rehnquist and (surprise) Scalia agreed with Alito's twisted non-logic. This is where we're headed, people. And please believe we say that not in an alarmed or inciting sense, but rather with a bored and heavy sigh of resignation. Standing Eight is rooting for but not predicting a fillibuster, and very willing to be wrong on the prediction. And forget your John-Roberts-Vote-as-Democratic- Presidential-Litmus-Test theorists of last month, here's the word: No Democratic senator who does not actively oppose Alito will ever win a single Democratic presidential primary. Standing Eight is prepared to use it's ever more considerable clout to insure that. (Sarcasm either reads poorly in print or is not Standing Eight's strength. )
Also especially noteworthy (end of law.com piece): People on the right think he's a great choice to be the first Hispanic justice. He's Italian. "We are not making this up," to quote Dave Barry, who we think is Chinese.
"The Pennsylvania Legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands' knowledge because of perceived problems -- such as economic constraints, future plans or the husbands' previously expressed opposition -- that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion."
Could have believed? Some women? May be obviated? Lotta holes in that net. Plus wouldn't it create an undue division among women, depriving the married ones of a right that is granted single ones? In fact, isn't the Casey law one of the rare instances of our government showing a predjudice against marriage? While the 3rd had only a lone dissenter, Mr. Alito, Casey went eventually to the Supremes, where Rehnquist and (surprise) Scalia agreed with Alito's twisted non-logic. This is where we're headed, people. And please believe we say that not in an alarmed or inciting sense, but rather with a bored and heavy sigh of resignation. Standing Eight is rooting for but not predicting a fillibuster, and very willing to be wrong on the prediction. And forget your John-Roberts-Vote-as-Democratic- Presidential-Litmus-Test theorists of last month, here's the word: No Democratic senator who does not actively oppose Alito will ever win a single Democratic presidential primary. Standing Eight is prepared to use it's ever more considerable clout to insure that. (Sarcasm either reads poorly in print or is not Standing Eight's strength. )
Also especially noteworthy (end of law.com piece): People on the right think he's a great choice to be the first Hispanic justice. He's Italian. "We are not making this up," to quote Dave Barry, who we think is Chinese.
29 October 2005
Casting Call
Here's an interesting game some Standing Eight regulars have been playing around the virtual water cooler: Casting the inevitable ChromeDome scandal movies. It's pretty self explanatory. Take a look, and feel free to add new castings and new roles to be cast. After all, only in working together will we defeat this thing. We have listed our choices on a rough high-to-low preference, but we also conceive of four possible categories: All-Time, Oscar Contender, Movie of the Week, and the optional last category, a spoof in the manner of the Watergate spoof "Dick" (don't flag us for content, that's the title of the film.) Action!
Patrick Fitzgerald: Jimmy Stewart, Joseph Cotten, Kevin Spacey, Martin Donovan, John Cusack, Michael Moriarty (cheating since he already played a hardball attorney for about a quarter-century.) Clearly all the hottest actors will be vying for this role.
Scooter Libby: Jon Stewart (think about it,) William Devane
Karl Rove: Russell Crowe, Brian Dennehy
Amb. Joe Wilson: Tom Hanks
Ms. Wilson/Valerie Plame/"codename flashfalcon": Marlee Matlin (think about it, she could also play Mary Matalin, for obvious though inappropriate reasons.) Meryl Streep, Felicity Huffman
Judy Miller: Judy Davis, Catherine O'Hara
Matt Cooper: Stephen Root
Tim Russert: Darrell Hammond?
Novak: Gary Oldman
Jeff Gannon: Tom Cruise
Bob Luskin: Harrison Ford
Scott McClellan: Kevin James
And if there's any justice in the world (an "if" statement on which Standing Eight has no official position,) Wes Anderson will write and direct and the Coen Brothers will produce.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Jimmy Stewart, Joseph Cotten, Kevin Spacey, Martin Donovan, John Cusack, Michael Moriarty (cheating since he already played a hardball attorney for about a quarter-century.) Clearly all the hottest actors will be vying for this role.
Scooter Libby: Jon Stewart (think about it,) William Devane
Karl Rove: Russell Crowe, Brian Dennehy
Amb. Joe Wilson: Tom Hanks
Ms. Wilson/Valerie Plame/"codename flashfalcon": Marlee Matlin (think about it, she could also play Mary Matalin, for obvious though inappropriate reasons.) Meryl Streep, Felicity Huffman
Judy Miller: Judy Davis, Catherine O'Hara
Matt Cooper: Stephen Root
Tim Russert: Darrell Hammond?
Novak: Gary Oldman
Jeff Gannon: Tom Cruise
Bob Luskin: Harrison Ford
Scott McClellan: Kevin James
And if there's any justice in the world (an "if" statement on which Standing Eight has no official position,) Wes Anderson will write and direct and the Coen Brothers will produce.
Link Sausage
Just a link to an interesting item from TPM and my man Josh Marshall, posted here without comment, which we sincerely hope is not a violation of blog etiquette. See It Now.
28 October 2005
A Word From The Paranoid Democrat:
New Theory Of What's Happening Now (NTOWHN):
Harriet Miers was never supposed to get to the Supreme Court: she was a Rove-inspired test balloon, meant to be popped loudly as a distraction on indictment day, thus forcing the mainstream media to divide its focus, thereby sliding indictment day (partially,) under the rug. It's the contemporary equivalent of Rove's now famous self-bugging, back in his salad days in Texas. Here's how Al Franken summarized the news of the day in the cold intro to his Thursday 27 October show (Sundance Channel version,):
"Miers is out, my friends, and I smell blood...not because she fell on her sword, but because I got a paper cut flipping through my newspaper too fast looking for news about PlameGate."
Exactly what Rove et al would have wanted to happen, had Fitzmas come Thursday instead of Friday. Which everyone was pretty sure it would. Knowing Rove as I do, (viz. through anecdotal evidence, poorly-mongered rumor and my own suspicious insinuations,) this all plays out just a little too pat to be 100% unintentional happenstance.
Remember you heard it here first. (Unless you didn't.)
--The opinions of The Paranoid Democrat do not necessarily represent those of Standing Eight Count. Further, Standing Eight would like to point out again that it is not necessary to call every Executive scandal "SomethingGate." We could hearken back to more genteel White House scandals, dubbing this one the ChromeDome scandal once Cheney and Rove are officially entangled. (Knock wood.)--
Harriet Miers was never supposed to get to the Supreme Court: she was a Rove-inspired test balloon, meant to be popped loudly as a distraction on indictment day, thus forcing the mainstream media to divide its focus, thereby sliding indictment day (partially,) under the rug. It's the contemporary equivalent of Rove's now famous self-bugging, back in his salad days in Texas. Here's how Al Franken summarized the news of the day in the cold intro to his Thursday 27 October show (Sundance Channel version,):
"Miers is out, my friends, and I smell blood...not because she fell on her sword, but because I got a paper cut flipping through my newspaper too fast looking for news about PlameGate."
Exactly what Rove et al would have wanted to happen, had Fitzmas come Thursday instead of Friday. Which everyone was pretty sure it would. Knowing Rove as I do, (viz. through anecdotal evidence, poorly-mongered rumor and my own suspicious insinuations,) this all plays out just a little too pat to be 100% unintentional happenstance.
Remember you heard it here first. (Unless you didn't.)
--The opinions of The Paranoid Democrat do not necessarily represent those of Standing Eight Count. Further, Standing Eight would like to point out again that it is not necessary to call every Executive scandal "SomethingGate." We could hearken back to more genteel White House scandals, dubbing this one the ChromeDome scandal once Cheney and Rove are officially entangled. (Knock wood.)--
27 October 2005
Chase Theme (First Audio Post!)
This was recorded to the blog from a phone, so the sound quality is mediocre, but herewith, please enjoy Standing Eight's first "accidental composition."
Standing Eight Political Memo: Waiting For Fitzmas
We're up late in the Standing Eight office, which is nothing new but tonight we've just sent our Fitzmas lists off to the north pole and we're wondering if the next news cycle we open up will have a shiny new prize inside, and we were struck (neither all at once, nor sequentially,) by a thought:
Perhaps the actual best disposition of the ongoing Executive Branch Scandal (Standing Eight does not approve of any of the names being bandied about, PlameGate, RoveGate &c. We would like to call it the Chrome Dome Scandal if Cheney and Rove get hit, and stop all this "gate" nonsense,) but anyway the best case for those who wish the Bush administration let's say a robust hubris-oriented gut-check if not an actual impeachment would be (stay with us here,) for it to continue dragging on like this straight through the next 365 days. We'll explain.
Of three possible "outcomes" to the next White House year, two point roughly to a continued Republican house in '06, while one leaves slightly more room for a Democratic take-back (Standing Eight's most optimistic minds think not even the best case improves the odds to better than 1 in 4, but we'd bet that in Vegas.)
Outcome 1) Karl Rove is not indicted (or he is but he soon after skates.) Result: Rove gets his focus back and turns the lack of imprisoned Bush Chums against the Dems, holds or maybe pushes his majority.
Outcome 2) Rove is indicted and knows all year long that prison is only a matter of months away. Result: Rove spends his last free year pursuing the '06 Republican majority with a vengeance, (albeit from the indicted shadows,) so he can go to jail knowing he protected his man GWB from what most Americans call "appropriate congressional oversight."
Outcome 3) Rove is indicted, but feels in limbo for the next year, will he be convicted, will he walk, will he prove he was framed? This leaves him as impotent as he has been since Terri Schiavo (ouch,) and keeps him from having an angle to pursue in '06, giving Dems their best chance.
Free advice and worth the price.
Perhaps the actual best disposition of the ongoing Executive Branch Scandal (Standing Eight does not approve of any of the names being bandied about, PlameGate, RoveGate &c. We would like to call it the Chrome Dome Scandal if Cheney and Rove get hit, and stop all this "gate" nonsense,) but anyway the best case for those who wish the Bush administration let's say a robust hubris-oriented gut-check if not an actual impeachment would be (stay with us here,) for it to continue dragging on like this straight through the next 365 days. We'll explain.
Of three possible "outcomes" to the next White House year, two point roughly to a continued Republican house in '06, while one leaves slightly more room for a Democratic take-back (Standing Eight's most optimistic minds think not even the best case improves the odds to better than 1 in 4, but we'd bet that in Vegas.)
Outcome 1) Karl Rove is not indicted (or he is but he soon after skates.) Result: Rove gets his focus back and turns the lack of imprisoned Bush Chums against the Dems, holds or maybe pushes his majority.
Outcome 2) Rove is indicted and knows all year long that prison is only a matter of months away. Result: Rove spends his last free year pursuing the '06 Republican majority with a vengeance, (albeit from the indicted shadows,) so he can go to jail knowing he protected his man GWB from what most Americans call "appropriate congressional oversight."
Outcome 3) Rove is indicted, but feels in limbo for the next year, will he be convicted, will he walk, will he prove he was framed? This leaves him as impotent as he has been since Terri Schiavo (ouch,) and keeps him from having an angle to pursue in '06, giving Dems their best chance.
Free advice and worth the price.
Brava, Brave Broad
News and commentary from the Dog Bites Man Department
Standing Eight Count would like to give a Cheer, a Thumbs-Up, or a Tip of The Cap to three-time WNBA MVP Sheryl Swoopes for "coming out," but those phrases are trademarked by TV Guide, Roger Ebert and TV's newest and perhaps pre-eminent pompous pundit, Stephen Colbert. So we'll just say we're proud of you, Ms. Swoopes. It took orange and white striped balls.
And yes, some of you will say, a complimentary Jeer or Thumb-Down or Wag of the Finger would probably be appropriate for her ethically shaky decision to express her lesbianism by way of a secret relationship with her team's assistant coach, but we at Standing Eight realize that these things happen, and frankly think the bigger Jeer goes to the NY Times for feeling the story needed a negative angle. (Standing Eight can hardly be blamed for mentioning it, though. We are merely an infant squirrel thinking about trying to get a nut.)
Standing Eight Count would like to give a Cheer, a Thumbs-Up, or a Tip of The Cap to three-time WNBA MVP Sheryl Swoopes for "coming out," but those phrases are trademarked by TV Guide, Roger Ebert and TV's newest and perhaps pre-eminent pompous pundit, Stephen Colbert. So we'll just say we're proud of you, Ms. Swoopes. It took orange and white striped balls.
And yes, some of you will say, a complimentary Jeer or Thumb-Down or Wag of the Finger would probably be appropriate for her ethically shaky decision to express her lesbianism by way of a secret relationship with her team's assistant coach, but we at Standing Eight realize that these things happen, and frankly think the bigger Jeer goes to the NY Times for feeling the story needed a negative angle. (Standing Eight can hardly be blamed for mentioning it, though. We are merely an infant squirrel thinking about trying to get a nut.)
23 October 2005
Memory Hole Alert
Two of our favorite Wide Media Disseminators, TiVo and the WaPo, tried to slide corporate accountability down the memory hole while you weren't looking this weekend. A story that topped the Washington Post website at midday under the headline, "Unisys Accused of Overcharging Taxpayers," now (early 23 October,) tops the site under a new sanitized headline: "Tech Firm Accused of Overcharging Taxpayers."
And that's not all. NOW, the lefty PBS newsmag that used to have Bill Moyers and be great, tapes late in the week and appears on most PBS stations all weekend. In Standing Eight Count's TiVo Guide, the Friday night NOW's second story was, "VIOXX scandal", and here, (or now, if you will,) it's Sunday night and the same episode of NOW has the same first and third stories, according to TiVo, but the second story is about an "analgesic scandal". We doubt, however, that anyone called David Brancaccio and an editor in the middle of the night to come in and change the story.
We here at Standing Eight are not lawyers, but we have had the misfortune in our travels of spending some time around lawyers, and we can just imagine how boring those two lawyer-to-lawyer calls were at whatever point this weekend.
But four or five people got to bill out at however many hundreds of dollars an hour. And the GDP did increaseth. And Orwell's sleep was no more restless than yours or mine.
And that's not all. NOW, the lefty PBS newsmag that used to have Bill Moyers and be great, tapes late in the week and appears on most PBS stations all weekend. In Standing Eight Count's TiVo Guide, the Friday night NOW's second story was, "VIOXX scandal", and here, (or now, if you will,) it's Sunday night and the same episode of NOW has the same first and third stories, according to TiVo, but the second story is about an "analgesic scandal". We doubt, however, that anyone called David Brancaccio and an editor in the middle of the night to come in and change the story.
We here at Standing Eight are not lawyers, but we have had the misfortune in our travels of spending some time around lawyers, and we can just imagine how boring those two lawyer-to-lawyer calls were at whatever point this weekend.
But four or five people got to bill out at however many hundreds of dollars an hour. And the GDP did increaseth. And Orwell's sleep was no more restless than yours or mine.
21 October 2005
Inaugural Post
The editorial staff here at Standing Eight debated what should be our virginal post on this, destined to become the most widely read blog ever on Politics Sports Art Music Philosophy Media and Literature Not Necessarily in That Order. It didn't seem right to just jump on the rather unappealing dog pile Harriet Miers is at the bottom of; and at this point no one who cares is going to be impressed that we were bitching about Judy Miller way before she went to jail; and Baseball just ended for the season, given that the board are to a man and woman lifelong Redbird fans; and David Foster Wallace's next book comes out later in the year and it's only essays anyway. (Seriously, the board wants to know, when do we get a new novel?) Rest assured, those and similar topics will fill our page regularly.
So in the spirit of getting things started, our first post is the first poem we ever wrote (as a board) that we liked enough (as a board) to show to people who weren't close friends (to the board). Forthwith and for your consideration:
If TS Eliot Had Been a Taoist, He Would Never Have Written a Poem
After, after now, before the end,
I sense, and so should you, a place where things will intersect,
And you will thread the needle's eye's hole of your intellect,
To weave a custom garment which by custom I select;
But you will do your due part if you duly do attend.
Beginningly, I'm sorry, but I feel I must digress
While we are still pre- any permanent undo-able progress
And take a moment to discuss my outer dressing:
"A needle's eye my intellect?"
If you, good sir or madam should object,
You'll find your cup of tea perhaps too full,
But I'm afraid my argument too pressing.
But, if you're open to receive,
If you're willing to believe,
You know mind is just a state of mind.
(Smiling,)
You know how to go with it when taken from behind
By ideas that seem at first to be a little bit unkind,
But after due review are not as cruel as we conceive.
The student who can learn is the teacher who can teach,
And others can say anything or nothing, each to each,
But none can put the question to themselves, auto-impeach.
And maybe that's the reason for the fall.
I must not be a poem because I made my point before I could say anything at all.
So in the spirit of getting things started, our first post is the first poem we ever wrote (as a board) that we liked enough (as a board) to show to people who weren't close friends (to the board). Forthwith and for your consideration:
If TS Eliot Had Been a Taoist, He Would Never Have Written a Poem
After, after now, before the end,
I sense, and so should you, a place where things will intersect,
And you will thread the needle's eye's hole of your intellect,
To weave a custom garment which by custom I select;
But you will do your due part if you duly do attend.
Beginningly, I'm sorry, but I feel I must digress
While we are still pre- any permanent undo-able progress
And take a moment to discuss my outer dressing:
"A needle's eye my intellect?"
If you, good sir or madam should object,
You'll find your cup of tea perhaps too full,
But I'm afraid my argument too pressing.
But, if you're open to receive,
If you're willing to believe,
You know mind is just a state of mind.
(Smiling,)
You know how to go with it when taken from behind
By ideas that seem at first to be a little bit unkind,
But after due review are not as cruel as we conceive.
The student who can learn is the teacher who can teach,
And others can say anything or nothing, each to each,
But none can put the question to themselves, auto-impeach.
And maybe that's the reason for the fall.
I must not be a poem because I made my point before I could say anything at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)